Powers and Principalities

Before the tangents and examinations, a little Pauline context.

Before I begin launching into my own thoughts on how “Powers and Principalities” is a fruitful way for us to talk about our times, it is important to give you a little context into the Pauline Epistle from which I’ve lifted the phrase.

The book of Ephesians is believed to be not a book that Paul wrote himself, but probably one written by one of his followers. In it we find all of Paul’s assertions about freedom and his understanding of how God in Christ Jesus comes to us, but the language is much more poetic than the Paul we meet elsewhere.

The author also assumes that the majority of followers of Jesus are now Gentile converts, which was not the case in Paul’s day.

Some scholars think that this might have been a cover letter written for the bound collection of Paul’s writings, which we know were being circulated throughout the early church.

There is one theme in the book, that of Christ uniting all things through himself.

Chapters 1-3 are a hymn of sorts to the beauty of Christ’s redemptive activity.

Chapters 4-6 explores four areas where the unity that Christ brings should be tangibly brought to bear.

1) The Church, where all believers should at length work together.

2) The Pagan world, which is filled with forces set against God. Christians should unite in opposition to the powers of ignorance and fleshly desires.

3) The Family, where those who follow Christ should model mutual love, patience, and forgiveness.

4) Finally, The “spiritual realm” where Christians appear to wage a supernatural battle against the cosmic forces of evil. Here the author likens the well equipped Christian to a Roman Soldier, whose equipment gives protection for specific reasons and against specific forms of attack.

It is in that final section where the concept of “powers and principalities” are mentioned.

Ephesians 6:12 reads, For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

The author asserts that is it not personalities or individuals we whom we most powerfully contend, and that is the first confusion that I want to address.

We are so easily drawn into dislike of “personalities" or persons.

One of the hardest things in ministry was often not taking things personally.

I am by nature a “people pleaser” and I like for people to like me. I always thought my most effective ministry and management was done when I could find “win-win’s” for everyone involved, and so I would seek to find commonality and compromise.

That kind of approach works well so long as all parties are operating with the same basic assumptions.

It is a quick way to get tied into knots if you don’t share the same goals, outlook, or desired outcome.

When I would proposed a course of action that was met with resistance, anger, or criticism, my first impulse was to try to figure out what that person didn’t like about me.

That is natural because we tend to tie and connect our personal sense of worth to our actions or ideas.

These are “my” things, (ideas, proposals, suggestions. I inhabit and exhibit through them. If you don’t like what I am offering, what have to say, my thoughts or ideas, then you must not like “me.”

One of the key insights the Author of Ephesians introduces is this sense of differentiation.

It is NOT “flesh and blood” with which we contend. It is something else.

I may have no problem with you personally. I can even “like” you even if we have disagreements in how things ought to be done.

It is what motivates you and your world view with which I must contend.

Normally, once that is pointed out to us, we can make the shift.

“Oh, I see now, we just don’t have the same outlook on things.”

From that point, one can normally negotiate to a shared commonality and compromise.

Except…..and this is important.

Not everyone operates with the same sense of how power works, or world view of how it works.

It was Virginia Satir’s “Peoplemaking” that helped me understand this.

Some will approach power as a finite quantity.

“Power-Over” is how she phrased it.

The more power I have, the less you necessarily have to have.

Since power is a finite quantity, it is important for me to have “more” in order to accomplish my desired goals, and therefore I need to make sure you have “less.”

Others will approach power as an infinite quantity.

“Power-With” is how she phrased it.

For these people, (because power is infinite,) the task is to multiply corporate power. The more we empower each other the more “corporate” power we have together to influence, change, and cause desirable outcome and effect in the world.

The confusion comes in the contention of these two world views, beliefs, or operating systems.

In the illustration above where I sought compromise, I was operating out of a “power-with” model and assumed the other person would respond with that.

If however, they are operating with the understanding of “power-over” … I have just ceded my power and it will not be returned or reciprocated!

You cannot meet proposing a “win-win” with a person who only thinks “win-lose.” You are not using the same criteria or understanding.

This is where the “Powers and Principalities” takes on that “Spiritual” quality. \

We are really talking about baseline operating systems now, what your “spirit” holds to be true and believes.

If you believe that there is no such thing as “corporate power” and that power is finite, the ONLY way you will operate is in grasping power for yourself. You cannot conceive of “win-win.” You may use the language as a concession, but your mindset, your “spirit,” and your goal is “me-win… you lose… something.”

If you believe that power is infinite, you are often way too eager to cede and give concessions to a “power-over” person in fervent expectation that they will come around and see your point of view, your “spirit of cooperation and good will.”

Good luck with that!

This is what you contend with, these very different viewpoints. That will be the launching point for my next little epistle, as we look at “Rulers.”

Questions for Contemplation or Discussion.

Does this “ring true” for me? When have I experienced a very different “spirit” in negotiating or compromising, or even approaching something?