Ehere is no universally valid suggestion as to how power should be organised in early Christianity: the individual groups develop too differently, the respective (intellectual-historical) home of the authors is too different, and the perceptions of the respective lifeworld appear too disparate. All of this, however, has an effect on the view and conceptualisation of power. At best, it is possible to look for convergences within the various writings of the New Testament that convey an initial idea of the understanding and exercise of power in early Christianity.
It all depends on the context
Social stratification
Early Christianity is a movement of the lower classes. There were a few wealthy and socially higher-ranking patrons in the congregations: Synagogue leaders who were enthusiastic about the message, respected and wealthy people who ensured social cohesion, supported the congregations materially and opened their homes to the congregations. The clear thematic emphasis on the topic of "poverty and wealth" in Luke's double work in particular shows that a social stratification of the communities was underway towards the end of the 1st century and that social tensions were present. To a large extent, however, the Christians in the Pauline communities probably came from the lower classes: Day labourers, seasonal workers and slaves and their relatives and families. Paul confirms this when he describes the Christians in Corinth as follows: "Look at your calling, sisters and brothers: in the eyes of the world there are not many wise, not many powerful, not many noble. On the contrary, the foolish things of this world God has chosen to shame the wise, and the weak things of this world God has chosen to shame the strong, and the lowly things of this world and the despised things God has chosen, the things that count for nothing, to bring to nothing the things that count for something, so that no human being should be ashamed.
boast before God." (1 Cor 1:26-29)
The communities in and of themselves therefore had no political power and no social influence. Even if no systematic or widespread persecution of Christians can be assumed for the second half of the 1st century, the Christians were nevertheless on the margins of society: economically barely potent, politically without influence, increasingly ostracised socially - precisely because of the obvious differences to Imperial Roman society and the local synagogues. A decisive attraction factor for early Christianity - especially as the social pressure on the congregations grew - was internal cohesion: social welfare, egalitarian congregational structures, the integration of each individual into a supporting social network of the congregation.
The home of the authors
The perception of political power and state rule differs greatly in the individual writings of the New Testament. The Apocalypse of John, for example, is characterised by a consistently critical attitude towards the empire, the emperor and the local cultic and political institutions that symbolise and propagate Rome's power. At around the same time (at the end of the 1st century) and in the same region (in the province of Asia), the 1st Epistle of Peter takes a much more co-operative view and - unlike the Apocalypse of John - does not argue in favour of a decisive demarcation, but rather for a promotional integration into imperial Roman society (1 Peter 2:12-14). The different perceptions and behavioural impulses may be due to experiences in the individual congregations, but above all to the authors' spiritual-historical backgrounds: a critique of the state and society is a matter of course for the seer John in the tradition of early Jewish apocalypticism, while the Roman citizen Paul reveals a generally positive perception of state authority: "Let everyone submit to the state authorities that have power over him. For there is no state authority that has not been given by God; those that exist now have been appointed by God. Therefore, whoever rebels against the authority of the state resists the command of God; but those who resist will receive their judgement. For it is not the good deed that the rulers must fear, but the evil. Do you not want to have to fear the authority of the state? Then do what is good, and you will be with it.
Find recognition!" (Rom 13:1-3)
Indirectly, however, this view of state authority as the guarantor of order does represent a virtuous mirror for state authority: The state and its representatives and institutions have to measure themselves against it. Criticism is inevitable if the state does not fulfil the functions and tasks emphasised here. Paul's view may also be characterised by the intention to protect the small and socially weak Christian community within society. Paul does not stir up conflict, but favours an initially appreciative and integrative approach so as not to exacerbate the Christians' position as outsiders.
The Pauline churches
In the conceptualisation and exercise of power, Christians are and remain children of their time and part of their living environment. This fact is already reflected in the titles and ministries used (episcopate, presbyter, head of household), which are adopted on the one hand, but changed in content on the other. The confession of Jesus and the orientation towards his preaching also modify the conception and exercise of power.
Theological approaches to the perception of power
Early Christianity is based on the history of Israel. The prophetic writings of Israel are regarded as binding: Early Christianity is aware of Israel's experience of powerlessness in captivity, in Egypt and in Babylon. The first Christians encounter prophetic criticism and accusations in the writings of the prophets when the poor are oppressed or exploited, when powerful people use their power for themselves or abuse it against others. With a view to Jewish history, early Christianity also has a basic tone that is critical of power, prophetically exposing and accusing the abuse of power.
