The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

“Hardly any examples could demonstrate more vividly than these parallels that vague ideas, such as Catholicism’s (alleged!) ‘estrangement from the world’ and Protestantism’s (alleged!) materialistic ‘enjoyment of life’s pleasures,’ remain at too high a level of generality to be helpful.” 

In the modern era, Catholics are generally seen to be less concerned with material goods and worldly affairs than Protestants. This typically unsubstantiated claim about Catholics and Protestants is often used to explain why Protestants are more successful within capitalism than Catholics. However, Weber argues that while such statements might be true in contemporary times, the opposite was often the case historically, with Protestants following an extremely ascetic lifestyle. As such, Weber believes that a deeper and more nuanced investigation is necessary.

“[T]he Reformation of the sixteenth century not only involved the elimination of the Catholic Church’s domination over the believer’s life in its entirety but also the substitution of one form of control by another. A highly agreeable domination that had become a mere formality, one that was scarcely felt in a practical manner, was replaced by an infinitely burdensome and severe regimentation of the entire organization of the believer’s life.” 

One of the principal targets of the Protestant Reformation was the Catholic Church’s rigid hierarchy and authority, which often held a form of control over believers’ lives. As such, many have described Protestantism as anti-authoritarian and more aligned to values of freedom. However, Weber argues that Protestantism was in some ways more severe than Catholicism, as it directed its followers to completely organize their life according to the Church’s moral code.

“Could not the entire contrast between estrangement from the world, asceticism, and church-based piety on the one hand, and the earning of one’s living under capitalism on the other, be understood as actually implying an inner affinity?”

Weber often uses the notion of “affinity” in his discussions of Protestantism and capitalism. Through the course of his book, Weber hopes to show that Protestantism and capitalism had an affinity toward each other—meaning that the two systems (religious and economic) held values that were compatible with each other. Weber specifically argues that early Protestantism’s values of asceticism and piety were amenable to the growth of capitalism.

“If one can discover at all an object for which the phrase spirit of capitalism is meaningful, then it can only be a specific historical case. Such a singular entity is nothing more than a complex of relationships in historical reality. We join them together, from the vantage point of their cultural significance, into a conceptual unity.”

In this quote, Weber comments on the method of his historical and sociological analysis—in particular, his use of the term “spirit of capitalism.” While Weber diagnoses a number of values and ideas that he sees as the core of capitalist society (its spirit), he acknowledges that such a concept cannot be clearly and obviously identified from the outset. Rather, Weber attempts to develop the concept of the spirit of capitalism through a number of specific examples that contain the essence of the spirit within them.

“Fugger’s entrepreneurial daring and personal, morally indifferent proclivities now take on the character, in Franklin, of an ethically-oriented maxim for the organization of life. The expression spirit of capitalism will be used here in just this specific manner—naturally the spirit of modern capitalism.” 

In Chapter 2, Weber quotes from a number of writings on capitalism and wealth to describe the main traits of the spirit of capitalism. He argues that its spirit is best contained in the writings of Benjamin Franklin, who advised individuals to organize their entire life around the earning of money. For Weber, what is particularly significant is that Franklin attaches an ethical significance to his advice, suggesting that it is honorable and morally good for an individual to seek to earn money and avoid squandering it.

“The pursuit of riches is fully stripped of all pleasurable, and surely all hedonistic, aspects. Accordingly, this striving becomes understood completely as an end in itself—to such an extent that it appears as fully outside the normal course of affairs and simply irrational, at least when viewed from the perspective of the ‘happiness’ or ‘utility’ of the single individual.”

While greed and the desire for money have existed for all of human history, the spirit of capitalism differs in a number of ways, such as its relationship to pleasure. While many individuals may see the accumulation of wealth as a means of acquiring pleasurable and luxury goods, Weber argues that the spirit of capitalism admonishes individuals to avoid enjoying the money they earn. Instead, capitalism turns continued and endless work into one’s goal, rather than working for the sake of improving one’s happiness.

“This example illustrates the type of behavior that should be called economic traditionalism. People do not wish ‘by nature’ to earn more and more money. Instead, they wish simply to live, and to live as they have been accustomed and to earn as much as is required to do so.” 

Weber argues that prior to capitalism, people’s relationship with money and work was characterized by what he deems economic traditionalism. Most individuals simply strove to earn as much money as necessary to sustain their livelihoods and were resistant to work more than that. Such attitudes toward work were a hindrance to the growth of capitalism, which seeks to maximize workers’ productivity so as to achieve more and more profits.

“Rather, [the spirit of capitalism] is the product of a long and continuous process of education and socialization. Today, sitting triumphantly dominant, modern capitalism is able to recruit its workers in all industrial nations and in all the branches of industry in these nations relatively easily. Yet in the past, recruitment was everywhere an extremely difficult problem.”

