Religious authority, religious leadership, or leadership of a religious organisation - same difference? An effort in clarification

Why is the term “religious authority” often understood as “leadership of a religious organisation” and not as speaking authoritative words of God. This question is explored in this paper. The author firs identifies the sources that brought her to an understanding of authority as a relational and dynamic concept, that has to do with speaking words that inspire the other grow, to realize what she or he might be capable of being. She explains that this interpretation of authority comes close to religious authority when it is connected to Luce Irigaray’s notion of a divine horizon that offers orientation for this process of growth. A religious authority would then be someone who speaks words of orientation, that are valued as authoritative. This interpretation differs from the dominant interpretation of authority as the power to command or enforce one’s views and of religious authority as referring to the leadership of religious organizations. Using Hannah Arendt’s text “What is authority?” as well as other sources, the author traces the origin of this understanding of religious authority from the classical period to modernity. She concludes that religious authority understood as leadership of a religious organization is the effect of equating “being in authority” with “being an authority”. Whereas the first refers to the legitimation of authority and therefore as the legitimation of the power to command, the second one presents authority as a relational and dynamic process that is not fastened to a position, but located in everyday life. Authority is freely granted to someone who speaks words that can be trusted and believed in because they are life giving.