Friday, 25 April 2014

Church And Governance:The Church Revolution And Its Duty In Governance


In the early century, when need for a leader to be chosen arose, the majority looked at the church as a guidance for the choice of leader to be chosen. It was during that time that the church usually, had the powers or keys of governance which was in form of a sword, articles, and flags.
     
An example of what I know in Greece, England and maybe the rest of Europe was that, the church had two swords; one was to be given to the chosen leader while the other remained with the church and this signified the spared leadership between God and the people. Since the church represented God while the leader represented the people and without the sword the leader had no authority because the authority laid in the sword.

Therefore, this historically practice done in the early centuries before, leaves me with questions on why the current sets of churches do not possess the powers their possessed earlier. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this article to highlight some transformations that have happened and it is important for readers out there to realize that the purpose of this article is not to discourage anybody’s faith but to encourage somebody.          

First and foremost, from an historically point of view, in the early century the majority of the people knew the purpose of God, therefore, this led to them to respect God’s representatives on earth, the church. And today’s population lack the quality the other population had in the early century due to the lack of respect of God hence, the importance to involve his body the church in choosing a leaders is not seen.       

And currently, it can be observed on how the new generation of leaders oppresses the church if it defends its integrity. And this can further be observed through government policies that disrespect and humiliates the foundation on which the church is built on, which in the past was unacceptable. For example, the popularizing corruption propagandas that most leaders use to gain popularity while degrading the value of the church.

In other countries, the church has suffered many attacks due to its independent decisions on social, economic and political situations. The latest one being, the governmental crackdown on the Catholic Church in southern Africa due to its demand for a constitution on behalf of the people.

The other reason, why modern churches have lost their powers on governance is that, the church members have failed to distinguish their political agendas from their beliefs. This has harmed the church so badly, because failure to distinguish beliefs from political agendas is like fighting an inside unknown family member. With this in mind, they readers can bear witness that most modern churches are on government payrolls compared to old ones that ran their finances independently, hence this limits they criticism and credibility.

I believe the church serves in the best interest of the people and this has to be respected without targeting the operation of the church and its members. It can also be stated that, the church is a platform that has always condemned the injustice in our communities, therefore, its existence outlives governance and most be respected.

In conclusion, I believe the church has undergone a lot of changes, but I believe the church has not changed its goals since its foundation has never changed and I would like to advise governing bodies from all walks of life to respect the church, for the church can live without the state, but the state cannot live without the church, so it is the church's obligation to coach and mentor the new generation of leaders in order to encourage transparency.