Weber argues that the spirit of capitalism did not come about naturally, and he notes that in capitalism’s early days, individuals were often resistant to joining capitalist workplaces such as the factory, where bosses expected them to produce as much as possible during the workday. However, Weber notes that such resistance is no longer a problem for capitalism and that there are more than enough individuals willing to join the capitalist workforce. Such a change in attitude could only come through transformations throughout the rest of society, which taught individuals to let go of their past habits of economic traditionalism.

“An audible echo from the religious realm unmistakably resonates even in the German word Beruf, and perhaps in an even more apparent manner in the equivalent English term calling: one’s task is given by God.” 

One’s career or work is often referred to as a “calling,” suggesting that one is uniquely meant to perform such labor. Weber argues that the word contains a hint of religious significance, connoting the idea of being called upon by God to perform a task or duty. Throughout Chapter 3, Weber explores how the idea of the calling has its roots in Protestantism and the teachings of theologian Martin Luther.

“The single means of living in a manner pleasing to God changes accordingly: an ascetic withdrawal from the world, as practiced by monks, and the clear surpassing of the world’s routine morality of daily life that such asceticism implied, is now replaced by this-worldly work.”

Prior to Protestantism, Christianity saw the epitome of a moral life in the monks, who lived an ascetic lifestyle isolated from society and devoted to God. One of the key transformations in the Reformation was a shifting of morality, as theologians advocated that a moral lifestyle could be achieved in daily life. Weber argues that such changes in dogma led to what he calls “this-worldly work” gaining a religious significance that it had previously lacked.

“By contrast, this-worldly work in a vocation appears to [Luther] to be a visible expression of brotherly love, a notion he anchors in a highly naïve manner indeed and in contrast (almost grotesquely) to the well-known passages of Adam Smith. Luther does so mainly by indicating that the division of labor forces every person to work for others.” 

Luther believed that the societal division of labor, in which individuals each perform specialized work for the rest of society, was a manifestation of God’s will. As such, the act of performing one’s work becomes an ethical duty, as it helps to fulfill God’s plan. Luther also argues that focusing on one’s work is not selfish but rather an “expression of brotherly love,” as one is performing one’s work for the sake of one’s fellow man and the betterment of society.

“The increasingly strong emphasis on the role of providential forces, even in life’s disjointed happenings, now leads him more and more to emphasize the importance of Divine Will as ‘fate,’ an idea that proved compatible with economic traditionalism: the individual should basically stay in the calling and status in which God has first placed him.” 

Though Luther imbued the notion of work with ethical significance, Weber notes that his views otherwise maintained an economic traditionalism that was antagonistic to capitalism. As Luther saw the division of labor as a manifestation of God’s will, he believed that one’s calling had been chosen for them by God. As such, Luther felt that seeking to change one’s calling or societal position was tantamount to rejecting God’s orders.

“To leave this Paradise, but shall possess

A Paradise within thee, happier far.” 

At the end of Chapter 3, Luther quotes from John Milton’s Paradise Lost, which he sees as a poem central to Protestantism, in the same way that Dante’s Divine Comedy is central to Catholicism. In the quote, Milton writes that while individuals will be sad to leave the Paradise of heaven for Earth, they will find a far happier Paradise within themselves. Weber sees this poem as epitomizing the attitude of Protestant thinkers after Luther, who held that individuals could find a sense of paradise within themselves and their worldly work.

“Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation. So that a natural man, being altogether averse from that Good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.” 

At the beginning of Chapter 4, Weber quotes extensively from the Westminster Confession of 1647, a document that evinces much of the central dogma of Calvinism and other later Protestant sects. Weber is particularly interested in the notion of predestination, which became central for Protestants following Luther. This doctrine holds that individuals have been predestined for either heaven or hell. In this quote, the Westminster Confession states that individuals are wholly unable to alter their fate, no matter the good deeds they may perform throughout their lifetime.

“Free and obedient to no law, God and God alone can make His decrees comprehensible and known to us. He does so only insofar as He finds it good to do so. […] All else, including the meaning of our individual destiny, is surrounded in dark mysteries that are impossible to fathom and to gauge.” 

Weber argues that one of the effects of Calvinism is to isolate individuals from God. As individuals cannot change or know their fates, their existence merely serves to fulfill God’s will for themselves, which is ultimately unknowable. Calvinism elevates God to a position where he is beyond human comprehension, creating a sense of loneliness and solitude in Calvinists.

“[I]t became a matter of duty pure and simple for believers to consider themselves among the elect few and to repel every doubt about their state of grace as nothing more than the temptations of the devil. This type of advice seemed plausible because a lack of self-confidence in one’s status as chosen was believed to result from insufficient faith; and insufficient faith results only from the insufficient effects of God’s grace.” 

