DIRECTIONS OLD AND NEW: METHODOLOGIES CONSIDERED

In the twentieth century there have emerged several, often diverse, Protestant ways to think theologically about work. Yet, most Protestant constructs bear some family resemblance. The heritage of vocational theology has left certain marks on most of these constructs regardless of whether they are re-appropriations of the vocational model or attempts to move beyond it. Our concern here is twofold. On the one hand, we shall identify both contemporary reformulations of the vocational model and new models (or directions) which Protestants have found to be promising. On the other hand however, we shall highlight where the continuing influence of vocational theology can be seen even in those approaches which have set the model aside.

Re-appropriations of the Vocational Model

Vocation as the Paradigm. It is almost instinctive for Protestants to construe work in terms of one’s calling or vocation. Even among those who have chosen to

understand work according to alternative models, vocation is still the backdrop to which they are reacting or the dialogue partner with which they aie arguing.

Now not all Protestants in the twentieth centuiy have found it necessaiy to abandon the vocation tradition. Indeed, most have not. Many have either simply assumed that the model is the staiting point, or have believed that there is still mileage left in it provided that it is further developed to fit with modern social realities, and provided that is rooted more satisfactorally in biblical / theological thinking. Indeed, most Protestants (excluding possibly Jacques Ellul) have continued to affirm (similarly to Luther and Calvin) that the active working life is a positive aspect of their spiritual lives. Obedience to God in one’s daily activities (or to God’s “call” to work), and a motivation to meet the needs of others through work are ideas which most Protestants have wanted to retain in some form. It is therefore not surprising that when work has become toilsome or unfulfilling, many Protestants have drawn on these motivations to provide them with the encouragement and meaning their lives have needed.

Following World Wai* II, many European Protestants turned their attention to a theological problem of work. While Catholics were exploring “theologies of work”, most of these Protestants were reinterpreting and reapplying their own vocation motif. ^ By the middle of the century, Protestants had come to believe that the doctrine of vocation needed to be revitalized and reinterpreted. With the end of the war tremendous changes had taken place in the world in general and, in the world of work in particular. Given the effects of industrialization and the global economic depression earlier in the century, the influence of expanding markets with the unstable workforce and unemployment which this brings, the growing influence of socialism, the appeal of the welfare state, and the realizations of both the negative as well as positive effects of technology, many Protestants felt compelled to reexamine their own theological understandings of work and to bring them more into line with contemporary realities.

^ One notable exception here is A. Richardson, a prominent figure in the World Council of Churches’ attempt to consider afresh the nature and meaning o f work. In The Biblical Doctrine of Work (1952) Richardson criticizes and sets aside the vocational understanding of work. See: pp.35-39.

Additionally, common critiques of the traditional understanding of vocation were: that it was too inwardly oriented and individualistic, that there was not enough concern about social / structural questions related to work, that it was too closely aligned with the spirit of capitalism, and, that it was dependant on, and encouraged, a far too static form of society.

These critiques may or may not be judged as substantial at the dawn of the twenty first century, especially given a more careful reading of what the Reformers actually taught concerning vocation. Doubtless, the concerns behind the critiques are legitimate and were appropriate at that time. The point however, is that by the middle of the century these perceived needs led many Protestants to look afresh, and to reformulate, their theological understanding of work. Examples of those attempting to re-appropriate the vocational model include O. Nelson Work and Vocation, (1954), and W. R.

Forrester Christian Vocation, (1951).

Toward the end of the century Protestants again took up the discussion about the vocational model. Some have been critical, calling Protestants to move further away from the tradition. Others have at least called for a serious recasting of it.^ Still others however, (mostly from Reformed / evangelical traditions) have appealed for a more direct and only slightly refined return to and rediscovery of the Reformation and Puritan doctrines of vocation. Three articles by Ian Halt (1995), and the books by Lee Hardy The Fabric o f This World, (1990), and Lyland Ryken Work and Leisure in Christian Perspective. (1987), are fine examples of this.

