My Response to Brueggemann’s Biblical Economics.

Scot McKnight recently linked a piece by Walter Brueggemann's called A Biblical Approach to the Economic Crisis. I've read and generally liked several things Brueggemann has written, which is part of why I find articles like this so irksome. Here is what I wrote on the Jesus Creed blog.

**********

Thanks for the link to the article by Burggemann. It is yet another example of what makes me want to pull my hair out when theologians start talking economics. 🙂

There are two basic questions every society has to wrestle with: "How many of which things shall we produce today?" and "On what basis shall things be distributed?" Theologians almost invariably dwell on the second question to the exclusion of the first. The mindset is that material goods simply exist. The only obstacle to abundance is greed and lack of generosity. If we were just more giving, then inequities would just melt away.

But material goods do not simply exist. Economic labor is about transforming matter, energy, and data from less useful states into more useful states. On any given day a society has X number of people, with X amount of productive capacity, and X amount resources. Which things shall we produce today? While a small community (i.e., family, small commune) may be able to know each other's needs well enough to come to some communal decision about what to produce how to distribute, you cannot do this when the community grows to more than a few dozen. How to coordinate the productive capacities millions of people who are complete strangers? Markets.

Markets create instantaneous feedback loops about what is wanted and what should be supplied. Markets are far from perfect. They process people's bad choices just as well as people's good choices. Alone, they will not lead to an entirely just production and distribution. The must be constrained by effect juridical systems and supplemented with a populous that values generosity. But they are absolutely essential to creating abundance the theologians like Bruggemann want us to share with each other.

Bruggeman is right that viewing the individual as the basic economic element is wrong. He does not precisely articulate what the basic element should be, but based on his "common good" motif it appears that national government might be his preferred economic element. But the only alternatives are not individual versus national control. The Torah has families living in community with other families as the basic element. The jubilee prohibits the permanent alienation of families from their allotted land. Land is privately held in trust for God to provide for the family and to be used in making available goods for trade and sharing. Levels of societal administration beyond these local communities exist largely in service to these communities. They are not the focal point of societal functioning or economics.

Autonomous individualism is a product of the Enlightenment. But so is the notion that a national government entity can correctly comprehend massive complexity, act with greater wisdom toward the common good than what emerges from people freely engaging one another, and that it can do so with greater moral rectitude than would otherwise be the case.

Bruggeman's economic vision is too small. Generosity? Yes. But we were created to be co-creators with God. There is scarcity. We are finite beings with finite time, capabilities, and resources on any given day. We participate in the generation of our individual and communal abundance. When we celebrate communion we don't take of the grain and grape but rather of the bread and the wine. Human labor is integral. But because theologians like Bruggeman see only existing goods to be justly distributed, the productive aspect of dominion … transforming matter, energy, and data from less useful states to more useful states … is lost. The basic question is not generosity but how rather how do we create a mutually advantageous cooperative venture that both justly produces and distributes abundance. Generosity and markets are essential to such a venture.

What we need from theologians is a carefully thought out understanding of how to engage basic economic questions in creating the cooperative venture. We need to rediscover the high calling of work in the marketplace and understand it in other than purely instrumental terms. Instead, we get moralist platitudes like, "Whereas autonomous economics begins with a premise of scarcity, biblical faith is grounded in the generosity of God who wills and provides abundance." We deserve far better from our best theological minds.


Comments

9 responses to “My Response to Brueggemann’s Biblical Economics.”

  1. I often have the same feeling about Christian leaders and theologians who speak strongly and often dogmatically about economic questions as I have about young earth creationists. They both fall into a kind of anti-intellectual obscurantism. Both have to ignore conclusive empirical evidence to hold to their assertions and they simply factor that empirical evidence out of their theological or ethical reflections.

  2. Rick McGinniss Avatar
    Rick McGinniss

    Wow, well said.

  3. Rick McGinniss Avatar
    Rick McGinniss

    Blue sky question (and I hope it’s not an inappropriate one):
    If you had the opportunity to teach a four-week sermon series to a congregation that would help them sift through some of the current economic issues, what would your topics be? (And just to be clear, I’m not talking about a giving or money management series, but something that reflects a biblical mindset towards economics in general).
    Your economic work on this site is fascinating to me and I feel like it would be extremely helpful to people in my congregation, but I’m curious as to what three or four nails you would pound if given the chance.
    Thanks

  4. Rick, that is a fascinating question. I’m out of town right now I and just came in from events that ran from 8:00 am until 10 pm. I’ve got some thoughts but let me sleep on it.
    Thanks for you affirmation.

  5. Hi,
    I’m working on this very question, down here in New Zealand, as my seminary has called a conversation between business and community leaders and theologians. Here’s my suggestion:
    Week 1 – creativity – co-creators with God in 21st century – Genesis 1, Psalm 8, Parable of sower, parable of talents
    Week 2 – justice – distribution of resources – Old Testament, host in Luke 14, Zaccheus, Joseph of Arimathea
    Week 3 – sustainability – how to live within ourselves individually, communally, nationally
    Week 4 – how then should we live – stories of how Kingdom is being earthed in local communities in response to credit crunch.
    thoughts?

