Work and the Meaning of Life

Moderator:
I have the great pleasure of introducing our fireside chat on Work and the Meaning of Life. It’s going to be with Ryan Anderson and David Bahnsen.

We forgot the fireplace, but we’ve got the chairs.

Quick intros for both of them—I know we mostly want to hear their insights.

Ryan Anderson is the President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He is the author or co-author of five books, including most recently Tearing Us Apart: How Abortion Harms Everything and Solves Nothing. He has also written or co-written When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment. (He probably wouldn’t be here if he wrote When Harry Met Sally!) He also authored Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom, What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense, and Debating Religious Liberty and Discrimination.

Ryan received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton and his doctoral degree in political philosophy from the University of Notre Dame. His dissertation was titled Neither Liberal nor Libertarian: A Natural Law Approach to Social Justice and Economic Rights. As was mentioned when he spoke on the main stage, his research has been cited by two Supreme Court justices: Justice Alito and Justice Thomas. (I’ll spare the qualifying remark that Ryan usually adds—that they were in dissent.)

David Bahnsen is the founder, Managing Partner, and Chief Investment Officer of the Bahnsen Group, a national private wealth management firm with offices in Newport Beach, New York City, Bend, Nashville, Minneapolis, Austin, and Phoenix—managing over $5.3 billion in client assets.

Prior to launching the Bahnsen Group, he spent eight years as a Managing Director at Morgan Stanley and six years as a Vice President at UBS. He is consistently named one of the top financial advisers in America by Barron’s, Forbes, and the Financial Times. He’s a frequent guest on CNBC, Bloomberg, Fox News, and Fox Business, and is a regular contributor to National Review.

He hosts the popular weekly podcast Capital Record, dedicated to a defense of free enterprise and capital markets, and he’s a regular lecturer for the Acton Institute and the Center for Cultural Leadership. He also writes daily investment commentary.

David is a founding trustee for Pacifica Christian High School of Orange County and serves on the Board of Directors for the Acton Institute. He is the author of several best-selling books including Crisis of Responsibility: Our Cultural Addiction to Blame and How You Can Cure It, The Case for Dividend Growth: Investing in a Post-Crisis World, and There’s No Free Lunch: 250 Economic Truths.

His newest book, which is the topic of tonight’s conversation, is Full-Time: Work and the Meaning of Life, just released in February 2024. He has been married to his wife Jolene for over 22 years and has three children.

You’re in for a real treat with this discussion—thank you.

[Applause]

Ryan Anderson:
There we go—that was loud! Thank you, Mark, for that warm introduction. The introduction was a little bit warmer than the stage. This may be the coldest fireside chat I’ve ever engaged in!

I can’t start interviewing David without first expressing my thanks to Tim and Steph. Every year, this conference gets better. This is the highlight of the year for me and my wife. I ask my wife to attend several work-related events each year—this is the only one she actually enjoys going to.

Thank you. This has come to feel like a family reunion—700 members of my family. So, a big family reunion!

I was thinking about this—we met a couple here eight years ago when we attended our first Napa Institute conference, and 10 months ago, they became the godparents to our child.

If you’ve seen the baby in the stroller that Anna, my wife, and I have been pushing around, John and Kristen Meyer are that child’s godparents.

The reason I mention that is just to say that when John moved on to Notre Dame, we wondered what would happen to the conference—but it’s only gotten better.

So, I just want to congratulate Mark on an amazing first conference. You had big shoes to fill, and this conference just keeps getting better.

Thank you to Tim and Steph, thank you to Mark and Danielle—this really is a highlight.

We are fortunate to have David Bahnsen with us this evening. David is one of the world’s leading financial advisers, one of the world’s leading investment managers, and one of the leading commentators on capital markets, the economy, and the free and virtuous society.

He’s just published an excellent book. David is a Protestant, and when I read the book—he asked me to write an endorsement for it—I said, “David, this is a very Catholic book. It sounds like you’re a member of Opus Dei.” He assured me he’s not—he’s still thoroughly Reformed. But it’s just an excellent book.

So, David, I want to start by saying: You open the book with a quote from Dorothy Sayers—the Catholic mystery novelist and Dante translator. I want to read that. This is what she writes, and what David quotes as the opening to the introductory chapter:

“Work is not primarily a thing one does to live, but the thing one lives to do. It is—or should be—the full expression of the worker’s faculties, the medium in which he offers himself to God.”