This sampling shows us that during the twentieth century a vocational understanding of work remained influential in Protestant theology. Although no longer the only voice, it is nonetheless an enduring one. Since the model has received such ongoing support, since it has shown its ability to be reformed, and since many can demonstrate that it is still able to offer important contributions to our understanding of work’s nature and meaning, any contemporary theological reflection on work should

take it seriously and be careful not to write it off too quickly. In terms of our hypothesis, the vocational model reminds us particularly of the importance of work’s instmmental aspect (especially with respect to human obedience / sanctification) and its relational aspect (concerning how our work can contribute toward meeting the needs of others and the broader society).

A Focus on the Initial Creation. When theologically exploring work, a common feature among Protestants generally, and also among those par ticularly viewing work as vocation, is a strong appeal to and dépendance on the various doctrines surrounding the initial creation, or as we might call it, protology. During the twentieth century the doctrines of creation ordinances, mandates, the image of God in humanity, and the fall have been given considerable attention both in biblical and systematic theology. Often, the topic of human work has emerged as integral to these themes.

The idea that the initial creation is the theological and ethical starting point for reflection on work has persisted in all but a few of the most recent writers. Emil Brunner for example, construed work as commanded in the initial creation, as an “ordinance”.^ Dietrich Bonhoeffer, uncomfortable with the concept of “ordinance” due in part to its ideological abuse by the Nazis, nonetheless considers work primarily as a creation “mandate”.^ Likewise, many in the Evangelical tradition, following closely Dutch Calvinism, aie also keen to constme work as first and foremost a creation mandate issued directly by God.^ Even Karl Barth, with his distrust of natural theology as seen in his argument with Brunner concerning “creation ordinances”, with his critique of the vocational approach to work and his replacement of it with a “sabbath” model, - even Barth finally theologizes on work at the end of his doctrine of the initial creation; and, while not referring to it as a creation ordinance or mandate, he

Brunner, (1937), pp.384-394. Bonhoeffer, (1955), ppl79-184.

See for example the writings of Paul Marshall: “Work and Vocation”, (1980)., “Calling, Work, and Rest”, (1988), Thine is the Kingdom: A Biblical Perspective on the Nature of Government and Politics Today. (1984). See also: Scanzoni, (1974)., and Scotchmer, (1980).

does consider it to be a necessary “relationship of creation”.^

One thing that this focus on protology when considering work suggests is that modern Protestant theology, explicitly or not, has been probing for and moving in the direction of developing an ontological dimension of work. The desire to locate and secure work’s nature and meaning in the very structure of the created world suggests that work has been perceived to be more than simply an instmmental activity. This possibility of developing an ontology of work, which is a central concern of our hypothesis, we believe will not be fully possible until christological / eschatologieal doctrines are also considered in relationship to the doctrines of the initial creation. Nevertheless, the explorations in protology provide necessaiy resources for a good part of this task.

Departures from the Vocation Tradition

We have stated that the vocational model (with its close dependence on protology) has not been the only Protestant “work” model operating in the twentieth century. As we shall now outline, some have been searching for other models and ways to theologically understand work which get beyond the weaknesses and potentially oppressive misuses of the vocational motif. What is apparent however, is that very few of these Protestant writers completely skirt the themes common in vocational thinking. The majority indeed seem, in some modified form, to have reappropriated many of its contributions. This should not be suiprising given that many of its themes are quite biblical. What we are suggesting is that these Protestants have come “through” vocational thinking even if they have not retained it as a model.

This suggestion of continuity however, should not distract our attention from the genuine innovations which some Protestants have put forth. Of those critical of the vocational model, some have moved to more “contextual” methodologies. Others have

® Barth, Church Dogmatics. Ill 4. (1961). Whether Barth would have returned to a discussion of work with reference to the new creation, had he lived long enough to produce his volume on eschatology, is simply a matter for speculation.

borrowed the “theology of work” motif from Catholic thinking, and still others have let their own system of theology guide their construals of work. We will now classify several of these writers and will pay special attention to how these developments have pushed forward the entire enteiprise of theologically construing work.