  6. Steve, you are moving along similar lines to my thoughts. I’ll get this eventually but I am swamped in meetings.

  7. I got a C- in Economics 101 but I get enough to understand– Thanks, very insightful!

  8. Ran across this while preparing for Thanksgiving. You make a good point, but here’s my question. Whether we are talking about the production side or the distribution side, is scarcity not an indication of human greed? I think the Bible is clear that God provides enough to meet our needs. When people go without, it is because we have misused the resources he has made available. We may misuse them in deciding what and how much to produce, or in deciding how to share what is produced. Either way, I think Bruegemann’s basic point holds: in God’s economy there is enough. We are the ones to screw that up, even in a free market economy.

  9. How interesting that you would resurrect this post today. I was just contemplating taking another run at this topic.
    “…is scarcity not an indication of human greed?”
    We need to begin by asking a scarcity of what? I interpret your comment to reference scarcity concerning the basic needs of life. That is a legitimate use of the term.
    When an economist talks about scarcity, it is probably more helpful to talk in terms of limits. As an individual, I have a limited amount of time in each day. I have a limited amount of finances with which to make transactions. I have limits on how fast I can work, what I can physically do, and my mental capacity. These are just a few of my limitations.
    Now let’s assume I’m a sinless person. I want to do only good things. My limitations will not allow me to do all the good I want to do today. There is “scarcity” relative to what I want. I must prioritize my actions and use of my resources. Also, understand “scarcity” isn’t just about food, shelter, and clothing. For economists, scarcity refers to the whole bundle of decisions I make about my life, up and down the Maslow Hierarchy Needs.
    Now in a sinful world, certainly some of what figures into our decisions are unwarranted wants. Some will argue that if we simply limited our wants that there would be no scarcity. But as I just demonstrated, this does not actually address the issue of scarcity as it used by economist. Each day we will still have to prioritize our lives.
    “I think the Bible is clear that God provides enough to meet our needs.”
    Enough of what? Virtually nothing we use as humans is provided for us in usable form. Matter, energy, and data must be transformed from less useful states to more useful states. Absent human labor, God has not provided us with an abundance of anything we use. Instead, he makes us his agents in producing abundance to meet our need. We agents experience scarcity and out of that experience we cooperatively produce abundance. God provides the earth and the environment. God gives us health and discernment. But we create the abundance.
    Now the issue is that throughout human history there have always been challenges in generating a sustained abundance. Look at Jacob’s life in the Genesis. He goes to Laban’s and returns a very wealthy man. But by the end of his life he is refugee in Egypt, having lost his land and wealth to famine. His life symbolizes the precariousness of abundance that was the norm.
    From 10,000 BCE to 1750, the average worldwide annual per capita income rose from $90 to $180 (measured in 1990 purchasing power parity dollars, which keep things constant for inflation and across cultures.) From 1750 to today, per capita income is nearly $7,000. During the same time the population grew sevenfold from just under 1 billion to nearly 7 billion. From 1970 to today, the percentage of the world population living on less than $1 a day shrank from 39% to about 17%. Furthermore, life expectancy at birth … the single best measure of societal well-being … was about thirty years over most of human history. During the past century it has risen to about seventy years old worldwide and nearly eighty in developed nations.
    These changes were brought by specialization of labor, expanded trade, and technological innovation. God’s agents found a formula for generating sustained abundance. An expanding number of people are appropriating this formula and joining the abundance. But many are slower to move than others. Sometimes there are culture values that hinder. Sometimes there are oppressive governments. Sometimes geopolitical decisions by the USA and others create barriers.
    Wealth is a lot like health. It is not something you can directly transfer to another. If a group of us are healthy, how would we give unhealthy people some of our health? Is there a fixed amount of health in the world that we have disproportionately taken for ourselves … were we greedy? No. What we would do is try to address the issues that cause ill health for our unhealthy friends so they can be healthy.
    Similarly, we can give aid and financial resources to others but that will always be quickly exhausted. No ultimate wealth is truly generated for the poor. What is needed is for poor societies to become wealth generating communities … to become more effective agents in their producing their own abundance.
    That’s probably much more than you wanted but those are some of my thoughts. 😉
    There is no doubt that greed plays a role in the suffering of the poor around the world. But it is much much too reductionist to simply blame greed. The issue is that we need to equip other agents with the ability to become abundance generators and work for favorable social/natural environments where that abundance can grow. And up until very recently, societies have not had a sustainable abundance because they had inferior formulas for work and trade. God has indeed provided for abundance but we only now figuring out how to do it.

Leave a Reply to Michael W. KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading