Of the yards of comment produced by the recent high profile Work Scheme case of graduate Cait Reilly (who was 'forced' to stack shelves for no pay to continue receiving benefits), by far the most interesting was that of Independent writer Terence Blacker. Particularly striking was the assertion that:
"For many conservatives, [big society ideas] must have been dangerously liberal thoughts. If people like Cait Reilly began to discover that there was more to life than being an economic unit, then the whole market-based system of values would start to crumble."
This is one more presentation of the battle between liberal and conservative views on the ordering of life that have raged since the 18th century. Yet what is interesting is that both socialist and social democratic movements also fall prey to exactly the same material critique- that in their systems the first measure of humanity is their economic wealth (or lack of). The counter critique is that liberal notions of humanity that are 'light' on economic urgency will soon lead us down the path of excess, laze and ultimately disorder.
As in most dialectic impasses, Christianity urges us to choose the truth of both ideas and learn how to keep a healthy tension in our public (and private) life. According to scripture Human is made in the image of God, and the character of God encompasses creativity, community, love and labour. Therefore we are intrinsically economic beings but we are intrinsically much more than that also. Unemployment does indeed offend our core humanity, but so does workaholism or an expression-free life.
Manual work is a dignified activity that should not be snobbishly shunned, for indeed the Lord Jesus himself partook of it. Yet this isn't the debatable point in this case, for the vast majority of reasonable people will agree with such a view. The real issue is as Terence Blacker described it - does the Work Scheme embody a dangerous view of humanity that we are only materialist and therefore can only fulfil the Human Call through being 'economic cogs'? Let us hope this is not so and that this case merely highlights a gross lack of sense and flexibility in the Work Scheme administration.
