[1] One of the central moral problems of the age-though not
usually recognized as such-is prodigality. At issue are
economic excess and its attendant social and ecological
harms:
* excess in the goods we extract from the earth, such as the
fossil fuels we use to empower oversized vehicles and
oversized homes;
* excess in the abundant and often frivolous products we make
and consume;
* excess in the waste and contaminants we dump on the land and
in the air and waters.
[2] The moral problem is not mainly that we seek "bad things,"
though, of course, there are plenty of examples of people grasping
for products they shouldn't have at all, not even in
moderation. Instead, the main problem is seeking too much of
the many good things in life. In the language of classical
Western thought, the prosperous people of the planet are guilty of
greed and gluttony, two of the seven deadly, or primary,
sins. The two are usually partners in producing excess.
[3] The prosperous have not learned the lessons of limits, both
biophysical and moral. The results include a host of
environmental woes and social inequities. To counteract
prodigality, we need to discern and develop a socially and
ecologically sensitive code of conduct, one that restrains us from
excess and enables us to live within planetary bounds, to the
benefit of all nations and all species, in this generation and all
future generations. The prime antidote to prodigality is
frugality-that classical virtue which has been perhaps the most
neglected norm in modern morality but is now a necessary condition
for economic justice and ecological integrity.
[4] The quest for economic abundance is the central paradigm
that has shaped our national character and cultural
institutions. Through most of the media of value
transmission-obviously, commercial advertising, but also our
much-celebrated "family values"-Americans have been socialized to
seek the superfluous, in both quantity and quality of goods and
services, on the assumption that Earth is a place of perpetual
plenty. Our national ethos sanctions and even glorifies
economic excess. These excesses reach their peak, ironically,
at the celebration of the one who was the model of just and
beneficent restraint.
[5] Political salutes to this "great" nation really mean this
"rich" nation. The American Dream suggests little more than
fulfilling fantasies of affluence. The "good life" or even
"life abundant" has been redefined as material prosperity. The
"pursuit of happiness" now implies the quest of
acquisitions. "Success" is defined generally not as social
service or creativity but as wealth-and gaining the property,
prestige, and power that wealth provides. Excess is now the
main sign of success, and the primary evidence of
progress. This ethos is inherently wasteful. In fact, the
more we can afford to waste, the better off we are perceived as
being. Significant numbers now have the economic capacities to
waste without wanting.
[6] In every culture, consumption is much more than economic
exchanges of goods and services for basic needs. Consumption
patterns are also cultural constructs, sending messages abut social
meanings and values. This is especially so in an ethos of
affluence. For example, shopping is recreation for many,
driven not by "needs" alone but also by the pleasure of discovering
their "needs." For some, shopping is a compulsion that
nurtures excess. For many others, shopping is therapy,
providing an "uplift" when one is feeling "down" or
"blue." Consumption often appears to be compensation for
loneliness, powerlessness, insecurity, and even
meaninglessness.
[7] In order to gain approval and inclusion, consumption is
usually conformity to the conventional wants and styles-such as the
"right" kind of car or TV-of our reference groups, whether of
families and friends, or groups to which we aspire, such as
economic elites. Millions of people feel forced to live far
beyond their means-even to the point of severe debt-in order to
"belong." The reasons behind over-consumption are not
always or even usually morally disdainful; they are often mainly
mournful. Greed and gluttony may be prominently present, but
these are often associated with deep human yearnings for
self-esteem, social acceptance, and even ultimate meaning, while
people are culturally conditioned to follow paths that frustrate
these yearnings.
[8] For some wealthy Americans, consumption is competition-the
flaunting of superiority in affluence and influence.
Competitive consumption creates a vicious spiral of
"conspicuous waste" (Thorstein Veblen) as the competitors race to
display how much they can afford or, in the case of ostentatious
gamblers, how much they can afford to lose. Reinhold Niebuhr
seemed to have these Grand Acquisitors in mind when he defined sin
in the form of "pride of power"-the futile and selfish defiance of
the inherent insecurities of life, which itself arises from and
reflects these insecurities, and which thrives at the expense of
social and ecological abuses.[1]
[9] One might expect Christian churches in America to be
spirited champions of frugality and aggressive challengers to the
ethos of affluence. But, in fact, they generally reflect this
ethos and some have sanctified it. Few are noteworthy
critics. Sociologist Robert Wuthnow's study of the
relationship between Christian churches and economic values in
American shows "mixed signals" in the churches' moral teachings and
members' attitudes in dealing with issues of affluence. The
churches offer little moral guidance, other than those vapid
bromides against "materialism." Religion and
affluence are "compartmentalized"; wealth and morals are
"separated," so that the economic value system remains "largely
unchallenged" and the quest for abundance goes largely
uninhibited.[2]
[10] In the meantime, the wealth and income gaps continue to
grow between the rich and the poor in the United States and between
the top fifth of the world's population and the bottom, desperate
half. Equally, unsustainable patterns of using the planet as
source and sink have led to climate change, collapsed fisheries,
endangered species, and pollution in a multitude of forms. No
doubt, the linkages between profligate prosperity and poverty, on
the one hand, and ecological degradation, on the other, are complex
and ambiguous. Causal connections are not always clear or even
evident. Nonetheless, there is plenty of evidence to contend
that the profligacy of the prosperous is often at least a
contributing cause of global disparities and ecological
degradation.
