Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, Rome, September 30 2024
On September 30th 2024 a workshop organised by the ROR group and the Chair of the Social Doctrine of the Church of the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross was held in response to the provocations of Kathrin Tanner’s book Christianity and the New Spirit of Capitalism (YALE University Press 2021), opening up further reflections from a christian perspective on the current condition of capitalism and further possible developments of Christian social thought. The debate, held behind closed doors and moderated by Ilaria Vigorelli (PUSC, Rome) and Giulio Maspero (PUSC, Rome), was attended by young politicians and officials of the institutions, as well as Luigino Bruni (LUMSA, Rome), Brian Griffiths (House of Lords, London), Ilyas Khan (University of Cambridge), Riccardo Ribera di Alcalà (formerly at the European Parliament), and Cristian Mendoza (PUSC, Rome).
Luigino Bruni pointed out in his speech that there are many points of contact between religion and capitalism: W. Benjamin even called it ‘a religion’. It is generally agreed that it has evolved in a ‘parasitic’ manner with respect to Western Christianity. Nevertheless, there are many references and registers in the Bible that refer to capitalism, theology itself since the Middle Ages was influenced by economics, and finally the term ‘economy’ itself is deeply implicated in dogmatic theology. E. Sella spoke of the trinitarian brand of economics by looking at the three supporting factors: land, capital, labour. This being the case, a key passage to consider in terms of the interconnections between theology and economics is to be found in the events of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation periods. Luther reacted against two elements of Roman christendom: the mixture of money and grace; the luxury in which the roman curia lived. The birth of capitalism is perhaps the best example, according to Bruni, of unintended consequences of action: it originated from criticism of church institutions that appeared too market-oriented. After this crucial step, Lutheran and Protestant anthropology pessimistically settled on Augustinian theses, according to which human nature, wounded by sin, would be incapable of genuine human behaviour. This position was countered by Catholic culture: human nature is indeed wounded, but not to the point of being incapable of relational virtues. In this perspective, the role of mediating institutions (the king, the father, the priest) to transform negative passions and errors became crucial. The mediation of saints in catholicism plays this same role. In the modern scenario, there has been a decline in mediation figures. The other is my equal, he is, therefore, a possible threat to me. The invisible hand of Hobbes’ Leviathan becomes a secular mediator who aims to avoid the threat posed by the other: a kind of immense immunity project. The visions of Smith and Milbank are also marked by a certain pessimism: it is not prudent to rely on the virtues of the other, better to look to one’s own particular interests. The consequence of this cultural revolution was the eclipse of ethical virtues, which are by their very nature an expression of a positive anthropology. This attitude pervaded the spirit of Western capitalism. One thinks of the theses of Hobbes and Smith in which the total absence of the ethical perspective is evident: business is business, gift is gift, or the doctrine of the two kingdoms. In addition to this view, another interesting reading of capitalism, a kind of alternative view, also emerges: the so-called “civil economy”. In this perspective, states, the family, the community, companies, cooperatives and the church are all challenged: business and gift. One must, however, beware of some possible deviations. The first great forcing of capitalism was the reduction of religiosity to a commodity. The second operation, the one we are witnessing with so-called spiritual capitalism, sees big companies becoming the first consumers of this ‘spiritual commodity’. The latest frontiers of leadership pose strategic objectives of spirituality in management: such as ‘training spiritual leaders’ or ‘spirituality and leadership’. This set-up, according to Bruni, has nothing to do with the ‘Economy of Francis’ to which the pope gave impetus, but seems to echo, a millennium later, the Pelagian doctrine of merit. The risk is always the same: imprisoning God in a meritocratic logic and thus witnessing a secular liturgy with no possibility of choice.
Brian Griffith, for his part, intervened by proposing a series of tight refutations of K. Tanner’s theses. Griffith firstly questioned whether finance profoundly influences capitalism and dominates it in all its forms, thus inexorably affecting the individual and his self-determination. The point is not whether or not capitalism is compatible with the Christian faith: work, after all, is a fundamental element in the mandate that human beings have received from the Creator. If one looks at the market with an anatomical approach, which explores phenomena from them as objective data, capitalism and Christian faith do not necessarily stand at the antipodes of each other. For Sir Griffith, the negative view reserved for the role of banks does not find adequate justification in the arguments offered by the author; likewise, the Weberian model adopted in her analysis lends itself to criticism, remaining an ‘ideal’ model from the meshes of which many concrete realities worthy of consideration may escape. Even Tanner’s criticism of multinational corporations or the unbalanced approach to work does not persuade the British economist. In his experience, large corporations are not necessarily inhuman places, especially in view of the flexibility instruments in the labour market today. That said, Sir Griffith focused his attention on a few key issues that in his view deserve to be brought into focus. The value of the market is indisputable, as is the value of property: without economic freedom it is very difficult to possess true political freedom. Prices provide important information for the construction of the social market economy or democratic economy. The market creates networks and social networks; in this regard, covenants with the city, the territory or the nation constitute an interesting area still to be examined and lead to even more determined exploration of possible areas of implementation of the principle of subsidiarity. The real enemy to be defeated is, finally, inflation.
The debate following the conclusion of the morning session, mediating between the various positions expressed, highlighted the need for Christians to develop a positive attitude towards the market as such. The market in its essence is a cooperation of people linked across the globe. Companies themselves can be understood as productive collective actions. This connotation is intrinsically good, which must be leveraged to enhance justice. A useful debate can, if anything, concern the structures and quality of their work. Certainly a major problem today is individualism, or worse, its degeneration into impersonalism, with the consequences of its assimilation into the approaches that govern the actions of economic actors. On the contrary, the economy in its essence is linked to the concept of mutual benefit, the golden rule of which is reciprocity.
Therefore, if capitalism is a system that persists, it is imperative to avoid human beings being considered a mere commodity within the evolutionary scenario of progress. The presentation by I. Khan, in this key, highlighted a crucial element to be taken into account in any attempt to balance future scenarios: if we lose sight of humanity, the system, according to some perspectives, fails. The survival of neo-liberalism implies the failure of democracy, and since financial wealth creates inequality, it is necessary to look at the system objectively: we waste more food in one week in some western cities than is consumed in entire countries in six months. It is technology that creates systems and also decides whether to allow them to persist or not: technology today also dominates capitalism, it is perhaps its Achilles’ heel, Khan provocatively states, and it is no longer under human control.
Nevertheless, the same technology that has created a better society has the potential to give man the freedom he has hitherto been denied. The problem in this regard is certain dominant realities, which impose their influence on the market, regulating its life in the absence of sufficient accountability and transparency. It is towards these realities that the level of attention must be raised to ensure equality, freedom and equal opportunities for all. As Riccardo Ribera pointed out in his speech, however, the economy can be put at the service of the human and in this sense Tunner’s work is a good starting point.
Another major area for reflection is that of work and its connection with human well-being and happiness. Work as man’s vocation was the central theme in Cristian Mendoza’s considerations. The starting point is the idea that what we produce is quite different from what we become through production. Work starts from matter, but in the Christian perspective it is conceived as something to be ‘offered to God’. Jesus himself was a worker for most of his life, so we can imitate him. In this perspective, our mission is to make the product of labour as human as possible. This is why we speak of a relative autonomy of economic and financial life from the spiritual life of man. We are involved in purifying the reasons that guide human actions to make work worthy of such a high calling.
