Franciscan Economy

Economy needs ethics – Franciscan impulses

According to former US President Obama, there is no way around a rapid reform of financial market regulations. „We cannot sustain the markets of the 21st century with the regulations of the 20th century. Let me be clear: We do not face a choice between a repressive state economy and a chaotic, irreconcilable capitalism,“ Obama said. „It’s more likely that strong financial markets need clear traffic rules – not to hinder financial institutions, but to protect consumers and investors.“ These were the words Obama spoke at the beginning of his term in office. The international financial crisis is repeating itself, but a necessary regulation seems to be lacking. The markets are still being left to the financial sharks.

Economic crisis, abuse of the financial markets, also by church institutions, raise the fundamental question of the connection between economic theory, economics, market events, human action and the ethical rules necessary for it. In many cases, the superficial opinion is that economic doctrine exists, and any rules that may exist can be traced back to Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679; mathematics and political philosophy; main work: Leviathan), Adam Smith (1723-1790; moral theologian and national economy) and David Hume (1711-1767; historian, philosopher and economist). However, the roots of economic theory to which Hobbes, Smith and Hume refer date back to the High Middle Ages and the Franciscan movement, especially the 1st Order and the so-called 3rd Order of the Franciscan Lay Movement, played a decisive role in this.

Starting point: the socio-economic characteristics of the early Franciscan movement

If we look back to the time of St. Francis, we can easily see, based on historical facts, that the hometown of the Franciscan movement, Assisi, like most of the growing cities of central Italy at that time, founded social life on economic progress and prosperity. This included the opening of new dependent markets and also led to usury, economic speculation and capital accumulation. Anyone who helped to shape this system, or at least somehow supported and helped to carry it through, anyone who integrated themselves into this system and swam with it in the current could benefit from it: Citizens, merchants, traders, craftsmen, property owners, bankers, and finally, though to a lesser extent, workers, servants, day laborers. Anyone who for any reason could not keep up with the system, the sick, the handicapped, low-skilled or even unskilled workers, or anyone who was labeled a public sinner by the church, was brutally expelled from the system. The society of Assisi was built on a violent economic system under the guise of an external religiosity. This system served a small class of new rich citizens and plunged a large part of the city’s inhabitants into economic dependence and poverty. We know that the family of Francis was also one of these new rich citizens.

In this reality, the refusal of Francis, who was converted to follow Jesus, to accept money became the starting point for putting social and religious life on a different basis, namely human and Christian values that were in keeping with the Gospel. In his Testament, Francis said of himself that he had left this world, that is, the socio-political and religious world of the city of Assisi. Irrespective of the social and economic position given in Assisi, Francis recognizes all people as his brothers and sisters, thus opening an alternative to the social, political and religious situation of Assisi, which excludes and marginalizes many. Very soon many citizens joined the alternative way of life of Francis. Francis and his brothers work with their hands. They only beg when their wages are withheld from them. But their work does not serve to accumulate capital, nor does it increase the wealth of the rich, elite class of Assisi. The brothers and sisters work but they do not produce and do not accumulate wealth. However, through their work they promote and ensure a dignified way of life for all and support an alternative social pact based on a religious foundation that Francis sees in the following of Jesus Christ. Instead of producing only consumer goods that few can afford, they produce the possible livelihood for all, and they ‘produce’ those creative goods that promote the community character, the social dimension of society. In a figurative sense, they produce solidarity out of Christian responsibility. With this way of life of the early Franciscan movement are laid, so to speak, the philosophical foundations for the Franciscan work in the economic, the market and banking fields. Despite their strict rejection of money, the friars had a concrete motivation to take care of the money business and market affairs in the broadest sense.