What does that quote mean to you, and what does the Book of Genesis have to do with this?

Work as Worship and Vocation

David Bahnsen:

First, I echo Ryan’s gratitude to Tim and Steph, and to all who have made this conference possible. It’s an honor and a pleasure to be here. I have thoroughly enjoyed this time—the fellowship I’ve experienced at events like this is tremendous. I appreciate your hospitality to an “Opus Dei Protestant” like myself!

The Dorothy Sayers quote, in many ways, could have been the book. The message of the book is encapsulated in what she said there.

It is my belief that too many of us either intellectually or practically, many of us operate as if work is something we do to live, rather than something we live to do.

This distinction—while perhaps a little cute—is actually quite profound. What Dorothy Sayers is saying is that, fundamentally, work is not merely instrumental. Work is not merely transactional.

And I believe that this is the animating message about work that is necessary to pull us out of the malaise we are in—as both a Church and a society—that has increasingly adopted a negative view of work.

That negative view is a violation of the American ethos and tradition, but even more than that, it’s a violation of the creational understanding of work. And that’s where the Genesis 1 understanding becomes so important.

It’s why I view this issue so ecumenically. Our views of work have to start—as most things should—in proper theology, with the first chapter of Genesis.

I believe that we were created to work. And in that message, we obtain a deeper understanding of the human person, of God’s relationship to the human person, and of God’s plan for human life. That is fundamental.

And when that message gets missed, it leads to all sorts of social epidemics.

A Misunderstanding of Work’s Purpose

Ryan Anderson: 

Thank you. Can you say more about that? You mentioned at the very beginning that you’re making not only a theological case, but also an ontological case. And the theme of this week’s conference has been about what it means to be human. Can you elaborate on the ontological argument for the importance and dignity of work?

David Bahnsen: 

Well, it shouldn’t surprise you to know that I believe ontology and theology are deeply connected. In a Venn diagram, there’s very little that doesn’t overlap.

What I believe about the human being is directly connected to what I understand about God’s design of the human being—which I learn from theology.

When we talk about mankind being created and God describing man—this is how I summarize it:

There are 25 verses that open the first chapter of Genesis, describing the creation account day by day.

In the first five days, God is creating things—and at the end of each day, He looks at what He created and says, “It was good.”

What were those things? The oceans. The mountains. The sun, moon, and stars. The animal kingdom.

These were probably more than just good—in terms of their beauty and majesty.

But then in verse 31 of Genesis chapter 1, after having created mankind, God says it was very good.

And I don’t know why I haven’t heard more sermons about that additional adverb—very—throughout my life.

There’s something distinct, something superlative, something dignified about the human person that God had made.

So when you look at verses 26 through 30, they provide the context for why Genesis 1 ends by describing mankind as very good.

You read that the very reason God made us was to be fruitful and multiply, to fill the earth (verse 28), and—back in verse 26—to have dominion over the earth, to rule it, and to care for it.

This is what we famously refer to as the Creation Mandate or the Cultural Mandate.

It was a commandment to build civilization. I would argue that verse 26 was also a commandment to build civilization—not just to procreate.

The Image of God and the Call to Co-Create

Yes, it was a commandment to procreation, but I do not believe it was only a commandment to procreation. To understand the idea of “being fruitful and multiplying and filling the earth” only in reproductive terms—but not also in economic terms—is incoherent.

It required mankind to work, to allocate scarcity—to do all the things associated with cultivation. Words like cultivate, rule, steward—these are all synonyms of work. This is a theological idea.

And then, four times in just two verses, God repeats that He made us in His image and likeness. It is, I believe, a non-controversial component of Christian theology to say that being made in the image of God did not mean we received God’s omnipotence, omniscience, or omnipresence.

So what did it mean to be made in the image and likeness of God? Well, in those very verses, He defines it for us. We were made to co-create with Him—to take the potential of creation and grow it, to steward it. And I don’t say this just as a finance guy or an economist—I say this as a Christian: It was a commandment for economic growth.

All of these things require work. And this all happened before original sin. This was God’s created design for His people. And He did this because He loved us—not because He hated us.