In addition, the fact that Jesus was crucified as a political criminal is a cautionary reminder in any perception of political power and state rule. Jesus' crucifixion shows the corruptibility of earthly power, the flawed nature of state judgement, but also the rejection of the kingdom of God that Jesus announced and whose values he represented - in word and deed. In short, looking at the crucified Jesus calls for caution and a critical distance towards forms of power that people exercise over others in an uncontrolled and arbitrary manner.
Power relations within the congregations are structured by a common initiation rite that characterises the theological dignity of all members of the congregation: Paul understands baptism as incorporation into the body of Christ, whose members are fundamentally equal. The gift of the Spirit, which is linked to baptism, requires charisms that, due to their origin (from the Spirit) and their gift character, do not allow any superiority or subordination: "You are all children of God through faith in Jesus Christ, for all of you who were baptised into Christ have put on Christ. So there is no longer Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal 3:26-28)
Finally, Christology also has a power-modifying torque. The centre is occupied: Christ is known as the Lord, on whom all power depends and to whom all power is accountable. In the hymn to the Philippians, Paul impressively traces the humiliation and devotion of Jesus, who did not cling to his power and became like the powerless (Phil 2:6-11). This life movement is presented to Christians as a model: "Have this attitude in yourselves, which was also in Christ Jesus." (Phil 2:5) Power does not serve one's own reputation and benefit: Power is - Christologically understood - to be orientated towards the life and well-being of others!
In recent years, the thesis that monotheism promotes violence has given rise to some debate. But the opposite is also conceivable: Since the centre is occupied and power is therefore not in human hands, monotheism could also stand against violence and abuse of power, critically question unjust powers, promote egalitarian structures and inspire respectful interaction with one another!
Apostolic self-image and egalitarian community
Paul exercises power. He sees himself as a messenger of Christ and emphasises the authority given to him by Christ in his calling (Romans 1:1). He acts as an authorised representative in the churches: He praises and rebukes, admonishes and criticises.
Nevertheless, Paul is aware of the limits that temper and modify his power: Human incapacity, his own weakness due to illness or overwork, human existence subject to death make him cautious. Paul sees himself as a weak vessel. He lives by grace (2 Cor 4:7). It is not his power. He is a co-worker and servant and must constantly remind himself and others to whom the field actually belongs and to whom the honour is due (1 Cor 3:10). He is at their service, but is not the master; he exercises power, but at best as an authorised representative and not as a ruler. The brokenness and frailty of our own power is an expression of a theological-Christological necessity: our own power and strength always draw on the power and greatness of Christ. In other words, they bear the imprint of the cross and prove their strength in powerlessness. Every seemingly impressive ability and every expression of power must be measured against the kenotic love of the Lord: Every prophetic gift, all knowledge and every religious excellence is nothing without love - and thus only ever as good as its focus on others and its service to the weakest!
Paul also presents himself as a model for the churches with regard to his self-image: the way in which he understands and carries out his ministry should characterise the way in which the churches live together. Even as an apostle, he is a member of the body of Christ, part of a fundamentally egalitarian community whose head is Christ. This new view, which breaks down class distinctions and affirms the fundamental dignity of all people, is likely to have been a key attraction factor in the early Christian communities. In general, Paul can address the Christians in the churches as saints - not in the sense of a moral qualification, of course, but in the sense of a fundamentally bestowed dignity. He greets women and men, slaves and free, Jews and Gentiles (Rom 16:1-16). Kerygmatic, diaconal and cybernetic ministries are mentioned and enumerated side by side - without superiority or subordination: They are all given by the Spirit and ennobled and unified from this source. All ministries are - crucially - orientated towards building up the body of Christ
(1 Cor 12:7). Starting with one's own abilities through to the tasks taken on in the church, the power associated with each is proexistent: not an end in itself and not self-interest, but power as devotion to
Authorisation of others.