Motivation

With the emergence of the new class, the bourgeoisie, the merchants, the traders, the craftsmen, the legal scholars and the bankers, the radical change from the local barter economy to the inter-regional and international monetary economy takes place. The first multinational organizations, commercial transactions and banking relationships are established. The father of Francis also had a cloth trade with business connections from the Near East via central Italy to southern France. It was the Franciscans in particular who, in the generations following Francis‘ death, took over the pastoral care of this class in the cities, which was religiously mostly neglected and also distrustfully eyed by the Church. The brothers are confronted with a concrete problem: the moral position of the inter-regional and multinational traders and merchants in the religious-social-political structured society, as well as the moral legitimization of the banking business. The moral position of the banker in the social order had to be clarified against the background of the social-religious society of that time. Likewise, the immoral behavior of church institutions was to be uncovered and contained. At the same time there was the need to clarify the mechanisms of a functioning inter-regional and multinational market and the foundations of the now emerging banking system, and to establish appropriate rules. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations and contents of a doctrine of economics had to be worked out.
Since economic theory and the practice of the market were related with the questions of humanization and religion in a religious and socio-political society, the development of the theoretical foundations of economics was the task of philosophers and theologians, especially moral theologians. Since the Franciscans themselves came mostly from the new middle class, i.e. the families of merchants, traders, craftsmen, bankers and lawyers, it was precisely the philosophers and theologians among the Franciscans who took on the theoretical and practical problems of economics. The distance to the monetary economy based on the prohibition of money and possession in the Order helped them to do so. Remaining at a factual distance, they were able to approach the problems from a kind of superior viewpoint, one that stood above things.

Biblical foundation

Of course, the starting point was not simply sought at the level of the socio-political dimension or the dynamics of market events. In view of a secular society that is also impregnated with religion and in connection with their own religious self-understanding, the Franciscan reflections took their starting point in the interpretation and commentary of the Holy Scriptures. The focus is on a few biblical texts: Mat 6, 19-34: Jesus‘ discourse on false and right concern; Luk 6, 34-35: Jesus‘ discourse on the lending of money; Luk 19, 11-27: the parable of the money entrusted; Luk 19, 45-48: the cleansing of the temple and the expulsion of the merchants; Luk 21, 1-4: the sacrifice of the widow; Mat 10, 5-15: the sending of the disciples and the word of Jesus „You have received in vain, but you must give in vain“. These biblical texts were read in view of the social situation prevailing at the time and interpreted in the light of everyday life. An ethical way of thinking and acting, necessary for the new states of affairs, was thus established from the Bible. Of course, there was also a philosophical foundation, which was developed on the basis of the interpretation of Aristotle’s Nichomachian ethics. The biblical and philosophical foundations were transferred into a proper teaching practice. For this purpose served Bible commentaries, the introduction of canon law, textbooks for university lectures, tracts and finally sermon manuals, sermon texts, handbooks for confession, confessional mirrors and a corresponding penitential literature. For a period of about 150 years after the death of Francis we have about 250 preserved writings dealing with questions of economics.

Ethics of economics (housekeeping)

Based on the biblical creed, moral theology develops principles and rules for economics. These principles and rules unfold in the tension between idealism/deontology on the one hand and practical, situational teleology and utilitarianism/utility on the other. This is about the justification of trade, the market and the banks from a religious perspective. For their own justification, the actions of traders, craftsmen, merchants and bankers must conform to certain ethical standards established by moral theology. Thus, it is above all a question of ethics of conduct. In order to be able to establish such rules and norms, however, the theologian must deal with the reality of trade, the market and banking. Here, economics is first understood as the science of the budget of general prosperity and the production, distribution and consumption of goods (bonum) for the benefit of the general public. Wealth is understood as the availability of the necessities of life plus the sufficient. In contrast, the accumulation and hoarding of abundance is considered harmful. Consequently, the ethics established is intended to help the general public to achieve this prosperity and at the same time to protect them from the loss of eternal life through sinful acts in contravention. The framework for this ethics is the interplay of economic theory, analysis of economic practice and moral references.

Property theory

An important part of the considerations was the creation of a property theory. This was based on the assumption that before the Fall of Humans, according to the natural law applicable in paradise, there was common ownership of all goods and their respective use according to personal needs. Only after the Fall it becomes necessary to introduce private property as protection against the general lust as a result of the Fall through a positive law and the corresponding legislation. With the positive right to private property is connected the social obligation towards the general public, especially towards the poor. There is a duty of justice to contribute from one’s own abundance to the common good and, above all, to give it to the disadvantaged. The evaluation of one’s own abundance is always related to the personal situation. A distinction is made between personal necessity and luxury. There is a positive right to the limited, moderate use of goods. Private property is thus subject to the public legislation of a community and is committed to the common good. Beyond that, however, the principle of the divine commandment continues to apply: God is the owner of all resources. This principle is upheld in the real situation of sinfulness by the positive law of private property with social obligation.
But in a special way the ‘ius necessitas’ remains valid as divine natural law also after the fall of mankind: in the time of need everything is common. Here the justice of free access to the goods necessary for life stands above the works of mercy. The fundamental principle is valid: necessity knows no commandment. There is a right to the necessities of life and the use of the necessities of life is not based on the mercy of the rich. The hungry may, if necessary, take what he needs to survive. The quotation “Necessity knows no commandment“ goes back to the Franciscan Francis of Meyronnes, circa 1288-1338. The necessity of survival is in the foreground.

