Empowerment: A Theological Perspective'

Empowerment: a theological perspective It is generally accepted that sound practice must he informed by sound theory. This maxim applies also with reference to the concept empowerment which is in vogue within South Africa today. Therefore it is argued here that for empowerment to be effective it must he underpinned by a sound theological understanding o f powerlessness. After exploring the use o f the term power (powerlessness), its occurrence and meaning in Psalm 82 is examined, concluding with an attempt at formulating a theological definition o f powerlessness. This is followed by a survey o f the concept powerlessness as it is fo u n d in current literature. These understandings o f powerlessness are also evaluated. Finally the benefits o f a theologically defined concept o f powerlessness as basis for empowerment are discussed.


INTRODUCTION
As we move to a new dispensation in South Africa, a term which has gained great currency is the word em powerment.Every vision for South Africa in one way or an o th e r focuses on this issue.At the W orld T rade C en tre in K em pton Park different aspects of this issue received attention.The constitutional negotiations seek to em power; affirm ative action is targeted at em pow ering the previously powerless; economic and educational restructuring has the same aim in mind.
But it is maintained here that for empowerment to be effective it must be underpinned by a sound theological understanding of powerlessness (poverty).This is important because of the inseparable link between one's concept of powerlessness and the strategies designed to empower the powerless.It must be noted that an inadequate concept of powerlessness can lead to an ineffective empowering strategy.Therefore, it is argued here that a theologically defined concept of powerlessness is vital for effective strategies of empowerment.

A T H E CO N CEPT O F POW ER AND POWERLESSNESS
Morris^ makes it clear that power, and by implication powerlessness, can be used in three basic ways: 1 Power used as an instrument Pow er in this sense is the power to get things done, or to change things.This understanding of power is dom inated by an ability concept of power.It must be noted that the exercise or non-exercise is not an issue in this understanding of power, for passive (non-exercised) power can be more powerful than active power.This distinction intends to stress the fact that power is not just about ability but also about the actuality of getting things done.

Power used to attribute responsibility and blame
Accountability is expected and blame and praise attributed on the premise that the person has the power to do what is expected, desired or required.As Morris^ says: "to have power or responsibility is to be able to do things".O perative here is the principle which says "ought implies can"'*.If a person does not have the power to do or not to do a thing, he cannot be held accountable; he cannot be blamed or praised, since the outcome has nothing to do with his power to do or not to do.With this use power is also understood as an ability concept.
3 Power used to evaluate social systems In this context power is used as a means of evaluating the distribution of power within a society or .socialsystem, "for people can, and do, value one distribution of power more than another"-^.It is used to express a judgem ent on the way power is distributed between A and B in a society.It seeks to determine whether A has more power than B. Thus power functions to evaluate how abilities are distributed in a society, for societies can be judged "by the extent to which they give their citizens freedom from the pow er of others [influence concept] or by the extent to which citizens have the pow er to m eet their own needs or w ants [ability concept]"^.According to Gowan, the Old Testam ent material on wealth and poverty should be used in this evaluative sense.This is clear from his remark: "the Old T estam ent m aterial has enduring value for descriptive purposes.The Old T estam ent's final criterion was diagnostic, and it can still be used that way"^.

