BY
TIM MCCOWAN
Principalities and Powers: Contrasting
Views
Introduction
This concept of the powers, of their
function in the world, of their defeat by Christ, and of the witness of the
church to them is of central concern in early Christianity (Webber 1986, 14).
One of the most important and animated
discussions occurring in missiological circles today has to do with the
rediscovery of the so-called "principalities and powers" referred to
in Scripture. What are these realities? How do we make sense of them?
It seems the language that Paul and
others used for these entities correlates with the very wide range of
experiences of Christian practitioners—pastors and missionaries struggling
against powerful spiritual forces as they seek to bring the gospel to their neighborhoods; social activists tackling fatalistic
thinking within their communities; churches facing pressures from authoritarian
governments or secularism; Christian politicians attempting to uphold laws of
justice or pass bills protecting rights of minorities in Congress; teachers
battling with bureaucratic red-tape in the education system; and Christian
psychologists addressing the subtle powers of darkness that seem to grip their
clients from within. All of them seem to face a revival of interest in
"the powers."
While this growth in interest is
exciting and potentially transformative for the shape of the church as it
enters the twenty-first century, it has unleashed a number of practices of a
very ill-advised nature. In addition, it has brought a wave of confusion among
believers, and at times resulted in more social and spiritual problems than it
cured. What one church perceives as a blessing from God, another perceives as
an evil spirit needing to be exorcized. The confusion, I believe, springs from
two reasons. One is the ambiguous language for these entities used by the New
Testament writers-one verse seemingly referring to supernatural spiritual
beings, then a few verses later, to historical persons or social structures.
And two, there is a lack of awareness of the breadth of different
understandings of the gospel and therefore the range of possible responses to
these principalities.
It is for this second reason that I
wish to present this brief survey of the main views:
It is my earnest hope that this exploration
may help contribute to a better appreciation of the different models being
practiced, to more and healthier dialogues between the different traditions and
groups. Ultimately, I hope that this will ignite ideas for creative joint
engagements of these powers for the sake of Jesus and the unity of his body on
earth, the church.
A Clash of Models
To illustrate the sort of variety of
approaches and consequent clash of models that exists between different
Christian traditions or groups, I would like to take as an example the problem
of graft and corruption. Not all believers, of course, perceive graft and
corruption to be part of the "principalities and powers" referred to
in Eph 6:12. However, I choose this because of its widespread practice, and the
perception that it is a social evil of immense power.
One tradition responds to graft and
corruption by initiating evangelistic Bible studies within government offices,
police and other departments involved. It is hoped that by doing this, the
gospel's power (through receiving Christ) will operate to resist graft and
corruption.
A second tradition urges its members to
enter government, the legal profession, the police department and other areas
of the social order to exercise their God-given gifts and callings to legislate
and campaign against such evils.
Another church gives social, economic
and spiritual support to their members to reject such practices when under
temptation, and to demonstrate a willingness to forego material gain and thus
not yield to Mammon-the more insidious and widespread evil behind graft. They
are encouraged, if necessary, to suffer the loss of the item or service
involved.
The fourth group holds a large prayer
rally in front of the departments, offices, at intersections, and in other
places where such things are practiced. These people engage in authoritative
"cosmic warfare" with the spirits of graft and corruption, tearing
down their strongholds over the city.
Another group works from the other
side-they begin networking and building community and people's organizations
and educating the wider populace in creative and non-violent action to resist
such exploitation.
Finally, there are those who set up
seminar workshops in the departments concerned, to address the psychological
causes, processes and powers that tempt people toward graft and corruption, and
to encourage their clients and staff to find positive alternatives.1
One can see that there are various
approaches and responses to the problem of graft and corruption, based on
different definitions of the "power" and the various strategies for
engaging them.
An Eclectic, Ecumenical
Experience
I do not hold a strong bias against any
of these models. In fact, I have grown to appreciate through experience the
value of each tradition for the truths from Scripture that it highlights, yet
recognizing that truth is often broader than our own limited perception.2
Having been converted as an evangelical
in a relatively liberal Presbyterian church, I was socialized in the Calvinist-Reformed
understanding that many of these realities are structural rather than
spiritual. But I was strongly discipled by evangelical leaders who taught me
that these realities are personalized, spiritual, supernatural forces that
bring temptation. They are agents of the devil, which I must resist. I then
transferred membership to a charismatic Baptist church (and studied at a
Baptist Seminary). Here, I was schooled into both the Anabaptist tradition
which makes a strong separation between the church and the sociopolitical
order, and the so-called "power evangelism" of the Third Wavers. I
then spent twelve months with Youth With A Mission (YWAM) in overseas
ministries where I not only saw, but experienced first-hand the power of the
Holy Spirit in changing and healing people, opening up areas and cities through
prayer and prophetic action.
More recently, since being involved in
a Christian mission organization, working alongside the urban poor here in
I have chosen four different traditions
of the church3, and two extra models (one from a sociological and
another from a psychological perspective) to illustrate the different interpretations
and methods for engaging the powers. I will briefly outline the primary
worldview and interpretation of the powers, then review their model of
engagement, and make some points about their relative strengths and weaknesses.
There is a multiplicity of variations
within each tradition, and some will be able to see their practice readily
fitting into more than one model. My purpose in outlining these approaches is
not to restrict people into one view or stereotype, but to demonstrate the
breadth of views, and to open ways for exploration and learning from different
traditions and experiences. It is my sincere conviction that each tradition
offers valuable insights into both the nature of our conflict with the powers
and the means available to us for engaging them.
