As we draw near the end of our series in YWBC on Ephesians,
a recurring theme in recent weeks has been ‘challenging powers,’ one of the
elements of the mission statement we’ve been developing in church over the last
year. Over the weekend I was struck by a great example of this practice when
reading Jonathan Freedland’s Saturday comment in the Guardian, on Pope Francis.
Since becoming Pope, Francis has hit the headlines on a
recurring basis, both because of his decision to shun the opulence which has
previously characterised the papal office, and also his frequent remarks on the
issues of justice and the need for the church to offer a more humble and humane
stance to those who have previously felt ostracised by it. Freedland’s article
cites as examples comments made in May this year about the ‘dangers of unbridled capitalism’ and as well as a recent tweet lamenting the ‘bitter
fruits’ of ‘the “throw-away” culture.’
Perhaps, it’s not surprising that Francis’s stance hasn’t
earned him universal approval. Freedland also quotes recent criticism of the Popeby the free-market think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, who bemoan the
fact that he lacks the more ‘sophisticated’ approach of his predecessors. What
struck me most forcefully about the IEA article was the way in which author
Philip Booth attacks the ‘error of arguing that ‘systems’ can have ‘goals’ or
‘idols’. It is acting, rational people who make good or bad moral choices. It
is certainly legitimate for priests to criticise greed amongst the several
billion people taking economic decisions each and every day, if they feel this
is an important moral issue. However, ‘systems’ do not take such moral
decisions independently of human persons. The system produces what is willed by
the persons who participate in economic life.’
Booth’s comments strike me as misguided for several reasons.
Strangely, they seem to contradict the attitudes of most free market champions
I’ve known, who usually speak with awe and reverence about market ‘forces’. The
market is spoken of as the higher power, the supreme arbiter who can shake out
the wheat from the chaff, the viable from the unviable, who can benevolently
ensure the trickle down of wealth from top to bottom.
Secondly, I wonder how many of us really feel ourselves to
be independent or fully in control in the spending choices we make. We are all
constrained by our upbringing, social location, circumstances or by limits to
the choices which are available to us. Is someone genuinely free when they
spend excessively to sustain an image which they hope will win the approval of
others? Is someone trapped by unemployment and taking out the pay day loan they
need to feed their family for the remainder of a month really making an ‘independent
moral decision’?
Finally, Booth’s comments seem to me to be contradicted by
scripture. On Sunday, Duncan will be concluding our series and talking about
Paul’s exhortation to the Ephesian believers to put on the armour of God. In Ephesians
6 he famously writes that, ‘our struggle
is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the
authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the
spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.’ In Naming the Powers,
Walter Wink describes Paul’s language here as a ‘heaping up of terms to describe the
ineffable, invisible world-enveloping reach of a spiritual network of powers.’
In this current age, it may not be possible to fully overcome
the powers, given the great reach they have into every aspect of our lives and
society. There may be moments when the best we can do is to simply ‘stand,’ to
use the language of Paul. We resist, we determine that where and when we can we
will make the choices that best reflect the values of the age to come. My hope
is that by talking together about challenging powers, perhaps in time coming to
the point where we can be more honest with each other about our own struggles
and the ways we feel controlled by the culture of our day, we can all discover
a new strength and resolve in living in the way Paul describes in Ephesians, ‘a
life worthy of the calling to which you’ve been called.’ Perhaps not a perspective
as ‘sophisticated’ as those held by the Institute of Economic Affairs, but one
which is, ultimately, far more liberating.
No comments:
Post a Comment