Market theory

Above all, Franciscan thinkers turn to the economics of the market. Since the contemporary exchange economy is changing on the basis of natural products towards the use of money, a fundamental theory of the market is needed first. This is found in the balance of the law of exchange-ability with the law of distribution: the commutative (law of exchange-ability) justice, that the goods exchanged should be of equal value, must be in balance with the distributive (law of distribution) justice, that the goods are fairly distributed. This is based on the ideal of mutual benefit through justice on the free market, including the protection of certain normally disadvantaged groups of people, such as the poor. This balance between the law of exchange-ability and the law of distribution is particularly considered by John Duns Scotus. Similarly, the principle of ‘generally customary’ in community agreement, excluding the taking of advantage, is introduced for the market. In this context the monopoly is outlawed. The monopolist exploits his position and abuses economic power; therefore, he must be expelled from the state. The norm of justice is the possibility of free competition in the market of goods and services. The free market thus develops between supply and demand, which determine the real value of a good or service offered at a given time and place. The market needs the free and full consensus of all partners involved (suppliers, buyers, manufacturers, transporters, organizers, workers, investors, etc.) for its permanent functioning. This consensus presupposes true information and the fair and proportional consideration of all parties involved. A market that disadvantages others to the advantage of some has no chance of survival in the medium and short term, as it liquidates, by disadvantaging one group, its own participants, who are necessary to the market. Such liquidation will lead to a threat of the market in the medium term and to the death of the market in the long term. Where more and more workers are poorly paid, the circle of potential buyers shrinks, and the market finds fewer buyers. A market where few get richer and richer and many get poorer will eventually destroy themselves. There the fundamental precondition of the free market is taken ‘ad absurdum’.

The theory of productivity, profit and gain of capital

Whoever is concerned about a functioning and fair market must also address some detailed questions. These include the questions of prosperity, property and profit. According to the Franciscan School, profit is the result which is achieved after deducting all costs and expenses. Capital is the profitable use of money through its use to make a potential profit in the future. For them, capital are the values and services used to generate productivity that is useful for society. The common benefit is higher than the individual benefit. Profit and gain are justified when they result from the honest work put in with capital. Unjustly demanded profit need not be paid by anyone, since it is in itself immoral. Profit is the surcharge on a good or service with which the provider earns a living for himself and his family. This profit or gain is derived from his work or service and not from the money invested and corresponds to the usual social standards and his own dignity.
The profit or gain that results from the productive use of the capital and is transferred to private property for individual needs may be a little more than what is necessary. Any profit that goes beyond that must be reintroduced into production (principle of circulating capital as a prerequisite for a lasting market). Dead capital that is hoarded as property without reference to production and the market is morally sinful and economically contradicts all the principles of a permanently functioning of the free market, as taught by Peter Johannis-Olivi and John Duns Scotus. Only the invested capital is fruitful for the market, society and the individual. Where the maximum profit of the individual is pursued at the expense of the community, an economic standstill threatens. And where only the individual or a small group profits, the market is exhausted in the medium term and the majority can no longer participate in market activities because they lack the means to do so. Thus, the market and economic life comes to a standstill because a few exploit the majority for their own enrichment. An economy which is based on the profit of the individual or a small group, which hoards and does not invest, and does not let the community participate more justly in its own profit, destroys itself in the long run. The market, which is stagnating due to the greed of some people, is then mostly rejected, a new market is sought, sucked out and drained, then rejected and another new market is sought again, etc., until in the end the crisis of a local market has turned into a regional or even international crisis. Thus, the unscrupulousness of the greedy destroys the market. In order to prevent this, capital, profit and gain must circulate more fairly, helping to reduce poverty, promote and safeguard the relative prosperity of all.