Reformed Tradition: Reform the
Powers
Background
This tradition arose during the years
when the church had various socio-political powers alongside the state, due to
its size and influence. Its Protestant form is most closely aligned with the
teaching of the Swiss Reformer, John Calvin. Its basic stance to the wider
society is one of "world formative" Christianity.4
This group largely operates from a
position of relative power in relation to the state. It is represented today by
some of the larger Protestant denominations and the position of the Roman
Catholic Church.
Worldview
God has created the world and has given
us dominion. However, humankind, together with the rest of the created order,
has fallen. In response, God has provided the means for our salvation (Jesus
Christ and his gospel) as well as tools for the ongoing work of salvation,
re-creation and reconciliation-structures, powers, conscience, intelligence and
so on-to exercise his authority through us in the world, in ways compatible
with the gospel.
View of the Powers
Most Reformers such as Mott, Caird,
Mouw, and Barth, see these powers as supernatural and independent entities that
penetrate the social, political, economic and religious structures.
George Caird (1976, 46) believes that
Paul's terms refer to "spiritual beings who preside over all the forms and
structures of power operative in the corporate life of men." He (91) goes
on to say that our "real enemies are the spiritual forces that stand
behind all institutions of government, and control the lives of men and
nations." Similarly, Charles Mott says:
Evil exists external to the individual
not only in the order of society but also in the social and political roles of
powerful supernatural beings. [These entities] are able to rule because
individuals follow their influence and conform themselves to the world-order in
actions which are system serving rather than system critical (Mott 1982, 6,
14).
However, he is careful to make the
distinction:
World-order and the evil presence of
the powers are never synonymous with the concrete forms of social and
institutional life.... The powers are always present along with enslavement and
death in small or large degree; but their real existence is behind the scenes
in a system of hostile values vying for control of the life of the world (Mott,
15).
There are other theologians of the
Reformed tradition, such as Walter Wink and Lesslie Newbigin, who take a more
inter-related perspective, seeing the spiritual and structural as not identical
but virtually inseparable. Wink, in his comprehensive trilogy on the powers,
argues:
These entities are the inner and outer aspects
of any given manifestation of power. As the inner aspect they are the
spirituality of institutions, the ‘within’ of corporate structures and systems,
the inner essence of outer organizations of power. As the outer aspect they are
political systems, appointed officials, the ‘chair’ of an organization, laws—in
short, all the tangible manifestations which power takes (Wink 1984, 5).
Newbigin, who draws on Wink's analysis,
explains:
These powers do not exist apart from
the human agencies in which they are embodied—Pilate, Herod, Caiaphas. Yet they
are not identical.... They refer ... to that which is behind them, to the power
which they represent and exercise but which is not identical to them (Newbigin
1989, 202).
In their struggle to find a language to
explain this interrelationship that is not overly dependent on spatial
metaphors, these theologians endeavor to clear up a common misconception. While
Ephesians says that the realm of these powers is the heavenly places, this does
not imply that they hover over our heads like vultures. After all,
"according to Paul; those who are in Christ are already seated in the
heavenly places where Christ is" (Eph
Method of Engagement
The typical model of engagement of the
powers by the Reformers is social action:
In combating evil in the heart through
evangelism and Christian nurture we deal with a crucial aspect of evil, but
only one aspect. Dealing with the evil of the social order and worldly powers
involves social action, action in the world (Mott, 16).
Although most acknowledge the spiritual
aspect, only Wink suggests ways of actually engaging the spiritual power
through intercession and creative non-violent action.
Goal of Engagement
Members of the Reformed group believe that
their work of social action is a participation in Christ's work of bringing all
things under his feet (1 Cor
[in] the end,
all the created world, people, supernatural powers, natural forces, and
institutions, will be conformed to the will of God (Mott, 101).
Example
An example of Filipinos following the
Reformed tradition was the involvement of the evangelical Greg Tingson and
Father Joaquin Bernas, S.J., in the writing of a new constitution in 1987, to
prevent another situation of dictatorship and martial law in the country.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Two of the strengths of the Reformed
model include their strong conviction that Jesus is Lord of all the earth, and
not just of the church, and their awareness that all authority is ultimately
from God, the Creator of all and Redeemer, which frees them to participate in a
broad range of social, political, economic and religious roles to transform
society according to the kingdom of God.
Some weaknesses are that, while they
give verbal assent to the reality of supernatural beings, they rarely discuss
how one is to tackle the spiritual aspect of these entities.5 Their
lack of tools for addressing the spiritual dimension while holding positions of
power in society has left them open to compromising their faith, and to being
tempted to push their own political agenda, rather than to upholding the gospel
values of justice for the poor.
Radical Anabaptist Tradition: Be
a Challenging Alternative to the Powers
Background
This group is associated with the
so-called Radical Reformation. This movement attempted to literally apply many
of the key doctrines of reformers, such as Luther and Zwingli, regarding the
separation of church and state, the priesthood of all believers, and adult
profession of faith. They are represented today in many small evangelical
denominations that advocate a strong distinction between the church and the
wider society.
