"The Lenses of Reformation Concerning Corruption in Illinois Civil Servants"
by Dr. Patti Amsden
The nation and the culture of Israel was formed from the pattern that God gave to Moses in a direct download from heaven. Israel was to be an earthly reflection of heaven’s government. God gave the laws, and Moses appointed judges to ensure that the laws were upheld and enforced. Because these judges would be exercising authority and power over the populace, certain qualifications were prescribed that would help to safeguard the integrity of the office against the potential carnal tendencies in humanity. One of those precautions declared that the civil leaders could not take bribes, which is a personal payment received for services either rendered or hoped for. (Ex. 18:21)
Reformation lens #1 – The combination of civil power and wealth transmitted by a bribe is too great for even good men to resist, therefore God prohibits bribe-taking.
Bribery threatens the social order. God repeatedly admonished Israel against her leaders receiving bribes (Deut. 16:19; Is. 1:23; Amos 5:12; Ps. 26:10; I Sam. 12:3). Those offering bribes know that rulers have the power to make or to enforce the laws in their favor or against them. When men think that they can buy a civil official, it is because the ruler is already corrupt or because the briber intends to corrupt the official. The civil guardian is no longer guarding the law, justice, and the society but is, rather, looking out for his own personal gain. The populace will eventually lose faith in a bribe-ridden social order.
Reformation lens #2 – Extensive bribery in civil officials is a sign of widespread corruption in the nation.
Bribery was the sin of Samuel’s two evil sons (I Sam.8:5). As the people of Israel began to lose faith that justice and truth were being distributed from those in seats of authority, they cried out for a stronger, more centralized government. It may have been hard for Samuel to take a stand against the appeal for a king when the judicial failure of Hophni and Phinehas may have contributed to that demand. Samuel sat in a higher seat of authority than his sons, yet he did not take action to rectify the covetousness within the system.
Reformation lens #3 – Selling God’s judgment to the highest bidder will invoke the intervention of higher civil agencies or the direct intervention from God, who will visit His judgment upon the corrupt ruler and their society.
As reformers, we must understand that the power to make laws and dispense justice is a responsibility bestowed upon rulers from the Lord. Rom. 13:1-4 refers to these civil rulers as ministers of God, therefore they must adhere to His covenant and uphold His righteous ways. Unfaithfulness to this duty and office is frequently spoken of in metaphors that are also used about marital infidelity. Someone is said to “betray” a spouse or a public trust. The word “faithless” is applied to both. The phrase “to corrupt” is a long-standing expression for a man who would seduce a woman or pay off an official. One who receives a bribe steps outside of covenantal ethics and thus betrays the bond of unity that must exist within the civil covenant.
Reformation lens #1 – The combination of civil power and wealth transmitted by a bribe is too great for even good men to resist, therefore God prohibits bribe-taking.
Bribery threatens the social order. God repeatedly admonished Israel against her leaders receiving bribes (Deut. 16:19; Is. 1:23; Amos 5:12; Ps. 26:10; I Sam. 12:3). Those offering bribes know that rulers have the power to make or to enforce the laws in their favor or against them. When men think that they can buy a civil official, it is because the ruler is already corrupt or because the briber intends to corrupt the official. The civil guardian is no longer guarding the law, justice, and the society but is, rather, looking out for his own personal gain. The populace will eventually lose faith in a bribe-ridden social order.
Reformation lens #2 – Extensive bribery in civil officials is a sign of widespread corruption in the nation.
Bribery was the sin of Samuel’s two evil sons (I Sam.8:5). As the people of Israel began to lose faith that justice and truth were being distributed from those in seats of authority, they cried out for a stronger, more centralized government. It may have been hard for Samuel to take a stand against the appeal for a king when the judicial failure of Hophni and Phinehas may have contributed to that demand. Samuel sat in a higher seat of authority than his sons, yet he did not take action to rectify the covetousness within the system.
Reformation lens #3 – Selling God’s judgment to the highest bidder will invoke the intervention of higher civil agencies or the direct intervention from God, who will visit His judgment upon the corrupt ruler and their society.
As reformers, we must understand that the power to make laws and dispense justice is a responsibility bestowed upon rulers from the Lord. Rom. 13:1-4 refers to these civil rulers as ministers of God, therefore they must adhere to His covenant and uphold His righteous ways. Unfaithfulness to this duty and office is frequently spoken of in metaphors that are also used about marital infidelity. Someone is said to “betray” a spouse or a public trust. The word “faithless” is applied to both. The phrase “to corrupt” is a long-standing expression for a man who would seduce a woman or pay off an official. One who receives a bribe steps outside of covenantal ethics and thus betrays the bond of unity that must exist within the civil covenant.