B T H E CONCEPT O F POWERLESSNESS IN PSALM 82«
W hen we turn to Psalm 82, which of these understandings of powerlessness do we find there?The Psalm views the poor as powerless in the sense that they are unable to get the things they want, done.They lack the ability to get things done.It was mentioned above that powerlessness in an evaluative sense can be understood both as an ability or influence concept or rather as an ability concept qualified by an influence nuance.We find this use of powerlessness in Psalm 82 as well.On clo.ser examination, however, it appears that powerlessness in Psalm 82 refers not so much to the fact that the poor are under the control of others, but to their lack of ability; they are powerles.s.We see this in the way God speaks to the gods.He commands them: 1. Verse 3a: give justice 2.
Verse 4b: deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
This command to em power the poor through deliverance from the power of the wicked will be accomplished to the extent that the gods heed G od's call to maintain justice in the cosmos.Thus verse 3 is G od's call to the gods to empower and enable the powerless and in this way break the influence of the powerful.Prinsloo maintains that verses 3-4 "are built up in a parallel manner"*^, and are th e re fo re also sim ilar in m eaning.O n this basis we can in fer th a t the imperatives in verse 3-4 have the emphasis of enabling the powerless.G od calls upon the gods to empower the powerless; to restore to them the ability to obtain the justice they desire, deserve and require.For the issue in poverty is not that the poor have abilities which they are not using.R ather it is the fact that the poor lack ability; they are unable to obtain what they desire, deserve and require.To use the words of Morris who says: "to be impotent (powerless) is to lack an ability"*®.
The evaluative use of powerlessness is evident from the consequences of the misrule of the gods contained in the climatic description of verses 5-6: "all the foundations of the earth are shaken".The cause of the chaotic state of the society (cosmos) is diagnosed as the inability of the poor to obtain what they need and desire.T heir pow erlessness is the basis for G od's evaluation of the society as chaotic.Psalm 82, therefore uses the concept powerle.ssnessas an evaluative term.
But Psalm 82 goes further than just recognising the im portance of the ability aspect of the concept powerlessness.It also focuses on the empowering of the powerless.It sees the enablem ent and em pow erm ent of the pow erless as coming from God.The inability (powerlessness) of the powerless are dealt with as they turn to God, the source of their empowerment.It is in looking to God, hoping in God, trusting in God, waiting upon God, depending upon God, that the powerless find their em powerment.Thus Psalm 82 adds another dimension to the concept pow erlessness, that of abject, total dependence upon G od.So powerle.ssnesstheologically defined is: the abject, total dependence upon God by the powerless in the quest to be empowered and enabled.In the context of the above powerlessness means to abandon oneself to another person; that is to God.Kvalbein writes in this regard that powerlessness refers to "the fundamental position of man before God as helpless, as sinner, regardless of the m aterial resources or social position"'^.Mcpolin describes the poor as "those who place their total dependence upon God, who plead helplessness before God.They are not delivered by their own power but by the pow er of God.In this sense they would be spiritually poor"i2.The last sentence of McPolin could be rephrased more appropriately: in this sense they are powerful.

C CONCEPTS O F POWERLESSNESS IN CU R R E N T LITER A TU RE
Poverty is being understood increasingly as powerle.ssness.A number of articles and books have been w ritten on poverty from this perspective.But what concept of pow erlessness do we en c o u n ter in this lite ra tu re ?How does this concept of pow erlessness relate to the insight developed in Psalm 82?The answer to these questions will be our next concern.A number of recent publications which consider poverty from the perspective of powerlessness are now discussed and evaluated.
1 Concepts consistent with the understanding of powerlessness in Psalm 82 1.1 R W Lyon^3 writes from a concern for evangelicals and particularly their ineffectiveness to impact the world scene and modern society.His analysis of North A merican evangelicalism shows that it is ineffective because it relies on the same sources and form s of pow er society rely on, th a t is: success, w ealth, politics; economic, social and military power.Against this background Lyon calls for a new brand of evangelicalism characterised by: (a) the renouncem ent of "power"; (b) a commitment to powerlessness in terms of life-style.Powerlessness is now defined by Lyon as being "dependent upon the word and Spirit".It m eans "to abandon ourselves to them" (i e word and Spirit).Therefore Lyon sees powerlessness as "abject dependence" upon G od, his W ord, and his Spirit.This form ulation of powerlessness is consistent with the theologically defined concept of powerlessness referred to above.
M ott'si'* criticism that Lyon does not define powerlessness is not valid, for implicit in Lyon's definitions of powerlessness is his understanding of power.This understanding of power uses power to evaluate society or a sector within a society.W hat can be said against Lyon, though, is that he does not draw out the implications of his understanding of powerlessness for the socio-political and structural obstacles in the fabric of the society clearly enough.An inadequate attempt is made at thls'5.In the end Lyon ends up where Shourie (see below) finds himself.
1.2 J Moltmann'6 M oltmann's book is a collection of sermons.The concept powerlessness gives the sermons coherence.Each sermon in one way or another deals with this theme.He understands powerlessness in the sense of the limitations people experience in their daily livesl'^.The limitations are experienced perpetually.The Bible is then used to see how others who have experienced similar limitations in the past, coped with them .S cripture is seen to provide m odels for dealing with the lim itatio n s experienced in daily life.Moltmann perceives the problem not as the limitation (powerlessness) itself, but the manner in which it is being met with by the individual.Consequently, for Moltmann powerlessness is part of the human condition, since it is part of the everyday existence and life of ordinary people.By looking at the Biblical m aterial and the way in which those in the Bible have dealt with their limitations, Moltmann wants to answer the questions: Where did these people get their power from?How did the powerless live meaningfully in the face of their powerle.ssness?His answer: From the Spirit, from God. Powerlessness is therefore conceived of by Moltmann as that which is imposed upon our being; impositions upon our humanity.Thus powerlessness is conceived negatively.It is that which restricts the being from being what it potentially can be and ought to be.
From this discussion it is clear that Moltmann has a theological concept of powerlessness, namely, total dependence upon God and his Spirit; and this under standing is best suited to an ability concept of power and powerlessness.Moltmann works with an ability concept of power and powerlessness, theologically defined, which is necessary if strategies which seek to address the real powerlessness of the powerless are to be formulated.

