Skip to main content

A Permit?

A permit?  A permit?  Really?  A permit?

Doesn't that sound sort of totalitarian to anyone else?

I work in an industry in which we interact often with our local and state health departments.  Several of the major services that we provide require us to get a permit from the local health department.  The local officials are occasionally genuine, but they are almost always condescending and almost never have respect for private property as such.

In the United States of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave, a homeowner is required to get a permit before doing almost anything to his property.  Some localities are worse than others, but they are all required by state and federal authorities to restrict the citizens' freedoms in meaningful ways.

How did we get here?  How did we get to the point where we allow government officials to require us to let them permit us to drill a well or build a house?

How did "Give me or liberty or give me death!" become "Please let me add a bathroom onto the back of my house"?

When did we start leasing our castles from Uncle Sam?

When did we turn back the clock to the manorialism of medieval Europe?

Well, you say, permit is just a word!  Don't overthink it!  It's just a way to organize society and document what happens on properties.

No, language reflects attitudes.  Words reflect assumptions.  When my local county tells me I have to file for a permit, which may or may not be granted, they are telling me that I don't really own my land.  I am not a free man on my own land.  I am a serf, living and dying at the behest of my overlord.

Did I mention that permits cost money?  Of course they do!  Government bureaucracies aren't cheap!  We have to find a way to fund the intrusive government agencies we create!

That's the salt in the wound.  Not only do you have to beg "Massa" to let you modify your own home and to regulate how you do it, but you actually have to pay him to do so!  They can't come out and inspect your work for free!

There's just something about that word: permit.

Really think about that word for a minute.  Contemplate the underlying presuppositions of that word.  Consider the ramifications of those presuppositions.

Permit.

Is that the language of free men?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...