government forms the basis of future CIVIL DISOBEDI-
ENCE. It limits the power of earthly states.
Augustine also wrote on international politics, pro-
claiming that in a sinful world, war would not be elim-
inated and so Christians may participate in just wars
where one country is defending itself or has a claim to
justice greater than its opponent. Still, it is the church’s
duty to encourage peaceful resolutions of political
conflicts.
St. Augustine remains the premier Christian politi-
cal thinker in the West, influencing most churches and
church–state relations ever since.
Further Readings
Augustine, St. The City of God,D. Knowles, ed. H. Bettenson,
transl. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin, 1972.
———. The Political Writings of St. Augustine,Intro. by Henry
Paoluci, ed., including an interpretative analysis by Dino
Bigongiari. South Bend, Ind.: Gateway Editions, 1962.
———. De Libero Arbitrio Voluntatis.(St. Augustine on free
will), Carroll Mason Sparrow, transl. Charlottesville: Uni-
versity of Virginia Press, 1947.
Brown, P. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography.London: Faber &
Faber, 1967.
Markus, R. A. Saeculum: History and Society in the Theology of
St. Augustine. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University
Press, 1970.
Marrou, H. I. St. Augustine and His Influence through the Ages.
New York: Harper Torch, 1957.
Martin, R. “The two cities of Augustine’s political philosophy.”
Journal of the History of Ideas33 (1972).
authority
In political thought, authority is the power to rule,
control, or set standards. It may exist in a person(s); in
a position; within a political structure or social system;
or in a law, document, or dogma. Authority implies
that this rule or preeminence is accepted or legitimate,
recognized, obeyed, and respected. All polities and
political theory have some standard of accepted
authority, except for radical LIBERTARIANtheories or the-
ories of ANARCHISM, which place all authority solely
within each individual. Authority is often contrasted
with LIBERTYor FREEDOM, and most great thinkers have
tried to reconcile individual and social liberty with just
authority. Radical DEMOCRATICmovements, which often
correspond with claims to universal EQUALITY, are often
hostile to all authority. Frequently, revolutions (such
as the French of 1789 and the Russian of 1917) begin
by attacking established authority (king, church, pri-
vate PROPERTY) but ended up establishing more author-
itarian governments and reducing social liberty even
more than in the past. The question then is: What con-
stitutes a good, just authority?
In PLATO’s Republic,just authority is rule by the
PHILOSOPHER-KINGS, exercising wisdom and VIRTUEin
governance. He contrasts this with the increasingly
less just authority of other regimes (the rule of the
military, the wealthy, the common people, and the
tyrant). ARISTOTLE’s Politicsviews the best authority as
that of the collective deliberation of the Greek POLIS
made up of well-educated, virtuous, civic-minded
citizens. This ultimately places good authority in Rea-
son or the best intellectual part of humanity. ROMAN
LAW, for CICERO, embodies this best Reason, so it
enjoys respectable authority over the whole Roman
Empire. The Judeo-CHRISTIAN political tradition sees
all authority as emanating from God and channeled
through his anointed rulers (Moses, King David,
Jesus Christ, etc.). Even cruel rulers can be used by
God to punish human sin, and the condemned Jesus
tells the Roman governor Pontius Pilate that earthly
rulers would not have power unless God gave it to
them, so they are responsible to God for how they use
it. After his Resurrection, Jesus proclaimed (in
Matthew 28:18), “All authority in heaven and earth
has been given to me.” Believing this, the MEDIEVAL
church claimed that European kings were God’s ser-
vants and accountable to God for their actions. If the
ruler was not faithful, the church could remove his
authority. Similarly, the American PURITANSbelieved
their legitimate authority and prosperity rested on
designing and maintaining a society in conformity to
God’s law. Moral authority and political authority are
linked in this view.
MODERNviews of authority tend to be more formal
or legalistic. Max WEBER described three kinds of
authority: (1) charismatic (based on the leader’s per-
sonality); (2) traditional (based on the leader’s past or
hereditary rule); and (3) legal–rational. The last char-
acteristic of modern BUREAUCRACYplaces authority in
positionsrather people. So, for example, the authority
in U.S. national government resides in offices (the
presidency, Congress, courts) with specific powers and
prestige, not in individuals (who come and go). So, in
the modern world, authority tends to rest in the offi-
cial position a person occupies, and when he or she
leaves that office, the authority ends except for any
personal or moral authority the person retains. For
example, President Jimmy CARTERcontinued in politi-
cal life (as a peace negotiator, etc.) after leaving office
on the basis of his personal moral authority.24 authority