We were made with souls that have an eternal destiny. But we were also made with a purpose—and that purpose was to work and co-create with God.

Genesis 1 lays a foundation that is deeply ontological about the being of the human person.

Work and the Interior Life

Ryan Anderson:

So, I’m not a member of Opus Dei—so I’m not an Opus Dei Protestant or an Opus Dei Catholic.

But when I was an undergraduate at Princeton, that’s when I first came in contact with the Work [of Opus Dei], and it was deeply formative for my spirituality, for my interior life—and particularly for my understanding of work.

I remember there’s a point in The Way—which, if you’re not familiar, is a short book by St. Josemaría Escrivá, with brief points for meditation or mental prayer—and one of those points, somewhere in the 300s, says:

“For the modern apostle, an hour of study is an hour of prayer.” That was deeply impactful for me at the time, as an undergraduate at Princeton.

What it highlighted was that, given our vocation as students at an elite university, we shouldn’t bifurcate our lives between religious life and academic life.

And more or less, that perspective has stayed with me. I was an undergraduate over 20 years ago, and all of the work I do now—whether writing or teaching or public engagement—I view as sanctifiable intellectual work.

It’s a way of serving neighbor, serving God, and so on.

Apparently, this is controversial in the Protestant world. I didn’t realize that.

Can you say a little bit about what motivated you to write this book, given where the faith-and-work movement within Protestant Christianity currently stands—and the dualism you see at the heart of some of the bad theology?

The Evangelical Retreat and the Rise of Instrumental Work

David Bahnsen:

I think a lot of the time it’s a latent dualism, but it’s still dualism nonetheless.

I joked with Ryan last night at dinner that I think one of my favorite things to do is talk critically about Protestantism in front of a Catholic audience.

I say that somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but seriously—I don’t fear getting booed off the stage here. Some of what I’ll say might stir things up online, though. So, let’s dive in.

I believe evangelicalism has, for the past hundred years or so, struggled with a kind of latent, closet dualism. It stems from an intellectual cowardice and a separation from society—largely driven by a desire to retreat from the public square and simply “wait out” the Second Coming. That mindset has had profoundly negative impacts on American life—in education, politics, commerce, and more.

This retreat escalated after the Industrial Revolution, and particularly as modernism and Darwinism began crowding out faith-driven ideologies. Evangelicals, pre–World War II, mostly responded by retreating further. Since then, we’ve made a comeback in some areas—like politics and education—with homeschooling, Christian schools, Catholic schools, charter schools, and so on. People are pushing back against the indoctrination of secular humanist institutions.

But in the marketplace? Protestants have struggled. Not in talking about faith and work—just Google that and you’ll get millions of hits—but in taking it all the way. Faith and work is still usually presented instrumentally: work is good because it lets you feed your family, support your church, or donate to charity. And yes, those are good things. But again, it’s all still instrumental.

Work as Vocation: Not Just a Platform

Then came another phase: professional-class evangelicals becoming more upwardly mobile. Now you can have status, maybe even witness to others because you’re respected. And that’s good too. We’ve built networks, breakfast groups, resources. But still—what’s been missing is a deeper belief that the inner work itself matters to God. That work—whether it’s technology, agriculture, finance, education, or entrepreneurship—is itself part of the Kingdom of God.

Even when Christian leaders believe that, they often tiptoe around it. They’re afraid of the implications. So I thought: maybe a self-professed workaholic like me should come tell them to knock it off.

Workaholism vs. Absenteeism: A Crisis of Purpose and Productivity

Ryan Anderson:

Perfect segue. I wanted to ask you about that term—“workaholic.” You mention in your book that sermons on work often caution people not to idolize work or become workaholics. But you argue the real crisis in America today isn’t workaholism—it’s absenteeism. People are dropping out of the workforce, not applying themselves.

You even quote Dorothy Sayers, who asked: what should a carpenter hear in a sermon? Not just “don’t drink too much” or “don’t skip church.” But “make good tables.” Jesus was a carpenter. Before his public ministry, he likely made excellent tables.

So what should we be preaching—especially to Catholics with secular, lay vocations who spend 40–60 hours a week working?

David Bahnsen

This isn’t just a Catholic thing. It’s a problem across all Christian traditions—Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox. The culture has shaped us all.