The development of offices: qualification and function
The question of the formation of ministries and offices (and the transfer of power) in early Christian and early church times is complex and can hardly be answered adequately in the context of this lecture. The beginnings of ministries and offices in the Pauline congregations are relatively charismatic: they are prompted by the challenges of specific situations and problems, tempered by the expectation of the imminent return of the Lord and structured by the different possibilities in the individual congregations or house churches. Expanding time, growing congregations, social pressure, problems of provision and the challenges of everyday congregational life all contribute to the development and consolidation of ministries. With a view to the synagogues and the administrative and overseer ministries in the Greco-Roman communities, presbyters and episcopes come to mind, who - strikingly enough - are initially only mentioned in the plural and presented as a community (Phil 1:1;
Jas 5:14). The presbyter ministry seems to originate from the organisation of the Jewish synagogue community and encompasses leadership functions of various kinds: exercised by people who have the natural authority to assume responsibility due to their experience and age. Episcopes, on the other hand, refer to officials in Greco-Roman associations or communities who supervise and carry out administrative and organisational activities.
But here, too, the early Christian writings - while adopting established concepts and ideas - develop their own profile of requirements and content: "If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a righteous work. Now the overseer must be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, orderly, hospitable, given to teaching, not given to drinking, not a brawler, but kind, not quarrelsome, not greedy for money, rightly ruling his own house, having children whom he brings up properly, for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how can he look after the church of God?" (1 Tim 3:1-5)
Such mirrors of virtue not only have the function of describing reality. They also serve as a challenge and warning and aim to influence the reality of the communities as positively as possible. This makes it clear that responsibility and power are critically scrutinised and also defined in terms of content. Power also exists in early Christianity, in the Pauline congregations and in the more numerically developing and differentiated congregations of the post-Pauline period: it serves to organise congregational life, to ensure the social distribution of goods, to resolve disputes and to promote the proclamation of the gospel. Especially in view of the abuse and corruptibility of power, the welfare of the congregation and the proclamation of the gospel remain decisive criteria for determining and exercising power: the gospel determines the content and function of the power exercised in and for the congregations.
Derived, targeted and content-structured power
The power exercised with the tasks assigned is in the service of building up the church and proclamation. This means that the power is orientated towards content and is also limited: It is not boundless, but functionally limited!
Power is always subject to the power of Jesus, by whose life and work it must be measured. It is difficult to follow in the footsteps of a crucified man - and only if the roots are forgotten and the powerlessness of Jesus is suppressed.
Coining insignia of power.
Power always remains embedded in the - already mentioned - egalitarian form of the church: "You are all one in Christ!" (Gal 3:28) Finally, power is also tempered in eschatological terms. All earthly powers and authorities are temporary and limited in time in anticipation of the kingdom of God: Even the Son ultimately submits to the one to whom all power is due, "so that God may be all in all." (1 Cor 15:28)
In this respect, the practice of early Christian communities reveals theologically and Christologically motivated elements and factors that temper power: power is structured and limited in terms of time, content and by being embedded in a fundamentally equal community of the baptised.
The Apocalypse of St John
Before concluding the New Testament study day with some synthetic impressions of the organisation and exercise of power in early Christianity, let us turn our attention to the Apocalypse of John. The last book of the Bible denounces - like no other scripture in the New Testament - God-forgetting, autocratic and oppressive power!
Empowering knowledge
The word "apocalypse" literally means revelation, discovery. Indeed, in the form of numerous visions and auditions, John reveals a new world to the recipients of his writing. This is by no means just about the revelation of the future course of history or the coming end of the world. The Apocalypse serves to change the perception of the present: the critical examination of the empire and the unmasking of Rome as a human-abusing beast are intended to change the readers' view. They take a look behind the scenes: John reveals the secret of the harlot Babylon, whose jewellery (only) fascinates at first glance (Rev 17:7). Rome exploits people and leads them into dependency.
John sees state power in competition with the power of God. This is reflected, for example, in the title of God: while Domitian - according to a remark by Suetonius in his Kaiserviten - was addressed as "dominus et deus noster", John now exclusively ascribes this title to God. What's more, God is the "Pantocrator", the all-ruler (Rev 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7).
On the one hand, John depotentiates earthly powers and authorities in the visionary world of his writing. The power of God will prevail: Earthly thrones will perish, God-forsaken exercise of power will fail. On the other hand, John - as the other side of the coin of apocalyptic criticism of power - ennobles the addressees of his writing and calls them "a kingdom", a "priesthood for God" (Rev 1:6).