Theory of money

Among the clarifications of the details is the question of the meaning of money. Money is first of all a medium, with its own value (at that time for example silver coins) and a utility value, which does not necessarily have to correspond to its own value. Money as such does not create anything useful for the consumer and user, the piece can only be used if there is something for it. Money in itself is infertile, sterile, because only a work performance connected with the monetary value produces something that is fruitful and useful. Without work there are no goods that one could acquire with money. Thus, money actually remains worthless despite the fictitious intrinsic value. Here still the contempt is to be felt, which Francis brought to the money. The sweat of the work and the concrete person who works is the real value and not the hoarded coin, whose value is only a social fiction, but to which one can become addicted and thus usually loses one’s own humanity.

The principle of work

It’s precisely the meaning of work that comes into view. Buying and selling (trade) must be a form of service to society and thus connected with the aspect of work. Several dimensions of work are distinguished. ‘Labor’, the manual work, ‘industria’ the more intellectual work, and ‘ministry’ as intellectual-spiritual work, the latter must not be sold and bought. With the prohibition of spiritual work, the clergy is prevented from enriching itself through profiteering (simony). The reason for this is that Jesus drove the traders out of the temple. Of course, this is against the sale of religious things, against the sale of indulgences and church commerce. Basically, the work then has a higher value than the money, because the money produces nothing out of itself. Work therefore requires a payment that is proportionally fair to production and trade, called the bread of justice. The value of work as a cost factor takes into account the respective necessary training for the performance of the work.
Thus the price of a unit of work is then calculated as follows: usefulness of the work for the production of the final product + availability of the concretely necessary work management + training + qualification + duration of the work effort.

Price theory

The relationship between labor, goods and capital raises the question of pricing. The norm is the discourse of the fair price. The fair price is based on the principle of the equivalence of the participants in the market and considers an incentive to participate in market events. A thing has the selling value that can be achieved considering the seller’s professional skill, the benefit of the goods to the buyer based on his needs or wishes, without taking advantage of the situation of the seller or the buyer.

Cost principle

The various elements of the price calculation are gradually concretized in a cost principle, taking into account a fair price. The following combination is considered reasonable and fair: the costs of the goods or services in itself + the inclusion of a profit for the reasonable livelihood of the trader, merchant or service provider (including his family) + a reasonable profit as an incentive to act on the market + the costs resulting from the availability of the goods and the production and transport possibilities + the consideration of the competitive situation on the market. For the first time in the Christian world, the moral legitimacy of a reasonable, but not excessive, profit is justified by the honest work done in the market.

Cost Law

As the partners of the market do not only sporadically or occasionally contribute with their goods or services, very quickly a longer-term valid calculation of arising costs on the market becomes necessary. For this purpose, above all the Franciscan philosopher and theologian John Duns Scotus developed a cost law which has not lost its validity until today. He teaches that in the long run the production costs correspond to the average costs calculated from practice. For this reason, fixed costs are averaged out over longer periods of time, thus reducing the amount of fixed costs to the price in individual cases.

Benefit principle

In the situation of supply and demand on a free market, a so-called benefit principle very soon comes into focus. The benefit principle is initially based on the object value of the goods or services, which is made up as follows: a self-value + the availability + the usefulness + the quantity of the object + the appearance and beauty, in other words the quality of the object. The object value, to which the final price ultimately refers, is therefore made up of an objective and a subjective usefulness. This explanation of the principle of utility by Peter Johannis-Olivi brings the objective circumstances together with the subjective, often subtly unconscious purchase criteria.
The offered good or service has a benefit for the buyer which is proportionally calculable and can thus be included in the calculation of the price agreement. A distinction is made between the material value and the usefulness. However, the benefit of the concluded trade must then correspond to the theory of equality for all parties involved. This means that even the subjective motives for usefulness must be disclosed and must not be exploited by one of the partners to their own advantage. In concrete terms, this means, for example, that subtle suggestive advertising, the talking-up of inferior goods, or taking advantage by exploiting emotional or distressing situations are generally considered immoral. The benefit principle corresponds to the rule of just exchange, which requires mutual benefit, we say today to create a win-win situation.

Principle of indemnification

Since many business transactions can also give rise to risks of the most varied kinds, which consequently make mutual profit impossible, this possible situation is also taken into account in a principle of indemnification. A quota can be included in the price calculation, which in the case of goods that are subject to a certain risk (for example transport) is calculated as compensation for any reduction in value or even loss of the goods. No one needs to participate in the market to his own detriment. For this purpose, a distinction is made between risk costs and a possible loss transaction.