View of the Powers
The Anabaptists understand the powers
to be a myriad of social, spiritual, economic and political forces and entities
that exercise domination. These powers are intent on unseating Christ's
victorious position as the Ultimate Authority and Power. Vernard Eller
explains:
In Colossians
Precisely because Jesus is THE ARKY,
the Prime of Creation, the Principal of All Good, the Prince of Peace and
Everything Else, Christians dare never grant a human arky, the primacy it
claims for itself (Eller 1987, 1-2).
Jacques Ellul puts it even more
starkly:
While it is true that all authority
comes from God, it is also true that
every manifestation of power is an expression of the might of Satan.... There
is no such thing as a good ruler ... [nor] good master.... Satan controls this
power and he grants it in order that men should subjugate one another.... In
contrast, Jesus reminds us that he has not come to exercise power but to serve.
In the Bible authority is always the authority of service (Ellul 1976, 55).
Method of Engagement
The Anabaptist model of engaging the
powers is through nurturing their distinctiveness as a church or "contrast
society" (Clohfink 1984, 122-132) from the wider society and its powers.
They do this by applying what they believe was an important ethic of Jesus,
namely, "voluntary subordination," which undermine the illusion of
the powers' dominance. The Jesuit Gerhard Clohfink also understands things from
this perspective. He argues that Jesus' preaching about the kingdom and call
for repentance aimed to ignite within the people of God a movement in
comparison to which the normal type of revolution is insignificant.... Jesus'
call for nonviolence and renunciation of domination implies the perspective of
a new society, one which stands in sharp contrast to secular societies marked
by the will to overpower and control (Clohfink, 123-124).
Jesus confronted the powers by refusing
to follow their pattern of exercising "violent lordship." His
"revolutionary 'subordination" was the mode of his victory over the
powers. In the same way, we, as Christians, must "accept
powerlessness."7 Yoder elaborates:
The willingness to suffer is then not
merely a test of our patience [but] ... is itself a participation in the
character of God's victorious patience with the rebellious powers of his
creation. We subject ourselves to government because it was in so doing that
Jesus revealed and achieved God's victory (Yoder 1972, 213).
In the Anabaptist tradition, the powers
are not engaged directly. Their position is more one of defense.
The very existence of the church, in
which Gentiles and Jews, who heretofore walked according to the stoichea of the
world, live together in Christ's fellowship, is itself a proclamation, a sign,
a token to the Powers that their unbroken dominion has come 10 an end. Thus
even this text says nothing of a positive or aggressive approach to the Powers.
Such an approach is superfluous because the very presence of the church in a
world ruled by the Powers is a superlatively positive and aggressive fact...a
sign of the end time, of their incipient encirclement and their imminent
defeat.... All resistance and every attack against the gods of this age will be
unfruitful, unless the church herself is resistance and attack, unless she
demonstrates in her life and fellowship how men can live freed from the Powers
(Berkhof 1977, 51).
Berkhof outlines this stance in his
exposition of Eph 6:10-18:
Paul is not contemplating an offensive
against the Powers. ...The believer ... is not called to do more than he can do
by simply believing. His duty is not to bring the Powers to their knees. This
is Jesus Christ's own task. He has taken care of this thus far and will
continue to do so. We are responsible for the defense, just because he takes
care of the offense. Ours it is to hold the powers, their seduction, and their
enslavement, at a distance, '10 be able to stand against the wiles of the
devil' (Yoder, 152).
For in the church, however heavily
veiled, the principalities and powers discern the person of their conqueror,
the Lord Christ. The powers of the age to come are already at work in her,
frail and fallible though she is. And as such she reminds [them] of their doom
(Green 1991, 190).
An example of their commitment comes
from Berkhof who rightly warns:
We can only preach the manifold wisdom
of God to Mammon if our life displays that we are joyfully freed from his
clutches. To reject nationalism we must begin by no longer recognizing in our
own bosoms any difference between peoples. We shall resist social injustice and
the disintegration of community if justice and mercy prevail in our own common
life and social differences have lost their power to divide (Berkhof, 51).
Goal of Engagement
According to Berkhof, the powers are
reconciled with God through Christ's death.
Here Paul uses it [reconciliation] in a
broader sense, as meaning a restoration of proper relationships. In this sense
the Powers as well are objects of God's plan of redemption. By virtue of this
purpose they will no longer lie between man and God as a barrier,
but can and shall return to their original function, as instruments of God's
fellowship with his creation (Berkhof, 41).
Examples
The Anabaptists perceive not just
governments, but "churches, schools, philosophies, ideologies, social
standards, peer pressures, fads and fashions, advertising, planning techniques,
psychological and sociological theories, [as] arkys out to govern us"
(Eller, 1-2). The list could go on ad infinitum (Yoder, 144-145).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Some of the strengths of the Anabaptist
model are: one, its emphasis on the power of the gospel as truth that we can
live by, thereby giving us freedom, in relation to the powers; two, the value
it places on the church as a distinctive contrast-salt and light-that needs to
keep its distinctiveness, or "holiness," by nurturing itself on
gospel values such as the Sermon on the Mount; and third, the valuable check it
provides on our motivations for working for social transformation. Those in the
Anabaptist tradition would ask what power is really motivating our involvement.
Since they reject all coercive means for bringing change, their model does
provide an important corrective and challenge to churches used to authoritarian
styles of enforcing their particular religious practices.
