A reflection on Mark 1:21-28 & 1 Corinthians 8:1-13  by Nathan Nettleton

One of the things you often hear said about the present era is that there has been a breakdown of authority. People no longer believe all the things that everyone used to believe and people no longer respect the authorities that were once considered unquestionable.

Well to me that sort of talk raises the question of what is authority anyway. Is there a good reason why these “authorities” should have been trusted and obeyed in the first place, let alone now? What gives someone authority? It’s not a simple question because the soldiers who were convicted at the Nuremberg trials all used the defence that they were just acting in obedience to the designated authority, but they were found guilty on the grounds that an “authority” should not be obeyed when the orders given are evil. Perhaps some of the decried “breakdown of authority” is actually for very good reasons – we have been taught that you don’t just obey someone because they have a position of authority, you have to question whether what they are ordering you to do is actually right.

Well the readings for this week speak to this question of authority and give us some good examples of the different ways of understanding it.

The reading from Mark’s gospel is especially interesting. One of the intriguing and perplexing things about Mark’s gospel is that he frequently tells us that Jesus was teaching and that the people were amazed at his teaching and said that he spoke “as one with authority” and yet he tells us very little of what Jesus actually said. There may be a clue in this passage though. The people are amazed at his teaching, then he sets a man free from the grip of evil, and the people are even more amazed “at his teaching”. That would suggest that what we are seeing here, and perhaps frequently in Mark’s gospel, is enacted teaching. What Jesus does is a direct outworking of what he’s been saying, and when the people see it happening in practice, they recognise it as more than mere words but as teaching “with authority”.

Now there are two points at which the reference to authority comes in here. First the people are astounded because Jesus “taught them as one having authority.” This suggests that Jesus’ style of teaching seemed more authoritative than what the people were used to, regardless of what he might be saying. Exactly what this means is a matter of some speculation, but we can have a fairly good educated guess. The most common style of the rabbis in Jesus day was to teach by continual reference back to earlier authorities. In other words authority was “derived”. In much the same way that we might back up our argument by saying, “As Jesus said..” or “As Evelyn Underhill said…”, so the rabbis would teach by assembling and presenting the teachings of authoritative teachers who had gone before them. But the impression we gain from the gospels is that Jesus didn’t usually do that. Instead he just taught what he thought as though the truth of what he said was self-evident. He taught “as one having authority” rather than as one who needed to appeal to an external authority.

The second point in the story where the issue of authority comes up is after Jesus has healed the man. This time it is the teaching itself that is described as having authority. When Jesus speaks, things happen. There is authority in what he says. Jesus speaks to the people, and we can surmise that his message is a message of freedom from the oppression of evil, and then when the people see that this is not just words but is something that has immediate impact in their midst, they identify it as a teaching that has authority.

Now what I find particularly interesting about all this is that the whole focus on Jesus’ authority is related to what he says and does, not to some badge of office that he wears. There is no suggestion that Jesus has authority because he is a properly ordained rabbi or because the has been anointed by God as the Messiah. People do not listen to him because he has been vested with authority – they declare him to have authority because they have listened to him and found what he said to be authoritative. His authority is earned. Once the people have concluded that he has authority, no doubt they would be even more willing to take note of what he says, but the initial conclusion about his authority is earned, not assumed. And it is earned by the fact that his message is a message of freedom and hope that is backed up by people actually being set free at his word and touch.

Now for a contrasting model of authority, let’s have a look at the reading from Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth. Paul is concerned here about the misuse of authority, or more specifically the immature handling of knowledge and teaching. He strongly asserts the priority of love over knowledge: “knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.” You could legitimately say he is asserting the priority of love over truth. Truth handled without concern for the rule of love can be hurtful and destructive, the very opposite of what we saw in Jesus. Paul is pointing out that just because something is true doesn’t mean that it will be freeing and upbuilding for everyone. In the hands of those who lack wisdom, maturity and compassion, truth can wielded arrogantly and oppressively. While it is still true that the truth will set you free, truth can be misused to cause fear and doubt and to disempower people. Paul is absolutely clear in his opinion: being right comes a distant second to being loving.

So we’ve got some interesting contrasting images of authority in these passages. Two of the most frequently used models of authority are discredited somewhat. We see Jesus moving away from authority based simply on established office – I’m the rabbi, therefore listen – or on appeal to established tradition – I’m quoting the experts, therefore listen. We see Paul criticising the claiming of authority founded on no more than the ability to prove oneself right – I can win the argument, therefore listen.

The model of authority that stands up to the scrutiny of these passages is that which is earned by the wise and compassionate sharing of knowledge and power that brings hope, healing and freedom from all that would oppress and harm people.

Now some questions for discussion in our groups during the week.

• What are some examples you have witnessed where those who held positions of authority acted in ways which failed to bring hope, wholeness and freedom to those who were subject to them?

• What are some examples you have witnessed where someone – perhaps without any official position – showed themselves to have a genuine Christ-like authority by the way their words and actions set others free and built them up?

• What sort of things do you imagine Jesus was saying if it is true that his act of freeing the man from the power of evil was a demonstration of his message? How would you put the message back into words?

• How can we enact the same message?