Book Review - Power and Poverty by Dewi Hughes

Poverty is, generally, unnecessary.  It rarely comes from a lack of natural resources or a human inability to use these resources.  Instead, argues Dewi Hughes in Power and Poverty: Divine and Human Rule in a World of Need, poverty is what happens when people misuse the power with which God entrusted us.  Understanding how poverty and power relate requires understanding who we are.  The linkage of poverty with the misuse of power means that in addition to being a social, political, and economic issue, poverty is a spiritual issue.  Hughes’ book has had more impact on how I think than any other book of theology or biblical studies.

Power and Poverty presents a framework of theological ideas presented through The Bible.  The Bible tells the story of God and the world.   God’s story shows that he created people with the capacity to rule.  Today 1 billion people experience abject poverty.  There is something wrong with how we use this capacity God gave us.  Christianity teaches that God can redeem people.  Redemption will influence how we rule, thereby affecting how we organize and govern ourselves.

 

Power and Poverty has three sections – Old Testament, Jesus and the Final Revelation of Divine Government, and God’s Governed Society and the Church – to guide readers through what the Bible teaches about poverty.

 

In Part One, Hughes identifies a large narrative within the smaller stories, poems, and prophecies of the Old Testament.  The narrative introduces readers to a good God who created the earth.  People, part of this creation, chose to reject God’s authority and caused disorder.  God chose to begin a process to re-order creation.

 

The Old Testament story makes several important contributions to a discussion about poverty, beginning by illustrating how poverty connects to The Fall.  The type of poverty that exists today doesn’t happen simply because someone holds authority.  It happens when authority is abused.  

 

The Old Testament Law had mechanisms to prevent poverty.  The Law is indivisible.  Laws that allow people the chance to earn a living or ensure social welfare are part of the same Law that forbids idolatry.  The Old Testament Law demonstrates that people are physical and spiritual creatures with physical and spiritual obligations.  We are responsible to both God and each other.

 

In Part Two, Hughes considers how Jesus’ role in the redemptive plan affects our response to poverty.  For Christians, responding to poverty should be a response to Jesus.  Christians should look to Jesus as a source for motivation by studying what he did while on earth, what he taught, and what he is doing today.

 

Jesus did three types of things on earth.  He embraced people that everyone else thought they were supposed to shun to remove a barrier that society created.  He forgave sins to remove a barrier that people created themselves.  He died and resurrected to show that sin is forever defeated and let people into the Kingdom.  Hughes’ claim is stark: If a Christian response to poverty does not grow out of how we understand Jesus’ death and resurrection, it is not a Christian response to poverty.  

 

Jesus’ teaching is also important to how Christians respond to poverty.  Jesus used political language when talking about the Kingdom of God.  This explained what the fulfilled rule of God will look like.  Jesus’ teaching has two sections.  Jesus’ teaching identified a fulfilled Kingdom by combining blessing (The Beatitudes) with ethical teaching (The Sermon on the Mount).  If Christians genuinely trust God, their behaviour will reflect these teachings, with the help of the Holy Spirit.  Anyone who claims to belong to this Kingdom and does not prioritize a response to poverty is lying.

 

Presently, Jesus acts through the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit’s most explicit role is re-creation so people will live within God’s purpose and will.  A plan to address poverty or other social issues can be excellent, but the people enacting it will still be sinful and imperfect.  The Spirit can direct a response to poverty.  Jesus’ work will continue into the future.  Hughes frames Jesus’ future work as “eschatological hope.”  Today there are places where Jesus does not reign, otherwise sin and hurt would not be so great.  Future hope should affect our response to this need. 

 

In Part Three, Hughes considers the people left by Jesus to do his work – the church.  Hughes explains how the church can help society order itself and overcome poverty.  The church offers an alternative way of life that will naturally improve the positions of marginalized people.  The church offers a different way of life in three ways.  First, it gathers people.  When the church does this, it can demonstrate what a society ordered under the teaching of Jesus can offer to people and provide an example to imitate.  Second, it demonstrates joy.  This shows people that Jesus’ teaching can help people, even in apparently odd teachings like commands to relinquish power or prioritize the needs of others over our own.  Third, it speaks on behalf of God (prophecy) and to God (prayer).  The church expects God to be relevant to specific problems today.  The prophet identifies and speaks truth both to the church and to others, but typically begins by addressing the church.  Prayer is essential to this process.  It is impossible to speak on God’s behalf if we refuse to talk with him.

 

Power and Poverty affects how I see myself as political and how I understand myself as an advocate for social justice because Dewi Hughes is the first person that I have read to connect directly communal/societal evil with how I understand human sinfulness.  As a Christian, I am not surprised that covering sin and forgiveness is necessary when discussing social justice.  I overlooked this until reading Hughes’ suggestion of God’s redemptive plan as a means for addressing poverty, however.  This is the primary lesson I take from this book.

 

It is also helpful that Hughes links God’s commands with human rights (page 82).  His contention is that we should not leave either protection for the vulnerable nor social welfare to the “charitable whims of the rich”.  By linking protection and provision to human rights and removing charity from the discussion, Hughes implies some difficult questions for any readers who are rich (and not just the 1-percenters).  Not the least is, are we willing to rely on charitable whims to protect our other human rights, such as free speech?  If we are not willing there, why are we willing to do so when addressing poverty?

 

Finally, I like that Hughes contributed to my thinking about how Christians and others can be co- advocates for justice.  Hughes’ idea that anyone – not just his fellow evangelicals – can come up with a good idea is a humble starting point for any social justice Christian (page 165).  Hughes continues the idea by explaining that imperfect people cannot follow even the best plan.  I think this is where Christians have something unique to offer.  We believe that that God counters human sinful character (even and especially amongst Christians) with a redemptive plan.  Christians can begin to explain how forgiveness and confession are invaluable to an approach ending to poverty.