Does integrating our faith and our work mean that we should rely on God more at work rather than on our own efforts? That seems spiritual, and it would be easy to convict most people of relying more on what they can accomplish in their own strength rather than really trusting God to accomplish work related tasks. Consider the following by David Watson from the article “The Ontology of Principalities and Powers”.

Philosopher Charles Taylor writes in his masterful work A Secular Age about the “immanent frame.” This is a very complex idea, but, in a nutshell, Taylor argues that our primary means of engaging the world in the modern West is one of “immanence,” rather than “transcendence.” We understand ourselves and the world around us as something we make. We place a high value on “instrumental rationality,” what we can accomplish
by our own skill and understanding. As we shape the world around us, we look to our own devices, rather than to a transcendent reality.

So, if we confess that at work we “look to our own devices, rather than to a transcendent reality”, are we guilty of working in a secular manner and need to repent?

But what if we look to our own devices precisely because that is more reliable for shaping the world around us than looking for help from transcendent reality? If shaping the world around us is important, and that is basically what our work is about, we are going to rely on what we find to be effective. The modern West has been far more effective in shaping the world around us with its commitment to instrumental rationality than cultures that engage the world with a focus on transcendence. Just look at all the technological advancements this has yielded. It is true that often when we really need to get something done, relying on our devices is the way to do it.

I can use a personal example. There was a time in my life when my work of shaping the world around me was keeping my wife Sharon comfortable while she was dying of cancer. Every time she would have a coughing fit, or be in too much pain, I would pray for God to take away the coughing or lower the pain (an act of looking to transcendent reality), but I never once saw that make any difference with her physical suffering. What I had was an array of drugs that I could administer to help her. I would continue to pray, but I was checking the box of prayer because that was not getting the job done. I could not rely on prayer. It was my own skill and understanding about the drugs and how to administer them that did get the job done. So I was absolutely operating with instrumental rationality in order to accomplish the task that I believe was given to me by God.

So what am I saying? Where is this going? Well, at this point I am simply observing what is experientially true and what is not experientially true. It is not necessarily true that if you rely more on the transcendent reality of God to accomplish your work, and less on your own skills and abilities, you will be more effective. God has given us more agency than this kind of “spiritual wisdom” about work acknowledges. We can and do affect the world around us with our efforts and strength. And we do it in ways that are pleasing to Him and might not be accomplished without our efforts.

I wonder if one of the reasons that people compartmentalize faith and work is because they have the understanding that integrating faith and work means that they need to rely more on God to accomplish their work than on their own abilities and effort. Like my experience with Sharon, if this does not get the job done, then faith/work integration seems impractical and unappealing. They would rather assign faith to their church lives and keep it out of their work lives because they think it will actually interfere with their effectiveness.

If this is true, then what is needed is a more nuanced theology about our role and God’s role in how we faithfully engage with our work.

I would love to connect with you about these posts if they have stirred any thoughts or questions. Take a minute, shoot me an email at bo@leavenedlives.org, and let’s see where that takes us.