This essay examines the relationship between Christian ethics, capitalism, and ecology in a post-Cold War world. Drawing on Robert Benne and Preston Williams' response to the "Postcommunist Manifesto" and Wendell Berry's essay "God and Country," the paper argues that theology can constructively engage capitalism without becoming subservient to it. It explores how a biblically informed ecological stewardship — rooted in humanity's role as steward of creation rather than its owner — can be applied within capitalist structures. The essay ultimately contends that Christian ethics can guide economic practice toward more just and ecologically responsible ends, provided theologians avoid conflating spiritual salvation with economic success.
The paper demonstrates effective use of categorical clarification as an argumentative strategy. Rather than accepting the apparent opposition between theology and capitalism at face value, the author systematically unpacks why the two belong to different epistemological orders — theology transcends any particular economic system — and uses this clarification to resolve the central tension. This technique allows the writer to advance a constructive position without dismissing either the theological or economic concerns at stake.
The essay opens by situating the problem historically (fall of the Soviet Union, ecological crisis), then works through a close reading of Benne and Williams before turning to Berry's ecological argument. A pivotal middle section resolves the apparent conflict between theology and capitalism by distinguishing their categorical scope. The final sections apply this resolution practically, assigning roles to theologians and laity respectively, before a conclusion that synthesizes all threads into a unified argument about theology's capacity to guide economic practice.
The role of Christian ethics in the political sphere has shifted dramatically over the last thirty years, as the fall of the Soviet Union and a growing awareness of the planet's interconnected nature have forced a reevaluation of theology's role in public life. The near-total triumph of capitalism over socialism and communism — even in ostensibly "communist" states such as China — requires theologians to consider how Christian ethics might be usefully applied to this dominant economic system, while increasing evidence of humanity's effect on the planet requires a simultaneous reevaluation of ecology in terms of how it can embody Christian ethics. The crises of the next century will largely be economic and ecological, and theologians must necessarily direct their intellectual efforts toward preventing or alleviating these crises. By reflecting on the role of Christian ethics in a post-communist, ecologically unbalanced world, it becomes possible to formulate some general principles for the effective deployment of Christian ethics within the political and public arena, without allowing the more extreme dictates of either capitalism or ecology to alter or otherwise compromise those ethics.
Arguably the most dramatic shift in modern society occurred at the beginning of the 1990s with the fall of the Soviet Union. Practically overnight, the global political and economic landscape was transformed, and the effects of this transformation were felt universally, if unevenly. In their 1991 essay "Responses to 'A Postcommunist Manifesto': Ethics, Economics, and the Corporate Life," Robert Benne and Preston Williams consider the opportunities presented to theologians by this global transformation. Benne and Williams respond to a previous essay — Max Stackhouse and Dennis McCann's "A Postcommunist Manifesto," written as an intentional adaptation of Marx and Engels' original Communist Manifesto — and evaluate its suggestions while adding some of their own. Before exploring the ramifications of Benne and Williams' work, it will be useful to examine their critiques of the earlier essay as a means of placing their larger arguments in context.
Overall, Benne and Williams agree with the intentions and conclusions of the "Postcommunist Manifesto," but according to Benne, they "cannot give three cheers for the particular form of [Stackhouse and McCann's] proposal," because "they need a dash of Lutheran diffidence to dampen an unseemly enthusiasm." Benne sees "two basic fronts on which their enthusiasm needs to be qualified" (Benne & Williams 489). To summarize, their main contention is that the tone and certain portions of the "Postcommunist Manifesto" appear to engage Christian ethics as a justification for global capitalism, rather than as a means of making global capitalism more just.