[11] The moral problem with excess is the deprivations it
imposes, on both other humans and other species. Our excesses
in goods are really excessive regard for ourselves at the expense
of others, which is the essence of sin in much Jewish and Christian
thought. Profligate production and consumption must be
restrained for the good of others. These restraints point to
the prime function of frugality.
[12] Countering the ethos of excess is a formidable
task. It demands cultivating the virtue of frugality in its
fullness in our personal lives, our communities of faith and
learning, and our social institutions. Frugality is truly the
subversive virtue, representing a revolt against the sacred values
of the Sumptuous Society.
[13] What is frugality? Contrary to conventional
stereotypes, frugality is not penny-pinching cheapness, or
hoarding, or hair-shirt austerity, or even simple
bargain-hunting. Instead, its Latin root, frux,
conveys the essential character of frugality: fruitfulness and
joyfulness! It finds joy in justice and fullness in
restraint. Frugality connotes moderation, thrift,
cost-effectiveness, and satisfaction with material
sufficiency-similar to the "contentment" described in the first
Pauline letter to Timothy (6:6-10). It can be interpreted as
the economic dimension of the classical virtue of
temperance. The features of frugality in its fullness include:
conscientious conservation of resources, sustainable production and
consumption, care and maintenance of possessions, living within
available means, optimally efficient technologies, minimal harm to
other species, comprehensive recycling of products, social
deterrents to waste and incentives for constrained consumption,
built-in durability and repairability of products, just and
generous sharing of resources, and the sacrifice of excess goods
for the common good.
[14] Indeed, as a norm for the economic activity of both
individuals and societies, frugality can be defined as ethically
disciplined production and consumption for the sake of higher
ends. It is a middle way that is concerned about both the
over-consumption of the rich and the under-consumption of
the poor. It is an earth-affirming, enriching norm that
delights in the non- and less-consumptive joys of the mind and
flesh, especially the enhanced lives in human communities and the
habitats of other creatures that only constrained consumption can
make possible on a finite planet. It is "sparing" in
production and consumption-literally sparing of the scarce
resources necessary for human communities and sparing of other life
forms that are both values for themselves and instrumental values
for human needs.
[15] Under a number of names, frugality has been a prominent
moral norm and practice in the world's great religious
traditions. In Christian history, Catholic, Orthodox, and
various Protestant ethics have been generally united in
interpreting frugality as an expression of love, including
justice. Indeed, one scholar describes the economic ethics of
the New Testament as frugality in "the service of love."[3]
The essence of frugality, then, from a Christian perspective,
is a form of sacrificial sharing for the sake of Christ's cause of
love. Prodigal societies will do well to learn what various
religious traditions have long known, at least in theory if not
always in practice: The fullness of life will not be found in the
abundance and opulence of possessions, but in just and generous
solidarity, so that all will have enough to thrive together.
[16] The frugality we need to combat prodigality, however,
cannot be a mere revival of a traditional moral practice-because
historical expressions of frugality have had too many debilitating
flaws and culture-bound limitations to be simply repeated in the
present. Instead, we need a revitalization and a re-formation
of this practice to make it responsive to contemporary conditions
and corruptions. Frugality, for instance, must be interpreted
not only as a personal virtue but also as a social
norm.
[17] The present political prospects for creating frugal
societies appear bleak. But we dare not succumb to fatalism or
self-fulfilling prophecies about the prospects for change, in our
churches or social institutions. Transformational
possibilities exist and can be enhanced, to degrees that we can
never predetermine, particularly if serious initiatives are
undertaken to promote the values of frugality against the disvalues
of alternatives. That is a major challenge for moral education
in these times.
Notes
1 The Nature and Destiny of Man: A
Christian Interpretation
(New York: Scribner's, 1949), 188-94.
2 God and Mammon in America
(New York: Free Press, 1994), 4-9, 25-28, 120-51, 173-79.
3
Wolfgang Shrage, Ethics of the New Testament,
trans. David E. Green (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1988), 102-106, 159-60.
© January 2007
Journal of Lutheran Ethics (JLE)
Volume 7, Issue 1