Contextual Methodologies. The first alternative models which we will mention can broadly be called contextual. Here, certain concrete ethical concerns have determined the agenda within which work will be considered, the materials which will be selected to inform the discussion on work, and the particular slant given to the arguments about work. We have in mind for instance, the attempts by politically, economically, or racially oppressed peoples to suggest theological understandings of work which are particularly directed toward their points of conflict. With these types of writings, the emphasis with reference to work usually has to do with liberation and economic equality. Good examples of this contextual approach are found in Cochrane and W est’s The Three-Fold Cord: Theology, Work and Labour (1991). Here we find among other offerings a specifically black theology of work and also a theology of work for “workers”.^

Not surprisingly, feminist theological models for depicting work have also emerged. Dorothee Soelle’s To Work and to Love (1984) is one example, Elizabeth J. Nash’s article “A New Model for a Theology of Work.” (1986) is another. Yet another, which combines both feminist and black perspectives is offered by Nondyebo Taki.^ A common thread in most feminist models is both the achievement of the human being’s personal self-end through work, and a sustained focus on the inteipersonal / relational dimension of work.

Feminists however, are not the only ones to be concerned with the existential ideas of fulfillment, personal development, and interpersonal relationality in and through work. As we have argued elsewhere, others, (often also combining these personal and relational concerns with additional explorations related to broader social relationships.

^ Cochrane, (1991), pp. 142-154, and 160-168. ^ Cochrane. (1991), pp. 169-176.

politics and economics,) have also recently taken this approach. Jürgen Moltmann, Douglas Meeks, Timothy Gorringe, and John Scanzoni are only a few examples here.^ Similarly, Jacques Ellul also shares these concerns although his reflections are critical, warning that work and its technological products are actually damaging to human development and human relationships.^®

Also, on the other end of the ideological spectrum, several have written theological enquiries relating to work which are meant to undergird their own particularly conservative theories of politics and economics. Michael Novak’s writings and several articles in Richard Chewning’s “Christians in the Marketplace Series” are examples of t h i s . H e r e work’s instrumental value in providing one’s basic needs is in focus, and work is construed as if it were mostly a sub-division of economics.

Still others, including Jürgen Moltmann and Rosemary Radford Ruether have discussed work with particular attention to how it relates, usually negatively, to the current ecological crisis. 1% These primarily negative pronouncements on work do nonetheless offer valuable resources which aie important for any positive evaluation of work theologically.

What these contextual approaches demonstrate is that any contemporaiy theological construal of work which hopes to be comprehensive, must broaden the range of its theological reflection beyond simply doctrinal explorations so as to guarantee that concrete concerns are adequately addressed. In terms of our own hypothesis, this

See: Moltmann, On Human Dignity. (1984)., Meeks, “God and Work,” in God the Economist (1989)., Gorringe,“Work Leisure and Human Fulfillment.” in Capital and the Kingdom: (1994)., and Scanzoni, “The Christian View of Work.” (1974).

Ellul, (1972).

^ ^ See Novak’s articles in Co-Creation and Capitalism: John Paul II's "Laborum Exercens". eds. Houck and Williams. (1983)., Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism. (1982), Also see: Chewning, ed. Biblical Principles & Business. Vol. 1. (1989)., and Biblical Principles & Economics. Vol. 2. (1989).

