I begin this essay by articulating capitalism’s problematic work ethic, to which a host of contemporary theologians are rightfully responding. I then establish a pattern that structures a host of those contemporary theological responses. Theologians working out of the “God as Worker” model aim to address work‐related problems by calling for workers to imitate God’s work. Making use of Augustine’s doctrine of transcendence, I problematize that mode of response on two fronts: (1) those proposals are based on too quick an appeal to theories of divine action, which the authors problematically assume provides a model for ideal forms of human action; (2) those proposals lack clarity regarding the precise nature of “work” and thus fail to develop a proper analysis of the cursed mode of agency. Thinking with Augustine and a classical theological schema wherein God is the transcendent cause (and final end) of all creatures thus prohibits the attempt to address questions of work by identifying just modes of work in God’s productive agency. In contrast to this model, I argue that an Augustinian response must treat work as both a distinctly creaturely and a cursed activity.

中文翻译：

---

作品及其不满：当代神学对作品问题的回应

在本文开始时，我先阐述了资本主义存在问题的职业道德，许多当代的神学家都对此作出了正确的回应。然后，我建立了一个模式，该模式构造了许多这些当代神学反应。神学家采用“上帝作为工人”模式工作，旨在通过呼吁工人模仿上帝的工作来解决与工作有关的问题。利用奥古斯丁的超越主义，我在两个方面对这种回应方式提出了质疑：（1）这些提议是基于对神的行动理论的太快的诉求，作者有疑问地认为这为人类行动的理想形式提供了一个模型。 ; （2）这些建议对“工作”的确切性质缺乏明确性，因此未能对被诅咒的代理模式进行适当的分析。因此，以奥古斯丁和古典神学模式来思考，其中上帝是所有生物的超然原因（也是最终目的），从而阻止了通过仅识别上帝的生产能力中的工作方式来解决工作问题的尝试。与这种模式相反，我认为奥古斯丁式的回应必须将作品既是一种明显的活泼行为，又是一种被诅咒的活动。