Friday 31 October 2008

Background

If we had to pick a passage of Scripture where the meaning waschanged most by the growth and spread of Christianity, then thiswould be a prime candidate. In historical Christian society weunderstand this as physical armour blessed and used for "holywars". Yet the understanding of the armour of God as physical (asseen in the crusades for example) would have been totally alien tothe original recipients of this letter.

The passage makes it clear that "our struggle is not againstenemies of blood and flesh" so what use can physical armour be? Yetso often we focus on physical enemies.

In the well-known imagery of the armour of God we see reflected thearmour of a Roman soldier: powerful, successful and fearedthroughout the world. Yet this letter suggests that material armouris gradually stripped away and replaced with spiritual items thatwill only serve to make the wearer vulnerable to physical enemies.Would anyone really want to face the barbarians at the gate withouta proper physical breastplate and shield?

This passage would of course have been written with the life,actions and teaching of Jesus in mind. He had met Roman soldiers,healed them, lived in a land occupied by them, had freedom fightersin his group of disciples (Simon Zealot and probably JudasIscariot) and was arrested and crucified by them. This must informour understanding of this passage. As Jesus was willing to bevulnerable to the violence of Roman soldiers it seems unlikely thispassage could be encouraging us to become versions of Romansoldiers - defeating all who stand against us, victorious in battle- be it physical or spiritual.

Instead it seems that, like Jesus, we are to throw away all thatthe world believes will protect us and replace it with trust in Godand faithfulness to the example of Jesus. It might be that for toolong Christians have looked to the rich and powerful in search ofGod's blessing. Maybe we should instead be looking to thevulnerable and weak, to the powerless and persecuted.

Maybe, in this passage from Ephesians, we are being taught to ridourselves of all that can distract us from a gospel ofreconciliation. With no armour for defence and no weapons forattack, what choice do we have but to seek reconciliation in truthand love, showing the grace and mercy that Jesus showed to all heencountered?

To Ponder

What do you rely on for protection?

How might this passage change the way you respondto your enemies?

What might this mean for you in a nation defendedby force of arms?

How could this connect to our foreign policy andour relationships with other countries?

Is there any instance, as Christians, wherephysical armour can be used for spiritual good?