The Protestant Ethic - Revisited

Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History

The Protestant Ethic - RevisitedAuthor(s): Reinhard BendixSource: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Apr., 1967), pp. 266-273Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/177867 .

Accessed: 09/05/2014 15:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press and Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History are collaborating withJSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Comparative Studies in Society and History.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.41 on Fri, 9 May 2014 15:17:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/177867?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


THE PROTESTANT ETHIC - REVISITED*

In his article on "Respect for Work and Cleanliness," Nikolai A. Mel'gunov touches on themes which are largely associated in our minds with the work of Max Weber. The aristocratic contempt for manual work and more broadly for any kind of specialization, the association of industriousness with religious dissent and with Protestant dissent particularly, the general view that labor is a burden which in Russian culture as in Catholicism is related to the frequency of holidays, the observable differences between Protestants and Catholics in the Rhineland - these and other themes can be found in Weber's work. Yet Weber himself considered these notions a commonplace in the literature. He believed that his own study offered a more probing analysis of the relation between the Protestant Ethic and that complex of attitudes towards economic activities which he designated as "innerworldly asceticism".

It is thus not new that the existence of this relationship is maintained here. Laveleye, Matthew Arnold, and others already perceived it. What is new, on the contrary, is the quite unfounded denial of it. Our task here is to explain the relation.'

Here Weber hints at, rather than refers to, an earlier literature in which writers had commented on the innerwordly significance of Protestantism. No doubt he was unaware of Mel'gunov, but a brief survey of this other literature will suggest that many nineteenth century writers wrote commentaries similar to Mel'gunov's.

The Belgian writer, Emile de Laveleye, was the author of a textbook on economics that was widely used in the 'eighties and 'nineties of the last century. In a chapter entitled "Influence of Philosophic and Religious Doctrines on the Productiveness of Labor" he specifically linked evangelical Christianity with the economic prosperity of countries, noting that the equalitarianism and the simple life-style of Protestants favored economic progress while intolerance was harmful to it. Laveleye also mentioned Voltaire's observation that there were no poor to be found among the Quakers in England and the Mennonites

* I should like to acknowledge the valuable assistance of Jean Guy Vaillancourt in the preparation of this comment. I Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), p. 191, n. 23. See also p. 280, n. 96.



THE PROTESTANT ETHIC - REVISITED 267

in Holland.2 In addition, he published a pamphlet comparing Protestantism and Catholicsm in their relation to freedom and prosperity obviously intended as a partisan argument in the religious conflicts of his country. Laveleye makes an invidious contrast of Protestant virtues and Catholic vices, among which the effects of both on economic affairs are mentioned incidentally. But in introducing the German edition of this work the political theorist J. C. Blunt- schli was more specific. Writing in 1875 Bluntschli pointed out, as Mel'gunov had, that in the Catholic Rhineland the most important factories were in the hands of Protestants. He also notes that much of German literature and science has been the work of Protestants rather than Catholics, although he also mentions that Catholics were relatively more prominent in music and the arts - a point of some importance in Weber's own study.3

Weber refers to Arnold as another writer who had noted the close relation between Protestant dissent and economic enterprise. Yet Arnold comments on this relationship only incidentically; he largely takes it for granted. His concern is with the cultural implications of Puritanism, and it is probable that he stimulated Weber as well as Bluntschli in this respect. At one point Arnold speaks of the English middle class as having "entered the prison of Puritanism" at the beginning of the seventeenth century and having "had the key turned upon its spirit there for two hundred years". Driven by their sense of the power of conduct, the middle class gained by what it became

... and the whole nation with them; they deepened and fixed for this nation the sense of conduct. But they created a type of life and manners, of which they themselves are slow indeed to recognize the faults, but which is fatally condemned by its hideousness, its immense ennui, and against which the instinct of self-preservation in humanity rebels.4

In this and many similar passages Arnold refers to the Puritan pattern of conduct - less in terms of its accomplishments than of its great emotional and cultural liabilities, though he recognizes both sides. That recognition is found in Weber's analysis as well. But while Arnold approaches this phenomenon as a critic of culture, Weber deals with it in functional terms. In his view the Puritan devaluation of emotional attachments, of sensual enjoyment, and of the world of art is the price that must be paid, if the daily conduct of affairs is subjected to so exacting and fear-inspired a discipline of the spirit.

John Keats and H. T. Buckle are two other writers to whom Weber referred. Both commented on the role of religion in Scotland with particular emphasis on the soul-destroying dread induced by the Church. Keats noted that there 2 Emile de Laveleye, Elements of Political Economy (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1889), p. 44. The book was published originally in 1882. 3 See Emile von Laveleye, Protestantismus und Katholizismus in Ihren Beziehungen zur Freiheit und Wohlfahrt der VKlker (Noerdlingen, C. H. Beck'sche Buchhandlung, 1875), passim and pp. iv-v of Bluntschli's preface.

4 From the essay on "Equality" (1878) in Lionel Trilling, ed., The Portable Matthew Arnold (New York, The Viking Press, 1949), p. 595.



268 REINHARD BENDIX

was much linguistic similarity on the neighboring shores of Scotland and Ireland, but yet a great cultural difference. Though both countries were poor, Scotch cottages were neat, clean, and comfortable; they were palaces by contrast with the hovels of Ireland. But the boys and girls of Scotland stood in terrible awe of the Elders

... they are formed into regular Phalanges of savers and gainers. Such a thrifty army cannot fail to enrich their country, and give it a greater appearance of comfort, than that of their poor rash neighborhood - these Kirk-men have done Scotland harm; they have banished puns, and laughing, and kissing ....5

Here is a clear, if incidental statement concerning the particular phenomenon on which Weber was to focus his attention: poverty, a carefree enjoyment of life and Catholicism on one hand; comfort and cleanliness, saving and gaining, and a fear induced by a life-repressing Presbyterianism on the other.

