Religion, work, and the purpose of life: what’s the connection?
Photo of Penelope Trunk, courtesy of the New York Times
I wouldn’t normally be interested in a blog called “Brazen Careerist,” and yet the topic of a recent post was arresting: “All career issues are religious issues. Maybe.” Its author, Penelope Trunk, is obviously a provocateur, but not in that screaming-at-the-top-of-her-lungs-just-to-get-noticed way that is becoming so much a part of our culture. And yet I must say that her opening salvo immediately got my blood pressure up:
I know for sure is that religion is great preparation for being able to get what you want out of your work life. And, if you read this blog regularly, you know that I think the purpose of work is to get you what you want out of your whole life, not just the work part.
Okay. So it sounds a little bit like she’s saying that the purpose of life is to get what you want out of it. If so, that’s about the least religious idea I’ve ever heard. Religion should not teach us to get what we want; it should teach us to do what God wants us to do, which might very often involve not getting what we want.
I know that sounds like a downer, but really it’s not. My experience tells me that too often when we do get what we want we end up realizing that getting what we want–or what we think we want–is not all it’s cracked up to be. Our materialistic, consumerist culture is all about getting what we want out of life, and I don’t see it making very many people very happy in the long run–and it’s clearly not what’s best for our environment or our common life as human beings.
Still, I’m glad I read further into the post. In spite of the inauspicious start, much of what follows in it is fascinating, including her four main points:
All of adult life is about facing terrible choices.
The most important thing to do at work is good deeds.
Good work is about good rhythms.
Personal responsibility is the most important trait of a successful career.
I don’t have the time or space to do my own riff on each of those ideas, but I certainly could. Penelope Trunk is Jewish, although she calls herself “the bad Jew” in her family. I can relate–as an Episcopalian, I’m basically the bad Catholic in the family. And based on her big ideas, I think we share some common experiences around religion. You’ll notice that there is almost nothing in her post about belief, which is what most Americans confuse for religion. She writes out of a religious view of life that is about practice, about rhythms and disciplines, not about subscribing to a particular set of beliefs.
The only struggle I have with this is around the question of motivation. Because when I hunted around on her blog, I found a very similar post about how being an athlete will help you get ahead at work. Playing sports, like religion apparently, teaches you skills and habits that translate well into the workplace. I’m starting to see a pattern here. But the question that keep nagging at me is: what would it be like if we did the right thing (whether that right thing is working out or going to worship or having dinner with our families) simply because it was the right thing, and not because it would move us up a few spaces in the rat race?
So back to the whole purpose of work/purpose of life issue. Penelope Trunk would probably consider me naive, if not just plain annoying. But I do not in the least think that the purpose of religion or life or work should be for me to get what I want out of it. Religion is not–or at least it should not be–about getting ahead, or feeling good, or making myself happy. That’s what makes me crazy about the “prosperity gospel” movement: its proponents seem more intent on prosperity than on than the Gospel, which in reality is pretty clear that it’s the poor who are blessed and that the rich people are gonna have trouble finding the kingdom of Heaven, unless they can get there on a camel that fits through a needle’s eye.
Pamela Dolan is a transitional deacon on staff at Emmanuel Episcopal Church. After high school in Hawaii and college in California, she earned a master's degree in theology from Harvard before spending several years in New York studying medieval religion and literature. Pamela is married with two children. 
I actually found it compelling, and suggest a more wholistic view of want.
It is the most authentic consideration and question. If you truly care about another, ask what they want and then listen.
In a word, it is the gateway to what it is that inspires us.
One view of having what you what in your life is freedom from blame and judgment. Ask and you shall receive, it is that simple, and not that easy. Don’t blame God because you are not clear about what you want. That is only a pretense for not being responsible for it.
Work is our fate as declared by God. To what purpose? Being responsible for our choices. Could that be the work we do?
Consider the possibility that one’s career, with work, discipline and desire is their vocation. Mine is, and from what I have witnessed from you, so is yours. I believe that is the integrity being called forth by her blog.
To your point, if it is a means to an end, you are not clear on the end. Meaning only you are not accepting repsonsiblity for your life.
And you know what I will say next, I put doing the “right” thing on the shelf right next to “whatever it takes” to get ahead. Highy over rated.
Judgment is a poor substitue for inspiration. Do the right thing? Its a cliche. Inspired to do the right thing? Not possible. Acts do not inspire.
Who people are being for themselves in any moment of doing is what inspires.
Did Jesus do the right thing? Doesn’t matter, God was pleased. What was it about Jesus, did he just have some inside information on what all the right things were? I don’t think so.
A moral code is one outcome of religion, and as such is used as part of its definition. It is not its purpose. A relationship with God is the purpose of religion.
Another, you write: “A relationship with God is the purpose of religion.” I think that’s an excellent insight, and I wish I’d said it myself. But I don’t think we see eye-to-eye on how to get there.
