The basic problem can be brought to the question whether power has its supernatural (God's) sources, or is it the consequence of what is called social development?
The answers to this dilemma can, of course, be different, but it is not easy to find them and put them up. And even due to the fact that the unearthly giving of it, as a necessity derived from the very essence of life, does not necessarily conflict with its description as a Community phenomenon. We gotta put it this way: our position depends on where we start our narrative. due to the fact that indeed: what has its supernatural sources can, or actually must, besides manifest itself in the form of a social phenomenon.
We can presume for a minute that this is only a problem of the alleged conceptual apparatus, or even the fashions of the reigning eras. If this is the case: we come to relativization and the opinion that everything is just a choice of vocabulary, and so fact does not actually exist. That is not the case! To get out of the cognitive trap, the first thesis should be correctly given, as the 1 derived in the first part may not be adequate and not know the correct conclusion. And so the designation of God's sources of power (let us make it clear that political) may mean, for example, that the necessity of its existence is due to the essence of human nature derived from God, not that in all historical case it is the consequence of supernatural intervention into human life.
In turn, the other view of this phenomenon is understandable as a phenomenon of historical nature only, nor is it unambiguous. For example, is power a prerequisite for society to exist? Or is it of a casual nature, and in specified circumstances it can disappear, and life goes on? We see that this full human dilemma should be highlighted somewhat differently. It seems that it is not about – or simply – that the Creator's power has been incorporated into our self, but that each time God himself designates it. In the second case, is power a contract or a social agreement? You supply the Lord's service, and within certain limits, we obey you, and we actually tolerate you as 1 of the participants in the contract.
Let us consider these matters, starting with the second. Here we request to see any weaknesses of this dominant, liberal world, view. If power is the consequence of a circumstantial agreement, or even any kind of doctrinal fiction, it is besides appropriate to ask: a contract with whom? Even if it were to presume that constitutions were these fundamental acts, this phenomenon of power was never about that. How do we know there are 2 sides to the agreement, and here if the people always and inactive be – then who designates those who are to rule? Actually, you don't know. For example, it may be that individual in, for example, secret societies should aspire for power. Fiction and utopia are crucial issues. Let's start with the reflection that if it does not have these sources – what does it have? We observe that it is attributed to man. There are different varieties of it. But limiting it to incorporation into our nature is besides much of an inclination to liberal doctrines. For God participates in past and is besides a donor of all peculiar power. We call it Anointing.
Antoni Koniuszewski
Think Poland, No. 39-40 (22-29.09.2024)
