Almost a month ago I read Joseph Kelly’s post about Ellen Davis’ book, Scripture, Culture, and Agriculture and it caused me to read Davis’ book. I won’t attempt a full review of the book right now but instead I’d like to offer a few reflections.
I think Davis rightly discerns a strong agrarian perspective on the part of many biblical writers. For the most part, this perspective and an application of it within contemporary religious communities is almost entirely absent. In my opinion this is profoundly disturbing particularly for those communities that claim to derive their beliefs from the biblical text. For this reason I think that anyone interested in biblical studies and/or Old Testament theology should read this book. The theme of (arable) land is so central to the Old Testament that I might go so far as to say that if you do not understand how the OT understands land and the relationship that humankind in general and the people of God in particular have in relation to it then you are not going to have a very deep understanding of OT theology.
Davis points out some stark differences between an OT view of land and modern, western conceptions of land. In modern society we typically view land as a resource, hence the term “natural resources.” The implication of this terminology is that land and its production are viewed as units that derive value in accordance with their economic utility. These units are then commoditized to facilitate more efficient trade. Once land no longer retains an ability to provide economic value it loses its worth. Shockingly, this view is also extended to human beings who are now termed “human resources.” Humans have value now as economic units who are themselves turned into commodities and can be disposed of when they are no longer productive. Or, if cheaper commodities can be found they will be replaced. Sadly, reflecting a certain degree of unreflective theological thinking, even Jewish and Christian institutions have “human resources” departments and business units.
Furthermore, the object of obligation within western society is strikingly different than the biblical ideal. Rather than biblical notions that humans are required to act in accordance with God’s designs for the good of others, modern economies are structured around the assumption that we must incentivize people to make decisions to maximize their self-interest. This is why countries are willing to fight wars in order to maintain a particular “way of life” but sit idly by while genocide occurs. Furthermore, companies are willing to fire employees (who are really only commoditized resources, albeit of the human variety) when they can get cheaper workers elsewhere. Some companies even add insult to injury by withholding severance pay until the displaced worker has trained the employee hired in his or her place. This certainly does not reflect a biblical notion that one has obligations toward the community–even if it costs you something. On a side note, it is amazing that this perspective is so ingrained amongst us that we can not even imagine how companies could function differently. However, there are some noteworthy examples of successful ventures that do: community supported agriculture and Lincoln Electric. Both of these examples involve an entire community which shares in the good times as well as the bad. Lincoln Electric has pretty much guaranteed employment to its workers, however, their pay fluctuates along with the fortunes of the company. There is a strong sense of obligation that the company feels towards all members of its community and therefore the entire community, including management and workers, mutually shoulders tough times and mutually shares in times of bounty. I am not saying that these are the only ways that we can live out biblical notions within modern economies but it does illustrate that there is more than one way to run a company and to treat employees.
Davis further explains, following Christopher J.H. Wright, that the OT views land as a divine gift held in trust by humans for the sake of God and also for others within the community and the generations that will come after them. Therefore, humans have obligations toward land and community members both present and future. To this end there are biblical stipulations against maximizing short-term economic gain (sabbath rest of the land and sabbath rest for humans and animals). Maximizing short-term gain often sacrifices long term sustainability. We see this currently in the obsession of ever expanding quarterly results that produces disastrous and wide-spread consequences. Furthermore, maximizing short-term gain often means shifting certain costs to the future. For instance, it is cheaper in the short-term to dump pollution instead of properly treating it but the full costs associated with the production of whatever produced the pollution are transferred to the generations to come. This kind of calculus is unthinkable within the ethical ideal of the Bible.
In short, Ellen Davis has provided a wonderful book that explores one of the most prominent themes within the Old Testament and she applies the implications of it to modern ethics and societal structures in deep and profound ways. I would encourage everyone to read it.
Charles, this is an awesome and thought-provoking post. Food, Inc. was on PBS last night, and your post (particularly the third paragraph) articulates the same issues in theological terms. I also like what you say about Lincoln’s approach to their workers. Whether this approach or another, creating some kind of employee investment in the company (instead of treating them like expendable resources) will only improve things from both directions.
There is a book or two in germinal form in this post. Thanks, Charles.
You inspired me to look around a bit and see what others are saying:
http://ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com/ancient_hebrew_poetry/2010/04/ellen-f-davis-roundup.html
Charles, what an excellent summary! We need to get together sometime this summer. Laura and I plan to move to Louisville at the beginning of July. If you know of any good CSA’s in the area, do let us know. We are a part of one here in Memphis that we have really enjoyed, and we hope to be able to join one mid-season after we move.
Hi Angie, I still haven’t seen Food, Inc. but I need to. Nice roundup, John. Joseph, we definitely should get together this summer. Lori and I are actually moving to Louisville about the same time you are; we’d love to have you over to our new place. There are a few CSA’s in the Louisville area but this is the one that we are going to join: http://www.aplaceonearthcsa.com/
Charles, thanks for the summary. Considering my strong agriculture background I have always wanted to read a book focused on the agarian background of the Bible. I just ordered the book and look forward to the read.
Charles,
You say, “Furthermore, maximizing short-term gain often means shifting certain costs to the future. For instance, it is cheaper in the short-term to dump pollution instead of properly treating it but the full costs associated with the production of whatever produced the pollution are transferred to the generations to come. This kind of calculus is unthinkable within the ethical ideal of the Bible.”
To go further, the idea of passing the buck was specifically noted and rejected by at least one of the biblical authors. Consider the following example:
Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the LORD…some of your sons…shall be taken away, and they shall become officials in the palace of the king of Babylon.” So Hezekiah said to Isaiah, “The word of the LORD which you have spoken is good,” thinking, “As long as there shall be peace and security in my days.” (2 Kgs 20:16-19).
Can this be read as anything other than a double condemnation of this king and his perspective?
Dr. Halton,
Thank you for this post. My husband pointed me in your direction because I just finished reading Wendell Berry’s latest collection of essays and other works, “Bringing it to the Table”. Among several other important themes, Mr. Berry really focused on reconnecting the food we eat with the land it is grown on. One essay in particular, “Agricultural Solutions for Agricultural Problems” will not let me rest. It speaks of our (North American) worldview being driven by language and imagery of a machine (land and human resources, units, etc.) and hints to the agrarian view of the Israelites. I am very interested in reading Ellen Davis’s book to further that connection with a biblical world view and really appreciate your reflections on her work. I will be looking into reading this in the near future!
Carl, perceptive, and I agree with you.
Hi Kelly, (by the way, my friends call me “Charles” and if you’re reading this blog then you’re my friend) thanks for the reference to Berry’s essay–you’ve piqued my interest and I’m going to track it down.