Reflections on work in a sustainable society

Ecumenical Review, The, July, 1996 by Francis Wilson

Most advanced industrial economies are also producing what Marx would

recognize as a

lumpen proletariat -- those whose potential productivity is so low that they

are not wanted

by the private economy at any wage rate that would come close to allowing

them to support

themselves in anything like the normal standard of living. Today we know

them as the

homeless... While there is some overlap with the homeless, there are [in the

USA] 5.8

million males who are the right age to be in the work-force and who in the

past used to be in

the work-force; who are not in school, are not old enough to have retired;

who exist but who

have no obvious means of economic support; who have either been dropped

from, or have

dropped out of, the normal working of the economy... This is social

disengagement on a

massive scale.(5)

Thus the second Visser 't Hooft consultation was held, under the general rubric of "Work in a Sustainable Society", in an attempt to look straight in the eye of the apparent conflict between policies deemed necessary for dealing with environmental degradation and those found appropriate for moving away from the increasing degrees of unemployment and marginalization found in so many parts of the world.

Before going on to reflect on those discussions, it is worth pausing to note two important advantages or contributions which the ecumenical movement could, theoretically at least, bring to the debate. The first relates to values; the second to the rootedness of its global perspectives. With regard to the former I am reminded of the scientist who declared at the famous WCC conference held in 1979 on "Faith, Science and the Future" that he found it exciting to be present because never before had it been possible for him as a scientist to raise the ethical questions that arose in his field (genetic engineering) and which troubled him as a human being. The ecumenical movement has an important contribution to make in the field of ethics, which tends to be assumed or unexamined by so many secular organizations. What are the values that should underpin and guide policy-making in this area?

The second major asset of the ecumenical movement is its potential for a genuinely rooted global perspective -- one which is rooted in both rural and urban areas and which can reflect the insights of both the powerful and the poor in societies that differ widely. To be sure, full advantage is not always taken of this potential, but it is important as this debate unfolds that voices are raised and listened to from all corners of the globe. In an area so fraught with contradictions it is critical to understand the diverse perspectives and find ways of drawing them together.

The articles in this issue by Amata Miller (pp. 317-31) and Lukas Vischer (pp. 286-311) and the Bible study led by Joannes Petrou (pp. 312-16) reflect something of the thinking about values that informed the deliberations of the consultation, and they help to bring together the cluster of environmental values that underpin discussions of sustainability in this context with some fundamental rethinking about the meaning and purpose of work. A surprising finding, but one of considerable relevance in current circumstances, is that the churches' traditional teaching that work lends meaning and fulfillment to life is rooted neither in the Bible nor in the Reformation. Vischer underscores that the most essential contribution of the Christian gospel to this discussion is the insight that the purpose of work is not to gain and accumulate property, but to meet the needs of the community. This view was echoed in Petrou's thought-provoking Bible study -- from a Greek Orthodox perspective -- on 2 Thessalonians 3:6-13.