And I think it’s adorable when we preach against workaholism. But let me be blunt: last year, Americans played 295 million hours of Fortnite. Those are not people struggling with workaholism.

We currently have the same number of able-bodied men aged 29–54 either working or looking for work as we had during the Great Depression. Today, there are still more open jobs than there are job seekers. Yes, there’s a skill mismatch—but the point remains: this is a crisis.

From the pews, I’ve heard warnings about overworking my whole life. But that’s not our real problem. The real, systemic issue is people not working hard enough—or not working at all. And even when they do work, they often lack joy and purpose.

Recovering a Theology of Work and the “Work-Life Balance” Myth

We need to recover a Genesis 1 vision of work. And about that word “workaholic”—yes, I know it’s modeled on “alcoholic.” But the issue with working too much isn’t the work itself—it’s what we’re neglecting while we work.

If someone’s ignoring their family because they work too much, the sin isn’t overworking. The sin is neglecting their family.

And if a non-believer comes to Christ with a drug or gambling problem, we disciple them away from those things. But if a high-performing lawyer or entrepreneur becomes a believer, do we say, “Hey, now you need to be mediocre at work”? Of course not. It’s a completely different ethical category, but we treat them the same.

Ryan Anderson

There’s a funny story in your book—about a young woman interviewing at your firm, the Bahnsen Group. You asked if she had questions, and she said: “What can you tell me about work-life balance?” That ended the interview. Can you share why you’re not a fan of that concept?

David Bahnsen

Yes. People ask: “Do you believe we should work all the time?” Of course not. But let me ask you: have you ever said to your spouse, “Sorry honey, I’m working on marriage-life balance”? Or “kid-life balance”? Or “church-life balance”?

No. We only say “work-life balance”—and only for one reason: to justify doing less work.

Work and life are not enemies. They don’t need to be balanced against one another. Work is part of life.

Now, do we face challenges in prioritization? Of course. Making it to your kid’s soccer game, being a good spouse, managing church commitments—these all require wisdom and planning. But they’re not in opposition to work.

The term “work-life balance” infantilizes young adults. If you’re 22 and interviewing for your first job, and you’re asking about yoga class at 2 p.m.—that’s a red flag.

Your first job isn’t about amenities. It’s about learning to grind, to hustle, to build character. You can balance other things later. But this obsession with “balance” early on undermines work ethic.

Against Retirement: The Case for Lifelong Vocation

Ryan Anderson

Let’s move from early-career to end-of-career. You’re not exactly pro-retirement.

David Bahnsen

Right. I have a chapter in my book called Against Retirement. But to clarify—I’m not against financial security, or more flexibility as we age.

I just don’t believe the biblical command to be useful and productive has an expiration date. Sure, there are physical and mental limits. I’m not saying a 70-year-old should be running down criminals. But there are many ways older people can still mentor, contribute, share expertise.

The very idea of retirement is a modern invention. Before WWII, “retirement” just meant dying. But after life expectancy increased, Madison Avenue began selling the idea of a long vacation at the end of life. Then life expectancy increased again—and now we’ve got people planning to spend 25+ years in leisure.

I believe that’s an unchristian vision of life. Work is a blessing. Even in old age, there is joy and purpose in being useful.

And it’s not just a concern for Boomers—it’s a huge issue for Gen Y and Gen Z. They’ve absorbed the idea that the point of work is to not have to work anymore. That’s dangerous.

A Vision of Work as Divine Vocation

Ryan Anderson

Final question. Your book is called Full-Time. You critique the idea in the book Halftime—which says that once you’ve had success in your career, you can pivot to significance. Why do you push back on that?

David Bahnsen

I push back because it creates a false dichotomy. It implies that the first half of your life—your career—is for success, and only later can you do something meaningful.

I believe that’s theologically wrong. Work is inherently significant. Our creative, productive endeavors reflect the image of our Creator. That’s not something you have to wait until midlife to realize.

So as people head back to the office on Monday, I want them to remember: it’s a blessing to work. We meet our needs by meeting the needs of others. And in a market economy, the cooperation, specialization, and innovation we participate in are nothing short of miraculous.

People can become prosperous—not just the business owners, but the workers too. And they can find joy and purpose, knowing they’re being useful and productive, just as God intended.