DLM iglor'8
"Power is the ability to do something.It is the capacity to accomplish a purpose"*^.
Power can be experienced actively (I do, act), or passively (I am acted upon, lim ited) by the power of others.T herefore pow er can, in a sense be said to be experiencing of the power of others in a negative way.Given this understanding of power and powerlessnes.s,poverty as powerlessness can be described as experiencing the negative use of economic power by others.Sociologically and politically power is "the ability of one group or class or nation to have its way and to control others"20.
It is clear from this discussion that Miglor works with an ability concept of power ISSN 0257-8891 = SKRIF EN KERK Jrg 15(2) 1994 and powerlessness.The weakness of Miglor's treatm ent is that he does not spell out the im plications for em pow erm ent in term s of the socio-political and economic realities of society.
2 Concepts inconsistent with the understanding of powerlessness in Psalm 82 2.1 C Shourie^' maintains that governments and their agencies together with those involved in developm ent work have failed to deal effectively with poverty.Evidence for this is seen in the fact that governm ent program m es m ake little difference to the poverty of the poor.In addition the failure by developm ent agencies to actualise their convictions is further proof of this.T he fundam ental reason for this state of affairs is that governments and agencies have diagnosed the problem of poverty incorrectly.Both have defined poverty in term s of its fruit rather than its root.Shourie expresses the root of the problem as follows: "Poverty is p o w e r l e s s n e s s " 2 2 .But what is powerlessness?To arrive at an answer Shourie first defines power as follows; "Power is the ability to control various factors in order to perpetuate selfish gain over and above the legitimate interests of others"23.Power is: to have control over.G iven this, pow erlessness is defined by Shourie as not exercising control over, particularly over oneself and one's resources as well as not resisting the control of others over oneself.
It is clear that Shourie works with an influence concept of pow er and powerlessness.He, moreover, sees the problem in terms of influence over the mind of the poor.He remarks, for example, that the poor should be made to "challenge from heart and mind"^'» the existing order of things.Further, that the poor are poor because they do not "have the resources they think they need"25.For him powerless ness is a state of mind.Shourie says as much by virtue of the constant reference to "believe", e g "with such beliefs; they believe in the same sources of power; and the poor are equally responsible for their very acceptance of these beliefs brought them, in the first place into existence"2<>.Poverty, according to Shourie is therefore a problem of consciousness; of a wrong mindset, of a wrong state of mind.How are the poor to be empowered?By "generating faith and confidence among the poor: faith in the values inherent in the New O rder, confidence to choose it [i e these values]"^^.Consequently, poverty is dealt with when we are able to get the poor to change their minds; to get them to believe something different.And what is that something different?It is the values of the New Order, the values of the Kingdom of God.
Shourie is correct to point out that unless poverty is seen as powerlessness, the root problem (s) of poverty will not be addressed.But Shourie himself fails to address the root problem of poverty because he works with an inadequate concept of powerlessness which inevitably leads to an inadequate strategy for dealing with the problem of poverty.He no doubt identifies the real problem.The weakness is his solution which does not go far enough to address the problem .According to Shourie the solution is in a "totally different source of power: the power which Jesus proclaimed" and which has "God as its definition.As people turn to God, the power of God is made available to them", and having this power, "they begin to resist the control of others over their lives and resources"; and they resist "not by a coup or a massacre" but by choosing biblical values such as "service, mutual dependence, selfcontrol, mutual love, respect, trust, harmony and reliability; in other words realise the intrinsic worth of created man"28.
So then: the way for the poor to remove the control of others over them is for the poor to turn to the New O rder and power available through participating in this New O rder which is the Kingdom of God.Spiritual conversion is the strategy Shourie uses to deal with the root problem of powerlessness.Thus Shourie's answer lies on the spiritual, personal and individual planes only.Why? because he works with a concept of powerlessness which is not sufficiently informed theologically.
T here are real structural obstacles in the fabric of the society which contributes to the powerlessness of the powerless.And to focus on this, an influence concept of powerlessness is inadequate.What is needed is a theologically defined ability concept of powerlessness as described above.Shourie's person who does not follow the power dynamics of this world, but follows the values of the Kingdom of G od, will still be unable to obtain a fair share of w hat can be described as the common social good due to the structural hindrances in the society, as Psalm 82 makes abundantly plain.His starting point is that hum an nature is essentially selfish.This selfishness expresses itself in the desire to gain more.How is this gain obtained?Through control over others.The solution is therefore to change human nature from it's selfish orientation towards another orientation which aims "to direct [one's resources] in a way which builds himself and others"^^.How is this new orientation achieved?By spiritual conversation.Therefore, a new nature is the solution to the root problem of poverty.
Once again we have an answer to poverty which leaves it on the spiritual level, and ignores the socio-political and the eco-socio-structural levels of the problem.Shourie himself points to and identifies certain structural problems but fails to address these.He rightly points out that "a m ere reshuffling of resources does not solve anything at all, creating rather only a new population of the poor"30.It is not just the transference of power to those who do not have power.It involves "the tran sfe re n ce of allegiance to a g rea ter Power"3i.B ut this is m erely to acknowledge that a strategy for empowerment must have a sound moral and spiri tual base; and this is very im portant.But his solution rem ains inadequate for addressing the root problem of poverty which is powerlessness.

