It is not fitting for a fool to live in luxury, much less for a slave to rule over princes.
Two narratives pop up in human thought throughout history: the victim narrative (prominent now) and the success narrative (prominent in Christ’s day, as well as now). On the one hand, men derive righteousness and power from victimhood; they harness ressentiment and the assurance that to be below in force is to stand above in morals. On the other hand, men point to their own power as either the proof of their righteousness (as the Pharisees, still mildly sane if utterly treacherous, chose to do) or as the fundament of it (might makes right, and this is the basic position of the modern state, of the courts and the legislatures). The Christian does not subscribe to either model of power’s relation to righteousness; he knows that these both prioritize the wrong end of the equation. God has created a connection, but it runs from righteousness to prosperity, not the reverse.
Proverbs 19:10 is a distressing verse, actually, on first glance, to our American (or Western) eyes. To us, ‘slavery’ may not be used ever as an indictment of character; we despise, with all the individualism we can muster, the idea of placing the prince’s moral character above that of the slave. Both, we say, can be righteous, and we’re right. Both, we say (if we think clearly), are often wicked. Historically, two of the most striking sources of atrocity are slave revolts (see Haiti in the early 1800s) and state action (see the entire 20th century). But doesn’t the verse draw a line, denigrating the slave’s character as making him unworthy to take the prince’s place, just as the fool is unworthy of the blessing of comfort?
I won’t bother with the assertion that the slave is unfit because he is untrained. The elite are often untrained and typically trend towards incompetence over time, and that’s not the point of the verse anyway. The point becomes clear when we consider the concept of ‘slavery’ which Scripture presents. Scripturally, slavery does include the external state, perhaps gained by ancestral oppression or being taken captive in war. That state, as we know from Philemon, is of no shame to the slave. Slavery in Scripture, at its core, is a willing abdication of stewardship over oneself (Deut. 15:16-17). This may in some part be voluntary (as it is in Deuteronomy 15:16) or an accepted and foreseen result of debt, but in large part it rises from vice. The man who abdicates from stewarding himself, obviously, is unfit to steward a people, to lead them in the civil government or in other areas.
This unfitness becomes even clearer when we consider the idea of slavery which Paul presents in Romans 6:16-18, of men who are “slaves to sin.” Yet the implications of this statement are immensely offensive to our pluralistic age. If the slave is unfit to rule, and every man who knows not Christ is a slave to sin, has given up his will and his desires to death (Rom. 8:22), then Christians alone are qualified to lead.
From this follows a double duty. On the one hand, Christians must seek leadership. First, that leadership ought to be of ourselves as persons; we must first be free in Christ (Matt. 11:29-30) and not slaves. Our first duty is to God, encompassing all others, which leads to a duty to honor Him in ourselves, as a means of honoring Him elsewhere and of loving His creation. Second, that leadership must be of our families, in the way that each is called by God (see Ephesians 5-6 and elsewhere), child as child, mother-and-wife as mother-and-wife, father-and-husband as father-and-husband. This is the next rung of duty.
Yet our duty of leadership does not stop there. It extends out, less clearly hierarchied now, to the rest of life. We ought to be leaders in business, in culture, in society, in education (though that’s properly part of the family duty), in the church, and in civil government. Note that Proverbs 19:10 actually directly references ‘princes.’ Slaves are unfit to rule, and Christians alone have true freedom and the potential for nearing the greatest expression of that freedom (for we are still prone to sin (1 John 1:10)).
On the other hand, however, we cannot simply demand that leadership as our right. Christian leadership is not gained or kept by mere assertion; that is the world’s way, and to demand leadership in the world’s way just demonstrates a heart still slaved to sin, to our cupidity and impatience. John 14:15 lays out the path of freedom: ““If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” As per Ezekiel 43:11, Christian repentance leads directly into a responsibility to His law.
Christians must strive for leadership by surpassing excellence in righteousness, a righteousness which includes diligence and creativity and rest in Him (Mark 2:27). It’s how the West rose to greatness, of course, that Christian striving towards righteousness, towards full stewardship of His creation (Gen. 1:28, 9:1,7). Leadership rises from righteousness; power and the rule of the earth comes from righteousness. God does not make an unfitting world; what was wrong will be put right (Ps. 94). Perhaps we’ll not see it easily; indeed we’ll not see it in full in this life. But He will work so that the righteous, whom He called to leadership, do indeed lead in the end. Righteousness lifts the poor to be kings, in nature (Matt. 5:5) and eventually even in history (1 Sam. 16:1).
God bless.
Sanctuary Functional Medicine, under the direction of Dr Eric Potter, IFMCP MD, provides functional medicine services to Nashville, Middle Tennessee and beyond. We frequently treat patients from Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Ohio, Indiana, and more... offering the hope of healthier more abundant lives to those with chronic illness.
Colson Potter writes copious fiction and nonfiction, including a weekly Proverbs post and his blog at Creational Story.