Some weaknesses of the Anabaptist
approach are firstly, their entirely "defensive posture." Is this
justified when Paul's description of the Christian church's armory includes the
"sword of the Spirit" (Eph
A question for the Anabaptists is:
While the earnest attempt to stand apart from the powers and idols of society,
including Mammon, paganism and secularism is admirable, how possible is this in
reality?
Individualistic Evangelical:
Convert the Captives of the Powers
Background
The conservative evangelical movement
is a more recent tradition, initially finding its identity through the
theological debates over how one interprets the Scriptures with those of the
more liberal persuasion of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Worldview
This tradition has a strong
Christological and salvation focus, believing that Christ's work on the cross
was decisive in winning our salvation from sin, the powers and the devil. Our
work is merely to implement or apply our salvation by standing on our victory
in our own historical contexts, and highlighting the need for a conversion to
Christ, both for ultimate allegiance and the practice of personal values.
View of the Powers
The individualistic evangelical
perceives these powers to be spiritual beings exerting a moral force, seeking
to tempt individuals from following Christ, or doing his will. Most of the
temptations are toward personal sins-adultery and lying (Rowlinson 1995,
115)-rather than social sins such as economic exploitation and
institutionalized racism (Sider 1993, 33). John Stott (1979, 274), a
representative of this view, explains that "...the principalities and
powers are personal supernatural agencies." Yet at the same time, he
avoids denying "that they can use structures, traditions, institutions ...
for good or ill."
Method of Engagement
While some in this group acknowledge
that structures can be penetrated by these supernatural beings, their emphasis
is on delivering the "captives" of the principalities. The
"classic mode of warfare [is] evangelism, discipleship and personal
growth," (Rowlinson, 35) using our God-given freedom of will to choose for
Christ, and stand on the victory he won on the cross. The powers are
"willing to admit defeat only when faced with the name of Jesus Christ. He
is the conqueror and they are vulnerable only when approached on the ground of
his victory" (Green, 189). It is the church's task to maintain the victory,
reminding the powers through preaching the gospel, that they have been defeated
by the conqueror Jesus Christ. For the evangelical..."no Christian can
hope to enter the warfare of the ages without learning first to rest in Christ
and in what he had done, and then, through the strength of the Holy Spirit
within, to follow him in a practical holy life here on earth' (Nee 1957, 52).
"What Jesus did to fight spiritual warfare with moral evil is what we are
to do, namely, trust in God's word of truth and obey through the indwelling
power of the Holy Spirit" (Rowlinson, 74). Typically, individualistic
evangelicals understand the encounter to be one of truth rather than power (a
typical Third Wave perception).8 Neil Anderson represents this view
well when he says:
Since Satan's primary weapon is the
lie, your defense against him is the truth. Dealing with Satan is not a power
encounter, it's a truth encounter. When you expose Satan's lie with God's
truth, his power is broken (Anderson 1990, 170).
Goal of Engagement
The goal of this engagement is to
deliver the captives and have Christians living by the personal values of the
gospel. This tradition understands that the powers only operate until Christ
consummates his kingdom, at his second coming. At that point, the powers will
be destroyed: "The destiny of the forces of evil is destruction. They are
given over to the ruin which they have chosen and which they propagate"
(Green, 191).
Examples
We see examples of this group's engagement
with various campus ministries-groups holding evangelistic Bible studies among
politicians, teachers, factory workers, and others. The World Home Bible League
and the Moral Recovery Program are other local examples operating by this
model.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Some strengths of the individualistic
evangelical's approach include its emphasis on the completed work of Christ on
the cross in defeating the powers. This brings enormous reassurance and freedom
from anxiety and striving. The accent of this approach is on the necessity of a
heart conversion for real change to take place, and of faith in the power of
the gospel to transform individual lives.
On the other hand, a significant
weakness of this model is that it often exhibits a lack of awareness of the
inter-relatedness of the social, spiritual, and political with the personal. In
the case of graft and corruption, for instance, while there is value in even
one person who resists, there is a wider social and spiritual pressure to
address. A sad consequence of this stress on the individual's choice is that it
misses out on the communal support which the church can give to address
effectively these powerful forces.
A question for the individualistic
evangelicals is: Does the emphasis on the individual over the social, and the
spiritual over the physical really reflect Jesus' prophetic ministry of
healing, delivering, feeding, overturning the injustice in the temple, as well
as his preaching and teaching?
Third Wave: Exorcize the Powers
Background and Worldview
The name "Third Wave" was
first coined, I believe, in the 1980s, and represents the third of the
perceived waves of the Holy Spirit in this century. The first was the classic
pentecostal movement at the beginning of this century, the second was the
charismatic renewal movement of the 1960s and 19705 (McAlpine 1991, S) and the
third was the recognition of the giftedness of every believer with the power
and gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the expectation of signs accompanying
Christian witness.
Generally speaking, those representing
the Third Wave approach are practitioners involved in a variety of mission
situations. They relate the New Testament language of the powers to their
experiences with evil spirits, demons, or geographical areas exhibiting
particular resistance to the gospel.
View of the Powers
Peter Wagner, the most renowned
proponent and writer of Third Wave practices, agrees with Timothy Warner when
he describes his basic understanding
that Satan delegates high ranking
members of the hierarchy of evil spirits to control nations, regions, cities,
tribes, people groups, neighborhoods and other significant social networks of
human beings throughout the world. Their major assignment is to prevent God
from being glorified in their territory, which they d0 through directing the
activity of lower ranking demons (Wagner 1990, 77).