2.2
H R Weber^^ points out that power manifests itself at different levels: social, military, political, economic, natural forces (like wind, water, fire); authority (of men and women); the divine and dem onic (behind the scenes in nature and history).Power takes on all these forms.Understanding power biblically means being able to see the interaction between G od's power and these powers as God struggles to establish his kingdom on earth.Powerlessness is availability to God to be used by Him as His instruments in the establishment of his kingdom on earth.It is therefore seen in term s of agency and instrumentality.Powerlessness is parti cipation in the struggle of God to establish his kingdom on earth.
W eber works with a concept of power which is essentially conflictive.Foundational to a conflictive concept of powerlessness is the definition of power as power over.The solution in such a situation is to overthrow the controlling power and in this way remove the powerlessness of the powerless including the use of revolutionary m ethods.Consequently the active revolutionary struggle of the pow erless is G od struggling to set up his kingdom; making his power felt in the world.T he question which remains, however, is: W hat happens after the revo lution?Recent history seems to show that the powerless continue to be powerless.T he inabilities of the poor rem ain even after the struggle and the revolutionary overthrow of those who exercise power over.T here is a transfer of power which does not necessarily lead to the effective em pow erm ent of the pow erless.A conflictive concept of powerlessness, based as it is on the influence concept of power, is inadequate.It is necessary to conceive of powerlessness as a theologically defined ability concept for empowering to find expression in the real empowerment of the powerless.In this way the causes and not merely the symptoms of power lessness will be addressed.

2.3
S Mott33 accepts Max W eber's definition of power which is functional.It contends that some hold power at the expense of others and use that power to further their own interests.M oreover, he m aintains that pow erlessness means "being controlled by others for their gain" or the "denial of aspects of participation in the community".Against this background "powerlessness" means the lack of, the absence of a sufficient amount of the constant-sum of power in the society resulting in the inability to realize one's will or the inability of a group of people to realize their will."Power is an aspect of social relations.It is not being held in isolation from others but in relation to others."Consequently, for Mott "power is power over others".Jesus' ministry is now evaluated in term s of this concept of power over (influence concept).So Mott argues: (a) power is not at stake in the temptation; (b) Jesus was not powerless; (c) the power dem onstrations by Jesus, (miracles, temple cleansing, etcetera which are political power demonstrations) resulted in his death.Power, not powerlessness caused Jesus' death.But what are we to make of Jesus' own admission of his own powerlessness?He did not know the hour of his second advent?I think an influence concept is not adequate to deal with the issue of power in the life of Jesus.
The remark by Mott that: "humility and trust do not equal powerlessness" cannot stand the test of biblical material.The Psalms in particular shows this in fact to be th e case.M ott's rem ark that: "Jesus did not su b stitu te this pow er for dependence upon G od, but in his career he indeed did exercise that power for others", drives a false dichotomy betw een power and dependence upon G od, a dichotomy not evident in Scripture, as the Psalms bear testimony.Put another way: the fact that he used power for others instead of in his own interest does not mean less reliance upon God.M ott sees "powerlessness" as abdicating divinely given responsibilities.But this is only true on the basis of his definition of power.If power is the use of power for selfish ends (as Mott would have it) then powerless ness is abdication.