See, Moltmann, On Human Dignity. (1984)., God in Creation. (1985)., and Ruether, Liberation Theology: Human Hope Confronts Christian History and American Power. (1972)., To Change the World: Christologv and Cultural Criticism. (1981)., and Sexism and God Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. (1983).

means that any contemporaiy theology of work must include considerations of: work’s instmmentality concerning economic survival, its role relationally in personal existential and interpersonal development, its relational role in social reoganisation and social service in light of the effects of technology on individuals and society, and work’s relationship to and effect on the environment. This means that the instrumental and relational aspects of work as we have called them, must be reckoned with in concrete terms.

Sabbath not Vocation. During the twentieth century, prominent Protestant theologians like Karl Barth began to criticize the adequacy of the vocational model of work on Biblical / theological, and not simply on ethical grounds. Barth, critical of natural theology and of Luther’s exegesis concerning “klesis,” offered Protestants a new model and a new theological place for work beginning with the principle of “sabbath” rather than vocation. Barth still addressed work within protology, but, rather than staiting with a calling to human activity, he took the sabbath to be the logical and conceptual theological starting point. This approach to work retained many of the traditional emphases of the vocational model; such as, the importance of human obedience to the call of God, and the importance of work as a service to God and others. However, at the same time it challenged and relativised the modern, almost “deified” understanding of human work in a way that the traditional Reformation model presumably could not.

Of course, the Reformers and Puritans took seriously and emphasized the sabbath. However, in their teachings, the sabbath relativised human work simply by being a complementary command beside it; that is, a type of additional duty to be observed. In Barth however, sabbath becomes paradigmatic and is meant to be a principle which permeates and transforms the entire nature and structure of work, and thus its meaning. It is not simply meant to keep work in balance or in check in a person’s life.

The particulai's of Baith’s innovative teaching on work have largely been neglected in subsequent theological reflections on work.^^ However, broadly speaking his

influence can be seen in more recent theological construals of work which attempt to integrate the sabbath and related concepts into the understanding of work itself (rather than to have it function simply as a parallel idea and limitation to it). Although Jurgen Moltmann himself does not draw specifically on Barth’s view of sabbath when commenting on human action and work, one can nevertheless detect Barth’s influence in his writings. Moltmann’s view that our human telos involves a participation in God’s sabbath (or the divine shekinah as he eventually calls its eschatological fulfillment) does bear striking similaiities to Barth’s view.

Also, Douglas Meeks’ chapter “God and Work” in God the Economist reflects elements of Barth’s sabbath principle, (although it is questionable whether this emphasis is drawn more directly from Moltmann rather than B a r t h ) . I n either case, Bai'th’s lasting influence on theological understandings of work is his idea that work is not the opposite of sabbath, but rather, that sabbath rest should be a characteristic of all human activity and thus also of work.

Eschatology not Protology. A recent trend in Protestant theology has led to the reinterpretation of work, and to the reconstmction of theological models of work based upon eschatological rather than strictly protological foundations. Both Jürgen Moltmann (as we shall shortly examine) and Miroslav Volf (in Work in the Spirit,

(1991)) are the primary theologians leading in this direction. Here again, we find a departure from the vocational motif. More significant however, is that for the first time some within Protestantism have made a decided move away from protology as work’s theological orientation point. This is not to say that these theologians have ignored protology. Rather, their eschatological orientation means that the teleological directions are aimed forward toward the future new creation rather than backward toward the restoration of the initial creation. It would not be inappropriate to claim therefore, that

However, for examples of attempts to probe and build upon Barth see: Atkinson, (1994), pp.104-11., and West, “Karl Barth's Theology of Work: A Resource for the Late 1980s”, (1988).

with this “new creation” orientation, work becomes a type of eschatological mandate rather than simply a creation mandate. Herein lies a significant shift in ethics.

What we have seen from this interpretive survey of twentieth century Protestant theological understandings of work is that the vocational model is still both influential and helpful, even if it is no longer the only possible or fruitful model available to Protestants. With the reappropriation of this model we find preserved in some form the Reformation’s accent on personal obedience to God in work, and meeting the needs of others through work. In terms of our own hypothesis, this suggests that the