Thus, Benne's first criticism is that the authors of the "Postcommunist Manifesto" "confuse the central Christian message of salvation with political and economic practice, in this case capitalist practice," thereby proposing "that human efforts at economic and political transformation are in some sense salvatory" (Benne & Williams 489). Benne does not allow that this might be the result of "the careless exuberance of manifestos," but rather sees it as a continuation of "a tendency to qualify the radicality and universality of the gospel by conflating a desirable human practice with salvation." The problems with this tendency are twofold, and although Benne and Williams only explicitly address the problem it presents for theology, they hint at the somewhat more dramatic problem this tendency creates for society as a whole.
First, as Benne notes, this conflation of the gospel's universal, redemptive power with a particular economic system "leads to an inclination to rule others out of the reach of redeeming grace" by suggesting that only those supportive of one particular human system of commerce can benefit from the gospel (Benne & Williams 490). Although a significant problem — as it attempts to circumscribe Christian salvation with economic prerequisites — it is easily identified and rectified, as Benne has demonstrated. The second and perhaps more pervasive problem, which Benne and Williams only hint at, is the threat of Christian theology being used as a justification for capitalism. Benne notes that the authors of the manifesto "claim that if our generation does not respond to the challenge (the constructive engagement with capitalism they commend), we betray the gospel" (Benne & Williams 489). This claim is a far cry from suggesting that Christian ethics might be usefully applied to capitalism; it argues instead that engagement with capitalism is a requirement of Christian ethics. The danger of this thinking is the perversion of Christian truth in the service of a definitionally secular belief system — capitalism — which can ultimately lead to Christian theology being deployed as justification for atrocities committed in capitalism's name, just as the misapplication of Darwin's theories served as justification for atrocities committed in the name of racism. Benne and Williams do not go this far in identifying the dangers of conflating Christian belief with capitalist practice, but their critique of the manifesto clearly evidences their concerns.
The second "front" where Benne and Williams see the need for tempered enthusiasm is the manifesto's "particular formulation of public theology" (Benne & Williams 490). They disagree with the manifesto regarding the point at which Christian ethics enters the discourse of capitalism. Whereas the manifesto sees "theology and ecclesiology […] on the front lines of the public discussion," Benne proposes "that the most effective public theology will be carried forward by laity who are more expert in their fields than theologians and ethicists will ever be" (Benne & Williams 490). In short, Benne suggests that a truly useful engagement between capitalism and theology will be mediated by those individuals best suited to navigate both. While the theologian and ethicist are dedicated to understanding capitalism in light of Christian ethics, it is the specialists in sociology, economics, and political philosophy who will ultimately bring these ethics to the fore of capitalist discourse.
Bearing these critiques in mind, one can see where Benne and Williams agree with the manifesto — namely, in the need for Christian theologians and ethicists to focus on "the moral and practical possibilities inherent in varieties of democratic capitalism rather than diverting their efforts to the unrelenting and exaggerated criticism that has been so characteristic of the past," coupled with "strong support for a renewed public relevance of Christian religious and moral claims for the evolving system of democratic capitalism in the face of a world that has marginalized and privatized those claims" (Benne & Williams 489). The need for this renewed focus can be seen most plainly in the field of ecology, where the conflict between capitalism and a secularly informed conservation movement has thus far failed to yield solutions to the ever-increasing economic and ecological disasters that are hallmarks of twenty-first-century global capitalism.
In his essay "God and Country," Wendell Berry contemplates the phenomenon of "churches, which claim to honor God as the 'maker of heaven and earth,'" showing "little inclination to honor the earth or protect it from those who would dishonor it" (Berry 524). Berry's qualms are not rooted in any ephemeral notion of "dishonoring" the earth one might find in neo-pagan theories of Gaia or an earthly consciousness, but in a very literal interpretation of humanity's role in relation to the planet as informed by Christian ethics and theology. Berry notes a general disinterest in ecology among churches, even though "those of us who are devoted both to biblical tradition and to the defense of the earth" see churches as belonging "properly and logically" to the cause of ecology (Berry 524).
