By Ezekiel Kimosop
INTRODUCTION
I once watched a Rambo movie in which the celebrated American actor had an unpleasant exchange with a Russian general in a scene depicting the dreaded Afghanistan war. Rambo had been betrayed into enemy hands by local Afghan agents.
The Russian general angrily shouted at Rambo who was tied to a chair. The general barked as he puffed his cigar: "You wish to test me? Good!!..."
Mr Rambo received severe beating for his beligerent resistance despite his brutal interrogation in the hands of his enemy captors. He finally managed to escape from His captors and organized a successful rebellion against the Russians.
PASSAGE ANALYSIS
Away from the screenplay script, we learn from the thirteenth chapter of Paul's Second Letter to the Corinthians that his apostolic authority had been questioned by some among the Corinthians. These opponents were perhaps envious of Paul's growing apostolic ministry in Macedonia, Achaia and Asia Minor.
The rebels in the Corinthian assembly perhaps considered Paul as more of a paper tiger than an assertive leader. Besides, they appeared to construed his apostolic stature as doubtful.
Paul had possibly placed sanctions against the erring among the Corinthians because of moral issues associated with them. It is possible that there were more discipline cases beside the one mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5.
The Corinthian "rebels" underestimated Paul's capacity to assert his apostolic authority, something to which he was entitled but which he graciously suppressed.
In 2 Corinthians 13:1-6, Paul employed both a hard and soft tone in the concluding section of his letter. He admitted that his coming third visit to Corinth would present an opportunity for authoritatively dealing with those who failed to tow the spiritual line and had apparently taunted him, seeking proof of Christ speaking through him (2 Cor. 13:3).
Paul ascribes his apostolic authority to Christ who called him into the Gentile ministry (Acts 9:1-9). It is evident from a number of his Letters that some radical Jewish elements had attempted to undermine Paul's apostolic authority (see 2 Cor. 11:5-15; Galatians 2:1-10). This trajectory appears to have presented simmering tones in the Corinthian church given the sharp divisions reported among them (see 1 Cor. 1:10-17).
Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians was a harsh one, by any standards. It was informed by the unpleasant circumstances prevailing in the Corinthian Christian assembly. He was compelled to issue firm instructions on the excommunication of an immoral believer and the restoration of spiritual sanity in the assembly.
Paul wrote his Second Letter to address some misconceptions that arose from the First Letter. It is therefore instructive that he chose to conclude his Second Letter in the manner he did. There was pending business at Corinth that he sought to conclude at the earliest opportunity.
Paul concludes his letter with an appeal to the Corinthians to esteem Christ as the ultimate authority under whom all leaders should serve in humility. He posits in reference to Christ, saying "For though He was crucified in weakness, yet He lives by the power of God. For we also are weak in Him, but we shall live with Him by the power of God toward you." ( 2 Cor. 13:4).
Paul ends his letter with an appeal for soberness, saying "Therefore I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the authority which the Lord has given me for edification and not for destruction." (2 Cor. 13:10). He sought to cool things down ahead of his visit.
Paul's treatment of the Corinthian issues is a perfect example for Christian leaders when handling conflicts in Christian assemblies. Paul employed his spiritual authority with utmost caution, not seeking to assert himself by the stick but making his position known with calmness.
CONCLUSION
Christian leadership is a tough calling that is fraught with many perils, including leadership envy, lapses and authoritative excesses.
Some leaders prefer total assertiveness in response to conflicts and by this they instill fear in the Christian community. This approach is unhealthy because it stifles Christian fellowship. Others opt for total anonymity, preferring to avoid conflicts altogether, even where their authoritative intervention is legitimate. This is not acceptable either. It is a tale in leadership failure.
We ought to maintain a healthy balance between overarching assertiveness and firm gentleness in godly fear whenever we deal with congregational issues.
Elsewhere in Scripture, Paul cautions the Galatians, saying "Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." (Galatians 6:1-2, NKJV). Paul was addressing the Galatian church leaders in this context and his exhortation speaks to every Christian community elsewhere.
How do you handle spiritual authority? Do you prefer assertiveness as a means of preserving your authority? Do believers fear crossing your path and would you take legitimate criticism as useful feedback or would you consider it an affront against your leadership?
How do you handle decisions touching on critical issues? Do you procrastinate over them or are you decisive or evasive? Do you employ teamwork in resolving critical leadership issues?
By today's leadership standards, the Corinthian rebels would perhaps have been summarily excommunicated under executive fiat and expelled from the congregation!
Paul's handling of spiritual authority demonstrates his utmost humility, gentleness and firmness, rolled together. He tampered his apostolic authority with grace.
Christ should receive glory in everything we do. John the Baptist spoke about the preeminence of Christ, saying "He must increase but I must decrease" (John 3:30, NKJV).
© Ezekiel Kimosop 2022
No comments:
Post a Comment