The result of the doctrine of predestination was a sense of anxiety in Calvinist believers, who worried about whether they had been chosen by God to be saved. Such anxiety was only increased by the fact that their fates were ultimately unknowable, and no individual action on their part could change them. As a result, individuals were advised to simply believe that they had been chosen by God, as doing so was seen as a sign of one’s faith in God’s plan.

“Restless work in a vocational calling was recommended as the best possible means to acquire the self-confidence that one belonged among the elect. Work, and work alone, banishes religious doubt and gives certainty of one’s status among the saved.” 

While Calvinists were taught to have faith in God, the simple act of faith was often not enough for them to calm their anxiety about the afterlife. They were thus advised to devote themselves fully to their work, which was believed to help calm anxiety and testify to their belief in God. Such an emphasis on vocational calling built on the ideas of Luther, which saw an individual’s career as being one aspect of God’s divine plan for the universe.

“[The baptizing sects] retained from this period a principle that we have already become acquainted with from Calvinism (even though somewhat differently grounded): the absolute condemnation of all deification of human wants and desire, for their cultivation rendered worthless the reverence owed exclusively to God.” 

The baptizing sects, which included groups like the Quakers and the Mennonites, were Protestants who sought to isolate themselves from society so that they could exclusively focus on fulfilling God’s will. As part of this withdrawal, they came to increasingly emphasize past Protestants’ teachings that saw the experience of pleasure as anathema to a spiritual and holy life. In turn, these baptizing sects helped to develop Protestantism’s organized ascetic lifestyle, which saw any consumption of goods or wealth as morally suspect.

“[T]he intensity of interest in a this-worldly vocational calling among the baptizing sects essentially increased. There were various reasons. First, the increase resulted from a rejection of employment in all state offices, a rejection that was originally understood as stemming from a religious duty to withdraw from the world. […] Second, together with this disqualification there developed an insurmountable opposition in all of the baptizing denominations to every sign of an aristocratic style of life.” 

Though the baptizing sects advocated an isolation from worldly affairs, Weber argues that they ultimately only increased the Protestant fervor for one’s work. As they had to avoid any form of government work, members of the baptizing sects would have embraced so-called apolitical work as a means of sustaining their livelihood. Likewise, the baptizing sects would have avoided living off their riches like aristocrats, as such an attitude would lead to idleness.

“The ‘saint’s everlasting rest’ comes in the next world. On earth, in this life, in order to become certain of one’s state of grace, a person must ‘work the works of Him who sent him, while it is day.’ According to the will of God, which has been clearly revealed, only activity, not idleness and enjoyment, serves to increase his glory.” 

Weber discusses the writings of British theologian and Puritan Richard Baxter, whose writings advocated the importance of one’s vocational calling. Though Baxter was in some ways critical of wealth, Weber writes that Baxter was more suspicious of those who enjoyed their riches. As Baxter believed that rest and relaxation were the providence of the afterlife, he argued that individuals should devote themselves in this life to their labor.

“[I]n addition and above all, as ordained by God, the purpose of life itself involves work. The Apostle Paul’s maxim applies to everyone without qualification: ‘if anyone will not work, let him not eat.’” 

For Baxter, work was not merely a way of avoiding idleness, but instead the utmost fulfillment of God’s divine will. Such elevation of work is based upon teachings like those of Paul, which state that it is unethical to eat without having worked. Baxter believed that Paul’s teaching applied even to those who had previously worked and accumulated wealth, and he taught that the rich still had to continue working before they could eat.

“Just as the endowment of the stable vocational calling with ascetic significance sheds an ethical glorification around the modern specialized expert, the providential interpretation of one’s chances for profit glorified the businessperson.” 

Weber argues that teachings like Baxter’s helped to elevate the status of businesspeople and others who methodically seek to improve their riches by any means necessary. As work is ordained by God’s will, any attempt to avoid earning as much money as possible becomes a repudiation of one’s ethical duty. As such, Protestantism saw the “self-made man” (109), who is able to earn enough money to provide for himself and others and avoid falling into poverty, as the epitome of a morally proper life.

“On the one hand, this-worldly Protestant asceticism fought with fury against the spontaneous enjoyment of possessions and constricted consumption, especially of luxury goods. On the other hand, it had the psychological effect of freeing the acquisition of goods from the constraints of the traditional economic ethic. In the process, ascetic Protestantism shattered the bonds restricting all striving for gain—not only by legalizing profit but also by perceiving it as desired by God.” 

Weber sees Protestantism as helping to usher in the spirit of capitalism primarily through its transformation of previous attitudes of economic traditionalism. While individuals had previously sought to earn only enough money as was necessary to sustain themselves, Protestantism helped to transform the earning of wealth into an ethical aim to be pursued for its own sake. At the same time, Protestantism taught its followers to avoid spending or enjoying their newfound wealth and possessions, instead directing them to invest their money so as to earn ever more profits.