D E Gowan
Gowan34 deals primarily with the Old Testam ent teaching on wealth and poverty.powerlessness as "not enough power"3<>.But this description of powerlessness leads us back to Max W eber's constant-sum (zero-sum) concept of power.M oreover, it is a good example of using a power concept as if it is an ability concept.The mere use of the word ability in a description of power does not mean a genuine ability concept of power is being employed.

H e focuses on wealth because he believes that research on poverty has
The weakness of G ow an's position is his contention that the Old Testa ment does not give prescriptions on the issue of poverty and wealth.But Psalm 82:3-4 indeed gives such prescriptions for dealing with powerlessness.It may not give a detailed blue print but does tell us that justice must be done; that a certain state of affairs must exist in society.It is certainly m ore than diagnostic.It is prescriptive indeed.

Carmichael and Hamilton
They provide a political definition of power from a black perspective.Power is defined as "control over the minds of men"^'^.They write: "where black people have a majority, they will attem pt to use power to exercise control.This is what they seek, namely, control.W here black people lack a majority, Black power means sharing control"38.This understanding of power is rooted in their conviction that for ages blacks have been controlled, their thinking, their living, and development; just about everything has been controlled.Therefore empowerment of the black person means wrestling control from and then exercising control over the black self.To accomplish this any means is legitimate.Sum m arising: P ow erlessness is to be u n d er the co n tro l of oth ers.Em pow erm ent is the revolutionary overthrow of w hatever and whoever exercises control over those who are powerless.The weaknesses inherent in the influence concept of power applies here as well.For example: Even though control by whites over blacks in South Africa is abolished by the dem ocratic elections of April 1994, blacks will still face major areas of powerlessness.They will continue to lack ability in significant areas of their daily lives such as the economic, social, education and health spheres.

C G EN ER A L EVALUATION O F POW ER CONCEPTS
C h a ra c te r is tic of th e th e o rie s of po w er discu ssed ab o v e is th e fact th a t pow erlessness is defined as the lack of control over.T he influence concept dominates.That the specific strategy for empowerment proposed is a direct outflow of the particu lar understanding and definition of pow erlessness em ployed will become clear from the discussion which follows.
The definitions discussed make use of "class" theory which seem to lie at the base of the influence concept of power.Class theory depicts the poor and rich as social classes.The theory contends that in the Bible th e re is a "class" or "collective group" called the poor.De Vaux39 disputes that this is the case.The problem with the theory is its contention that the poor exist because the rich exist.But it would ap p ear that the poor exist because the provisions regulating the relationships between people in society are disregarded.This is the reason for the p rese n ce o f p o o r peo p le in the society, as Psalm 82:3-4 m akes very clear.Consequently poverty (powerlessness) cannot be resolved by simply transferring power.Something more must be added.That something extra is the presence of a m oral and spiritual base.Put differently, values and norms must support the transfer of power.For this to happen we must therefore conceive of power in more than just political terms.O ur understanding of power and powerlessness must be broadened to include spiritual, moral and religious elements.It is at this point that our analysis of Psalm 82 and our theological conception of powerlessness is of value.
A nother weakness of the definitions discussed is the concept of human nature evident in the concepts of power and powerlessness.Power is discussed within the limits of sheer human possibilities.Human nature in the concepts of power discussed tends to be conceived of as determ ined by the context.H uman nature is seen as autonomous and totally independent, having to work out it's own salvation.This is certainly a very narrow and unbiblical concept of human nature.
The constant-sum concept essential to the concepts of power and power lessness discussed above, hum anizes G od excessively.He is pictured as being unable to stand "above" the struggle for power.In fact He is part and parcel of the struggle for power.The danger here is that He may be found to be affected by the outcome of this struggle for power; something like the gods of the nations around Israel who are defeated when the nation is defeated by Israel.In addition it is a conflict concept of power which inevitably creates a conflictive society in which the Biblical values of peace, justice, and righteousness is seldom evident.
T hese concepts allow no room for divine sovereignty.They lead to dom ination rather than to mutuality and interdependence.For example Steven M ott's criticism of Lyon breaks down because Mott fails to see that even power is a created datum.We really do not know the essence of power.Power, like time and life, is a created thing and cannot be seen as existing outside of God.Thus God is not power, he uses power.In other words to say of God that he is power or might is not an analytical and philosophical statem ent which describes the essence of God but a descriptive statem ent of power encounters of and with God, or descriptive statem en ts expressing our observations of the pow er m anifestations of G od.
Statements to the effect that God is power promote power for its own sake.Power then becomes an end in itself.

