p. 7 | Source of Authority by John Flavel Bliss

Pacific Press Publishing Association · Mountain View, California · Apr 28, 1909

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 36, No. 17.

Source of Authority

By John Flavel Bliss

In matters of religion, the people are never the fountain of power, but God. The tail is not to be the head nor the head to be treated as the tail. In civil and political matters the people are the source of power, but in religion God is the only source of power. Where did the chain of title to power, among these modern rulers over these modern folds or kingdoms, built by men and enlarged by such stratagems, begin? In the kingdom of the pope; it began with the first founder of popery. In the Church of England it began with one of the kings, his Parliament, and the bishops. In the Presbyterian kingdom it began at John Calvin. In the Methodist kingdom it began at John Wesley. So in the kingdom of freemasonry the chain of title to power began at Elias Ashmole. In Mormonism, at Joe Smith; and in the kingdom of darkness the chain of title to power began at Beelzebub.

Suppose Beelzebub had an office in heaven, could he exercise that office in the kingdom of darkness? Were the terms upon which he received that office in heaven such, that he might exercise it in heaven for a while, then rebel, then be thrust down to hell, and still exercise that office as legitimate in hell? Suppose the first founders of popery held offices. Were they empowered to exercise those offices in the kingdom of Christ for a while, then to rebel, then to build up a rival and an opposing fold; and still to exercise those same offices in this rebellious and new-formed fold or kingdom? When an officer in an army becomes the head of a mutiny and revolts, and fights against the army where his office was derived, does he hold his office any longer as of the original army? — Certainly not. As soon as any officer of any description begins to act in a revolted, or another government, his office from the first, in the nature of things, ceases, and becomes void. To pretend to exercise it in another government, or kingdom, or army, or country, or fold, than that where it was conferred, is perfectly absurd in the nature of things. To turn vulture upon the government which conferred it, and still to exercise it as of that government, is the most absurd thing in nature.

If the first founders of popery had offices under the kingdom of Christ, yet as soon as they began to build up popery — and opposing government — their offices ceased. They usurped and assumed all the power they exercised in the new government after that. So also when Henry the VIII and his bishops revolted from popery, they all lost the office they held even from the pope, and from that time forward assumed and usurped all the power they exercised, and were perfect usurpers. — John Flavel Bliss.