In her discussion of The Parable of the Unjust Steward in Luke 16:1-13 Kathleen Rushton says that we are to see ourselves as integrally related in love within creation.

Disreputable characters feature in the parables of Jesus and among the company he kept. But the unjust steward of Luke 16:1-13 is in a class of his own. This parable begins: “Jesus said to the disciples, ‘There was a rich person (anthrōpos) who had a steward (oikonomos)...’”

Stewardship in the Gospels

Greek words related to stewardship are found only on two occasions in the Gospels. In the Parable of the Unjust Steward are three related words: oikonomos (the noun for a household administrator, or steward), oikonomia (the noun for the role of administrator), and oiknomēo (the verb “to administer”).

Oikonomos, the noun for the person, is found in Lk 16:1 and 3. Oikonomia, the noun for the role, is found in Lk 16:2, 3, 4. The verb oiknomēo is found in Lk 16:2. The NRSV, however, translates these words as “manager” and “management.”

The other occasion these Greek words are found is when Jesus asks a question about watchfulness and faithfulness: “Who then is the faithful and prudent manager (oikonomos) whom his master (kyrios) will put in charge of his slaves (doulos), to give them their allowance of food at the proper time?” (Lk 12:42, NRSV). The Jerusalem Bible has “steward” rather than “manager.”

In some Gospel stories, it is assumed stewardship is there. In the Parable of the Talents (Mt 25:14-30), for example, where a man hands over talents to his slaves (doulos), none of the Greek stewardship words are used. Some translations of Jn 2:8-9 have Jesus giving directions about the wine to “the chief steward.” The Greek word here is “master of the feast” (architriklinos).

Christian Use of Stewardship Today

Today, Christian institutions use stewardship in various ways.

Some employ this ambiguous paradigm to name their ministry for the administration of property and finance. Others use it to inspire church members to value and use their gifts and talents in God’s mission.

Care for our common home is becoming a central dimension of Christian faith. Consequently, it is worrying that Churches still draw on the decades-old paradigm of stewardship which has since been critiqued from theological, scriptural, ethical, environmental, evolutionary and secular perspectives.

Origins in Christian Biblical Interpretation

In 1967 historian of science Lynn White argued that Christianity was responsible for the ecological crisis because it promoted humankind’s unlimited mastery over nature. According to White, Genesis 1:26 allowed Christians to claim that humans are mandated by God to use Earth as their possession. He asserted that Christianity was the most anthropocentric religion the world has seen (see “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis”).

Christian theologians, and especially biblical scholars, set out to defend their tradition. Many argued that the term “dominion” (Gen 1:26) had been misinterpreted. God gives to humanity the responsibility to care for Earth. Humanity does not have unlimited mastery over creation, they are not owners.

This led to confusion: the Hebrew imperative, “subdue” (kabash) often translated as “dominion,” became interpreted as meaning “stewardship” even though that word is not found in Genesis or anywhere in the Old Testament.

According to environmental ethicist Willis Jenkins stewardship “emerged as a discrete theological discourse in the 1980s, supporting a public Christian environmentalism especially associated with evangelical Protestants.”

Stewardship in the Ancient World

Stewardship is assumed to have the authority of Jesus. In the ancient world, it was associated with three components: the master, the steward and the master’s possessions or household for which a steward was responsible. The steward was usually a slave whose responsibilities were over the household on behalf of the master. They involved the oversight of all labour including its products, maintaining a household (both production and consumption) and application of the craft of household management.

This idea of stewardship comes from a society based on human slavery — a human relationship which is now officially condemned even though it is still practised today.

Theologian Clare Palmer writes that the “political message encoded in stewardship is one of power and oppression; of server and served.” An added problem is the idea of an absent owner.

Jesus says many things about money and wealth and about the dangers of wealth that we do not encounter in the theological and cultural discussions of the Parable of the Unjust Steward. Stewardship is generally about the management and the opportunities of wealth, not about the problems of wealth itself.

Theological Problems

There are theological problems related to God’s presence and action in the world because stewardship infers that God is absent. The notion of stewardship presents the relationship of humans to creation in a purely vertical way without a related horizontal dimension:

God

Humans

Other than humans

This hierarchy obscures the fact that humans are also creatures in Earth — the common home of all creatures. Stewardship places humans in authority over rather than in community alongside and with creation. This model is a one-way relationship. Humans rule over and care for creation. Creation is a passive receiver of our care.

Politically, the problem encoded in stewardship is one of power and oppression, server and served.

In the light of evolutionary science, the notion that Earth is to be managed by humans does not make sense. Stewardship in its Christian and secular usage is anthropocentric rather than ecological and can tend to support and legitimate the use and exploitation of the natural world.

Beyond Stewardship to Integral Ecology

Four terms in Laudato Si’ identify a significant shift from understanding humanity’s role in creation as stewardship. They are our common home, interconnectedness, love language and, in particular, integral ecology, to which Pope Francis devotes a whole chapter.

Integral ecology affirms the deep connections in the biblical creation accounts which suggest that human life is grounded in three fundamental

and closely intertwined relationships: with God, with our neighbour and with Earth.

This resonates with the Māori concept of whakawhanaungatanga (making right relationship happen). In this understanding, right relationship is a verb, an action. The causative prefix whaka suggests “making” and turns the noun, whanaungatanga (right relationship) into the verb, whakawhanaungatanga — “making right relationship” in a series of interconnected relationships with Atua (God), tangata (people) and whenua (land).

By developing a spirituality of integral ecology we become more aware of how all creation is interconnected and learn to listen to and respond to the cry of Earth and the cry of the all life — human and other-than-human — impoverished by misguided ideas of stewardship.

Tui Motu Magazine. Issue 274 September 2022: 24-25