D B E N E F IT S O F T H E T H E O L O G IC A L L Y D E F IN E D C O N C E P T POWERLESSNESS
According to Shourie"*^ the root problem of poverty will never be addressed until we see poverty as fundamentally powerlessness.And because governments and other agencies have not grasped this, their empowerment programmes have been ineffec tive.A gainst this background conceiving o f poverty as pow erlessness has the following benefits: The diagnostic aspect helps us to target our empowerment programmes as the correct levels.Poverty and empowering program m es which does not address areas requiring real empowerment would be evaluated as not really helpful to the poor and powerless.
T he evaluative function perform ed by the concept powerlessness helps with the assessm ent of program m es.It can be used to gauge the "success" of em powerm ent attem pts way.When we do that which merely relieve poverty and stop, we are not addressing the core problem s, since relief efforts imply th at the poor have abilities which have tem porarily been hindered.O nce the tem porary hindrance has been removed the poor will be in a position to use their suspended abilities.The concept of powerlessness implicit in relief program m es betrays an unbiblical understanding of the poor.The Old Testam ent and the Psalmist seem to indicate that the poor are really powerless and that any assistance must address this situation if it is to be meaningful.
It also evaluates em pow ering program m es according to w hether they make a difference.Poverty programmes which are aimed at dealing merely with the apparent problems of the poor are equally ineffective.The experience of the Black Am erican civil rights movement is a case in point.Even though black Americans were em powered legally and constitutionally, they continued to be powerless.The civil rights movement aimed at making the de jure situation the de facto.The same is tru e in th e a re a of em pow ering the pow erless.In this way th e concept of pow erlessness serves an evaluative function checking w h eth er em pow erm ent programmes are successful, i e whether they have resulted in real empowerment for the poor and powerless.
Powerlessness theologically defined has another dimension: it gives to the pro b lem o f poverty a tran sc en d e n t aspect.It calls on G od to intervene and therefore provides hope instead of resignation.If there is another powerful source that can intervene and change things it gives meaning to the efforts and struggles in addressing real powerlessness.
In addition, the theologically defined concept of powerlessness brings to empowerment efforts a spiritual dimension.It opens up a perspective of the poverty and empowerment problem that can so easily be missed.It ensures that we in fact diagnose and target correctly the need for em powerm ent in that it opens up the spiritual in the human person.Put differently: all political and economic changes must be based on moral and spiritual values.Here one can think for example of the lost generation in Soweto made up of young people who are growing up without real spiritual, moral and religious values.If they are given socio-political and economic empowerment without a moral, religious and spiritual base, we might end up with a situation in which the might is right approach is resorted to in order to resolve the difficulties which are perceived to be the causes of poverty.Brute force becomes the m ethod for dealing with the perceived causes of pow erlessness in society.Understanding powerlessness theologically therefore underpins empowering strate gies with a spiritual base.
Powerlessness understood theologically also challenges the com prehen siveness of our em pow erm ent efforts.For underlying a theologically defined concept of powerlessness is a specific theory of human nature.It perceives man as a whole person with an integrated physical, mental, spiritual, em otional and moral dimension.Consequently empowerment strategies must seek to address the whole person.A theologically defined concept of powerlessness will ensure this.
Powerlessness theologically understood emphasises accountability which flow out of the concept of interdependence.Powerlessness .sayshuman persons are not autonomous but dependent beings.O ur very creatureliness stresses this point.If human persons are not autonom ous, then co-operation is required to achieve goals.So powerlessness calls for co-operation between the "haves" and the "havenots" in order that poverty is addressed meaningfully.This must be done in such a way that the accountability of both parties is evident for interdependence calls for mutual accountability.Both the implementers and beneficiaries of em powerment strategies are in the final analysis accountable to God.
Powerlessne.ssunderstood in the way we have defined it ensures that our strategies for empowerment make room for the Biblical perspective of powerless ness as complete reliance upon God.The poor of Yahweh is so named, precisely because they are totally dependent upon him.Powerlessness as human dependence is a positive concept.This idea of powerlessness as positive dependence ensures that em pow erm ent strategies and processes rem ain hum ane, just and righteous.Without this we may have a situation in which the previously oppressed become the oppressors; the under-dogs, top-dogs; yet dogs all the sam e. T he concept of dependency upon Yahweh can save us from inhumanity; can save us from being instruments of the loss of human dignity which other people may experience.
O ur concept of powerlessness has ethical implications, and can thus assist in dealing with the issue of revenge and bitterness.It can serve as the basis for reconciliation rath er than retaliation.The qualities of humaneness, justice and righteousness discussed above are criteria by which empowerment strategies should be judged.For the goal of em powerment is not just the transfer of power but the establishm ent of justice (cf.Ps 82).The question to be asked of em powerm ent strategies is: do they contribute to the manifestation of justice, peace, righteousness, and reconciliation in society?But we can only expect em powerm ent strategies to conform to such crite ria if the concept of pow erlessness which inform s the em pow erm ent strategies take seriously the idea of dependence upon Yahweh put forward in this discussion.And it is also against this background that words like helpless, powerless, should be used.They express relationships, particularly the relationship between God and people.

