If circumstances put you into a position of authority, then you must speak with the voice of authority. Of course you have to work within the parameters laid down for you, by law, or by tradition, or by superior orders; but within the narrow limits in which you are expected to use your discretion, you should try to use your own judgement, and not rely on someone else’s, unless your experience is too limited to do anything else. This is so, whether you are a National Service subaltern still pretty green behind the ears, or summing-up to a jury with a lifetime’s experience behind you. You must speak with the voice of authority, even if you sometimes make mistakes; and if you do not, everyone else will recognise that you are not up to the job. In Court if you do not speak with the voice of authority, advocates may flatter you, in the hope of taking advantage of your various weaknesses of character for the benefit of their clients; but unless you are incredibly conceited, you ought to recognise that they are treating you with contempt. If in a position of authority, you do not speak with the voice of authority, everyone sees it with perfect clarity. If clergymen had imagination, they would see that speaking with authority is the modern version of the imitation of Christ.
St. Thomas Aquinas suggested five proofs for the existence of God, which all had the refreshing recognition that creation itself was the best evidence of the Creator. But as Sir Edmund Whittaker explains in his excellent book, “Space and Spirit”, these are only persuasive proofs, not rigorous proofs. The first two proofs are of “the unmoved mover” and of “the ultimate efficient cause”: proofs which had been known for a very long time. But to my mind, even to talk or write in this manner betrays the fact that you are still thinking Man’s thoughts. Better by far to recognise that God, if He exists, is the creator of all movement, the creator of all causation. In the same way, Meister Eckhart said that it was quite wrong to say that God was “good”, because God was beyond “goodness”, indeed He was the source of all “goodness”; and to call Him “good” was to limit Him to the qualities of His own creation. And when you talk about Man being made in the image of God, if you ever do, you ought to mean that man’s situation is somewhat similar; inasmuch as when someone is in a position of authority, he should speak with authority. He should not speak as though he was the mouth-piece of his superior. He should talk with the authority with which he has been invested. Anyone can tell the difference.
It follows that when people say that “Man is made in the image of God”, the correct conclusion is that all men are terribly unequal; as different as a leader is from those who need to be led. Few things are more frightening than being led by someone who manifestly is not up to the job, at least if physical danger is involved.