It is also striking that - apart from the patriarchs and the twelve apostles of the Lamb - no other titles or offices are mentioned in the Apocalypse of John: John conveys a high, aristocratic self-image to the addressees. They, the outsiders who do not pay homage to the emperor and do not take part in processions and games in his honour, are promised power. They will sit on the throne with God and sit in judgement (Rev 3:21). What effect might this have had on the socially marginalised Christian minority? The Apocalypse reveals and comforts: It unmasks the empire, which is geared towards oppression and maintaining power, and promises the victims of history the powerful assertion of God, who is on the side of the weak.
There is no doubt that the Apocalypse of John has an element of power-criticism and a fundamental concern: it puts power to the test and turns the addressees into accomplices. The Apocalypse's concern with revelation is of a power-critical nature: ignorance, lack of knowledge or deliberate secrecy support the power of some or keep others in the (ignorant) power and powerlessness of others.
Trapped in defencelessness. The Apocalypse of John, on the other hand, aims to empower the Christian minority of Asia Minor in terms of its content and mediation approach: the "revealed" criticism of the empire expressed in Scripture serves to empower the oppressed, to enhance their self-image and to develop a form of community life that is critical of society.
Non-violent renunciation of power and the power of the word
The Apocalypse of John is addressed to a politically and socially powerless audience, although not systematically and actively persecuted: a small minority of believers in Christ who were marginalised in the Roman Empire. Confessing Christ isolates them. John pleads for the Christian contrast society to set itself apart from the imperial Roman society and to clearly mark the boundaries: "And I heard another voice from heaven saying, 'Come out of her (the city), my people, so that you will not share in her sins and so that you will not receive of her plagues'". (Rev 18:4)
John recommends refusing the power of Rome, even at the cost of economic, political and social disadvantages! At no point, however, does John call on the addressees to militant resistance. On the contrary: it is not the lion that is victorious, but the lamb, the sacrificial animal that bears the marks of the slaughter and has won the victory through its own non-violent gift of life (Rev 5:5-10).
According to the testimony of the early church, John himself probably endures a temporary punishment: "Because of the word of God" (Rev 1:9), he is imprisoned on the island of Patmos. What remains for him is the power of the word: he relentlessly and courageously denounces the godless exercise of power by the empire. He uses images and comparisons, draws on the prophetic books of the Old Testament and sees himself as a prophet (Rev 22:6, 9)
and denounces exploitation and oppression.
The situation of powerlessness he endures does not break his back. On the contrary: he calls for patience and faithfulness, for intense perseverance in trusting in the divine power that prevails. In deep solidarity - the powerlessness makes self-made hierarchies and rankings appear questionable - he presents himself to the addressees as a "brother and sharer in tribulation and kingship and endurance in Jesus" (Rev 1:9).
The reflection makes it clear how John understands power: For him, too, the centre is occupied. Power does not belong to a creature, but to the Creator: God alone (Rev 4). Human power is never absolute.
John does not take up arms. He does not call for militant resistance. He uses what remains to him: the power of prophetic criticism and accusation, the power of the word. Incidentally, God also seems to have other means and ways of asserting his power (in the end times) than human power would: God judges by the sword from his mouth - in other words, once again by the word (Rev 2:6; 19:15.21). God does not put the enemy to flight with a military superweapon: His mere appearance - the revealing of God - settles the matter (Rev 20:11). John's remaining - and admittedly limited - power is also a power in the service of others: It aims to empower the powerless by revealing backgrounds and stabilising hope so that life does not degenerate into despair.
Summary and impulses
We are looking at the texts of the New Testament from a time in which multiple abuses of power in the church became apparent, great injustice occurred and people were deeply hurt. Quick and easy solutions to current issues cannot be found in the texts of the New Testament. However, a look at the beginnings of the early Christian communities can be inspiring: What impulses can be derived from the early Christian struggle for the distribution of power in the communities and the perception of political power in the world and society?
Alternative forms of power
In the best sense of the word, Christianity - if we want to stay in touch with its origins - must be about alternative forms of power and the exercise of power. Through the history of Israel, the Old Testament prophets' criticism of power, but above all through the work, preaching and crucifixion of Jesus, Christianity is instilled with a reserved, critically scrutinising attitude towards power and rulers. Ultimately, Christianity goes back to Jesus, who was crucified by the Romans outside the city as a high traitor. Shouldn't this and Jesus' central message of the reign of God also (have to) be reflected in the organisation of church services and power structures?