E CONCLUSION
P ow erlessness is a term often used in discussion on poverty.W hat we have attem pted to do was to form ulate a definition of powerlessness which takes its cue from Psalm 82.Against this background several concepts of powerlessness current in the literature on poverty were assessed.It was found that a concept of powerlessness, defined theologically, is needed in order to deal with the real fundamental problem of powerlessness which is the inability of the poor to get things done.
T o m o tiv a te th is c o n te n tio n se v e ra l a d v a n ta g e s o f a c o n c e p t of powerlessness theologically defined were discussed.
T he conclusion to be draw n from this exploration is th at the concept pow erlessness en c o u n te re d in Psalm 82 is vital as a basis for em pow erm ent strategies which attem p t to address the real {de facto) problem s of poverty and powerlessness.It is in this that the value of a concept of powerlessness theologically defined is to be found.
neglected the aspect o f wealth.H e concludes that the Old Testam ent's teaching on poverty and wealth cannot be accepted as prescriptive but rather as diagnostic, i e it does not give specifics on how we should deal with wealth and poverty.It rather helps us to determ ine the state o f a society.T o address the issue o f wealth and poverty G ow an looks at the Old T estam en t's teaching on the poor, widow, orphan and stranger.H e sees them as examples o f "powerlessness".In other words the common denominator characteristic o f these concepts is the idea o f powerlessness.The four categories o f poor, widow, orphan, and stranger can be used to diagnose whether a society is healthy or not.T he extent to which a society is characterised by the biblical demands o f mishpat, hesed, and rahamin is indicative o f the health or illhealth o f that society.These values or norms find concrete expression in the status o f the powerless (poor, widow, stranger and the orphan) in the society.But what does Gowan understand by powerlessness?H e conceives o f pow erlessness as the "inability to maintain rights"35.in addition to the "ability" concept, Gowan defines ISSN 0257-8891 = SKRIF EN KERK Jrg 15(2) 1994 author's M A dissertation.Poverty as powerlessness: An exegetical study o f the meaning o f the Hebrew terminology fo r p o o r in Psalm 82.D epartm ent of Biblical Studies, University of Pretoria, 1993. 2 P Morris, "The essentially uncontestable concepts of power", in: The frontiers 261 EM POW ERM ENT: A TH EO LO G ICA L PERSPECTIVE o f political theory, (Edited by M Freeman & D Robertson), Herts Wealth and poverty in the Old Testament": The case of the widow, the orphan and the sojourner.Interpretation 41 (1987), 341-354.8Seechapter two of the M A (Biblical Studies) dissertation of the author for a detailed exegesis of the Psalm.9 W S Prinsloo, "Psalm LXXXII: O nce again, Gods or men", unpublished paper read at the lOSOT conference in Paris, (July 1992) 1-9.