John Dawson, a popular YWAM speaker,
similarly understands Satan's kingdom to be a limited hierarchy of evil
spirits, with order, authority and chain of command.... High ranking,
supernatural personalities, referred to as principalities and powers in
Ephesians 6, seek to dominate geographic areas, cities, peoples and
subcultures.... God's word tells believers ... [that they are] given authority
to overcome the enemy as a result of Jesus' victory
(Dawson 1989, 137).
Another YWAM speaker on these issues,
Dean Sherman says:
'Principalities' (which are] often
referred to as 'territorial spirits'...are simply beings with broad areas of
influence in Satan's kingdom .... Satan has a specific strategy and has
assigned spirits for refugees, policemen, battered wives, telephone operators,
the blind, businessmen, and every one of the countless tiny and separate
groupings of humanity (Sherman 1990, 92, 95).
Method of Engagement
The Third Wavers primary method for
engaging the powers is through spiritual discernment and authoritative,
intercessory prayer. So in answering the question of how do we overcome the
enemy,
We discern the nature of his deception
and come in the opposite spirit. Being careful to resist temptation ourselves,
we continue in united prayer until authority is gained and God breaks through (
Goal of Engagement
Third Wavers typically do not see these
powers as having any redeeming qualities, and are doomed to suffer ultimate
annihilation at the coming of Christ.
Unlike most of the other traditions,
this model takes a rather pragmatic perspective on the reasons for involvement
in this warfare. "Mankind has been made to take dominion. It is necessary
that we face an antagonist during our brief apprenticeship on earth to qualify
in character to rule with Christ in eternity (Dawson 1989, 130). Unlike before,
when there seemed to be an over preoccupation with spiritual warfare, the Third
Wavers now qualify their involvement: "Spiritual Warfare is merely a means
to an end which is firstly, reconciling the lost to himself, and secondly,
bringing his body to maturity and wholeness" (
Ultimately, our goal is not to expose
satanic strongholds, unmask occultic deception, pursue spiritual mapping or
bind principalities and powers. Our goal is to restore God's glory to every
detail of his creation. Knowing God's redemptive gift provides specific,
positive direction to our praying and other activities in spiritual warfare
(Wagner 1993, 56).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Some strengths of the Third Wave model
are: one, it sees the importance of recognizing the spiritual nature of these
entities; two, it affirms the efficacy of God's power working through
authoritative, (faith-filled) intercessory prayer in dealing with these
spiritual realities; and three, it emphasizes the importance of waiting on God,
and of the need for spiritual discernment. Since most Third Wavers are
practitioners, their insights are readily applicable to those who are in
ministry. This practical focus is potentially empowering to many who might well
be struggling. Finally, the approach of combining prayer and prophetic o
symbolic action based on Jesus' social ethics is proving very helpful for the
wider church in validating the applicability of Jesus ethical stance.
A few weaknesses of this model include
its hermeneutics. The lack of sensitivity to the historical and cultural
context of this Scriptures has resulted in an indiscriminate use of the Old
Testament. Fears or biases can be projected out onto the community and be
called "territorial spirits," instead of going through the process of
careful discernment through a wide variety of spiritual disciplines. A further
weakness is that at times the advocates of this approach can appear overly
confrontational. This has had detrimental effects on further missionary
outreach in those communities in which they are situated.
The last two "traditions,"
the Social Activist and the Christian Psychological, are not Christian
traditions in the usual sense of the term. They are more like groupings of
Christians from different theological traditions who seek to relate the
biblical language of the powers to their model of reality. The first is more
sociological; the second more psychological.
Christian Social-Activist:
Subvert the Powers
Background and Worldview
This group embraces a wide assortment
of different Christian groups, associations, organizations, and churches that
have a common mission focus of organizing and empowering grassroots communities
or marginalized groups. They share the presupposition that institutions,
structures, and authorities of the social order depend on the support of the
"common people" for their power.
They include Base Ecclesial Communities,
urban poor churches, many NGOs, people's organizations, Micro-Enterprise
organizations, and liberation movements.
View of the Powers
Most of these practitioners draw on the
theological and exegetical research of others for their conceptual framework.
And so one writes of the growing consensual view that the principalities and
powers refer to "both the socio-political structures of human society and
to unseen spiritual forces that undergird, lie behind and in some mysterious
way help shape human sociopolitical structures" (Sider 1980, 12). Many
have found Wink's trilogy on the powers to provide a helpful framework for
their ministries:
The 'principalities and powers' are the
inner or spiritual essence ... of an institution or state or system ...
emanated by organizations or individuals ... whose energies are bent on
overpowering others (Wink 1984, 104).
William Stringfellow, a lawyer and
astute prophet of American society, offers his own contextualization of Paul's
terminology: "what the Bible calls principalities and powers are called in
contemporary language ideologies, institutions and images' (Stringfellow 1994,
194). Like most Christian Social Activists, he learned about this battle from
the people "at the bottom," who often possess a clarity of insight
into these realities that is denied those who draw many benefits from the
system. Stringfellow shares:
Slowly I learned something which folk
indigenous to the ghetto know, namely, that the power and purpose of death are
incarnated in institutions and structures, procedures and regimes-Consolidated
Edison or the Department of Welfare, the Mafia or the police, the Housing
Authority or the social work bureaucracy, the hospital system or the banks,
liberal philanthropy or corporate real estate speculation. In the wisdom of the
people of the
Method of Engagement
Christian Social Activists exercise a
fair amount of freedom in their use of different forms of power to tackle these
realities. They often draw from Reformed and Anabaptist theological
understandings for their practical engagement. So for instance (in reflecting
on Col 1:16), Sider, though writing from the Anabaptist tradition, sounds at
times more like a Reformed theologian. For example, he says:
If the principalities and powers are
part of the good creation, it would seem to follow that power itself is not
evil. It is only when power is used for an evil purpose or when the methods
used are not compatible with the methods of Jesus' Kingdom that the Christian
must say no to power (Sider 1980, 13).