Berry argues that this inattention to the planet's well-being arises from "the failures and errors of Christian practice," rather than from Christian truth itself. Specifically, he identifies Genesis 1:28 — in which God instructs Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it" — as the point of contention, and sees any subsequent problems in addressing ecology from a Christian perspective as arising from a misreading of this verse (Berry 526). He suggests that it is "the belief of many non-Christian environmentalists as well as at least some Christians that Genesis 1:28 […] gives unconditional permission to humankind to use the world as it pleases" (Berry 526).
This is precisely the kind of misapplication of theology that Benne and Williams warn against, because it arises from "an extremely unintelligent misreading of Genesis 1:28 itself," focusing only on the word "subdue" without any attention to "replenish" (Berry 526). Berry goes on to point out that "such a reading of Genesis 1:28 is contradicted by virtually all the rest of the Bible," and that "the ecological teaching of the Bible is simply inescapable," the most important part of which being the fact that God "has never revoked the conditions, bearing on his gift to us of the use of [the earth], that oblige us to take excellent care of it" (Berry 526). Thus, the ecological teaching of the Bible is one of stewardship: rather than being "spiritual at the earth's expense," it means "exactly the opposite: do not desecrate or depreciate these gifts […] by turning them into worldly 'treasure'; do not reduce life to money or to any other mere quantity" (Berry 526). This biblical ecology might appear to be in direct opposition to the engagement with capitalism that Benne and Williams support — since capitalism by definition reduces everything to money or mere quantity — but a more nuanced reflection on the theological implications of either essay reveals both to be in harmony with each other.
With the near-complete domination of capitalism across the globe following the fall of the Soviet Union, humanity is faced with numerous problems arising from destructive practices employed under capitalism. Among these, the devastation of the earth and its resources — and the subsequent climatic shifts — is one of the most readily apparent, as it affects the entire planet. Relatively recently, theologians have attempted to determine the best way to engage capitalism as a means of reinvigorating Christian ethics and effecting their application to economic life, and addressing the need for better ecological stewardship presents an ideal context for this engagement. Because the Bible presents a relatively clear ecological ideal — in which humans are the preeminent stewards of creation while remaining part of that creation — one can consider how this ideal might be attained even within the admittedly less-than-ideal context of capitalism. With the laity serving as a conduit for Christian ethics, theologians are able to argue for the application of Christian ethics to an economic system that itself sees little use for them except as another commodity. In effect, theology can teach capitalism ethics, even if capitalism refuses to acknowledge it.
By approaching capitalism from the perspective of a biblically informed ecological stewardship, as laid out in Wendell Berry's essay "God and Country," the theologian is able to effectively engage capitalism without misapplying Christian ethics to serve capitalism's goals. Instead, by reaffirming humanity's biblically elevated position as steward — first among creation rather than separate from it — one can demonstrate the efficacy of Christian ethics within a capitalist society without conflating the two, or otherwise elevating economic success to spiritual success, economic goals to spiritual goals, or monetary accumulation to eternal salvation. This kind of engagement, encouraged in Robert Benne and Preston Williams' essay "Responses to 'A Postcommunist Manifesto,'" recognizes the fundamental deficit in contemporary economic discourse that has arisen due to a previously combative relationship between Christian theology and capitalism — itself the result of a confusion of categories that placed theology and economic theory on the same epistemological plane. Using Berry's notion of stewardship as a test case in the application of Christian ethics to capitalism has demonstrated how theology can engage with economics without conflating the goals of the two, such that capitalism might be used in the furtherance of salvation without pretending that capitalist success is a form of that salvation — or, more ominously, that capitalism is a prerequisite for salvation.
Benne, Robert, and Preston Williams. "Responses to 'A Postcommunist Manifesto': Ethics, Economics, and the Corporate Life." From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, edited by Wayne Boulton, Thomas Kennedy, and Alan Verhey, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994, pp. 489–492.
Berry, Wendell. "God and Country." From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, edited by Wayne Boulton, Thomas Kennedy, and Alan Verhey, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994, pp. 524–528.
You’re 55% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.