Perfil profesional

A framing of church action for Fair Trade solely in terms of social capital cannot fully describe what is taking place. Atherton et al (2011, p.101) value social capital as an analytical framework for examining the churches’ role in public life but they also point out the limitations of the concept. Notably, it is criticised for its social conservatism. The focus of social capital is on traditional understandings of what is a social good, in terms of strong community bonds creating the conditions for economic prosperity within the pre-existing economy. This focus is to the exclusion of the questioning of the economic order and the need for alteration to the structures of the economy or society. Bourdieu (1986) offers an analysis of social capital which emphasises the reciprocal benefits to be gained by individuals in cultivating their stock of social capital. There is a marked difference in emphasis between Bourdieu’s description and that of Putnam.

Putnam, although admitting that social capital has many and varied forms, tends to view motivation for contribution to social capital in terms of altruism, or an inherent sociability, whereas Bourdieu discusses tangible benefits that can accrue from cultivating a network of connections.

Bourdieu acknowledges a link between social capital and other forms of capital, such as economic and cultural capital. Hence, for Bourdieu, social capital is more about reinforcing class biases within society than bringing different sectors of a community together. The critique of social capital offered by Bourdieu serves to problematise the use of the concept as a catch-all solution for the ills of society. For Fair Trade action by churches, reference to social capital does capture the community mindedness of the

Fair Trade Town project. However, the use of the concept of social capital to describe forms of support for Fair Trade which call for radical change and question the ways in which society is ordered, can prove problematic.

For Fair Trade action by churches, there is not a clear cut either / or regarding its contribution to increasing bonds in the existing society or the need for radical change of societal structures. At times, there is conflict between these two aims. For example, the Fair Trade Town certificate urges a coming together of local activists and retailers. In the case of small businesses this is an uncontroversial aim; however, discomfort is expressed by some of the churchgoers in my study regarding the business practice of supermarkets and large corporations,³ to the extent that they do not regard large retailers or corporations as partners or allies in the Fair Trade Town campaign. There is no consensus within the Fair Trade movement as to whether the Fair Trade project is primarily concerned with the challenge of power structures or whether its major focus is on amelioration of the worst effects of the market. Although the Fair Trade movement today has to some extent entered the mainstream, both of the elements of being ‘in’ and

‘against’ the market are still there and there is debate within the movement as to degree to which the practice of Fair Trade should reflect either one, or other, of these elements. As I have indicated in Section 2.1, the framing of Fair Trade action by churches in terms of social capital fits with the engaged emphasis of Public Theology. Whereas, the role for Fair Trade in calling for a radical change in structures is more closely related to the distinctive emphasis of Public Theology. This questioning of the structures of society resonates with Northcott’s (2007, p.182) interpretation of Fair Trade as resistance to the exploitative trade system; an interpretation which would receive approval from many of the churchgoing participants in my research.

For the churchgoers in my study, the benefits of Fair Trade action by churches in bringing the community together and in linking the church with the wider community are widely acknowledged. However, some of the participants call for radical change in the system of trade, even if this will

3 This will be discussed more fully in Section 8.1.

alienate some sections of the community. Ann, a local Vicar, argues that the church should not shy away from politics.

I think the Church is inherently political. Christ was extremely political and I just think that we have, over the years, we have pretended that we are not […] the Church has an absolute

obligation to speak out, and against, the unfairness and injustice of the world.

Brandon, an Anglican churchgoer, discusses at length in his interview the injustices of the trade system and the problems that hamper international development. He expresses that for fair trading to become a reality this will require the developed world to “restructure the way the world operates.”

Brandon concludes that the Church cannot avoid talking about and

addressing societal issues. Of those who argue to the contrary, he asserts:

If Jesus had lived his life like that then they wouldn’t have crucified him; because he was attacking the status quo and he was attacking vested interests.

Ann and Brandon are not the only churchgoers in the study to recognise a radical side to Fair Trade which may not result in agreement from all

sections of society. The majority of the churchgoers refer to the need for the Church to speak against injustice, however controversial this may prove.

This is the call for the Church to follow in the footsteps of the Christ who comes to bring ‘not peace but division’ (Luke 12: 49-53). This verse from Luke highlights that the teachings of Jesus cannot be solely understood as a bringing together of all people; the call for justice will bring division within society more than it will bring unity. Hence action for social justice cannot be understood purely with reference to the concept of social capital. Social capital measures ‘the good’ purely in terms of the ability to strengthen bonds, the concept begins to falter when confronted with action for social justice which aims towards ‘the good’ or ‘the just’ but results in a divisive outcome for society.

The development of the concept of spiritual capital has assisted in extending the concept of social capital beyond discussion purely in terms of

strengthening bonds within communities.⁴ Social capital generated by faith communities can be defined in terms of religious capital (the strengthening of bonds within communities as a result of the bridging capital of religious actors) and in terms of spiritual capital, which stresses the values that are motivational in generating religious capital. These values, which are embedded in the texts and traditions of faith communities, both motivate and shape the action that is carried out. However, rather than fully solve the problem of the divisive result of action for justice, spiritual capital can serve to highlight it further. The values behind spiritual capital can indeed

motivate church action which results in a strengthening of bonds within communities and society; but they do not always. Baker (2007, p.200) points out that these values can also critique the norms of society. This will most likely take the form of a critique of societal structures. Such a critique is inherently controversial as it challenges powerful vested interests, which in turn will react to safeguard their position. As Kim (2011, p.12) indicates, the media should in theory promote debate within liberal societies, but to the contrary, he indicates that they: ‘have often played the role of judge,

asserting their own verdict rather than allowing the public to engage in a healthy debate.’ Church projects such as Fair Trade and the provision of foodbanks are lauded when framed in terms of charitable provision.

However, when the Church begins to ask questions as to why there is

unfairness in trade, or why families are so poor that they have to access their food from foodbanks, then this can provoke criticism from the media; in turn influencing large sections of the general public. This level of division will be discussed in Section 3.4, where I refer to the negative connotations to the word ‘society’ expressed by the churchgoing participants. Rather than viewing society solely as a ‘coming together’ of diverse parties, the churchgoing participants view it negatively as a system driven by values which are alien to Christian values of peace and justice. Atherton et al (2011, p.98), talking in the context of social and welfare provision, refer to a disjunction between religious values and mainstream policy discourse.

They go on to state that ‘there is perhaps discomfort at the intensity of the

4 As discussed in Section 2.3.

vocabulary used when faith groups want to talk about not only what they do, but why they do what they do’ (Atherton et al 2011, p.99).

The statement from Brandon, quoted above, which points out that Jesus challenged the status quo and vested interests (and hence, so should the Church) will not resonate with all supporters of Fair Trade, nor with most members of the public; however, it is a statement which indicates his religious motivation. Whereas religious capital is in the business of strengthening bonds in society in accordance with the discourse of social capital, it appears that the spiritual capital, which motivates and nourishes the religious, can lead the believer to a questioning of the status quo. This questioning can result in challenge and resistance to views prevalent in society, engendering division as much as coming together around shared values. In a sense, religious capital and spiritual capital represent the paradoxical emphases of Public Theology. Religious capital possesses an emphasis on engagement, as it represents the work of faith communities in bringing multiple parties together to work on projects of common interest.

Spiritual capital balances this urge for engagement with an emphasis on the distinctive values which motivate the believers’ involvement in projects for social justice. I have highlighted the role for Fair Trade action by churches in networking within communities to achieve both a coming together of diverse parties and the presentation of a distinctive message. My study reveals that this networking is not limited to the local community but reaches out to effectively connect the community with national and global partners.