Let me point out a few places where we disagree. Not in a spirit of judgment, but of clarification.
You write: “Judgment is a poor substitue for inspiration. Do the right thing? Its a cliche. Inspired to do the right thing? Not possible. Acts do not inspire.”
Really, I would say that almost the opposite is true. Inspiration is lovely, when it happens, but it’s a gift from God over which we have no control. Judgment, in the sense of discernment, is our responsibility. Especially if we use it on ourselves much more than on other people.
And acts are *exactly* what inspire. When I witness someone do something truly good, I am inspired to try to do good myself. I can’t judge what is in another person’s heart, but I can always look at my own actions and judge (or discern) if they are in keeping with God’s will as I best understand it.
“A moral code is one outcome of religion, and as such is used as part of its definition. It is not its purpose.” I think we agree here, and it might be that I said some things that were unclear on this point. When I say that religion for me is about “practice, rhythm and disciplines” I’m not really talking about a moral code, or at least not that exclusively. I’m talking about structuring my life externally in a way that allows me to make room in my life for God, and to get better at putting God’s will ahead of my own (something I’m NOT particularly good at, by the way, although I keep trying). So for me that includes a particular rule of life, with regular prayer and communal worship at the heart of it.
I act in that way whether I am inspired or not. I don’t judge others who don’t do the same, I just know that I am better able to develop a relationship with God when I do those things. Does that make sense?
And by the way, I found the post compelling too. Otherwise I wouldn’t have written about it!
There was a book about work/life issues that came out several years ago titled “Do what you love, and the money will follow”, which also wanders around this point.
There is a classical Christian teaching about work that revolves around the idea of calling. The idea is that we are ALL called to a work, a function in the world. And, once we find our calling, acting on it is not exactly “work” any more. Some are called to teach, others to be engineers, others to be carpenters, and so on. If you’re so inclined, we can see having to work for a living as our living with the curse of Adam. However, God IS in the redemption business, and so God calls each of us to some work.
The idea that true religion is about practice and rhythm and is expressed in our daily life IS a very apt point. And, most religions teach such things, whether they acknowledge it or not. From the Monastical liturgy of the hours from Matins to Compline, to the traditional annual calendars of feast days, to the 5 Moslem calls to prayer, and all the rest ARE about practice and rhythm.
Pamela,
consider, when you see someone doing a good thing, you are inspired by who they are at that moment more than the act itself or that it is, in your view, a good thing. The outcome, a good thing in your judgment, may be affirming, but it is not the source nor is it inspiring in its self.
If it was we would be worshipping “Good Acts” not a “Supreme Being”. Some would suggest we do that anyway.
One relies on knowledge, appearance, and judgment. All elements of this world since Adam. The other on being. God’s gift to us.
When you roll out of bed in the moring and your feet hit the floor, you may or may not be experiencing the euphoria of wild inspiration. I will assert you are being called forth by your choices and commitments, and you are not getting out of bed in the morning because it is the right thing to do.
When nobody is watching, you love your life, your family, your calling, and those around you. This pleases God, in my view.
Knowing that you are doing the right thing is only for yourself. This is the first lesson of the Bible.
Or another way, what is it that you think you do not know about right and wrong that would make you a better person, or more to the point, another person that needs your convincing in a matter of right and wrong? What would cause you to think that God would leave you needing that?
This is the temptation shared in the first story. We continue to tempt each other, as we were first tempted, with the knowledge of right and wrong. That religion continues to ignore this lesson is not surprising. It is the original temptation.
Another: “When nobody is watching, you love your life, your family, your calling, and those around you. This pleases God, in my view.” That is lovely, and whether you meant it to be about me personally about about the general “you,” I am grateful for it.
Still, we clearly don’t see eye-to-eye on this one, and it might well go all the way back to our having differing interpretations of scripture, including the Adam and Eve story. I just don’t see any way to read scripture that doesn’t clearly show that actions are important, that we have a choice between right and wrong, and that we will be judged by what we do. That doesn’t give us the right to judge others, and I’m always glad that you remind me of that. But I can’t go all the way with you into some of the other conclusions you draw.
Still, I think we might have a point of contact. I’m guessing that we both value integrity, where our “doing” and our “being” are in perfect accord. God love us for who we are, not for what we do, yes? And yet, what we do is such an accurate reflection of who we are…
hs, I agree with you about the connection between work and calling. I’d like to write more about that in another post, but it seems to me not at all what Penelope Trunk was discussing. Her blog, after all, is all about advancing one’s career, and I really don’t mean to diss her for giving people career advice. That’s what they go to her for! I just worry that too many people try to sell religion as something that will get you somewhere, or get you what you want out of life, and that makes me uncomfortable on all kinds of levels. But when I read deeper into it I was actually pretty impressed by her understanding of religion, even if I disagree with what she wants to do with it. Still not sure I’m being very clear!