In a lecture on markets and monasticism at Acton University, Dylan Pahman gave a fascinating overview and analysis of the interaction between Christian monasticism and markets. He’s written on this before and has a longer paper on the topic as well.

In the talk, he highlighted a range of facts and features, from monastic teachings on wealth and poverty to the historical realities of munities and enterprises. Over the centuries, monasteries have contributed a host of products and services to civilization and culture, oftencountering mon assumption that all munities areflatly against trade, production, and wealth creation.

One pointthat stood out in particular was Pahman’ssummary of a recent study by Nathan Smith, in which Smith pondershow munities have managed to succeed for so long, particularly given their many (internally) socialistic traits. According to one study, the average longevity of monasteries is 463 years(!), which is far longer than the lifespan of paniesand states, never mind your run-of-the-mill mune (Portlandia variations included).

There are a variety of forcesthat may contribute to this, including unique pressures of mitment, corresponding theological reinforcement, etc. But when es to some of the more universal traits that help munities thrive, theymay offer some lessons to help orient andaffirm our broader thoughts munity in the context of work, trade, enterprise, and worship.

In keeping with that particular focus, consider the following traits they highlight. For the rest, consider the full papers (Pahman and Smith).

1. Worship

As Smith notes, the central presence of worship is one of the key drivers of this success, not only as a unifying force, but a continuous motivation and empowerment that munities so often lack.

What makes monasteries different is that when monks and nuns engage in worship…they also build spiritual capital, thus acquiring an increasing “taste for” (or “productivity in”) worship, which makes them unlikely to wish to leave the monastery in future. By this account, worship has properties that resemble “addictive” goods. Marx’s dictum about religion being an “opiate” turns out to be true, except that, unlike narcotics, worship does not degrade human faculties. The “addictive” character of worship solves the turnover problem and enables monasteries to make (voluntary) socialism work.

2. Eremitic Origins

Unlike a mune, which likely begins with a group focusedon munely together (or, as the latest phrase goes, “doing life together”), monasteries often began with a single hermit going out into the wilderness or the forest to pray, and others simply followed in turn. Such beginnings are far from the “individualism” that one thinks of in a more typical market context. Nevertheless, it’s noteworthy that so many of munities begin with individual initiativetied to something truly before and beyond munity. As Pahman explains:

Among those disaffected by any particular society, there will always be some who embrace an eremitic lifestyle. When this is done for spiritual purposes, the individual cultivates spiritual capital (or, we might say, heavenly treasure), which, in turn, attracts others to follow the hermit’s example. After a while, enough monastics group together and form munities.

3. Competition

Although many munes do, in fact, barter and sell with the “outside world,” much like munities, Smith observes that in the case of monasteries, “a high degree petition has existed within monasticism among orders and practices,” and petition for members “may also have given impetus to monastic achievements.” As other munities emergearound different spiritual approaches and practices, the pressures petition likely givesome check, albeit long-term, to the munities, whether on their approach to prayer, munity, or otherwise.

4. Cycle of Renewal

In a way, this really just ties all the previous points together, which (I think) serves to affirm them. Smith writes that “there seems to be a monastic reform cycle, with repeated decay and renewal,” in which “monasteries relax until they are seen as too worldly by zealots, who then seek to renew austere devotion by founding new orders or reforming older orders from within.” The parallels here with entrepreneurship, innovation, and value are plain to see, in petition keeps things in check. When it fails to preserve existing institutions, new enterprises are formed to meet the need.

—

As for what this all means for application in the present day or in the market economy more generally, it’s a bit unclear. But at the very least, the bination of faith/worship, work, and service to munity — a feature Christians ought tostrive for, even in less overtly religious vocations—offers a convenient case study to draw out some of these tensions.

If heightened worship helps munities and institutions survive by empowering “human faculties” toward greater unity and production, how might similar or different forms of worship impact our daily work in other vocations and industries? If up-front individual ownership and initiative provides a stable groundwork in these cases, what might that teach us about the artificial designs and central planning of outsiders that we so often encounter?