The organisation of power in Christianity must also be alternative because it has to be measured against the content of the proclamation and the self-understanding of Jesus. The endeavour to achieve this is reflected - in all its fragility - in the early Christian communities: Paul emphasises with the Philippians hymn, but also in the Song of Songs, a consistently kenotic orientation of church life and all individual ministries and responsibilities. It is never about arbitrary power. Power has to be justified and orientated towards the situation and objective. When power becomes an end in itself and is no longer in service, when it no longer takes into account the kenotic and diaconal concerns of the founder, it must be criticised and modified.
Observe competences and establish authority
The enumeration of various charisms in the churches (1 Cor 12:8-11) presupposes the skills and suitability of the various persons. The existing competence to speak prophetically, to discern the spirits, to give advice and help or to translate tongues is understood as an effect and gift of the Spirit. It is never just about personal inclination, but always also about the actual aptitude and skill given by the Spirit that promotes the building up of the church.
The house tables and virtue catalogues describe a profile of requirements. Ministries and responsibilities are not defined in abstract terms: they are concrete and serve the church, the proclamation and the building of the kingdom of God. They are necessarily based on competences that must be present or acquired. This also involves a personal fit with the task or ministry, which protects against excessive or insufficient demands and enables meaningful fulfilment of the ministry.
In this respect, it is noteworthy that although canon law speaks of "potestas", "munus" and "officium" with regard to the offices in the church, terms such as "competentia" and "auctoritas" are missing. However, in order to exercise an office, authority is necessary, which arises from the recognition of the office holder on the basis of the competences that enable them to serve. The exercise of an office without the necessary competence not only undermines the office, it harms both the holder and the recipients of the office.
Establish control mechanisms and clarify responsibilities
Paul is aware of his responsibilities: He is "not sent to baptise, but to preach the gospel" (1 Cor 1:17). His core task is to go on the road for the purpose of proclaiming, interpreting and explaining the gospel. The deacons in Acts 6 are appointed to serve at the tables and care for the needy. Power is limited because it is focussed on functions and a goal. Those for whom the service is carried out come into view as the controlling authority. They are - or would be - part of a healthy feedback culture in order to critically examine functionality and effectiveness and maintain a dialogue with one another. As the Spirit is the foundation of the various ministries and tasks, a discernment of spirits should be undertaken. The ministries in the churches also have to measure themselves against the fruits of the Spirit and critically ask the question of whether the commitment contributes to greater love and joy, to more peace, generosity, kindness, goodness and faithfulness (Gal 5:22).
Last but not least, the group seems to be an essential corrective of leadership ministries in the Pauline churches: Paul speaks of the episcopes and deacons in Philippi in the plural. It is not an individual, but a group that exercises the ministry of leadership or care: a group that relies on the principle of multiple eyes and benefits from it.
Power to empower others
Paul's missionary strategy is fascinating: Paul deliberately chooses large cities from which a special radiance and further spread of the gospel can emanate. Paul starts in the centres, proclaims the gospel there, establishes initial structures and - with a view to the existing skills in the churches - entrusts
with responsibility. After a few months, he usually departs and the congregation lives on. His work in the church was aimed at empowering the church to be independent. Paul's ministry is successful when it is no longer necessary, when others have been empowered to serve, to preach and to take on responsibility.
This is likely to have required a good degree of tolerance and a focus on the essential elements of church life. The different foundations and congregations are correspondingly diverse. Not everything is the same, but they are united in their commitment to Jesus Christ and the proclamation of the Gospel. In any case, power is - as can be seen from Paul's itineraries and temporary sojourns - a goal-orientated power that serves to empower others.
In Ezekiel's calling, there is a meaningful sentence: "As he spoke to me, the Spirit came into me and set me on my feet" (Ez 2:2). The Spirit causes the prophet to stand upright and independent. Spirit-filled activity, the spiritual exercise of power seeks precisely this and can be recognised by it: Power in the church is to be structured accordingly and corrected where it does not serve the proclamation of the gospel and the dignity and empowerment of others.