Gratuitas

The great achievement of Franciscan economic doctrine is not only in the elaboration of market rules and their moral evaluation. Entirely out of spiritual and religious conviction, the Franciscans, inspired by the Bible, introduce the element of ‘gratuitas’, of ‘free/gratis’ into economic activity. First of all, this ‘Gratuitas’ has a very pragmatic meaning. Because in a contract of sale of any kind the agreement always requires a compromise, whereby, taking into account the just, mutual benefit, everyone must renounce part of his advantage or his claim in order to come to an agreement at all. This renunciation of possible further claims in order to reach a fair compromise is called ‘Gratuitas’, ‘gratuitous’. Every sales contract has so also its ‘gratuitous’ side. The ‘Gratuitas’ manifests itself based on mutual trust and the good will to come to a conclusion that serves all parties. This trust and good will are the prerequisite for any trade. Beyond this importance for the contractual system, the ‘Gratuitas’ takes on a socio-political meaning. The free and fair market exists and functions only where the majority of a population can participate in the market at all. This presupposes a distribution of wealth and property that allows as many people as possible to participate gradually in prosperity. Because only those who are financially able can participate in the market freely and without coercion. However, experience shows that there are always broad sections of the population for various reasons who cannot participate in the general prosperity, and who are not able to achieve such a necessary and just prosperity on their own. Therefor an intervention, in the sense of a socially oriented market, by the wealthy participants of the market is necessary. Or where this is refused by the responsible authority. Such an intervention should enable the majority of the population to participate in the market and to achieve a necessary prosperity in the market by their own efforts. The necessity to allow as many, if not all, to participate in the market, however, requires a favorable start-up capital in the form of start-up aid at favorable conditions in order to enable the socially weak to participate in the market and to generate a necessary prosperity for themselves. This seed capital, which is given by the more prosperous market participants, is called ‘Gratuitas’. It is not a matter of charity, because it is in the own interest of every free and fair market to involve as many people as possible, otherwise the market will ruin itself in the long run, if broad sections of the population are excluded from participating in the market.

Credit bill

Such seed capital, the ‘Gratuitas’, can be provided in the form of a loan. But since the credit system and especially the interest economy connected with it was forbidden by the church as immoral, it required a detailed reflection on the moral conditions of the credit economy. Based on a historically longer discussion, the Franciscans finally established a morally legitimate credit account. This provided for the repayment of the borrowed amount + an allowance for administrative costs + any risk costs in the event of credit default + the price for the purchased right to use the borrowed amount for one’s own profit or gain. So, whoever borrowed money did so in order to make a profit with the borrowed money. The lender then receives a proportional share of this profit. Such profit sharing is agreed upon in advance when the loan is concluded on the basis of fair compensation. Furthermore, there is still a ban on interest, as interest is considered usury.

Virtue doctrine of the market

The doctrine of the free market and the rules of the game established to make it work fairly and for the common good is first of all a theory that must be put into practice. The Franciscan teachers see the idea of the free market quite realistically as an abstract fiction, which does not exist in reality. ‘The market’ as such does not exist, there are only people who create and form such a market through their actions. Consequently, the idea of the free market only functions if all participants adhere to the basic rules of this market. But reality shows that people are not inclined to work for a fair free market and the welfare of all, especially if it costs them something. The Franciscans realistically count on the sinfulness of man, theologically speaking, who first of all has his own advantage in mind and tends to capitalize on the market to the detriment of others. Unscrupulous greed for power, possessions and wealth is often more or less openly lived out under the guise of a commitment to the free market. That is why the free market needs rules that protect it from all abuse for its own protection and ensure its function to contribute to the welfare of all. Such market-oriented rules must also be justified by the basic ethical and moral attitudes of the participants in the market, otherwise they become a mere catalog of regulations which are circumvented by clever doings. The Franciscans are therefore setting out such basic moral and ethical attitudes in a so-called catalog of virtues. A virtue in this context is the realization of the appetite for goodness, which can also be manifested in the material, in a concrete situation. The appetite for the good success of the market economy is now particularly satiated by the virtues of friendliness, mercy, freedom, generosity and justice.

