NPR Marketplace: Bridging the theology-economy gap
Kai Ryssdal: The head of the Anglican Church is no fan of the global financial industry. The Archbishop of Canterbury has been stirring up controversy in England with some fairly strongly worded sermons and statements on that subject. A couple of weeks ago he brought those views to Wall Street.
Trinity Church, right on the corner of Wall Street and Broadway, held a conference on how to build an ethical economy. On stage with him was frequent Marketplace commentator Susan Lee. So we asked her to share her thoughts on the ethics of economics from her perspective as both an economist and a theologian.
SUSAN LEE: Sharing the stage with the Archbishop of Canterbury forced me to wear both my hats at the same time. And, since ethics are the common ground for theology and economics, the result wasn't as loaded with conflict as you might think.
Both theologians and economists are interested in improving the lives of all humans. Both groups agree on policy goals like low unemployment and sustainable growth.
In fact, these goals are in harmony with a definition offered by the archbishop. He said: "An ethical economy is one where we care for our neighbor by creating conditions so the most vulnerable aren't abandoned."
Well, this is a description of capitalism in the U.S. In capitalism, economic wherewithal comes from increasing rates of growth. Or, in the economist's favorite image — a bigger pie. And the sharing of this pie with the most vulnerable is mandated through a social safety net.
Over the past six decades, our economy has enjoyed good economic growth, so we have a bigger pie. And, because of the moral consensus to protect the most vulnerable, we've given more of this pie through the social safety net.
But here's the hooker. Economists are interested in how to make the pie larger. Theologians are interested in how to divide the pie. And so many theologians treat capitalism like a Chinese menu. They pick the wealth-distribution parts and discard the wealth-creation parts.
They assume there can be: work without incentives, enterprise without income inequality, investment without market-rates of return.
But picking and choosing isn't an option. Capitalism is an integrated system. And it's this integration that creates the wealth-making, which is the basis for wealth-sharing.
Well, the Archbishop listened to me politely. But I didn't convince him. I was, however, thrilled to take my views to the top — so to speak.
RYSSDAL: Susan Lee is an economist and a theologian based in New York City.
This is a great summary of the gulf in the conversation between theologians and economists. I continue to be astounded at the huge blind spot theologians have toward the production issue.
Ben Witherington makes this important observation in his recent book Jesus and Money:
"… In biblical culture there was both low productivity and no notable means of increasing productivity over time. … Given these realities, ancient peoples tended to believe that the goods of life had been distributed, even distributed by God, and they could not be increased — they were decidedly "limited." This in turn meant that if a person wanted something he or she did not have, they had to barter for it (or steal it). It was not a matter of finding some way to make "more," in order to increase one's income and spending power. …" (46)
The book is a wonderful resource for examining how money and wealth figured into the Christian narrative and ethics. Yet when it came to an end, stewardship is cast almost exclusively in terms of consumption and distribution, just as First Century Christians would have framed the issues. Other than warnings against participating in unjust systems, production is absent from the picture. Yet it is production that has made the ever-expanding wealth of today possible.
From 10,000 BCE to 1750 CE, annual world per capita GDP (in 1990 adjusted dollars) grew from $90 to $180. The world population was 790 million in 1750, meaning a total world economy of $142 billion. Between 1750 and 2000, the per capita GDP soared from $190 to $6,600 … this during a time when population grew more than seven times to six billion! That gives a world economy of nearly 40 trillion 1990 dollars. Over human history, world life expectancy rates at birth were around thirty years. Over the last century, the global rate has extended upwards toward 70 years. From 1970 to 2006, the global Gini Coefficient … a measure of income inequality … has steadily dropped from .68 to .61. (See yesterday's post.)
My point is not that limiting our consumption and being generous to others is unimportant. They are core to our personal discipleship. But if we are talking about justice for the poor, the transformation of economic production … not simple living and generosity … has done exponentially more to improve lives. Why do theologians persist in mindsets of low-productivity biblical-era Christians instead of a post-Industrial Revolution mindset where productivity can be radically increased? Where is the counsel that helps us process simple living and generosity and how to invest resources to increase productivity for individuals and society?
Leave a Reply