So he encourages those from the
historic peace churches (Anabaptist), to move forward creatively and boldly in
the exercise of economic and political power. We need to become co-workers of
the oppressed as they rightly search for a more just distribution of power in
our world. For some that will mean persistent, uncompromising advocacy of the
rights of the oppressed from within present economic and political systems. For
others it will mean economic boycotts, demonstrations and civil disobedience.
For both groups, it will mean ongoing prayer and dialogue to see when
conscientious objection, conscientious refusal to participate in a given
corporation, election or office is the only faithful, effective way to exercise
power (Sider 1980, 20).
One of Dave Andrews' strategies in
bringing change to the powers, which are perceived as unjust institutions and
structures is to "conform as much as you can, compromise as little as you
can"...seek a sponsor, then build a support group within the organization
with others who share a common perception of the injustice, then begin to
"ask questions that make the institution answerable" (Andrews 1996,
145-149).
Goal of Engagement
These activists entertain the hope that
through their solidarity with, and involvement
alongside the poor and marginalized, the spiritual power and the structures
themselves will ultimately be purged or reconciled as expressed by Paul in
Example
An example of this tradition's view in
practice was the civil rights movement in
The direct path to this achievement of
partial justice was creative reform through politics. This path was not the
only one however. In the distant background was the teaching of the Christian
church on the meaning of the life of everyone for whom Christ died. Behind the
civil rights legislation was the powerful witness of those who had laid down
their bodies and even their lives in noncooperation with evil. And behind those
witnesses were communities which sustained them (Stott, 208).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Some strengths of the Christian Social
Activist approach include its recognition of the breadth of influence of these
powers and of the need for active Christian involvement rather than purely theoretical
speculations. Also, its clear social stance can potentially open up for us a
deeper understanding of the gospel and the powers. Finally, the Christian
Social Activists' awareness of the complexity of the issues, and willingness to
use a variety of practical and spiritual approaches in their engagement
demonstrate a valuable attitude if we are to build creative and cooperative
ventures with those of other traditions.
Weaknesses in this model include the
ease with which the proponents may overlook their own personal biases, while
exhibiting admirable social commitments. It is possible that they leave unchecked,
unresolved anger or resentment towards recalcitrant authorities, or resistant
members of the organization and perceive them as enemies instead of humans also
in need of love. Peter's caution is noteworthy here, "The language,
mentality and posture of spiritual warfare may tempt us to confuse our true
enemy with the people whom God enjoins us to love...." (Peters 1994, 251).
Also, their holistic vision, may sometimes lead to paralysis, especially in
exploring new initiatives, out of fear of becoming unbalanced.
Christian Psychologist: Integrate
the Powers
Background
This group, similarly, is not
identified with a single denomination or tradition, but has adherents from most
mainline traditions, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Baptist and Independent. The
chief basis for their association here is a worldview with a strong Jungian
psychological component. Morton Kelsey is the main writer; his views seem to be
gaining a wider and wider audience.
Worldview
Christian psychologists perceive the
biblical story through a psycho-spiritual framework. We are complex beings,
created by God as body, soul and spirit. Numerous hereditary and environmental
factors affect our psyche, and also the way we relate with the wider world.
Kelsey writes:
The great Fathers and Doctors of the
Church who gave us our Trinitarian Christianity continued to express their
knowledge of humankind as a bridge linking two worlds. They saw humanity with
one side joined to the physical world of matter, and the other immersed in the
nonmaterial but even more real world-of-spirit, and the human soul or psyche as
the instrument of communication between the two (Kelsey 1976, 36).
View of the Powers
Kelsey and other Jungian analysts
perceive the principalities and powers as archetypes that influence our psyche
and, if unchecked, our outward behavior. "Jung chose the term ,archetypes'
as a more phenomenologically neutral way of speaking about what religions have
called gods, spirits, angels and demons" (Wink 1986, 117). A key
connection for Kelsey is the correlation between Middle Age understandings of
angels as "thinking thoughts" and Carl Jung's definition of
unconscious complexes as "groups of psychic contents, isolated from
consciousness, functioning arbitrarily and autonomously, leading thus a life of
their own in the unconscious" (McAlpine, 58).
He elaborates further by saying:
One's being can be touched and even
penetrated by the powers of evil, as well as by the creative force that is often
called the Holy Spirit. Most people who turn inward find a war going on within
them between the powers of destructiveness and the force of light which the
early Church knew as the Risen Christ. This is the struggle which one cannot
win by one's power, but only by being open to the reality of the Risen Christ
and allowing him to win the victory (Kelsey, 37).
By way of example he offers a picture
of the soul which houses Aphrodite, Ares, Demeter, Eros, Hephaestos, Hermes,
Zeus, the Fool, and Science.
These nine men and women who have come
to my door were neutral parts of me. If they are under the direction of
wholeness and harmony, the master, the Risen Christ, then they work together. If they are left alone they quarrel and cause
chaos. But worst of all they can fall into the hands of the Evil One. His
strategem is to convince each one that he 01 she is the only valuable person
within and should subject the others to him or her (Kelsey, 59).
Wink laments the loss of this
connection between the gods "out-there" and the archetypes
"inside" our psyche.
The collapse of the god-archetype for
s0 many in our time has meant that the central thrust of life-energies in the
self has been bereft of symbols of expression, and so has unconsciously been
projected on more or less suitable human personalities messianic figures in
politics, movies, sports, entertainment, and therapy. The most catastrophic
recoil of the gods in our time was Nazism, with its volcanic revival of the
cult of the Norse god Wotan, and its hysterical adulation of Adolf Hitler (Wink 1986, 118).
McAlpine (59) poses a good summary
question: "On the individual level, do we talk about a spirit of lust, or
about Aphrodite gone astray?"
Method of Engagement
For Kelsey the main approach is through
the spiritual disciplines of meditation, dream interpretation and spiritual
direction.
Meditation is the practice, the art of
letting down the barrier that separates one's rational consciousness from the
depth of one's soul. In Christian meditation one is trying to come into touch
with the spiritual world in a way that will open one's whole being to the
reality of this creative and integrating centre, or the Risen Christ. The purpose is to allow the Christ to bring the split-off, conflicting
parts [i.e. the powers or archetypes] of one's being into fruitful
relationship, and at the same time deliver one from destructive evil
which seeks to keep the person fragmented and operating unconsciously. In this
way one is brought together and given the single eye-that new center of being
which allows a person to operate at more nearly full potential, creatively and
freed from giving in to destructive impulses (Kelsey, 37-38).
Wink affirms the ancient Israelite
practice of recognizing the existence of other gods, but categorically placing
them in a subservient position, as a model for current engagement.
Christians have been afraid to admit
the existence of gods for fear people would succumb to worshiping them. That
danger is great, but no greater than the opposite danger of denying their
existence and being unconsciously tyrannized by them. The only sane course
would appear to be to acknowledge their reality, learn their characteristics,
raise to consciousness their ineluctable workings in our depths, and subject
them to the sovereignty of the God of gods (Wink 1986, 123).
Goal of Engagement
The goal for these Christian
psychologists is integration of those split-off parts of ourselves
which can become instruments either of God or of the Evil One. Wink writes:
The archetypes should be honored, but
honored at a distance, as a fire that can consume, as a force that both blesses
with its presence and inflicts itself as curse.... Our mistaken quest for
perfection ill-prepares us to find the healing value in the very inferior and unacceptable
aspects of ourselves that we have s0 long tried to flee, deny, crush, amputate,
or disown. But it is just there that the God of gods waits to be discovered, in
the integration of autonomous pans of ourselves into the total selfhood to
which we are called (Wink 1986, 125-126).
In this way we are calling (like the
writer of Ps 29: 1-2) for "the gods" to worship Yahweh.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The strength of the Christian
psychologist's model is seen, in the first place, in the way it potentially delivers
the church from making hypocritical judgments, as Christians heed the word of
Jesus to first remove the log from their own eye, before seeking to take the
splinter from their neighbor's eye (Lk 6: 41-42). Secondly, this model deeply
challenges our motivations for involvement in personal and social
transformation.
A weakness of this approach is that one
can get so caught up in addressing all of one's inner powers and gods, that one
no longer feels convicted about wider social evils in the nation.
Can We Bridge the Gap? Integrating the
Traditions
Having contrasted the typical models
which we see currently practiced, what possibility is there for corporate
engagement? Aren't the views too divergent? While I recognize the extent of
this divergence I also hold the conviction that this variation may be a good
starting point for dialogue. Just as with a rainbow, beauty is more enhanced
when colors are held together with all the other colors. I believe that the
variety of models can complement each other if they are practiced with the
humility to recognize the truth in other people's views, and the errors in
one's own.
Doing this survey has shown that all
traditions examined recognize that the gospel is the primary means of dealing
with the powers, however they are perceived. The differences really hinge on
people's understanding of the gospel, and Jesus' commission to all believers.
Those who take a more "defensive posture" against the powers like to
emphasize either the faith or communal dimension, the shield of faith, the
helmet of salvation, the breastplate of righteousness and so on. Those taking a
more offensive posture" emphasize the sword of the Spirit, the Word of
God, the combination of the Spirit and God's Word, proclaimed and lived. But
just as the soldier can't really be assured of victory if he only has a single
piece or an incomplete set of armor, so nor can we, I believe, leave behind,
reject, or ignore those pieces in our weaponry which other traditions offer us.
We need each other, for a key feature of the Ephesian metaphor is our unity:
standing side by side, shields overlapping in an impenetrable wall.
I find it encouraging that over the
last decade there has been some significant movement of the different
traditions toward each other. Yoder and Sider from the Anabaptist tradition are
fruitfully interacting with the Reformed. Likewise, Mouw and Mott acknowledge
the value of the Anabaptist and individualistic evangelical positions. Third
Wavers like Dawson (and to some extent Wagner) have moved to more moderate
positions, and are incorporating insights gleaned from the Anabaptist and
Reformed traditions; they are beginning some work of social justice and racial
reconciliation. However, except for Wink, very few of the Reformed and
Anabaptist theologians are prepared to interact with the Third Wavers. In
addition, all five of the models still seem far distant from the psychological
model of Kelsey.
This is not the place to explore what
such a corporate, integrated wrestling would look like; yet I would like to
conclude with some thoughts and possible questions which each tradition might
bring to a round-table discussion and cooperative engagement of the powers in
Those in the Reformed Tradition affirm
that we have political and civic powers as children of God, Christian
professionals, workers, citizens with voting rights. So their question might
be, "What about social evils such as injustice, companies not paying the
minimum wage, kidnappings of Chinese children, and the unfair international economic
system? Does not the gospel call us to respond to these?" Followers of the
Anabaptist Tradition, on the other hand, recognize that the gospel gives us
cultural power as an alternative counter-cultural community within society.
They might ask, "How is the church being a
distinctive alternative to the wider society, as light, salt and leaven?'
Members of the Individualistic Evangelical tradition stress that the gospel
gives us moral power through our free choice as individuals created in the
image of God, and free to respond in faith to Christ's work for us on the
cross. They would like to ask, "What about the need for individuals within
the evil structures, being converted and changed?" People of the Third
Wave tradition have discovered the spiritual power of the gospel, through the
Holy Spirit's empowering, and authoritative prayer in Jesus' Name. They might
ask, "What about the power of the Holy Spirit and intercession to change
spiritual, social, and structural evil?" Christian Social Activists affirm
that the gospel gives us social power as united individuals and groups, when we
unite and work cooperatively together for a worthy cause. They could ask,
"What about the processes we use, are the poor and marginalized being
empowered in the process? Is the kingdom coming among them, as Jesus
intended?" Finally, the Christian psychologists believe that the gospel
has given us psychological powers or "powers within, through our psyche,
to become integrated persons. Their question is, "What about not being hypocrites,
by first removing the log from our own eye?"
Conclusion
Two final things need to be recognized
about this whole debate, and they both take us back to the Apostle Paul. The
first is the language he uses for these realities. It seems that Paul was
sufficiently wise and experienced to know that these entities take many
different forms and shapes. He therefore seems to keep the terms deliberately
ambiguous. "Paul's use of words in relation to these unseen realities is
extremely flexible. Such words as principalities, powers, dominions, thrones,
angels, authorities, and others are used without any apparent attempt to
distinguish between their meanings..." (Newbigin, 203). All the traditions
need to acknowledge this.
Second, before Paul calls us to put on
the armor of God to fight, he tells the Ephesians,
Be completely humble and gentle; be
patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity
of the Spirit through the bond of peace.... Instead, speaking the truth in
love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the head, that is, Christ.
From him the whole body joined and held together, by every supporting
ligaments, grows and builds itself up in love.... Submit to one another out of
reverence for Christ .... Finally ...put on the full armor .... (Eph 4:2-3, 1f-16,
NOTES
1 All of these are very simplified
categorizations of the primary models of engaging a contemporary Power.
2 1 Cor 13:9-12.
3 I have drawn several of these labels from
McAlpine (1991), although I have added two extra groupings, and differ in some
of my descriptions of their respective views and from Sider (1993)
4 Wolterstorff
(1983, 5), who represents the Reformed Tradition argues that its perspective is
one of seeking the reformation of reality which he calls, "World Formative
Christianity." See also pages 3-22.
5 Wink, who actually comfortably fits
in most of the models, is the only exception.
6 In the NT, the word "arky"
is translated "principalities" or "authorities."
7 Mouw (1976,
112) summarizing the position of Yoder (1972, 213).
8 Wagner (1993, 58) as the spokesman of
the Third Wave says, "Our central task is discerning where the invisible
has corrupted the visible and dealing with it through a power encounter (2 Cor
i0:4, 5). Our goal is to block Satan's work and bring God's redemptive gift,
not to destroy the culture."
WORKS CITED
Caird, G. B. 1976. Paul's
Letter from Prison. In The New Clarendon Bible.
Clohfink, G. 1984 trans. Jesus and
Community: The Social Dimension of Christian Faith.
Eller, V.
1987.
Christian Anarchy. Jesus' Primacy Over the Powers.
Ellul, J. 1976. The
Ethics of Freedom.
Green, M. 1991. "Principalities
and Powers." Territorial Spirits. Edited by C. P. Wagner.
Kelsey, M.1976. The
Other Side of Silence.
Mouw, R. J. 1976. Politics
and the Biblical Drama.
Nee, W. 1957. Sit, Walk,
Stand
Peters, T.
1994.
Sin: Radical Evil in Soul and Society.
Rowlinson, D. 1995. Power Encounters.
Sherman D.
19g0 at 1991. Spiritual Warfare for Every Christian.
Sider, R.
1980.
"Christ and Power." In International Review of
Sider, R.
1993.
One Sided Christianity.
Stott, J. R. W. 1979. God's New
Society: The Message of Ephesians.
Stringfellow,
W. 1994.
"Christ and the Powers of Death." Keeper of the
World Edited by W. Bill and Wylie-Kellerman.
Stringfellow,
W. 1996.
"Resisting Death Incarnate: The Principalities of Urban
Violence." In Sojourners Online 25, N0. 2 (March-April), 1. Wagner, P. C. z990.
Wrestling with Dark Angels.
Wink, W. 1984. Naming
the Powers.
Yoder, J. H.11.1972. The Politics of Jesus.