The classic definition of economy was the management of the family or community that makes sure everyone is treated with dignity and has enough.
We find ourselves in trouble because the model of the economy, that served us well in the past, no longer works in a technological society. That model believed work bestowed dignity when people competed with others in amassing private property. It assumed the supply-demand characteristics of a free market provided an invisible hand that made this work for the common good. This model has failed as modern technology provided power for some to amass more and more private property by controlling the risks in the market to their own advantage. We have also found that the model is unable to heal the resulting deep separation of rich and poor, because this technology increasingly eliminates the need for human labor. Indeed, those most able to amass private property today manipulate finances rather than provide work for people.
When she wrote over 25 years ago, Sister Joan thought the Benedictine Rule offered some guidance for coming up with a new model. This would begin by consciously seeing your work as directly benefiting the common good. You do not only work to make money for yourself, but also to care for the creation and the community. She felt placing work in this context would enable us to establish humane priorities.
My first response is that this presents a tremendous challenge. The Rule assumes a Christian community in which nobody has any personal possessions. In fact, private property is pictured as a great vice. All have enough, because the community takes care of everyone. However, work is a duty. An authoritarian abbot makes sure every last person does their share, but he also takes care that the infirmed are given tasks according to their ability. How can this be helpful when we have so much personal property and so little authority to control its use?
My second take is that the Rule still offers us some much-needed perspective. When I have spent time at monasteries, I have always been impressed that work is valued in balance with other activities. Some monks appear for worship in work clothes rather than monastic robes during the day. At times, some are visibly absent, excused because they are needed when animals give birth. Work is a natural part of the day, but it does not consume the worker. I have never met a workaholic monk. None seems to think that they are defined by what they do rather than who they are. It is worth examining what has contributed to this way of life.
Studying the Rule might help in two ways. First, it could go a long way in making clear how much the common good has disappeared in our present situation. Then it could offer some foundation for building a new economic model. If the common good can no longer be presumed, then we must directly concentrate on its development. Sister Joan repeatedly emphasizes that this should include seeing work as co-creation. Work is not primarily about making money but rather about contributing to the creation and the community. Our work develops, rather than destroys, God’s creation. It produces care for people rather than exploitation of them for personal profit.