Today’s problem

Today we can see that the theory of the free market is being held up as an alibi for anti-social behavior and aggressive liberalism. That ‘the market’ is self-destructing through such an orientation is becoming more and more evident through the economic crises which are getting worse in shorter and shorter time intervals. Short-term solutions without a fundamental change in market behavior and basic human attitudes can only delay the collapse of the markets, but can no longer prevent it. This requires a real root canal treatment of the basic attitudes that are leading to the dramatic deterioration on the world markets. The current theoretical foundations must also be re-examined. The current theoretical foundations go back to Thomas Hobbes, Adam Smith, David Hume, Arnold Gehlen and many others. In the foreground is a model of the rational man seeking his advantage, which is presented as a deficiency being. For his own advantage, man now tries to remedy his deficiencies and this behavior of remedying deficiencies is, so to speak, the motor that boosts the economy. In order to prevent the deficiencies from appearing saturated at some point, new deficiencies must be suggested in order to keep production running. This model becomes the explanatory approach for culture, law, economy and religion.
The economy is deficiency-oriented and has the deficiency competition as its central idea and promotes the maximization of one’s own prosperity. In order to satisfy the deficiency, the economy requires the maximization of individual benefit. This attitude also characterizes today’s view of society. Society consists of individuals who freely interact (trade) to satisfy their personal desires and interests. At the center is the motto: the individual person should achieve maximum participation in limited goods with the least possible effort. This basic attitude, which is egoistic and alien to any social attitude and harmful to the common good, even becomes respectable in the so-called efficiency principle.

From an anthropological point of view, we are thus faced with a confusion of fullness of life with the elimination of a deficiency through accumulation. This anthropological misinterpretation, which is forced by economic theory today, leads to the suggestion of wealth by addition and multiplication of quantity and increasing mass. However, this attitude is confronted today with the knowledge of the limitation of resources and the destruction of the environment. This economic policy is particularly striking in the accumulation of monetary values, in that the money market has been separated from the real market events in practice and leads a life of its own, as it were, which no longer has much to do with the reality of a market of goods, commodities and services, but is nourished by speculation, money betting, currency devaluations and revaluations, as well as risk transactions. The accumulation of ever increasing sums of financial assets is anthropologically seen as a substitute for the abundance of life. However, this financial wealth remains only an abstract and potential fulfillment and elimination of the lack of fullness of life. Today’s capitalism replaces more and more the real resources by the accumulated money, which only exists as a computer size, as a fiction of survival, because money cannot be eaten, and money cannot buy a successful life.
Since the fulfillment of lack is confused with fullness of life, the rational processes of remedying lack are no longer solved rationally by the market, but economically relevant decisions are made based on sensitivities, emotional fears and fantasy. Through these mechanisms the market destroys itself, you do not need to be a prophet to determine this.
A way out is to overcome the idea of a management of scarcity limited and isolated to the individual by the interaction that secures the possibility of life for all and thus creates the market through which as many people as possible can gain their livelihood. Religion and the related Franciscan approach, through its ‘doctrine of virtue’, offers here a way of humanizing human desire that destroys the market.
Theologically, fullness of life is not the end of a deficiency or its remedy, but fullness is the continuous joyful desire for the good, for what is good for me and my fellow and serves for a successful life.
From a theological point of view, therefore, the Franciscan tradition emphasizes the following fundamental human and ethical qualities for the economy: a) communion and community, b) ‘liberalitas’ and generosity, c) creditworthiness and goodness, d) integrity and sincerity.
a) The theological vision of God as Trinity, as communion and intimate community between God the Father and God the Son in the Holy Spirit, becomes a model for the different dimensions of human coexistence. In the economic sphere, the value of communion and community is shown in the concept of equality of all participants in the market, which requires just contracts and pacts that open up mutually profitable opportunities for all. The theological view of communion becomes the basis for a just distribution of benefits to all participants. This includes the so-called fair price, which does not take advantage of anyone.
b) In theological reflection, the God is discovered who, in his generous generosity, has created the abundance and diversity of creatures and natural resources which now serve mankind also for life. In economics, starting from this theological understanding, the model of ‘liberalitas’, of generous generosity, is contrasted with the wild, untamed liberalism that promotes only those who already have everything and exploits the already weak and discriminates even more. The ‘Liberalitas’ is supposed to give the weaker ones a generous jump-start to be able to participate in economic life. The generosity is intended to help to end the vicious circle of debt, misery, dependence and the associated increase in crime and the threat of economic chaos. (Cf. For example debt relief at the turn of the millennium)
c) For Franciscan theology, God is the ‘Supreme Good’ who gives himself in Jesus Christ so that all creatures may find the fullness of life (the emphasis is on ‘all creatures’). Starting from this theological-spiritual view, credit rating becomes an essential model of economy. The term creditworthiness in this context does not only mean solvency and financial standing. Rather, the concept of creditworthiness is understood from its very meaning as commercial solidarity, as the goodness and quality of the relationship which enables the other person to participate in the market in such a way that he or she can acquire at least a little more than the necessities of life. However, creditworthiness also means that there are goods that must not be privatized but belong to everyone as the basis of life, for example water.
d) From the theology of creation, the Franciscan tradition founds the vision of the integrity of creation which requires an attitude of human respect for creation. In economics this leads to a vision and action of the integrity of creation or environmental justice, as we say today.
To look at creation and the goods of this world with sincerity means not only to exploit them as economic resources and consumer goods, to waste them and to sacrifice them to a boundless progress that benefits only a few people. In the foreground is the protection of nature and sustainability in consumption (usus pauper), so that nature can regenerate itself again and again.

