How Did We Get Here?
Throughout my life I have seen those who I admire show great self-responsibility, a hard work ethic, and a motivating drive to succeed. My parents and mentors were prime examples. Furthermore, a good work ethic is something we look for when we hire staff and it is something we have tried to instill in our children.
As I began to read Max Weber’s “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism” I realized Weber seemed to see the Protestant ethic as having a negative quality that promoted the rise of Capitalism. This sparked my interest but also put me on edge. The Protestant ethic has its positive points as does economic health. However, we have crossed a threshold of consumerism that is, well, “consuming”. Something has gone very wrong and it does take a wrestling of how we got here.
The Protestant ethic, according to Weber, seems to set the perfect stage for Capitalism to grow and thrive. He differentiates the motivating forces at play in Catholicism and Protestantism. “The Catholic is quieter, having less of the acquisitive impulse; he prefers a life of the greatest possible security, even with a smaller income, to a life of risk and excitement, even though it may bring the chance of gaining honor and riches. The proverb says jokingly, either eat well or sleep well. In the present case the Protestant prefers to eat well, the Catholic to sleep undisturbed.”[1] This actually caused me to chuckle. Though it may be over-generalized, Weber brings out the point of underlying motivation.
In essence, Weber sees the Protestant work ethic as the culprit for the evolving consumeristic mindset. This generalized view brought up a red flag in my thinking. I wish I had read Dr. Jason P. Clark’s paper, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism,” first to make greater sense of Weber’s theory. Clark brings varying points of view to focus as they respond to Weber’s work. One important contrary thought Clark shares is of Colin Campbell who asserts that “evangelicalism may not have endorsed capitalism, but rather the “challenges of a new world order…(and) an emerging Romantic ethic” laid the groundwork for a society of consumption.[2]
Samuel Gregg in his online article “Why Max Weber was Wrong” states:
“The real controversy begins with Weber’s argument that the decisive linkage of this form of rationality with economic practices occurred primarily in Europe’s predominantly Protestant areas.” Weber seems to make a far-reaching generalization which brings about an unrealistic assumption (something we learned about in “How to Read Numbers” by Chivers and Chivers[3] ).
Gregg also finds that empirical evidence disproves Weber’s theory regarding commercialism as just being a recent problem:
“Even Catholic critics of modern capitalism have had to concede that “the commercial spirit” preceded the Reformation by at least two hundred years. From the eleventh century onward, the words Deus enim et proficuum (“For God and Profit”) began to appear in the ledgers of Italian and Flemish merchants. This was not a medieval version of some type of prosperity gospel. Rather, it symbolized just how naturally intertwined the realms of faith and commerce throughout the world of medieval Europe. The pursuit of profit, trade, and commercial success dominated the life of the city-states of medieval and Renaissance Northern Italy and the towns of Flanders, not to mention the Venetian republic that exerted tremendous influence on merchant activity throughout the Mediterranean long before 1517.”[4]
As one can see, Max Weber’s theory of how the Protestant work ethic affected Capitalism has come under great scrutiny throughout the years, causing much debate. However, could it be that though Weber falls short, his premise brings about a debate that is needed?
This debate sparks deeper thinking as to how our identity in Christian circles has evolved and formed. Clark surmises that beliefs and practices mix together for identity-making. He makes the point that “the pathways of anxiety, assurance, and providence” set the tone for how evangelicalism evolved in an increasingly capitalistic society.[5] Clark surmises that “Evangelicalism was both a creature of, and a generator to, aspects of capitalism.”[6]
We are at a transition point in our church circles. In times of transition, it is important to evaluate what has served us well and what has not. There is wisdom in looking at these themes that Clark mentions that have brought us to where we are today. Though it is advantageous to honor the past, perhaps the Holy Spirit is calling us to lead differently…
[1] Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (Merchant Books, n.d.). 9.
[2] Clark, Jason Paul, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship” (Portland, OR, Portland Seminary, 2018). 108
[3] Tom Chivers and David Chivers, How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them) (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2021). Chapter 18.
[4] Samuel Gregg, “Why Max Weber Was Wrong,” Public Discourse, December 11, 2013, https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/12/11099/.
[5] Clark, Jason Paul, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship.” 120.
[6] Clark, Jason Paul. 120.
About the Author
Esther Edwards
Esther has served in ministry leadership for over 35 years. She is an ordained minister, an ICF and CCLC certified coach, and licensed coach trainer. Her and her husband have launched their own coaching practice, Enjoy the Journey Leadership Coaching and seek to train ministry leaders in the powerful skill of coaching. Esther loves hiking, reading, and experiencing new coffee shops with friends and family. She enjoys the journey with her husband, Keith, their four daughters, sons-in-law, and their five beautiful grandchildren.6 responses to “How Did We Get Here?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Esther,
I really enjoyed your perspective, you wrote. “In essence, Weber sees the Protestant work ethic as the culprit for the evolving consumeristic mindset.”
Reading the posts of our cohort, some glommed onto Calvinism/others work ethic. I was just confused.
You quoted Clark, “Clark surmises that “Evangelicalism was both a creature of, and a generator to, aspects of capitalism.”
Okay I can live with that.
I glommed onto this aspect of what he said, “Indeed O’Donovan reminds us that the Spirit authorises and empowers the church. It is through the Spirit that the church recapitulates the Christ-event” (p. 239). He adds, “What is still needed, and my thesis points to, is a robust theology of the Holy Spirit that engages with the formative practices of capitalism” (p.240).
Ah…enter the Holy Spirit. You ended, “Though it is advantageous to honor the past, perhaps the Holy Spirit is calling us to lead differently…”
Amen.
Shalom…
This was a tough read for me as well. With little time and a foggy brain, it was difficult to understand all that was being communicated but it so helped for me to read everyone’s blogs as well as a few summaries. It is a gift to have such a great cohort.
As always, I appreciate your insights and comments, Russell.
Hi Esther, I thought Weber’s summaries of the different perspectives between Catholicism and Protestantism were insightful. Weber’s “Either eat well or sleep well” statement has me wondering how either a loss of Christian conscience with regards to consumerism or fears of not having enough play into how we got here. As you consider “transitions” in your church context, what are you noticing works well and what doesn’t? It is all very exciting and humbling to think about!
Hi Esther!
I am intrigued by your post. I like your description regarding the connection between Protestant ethics and capitalism.
Near the end of your piece, something piqued my curiosity when you mentioned: ‘Though it is advantageous to honor the past, perhaps the Holy Spirit is calling us to lead differently.’
Could you give further examples of what you meant by ‘leading differently’?
Thank you.
Esther,
You brought up how Weber compared the Catholic mindset and protestant way of working and thinking. I find it interesting, and perhaps I have my reformation history confused (totally possible, not my favorite part of seminary) but part of Luther’s thesis was the excessive riches the Catholic Church leaders gained, right? And then in separation, doesn’t it seem the theory of “sharing the wealth” went to everyone…perhaps Capitalism is the same thing with Catholic leaders…we just want the Money! What do you think, is that an unfair critique? I love your call out to flow into a different kind of leader.
Great posts Esther! “However, could it be that though Weber falls short, his premise brings about a debate that is needed?”
Love this quote and I agree, thinkers like Weber are not perfect and may not always connect the right dots, but they do get important conversations going that are needed and cause us to evaluate our faith and history deeper. I think it important for us to ask “How did we get here?”