Principles of a ‘New Economy’ from a Franciscan perspective

From the Franciscan tradition there now emerge some principles and perspectives that seek to stimulate a ‘new economy’.

• Transparency and reciprocity in all things: all goods, all economic activities and services are at the service of the whole (holism).
• Justice: the individual and the community receive what they need and contribute to the common good and to the building of society. The sense of entitlement is replaced by the willingness to provide services and this requires the vital willingness to rethink and act differently.
• Participation: market mechanisms are created and introduced that promote cooperation between all those involved in the market, overcoming the domination of the few and the deprivation of the many.
• Solidarity and subsidiarity: Abundance is spent first to remedy real need and to build up the possibility of helping people to help themselves. The diversity and variety of the market is encouraged and not leveled by monopolism.
• Frugality: the use of the necessary minimum of resources and not the exploitation of the superfluous maximum. An elaborated, frugal lifestyle, so that as many people as possible can work for what is sufficient for living.
• Circulation: capital is not hoarded in the depots of the few, but is used to generate wealth for many and the necessities of life for all through the circulation of the market.
• The development of strategies that combine economic development with ecological balance:
  The development of economic models that are not oriented towards wasteful consumption, but rather, through sustainability, enable as many people as possible to participate in the market and preserve resources for future generations.
  The balance of the free market economy through institutions, laws and rules which open up participation in the free market to all, which integrates the disadvantaged in the market in economic life in such a way that they too can participate in the growing prosperity and the necessities of life can be acquired by all.

This means rethinking and changing some economic models:
a) The current growth model: by using more and more material goods to satisfy unbridled consumption needs, combined with the creation of artificial needs, leads to an enormous consumption of resources, wastes too much energy and at the same time creates poverty. Instead of this economic growth model, which only focuses on production, an economic development and education model is needed, which focuses on the holistic living environment.
b) The materialistic and utilitarian, consuming economic model must be replaced by a life value and quality model.
c) the individualistic and hedonistic economic model must be integrated into a community and sense-oriented model.
d) the updating of the gross domestic product measurement should be supplemented by a holistic quality-of-life model.

There are also some behavioral patterns for personal life that correspond to a ‘new economy’:
a) Instead of satisfying desires, pacifying desires;
b) Instead of throwing away, disposing;
c) Instead of frenetically exchanging, growing and maturing;
d) Instead of waste, frugality as freedom through renunciation;
e) Instead of exploitation, careful handling;
f) Instead of appropriation, sharing;
g) Instead of knocked-down price, appropriate payment.

Reference:
Bazzichi Oreste, Dall’usura al giusto profitto. L’etica economica della Scuola francescana, Effata‘ Editrice, Cantalupa 2008.
Langholm Odd, Economics in the Medieval Schools, Brill, Leiden 1992.
Todeschini Giacomo, Ricchezza Francescana. Dalla povertà volontaria alla società di mercato, il Mulino, Bologna 2004.

© 2020, JBF, MZF