What Keats spoke of in an incidental comment was the subject of lengthy analysis in Buckle's Civilization in England. Again there is a contrast between adjacent countries, but Buckle compares the effects of Protestantism in Scotland and England rather than of Irish Catholicism and Scotch Presbyterianism. For Buckle Protestantism is the mark of progress and civilization in contrast witlh Catholicism, yet in practice even the same religion may have divergent effects depending upon the cultural level of the population.

While in England Protestantism has diminished superstition, has weakened the clergy, has increased toleration, and, in a word, has secured the triumph of secular interests over ecclesiastical ones, its results in Scotland have been entirely different; and that, in that country, the Church, changing its forms without altering its spirit, not only cherished its ancient pretensions, but unhappily retained its ancient power.6

In Scotland, the Protestant movement "never produced the effects which might have been expected from it, and which it did produce in England".7

From the standpoint of Weber's later analysis the most interesting part of Buckle's discussion is contained in a chapter on "The Scotch Intellect during the Seventeenth Century". According to Buckle, Scotland presented the paradox of a people "liberal in politics" but at the same time "illiberal in religion". For a hundred-and-twenty years after the establishment of Protestantism, the rulers of Scotland, by their neglect or persecution of the Church, had driven the clergy into the arms of the people with the result of strengthening the democratic spirit, since the clergy and the people were thwarted by the upper classes.

But these very circumstances, which guarded the people against political despotism, exposed them all the more to ecclesiastical despotism. For, having no one to trust

5 John Keats, Complete Poetical Works and Letters (Cambridge, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1899), p. 310. The quotation is from a letter, written in July 1818, to Keats' brother Thomas. 6 Henry Thomas Buckle, Civilization in England (New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1861), II, p. 153. 7 Ibid.




except their preachers, they trusted them entirely, and upon all subjects. The clergy gradually became supreme, not only in spiritual matters, but also in temporal ones .... In fairness to them, we ought to acknowledge that the religious servitude into which the Scotch fell during the seventeenth century, was, on the whole, a willing one, and that, mischievous as it was, it had at least a noble origin, inasmuch as the influence of the Protestant clergy is mainly to be ascribed to the fearlessness with which they came forward as leaders of the people, at a period when that post was full of danger, and when the upper classes were ready to unite with the crown in destroying the last vestiges of national liberty.8

Buckle did not neglect to mention that towards the end of the seventeenth century the energy of the Scottish people turned away from religious contro- versy to the new channel of commercial enterprise, but this reference occurs in the context of discussing the general pacification of Scotch society and the decline of feudal institutions and loyalties.9 The greater part of Buckle's attention was devoted rather to a detailed examination of "ecclesiastical despotism." For all its obvious partisanship this discussion presents an impressive survey of seventeenth century literature which contains many of the themes mentioned by Mel'gunov, on which Weber commented later. Quoting at length from the sermons of the period Buckle characterized the spiritual mutilation of the people. Here is part of his own summary of that presentation:

To be poor, dirty, and hungry, to pass through life in misery, and to leave it with fear, to be plagued by boils, and sores, and diseases of every kind, to be always sighing and groaning, to have the face streaming with tears and the chest heaving with sobs, in a word, to suffer constant affliction, and to be tormented in all possible ways; to undergo these things was deemed a proof of goodness, just as the contrary was a proof of evil. It mattered not what a man liked; the mere fact of his liking it, made it sinful. What- ever was natural, was wrong. The clergy deprived the people of their holidays, their amusements, their shows, their games, and their sports; they repressed every appearance of joy, they forbad all merriment, they stopped all festivities, they choked up every avenue by which pleasure could enter, and they spread over the country a universal gloom ....10

There is in this picture a degree of spiritual blight which left no room even for those habits of "foresight and of provision for the future" that played so important a role in Weber's subsequent study.1' At the same time Buckle gives a very vivid impression of what Weber calls at one point the "power and torment of those metaphysical conceptions". It is possible that Weber's emphasis on the religious dread induced by the doctrine of predestination was partly influenced by Buckle's colorful account.12

8 Ibid., II, pp. 260-261. 9 Ibid., II, pp. 236ff. o- Ibid., II, p. 314. 11 Cf. ibid., II, p. 313, where Buckle specifically identifies thoughts about the future as in- compatible with complete resignation to the Divine will. 12 Cf. Weber's own stress on the importance of this consideration in his "Kritische Bemer- kungen zu den vorstehenden 'kritischen Beitragen"', Archiv far Sozialwissenschaft, XXV (1907), 248 and passim.



270 REINHARD BENDIX

Reference to this consideration brings us closer to Weber's specific concern with the behavioral correlates of particular religious doctrines. In this respect several other historical references are revealing. After mentioning Keats, Buckle, Laveleye, and Arnold, Weber cites the case of the Mennonites in East Prussia whom Frederick William I tolerated as "indispensable to industry, in spite of their absolute refusal to perform military service". Weber calls this an especially striking instance of the fact that "a religious way of life and the most intense development of business acumen" went together.13 Frederick William is well known for his ruthlessness in promoting the military capacities of his country. The abuses practised by his military recruiters are documented with specific reference to the Mennonites. All but one of the Mennonites forced into service and subjected to various tortures, resisted steadfastly on religious grounds, and Frederick William decided to banish the entire Mennonite community, preferring other Christians who did not reject military service. But then the Konigliche Kriegs- und Domainenkammer of Koenigsberg petitioned the king in March, 1732, on the ground that execution of this edict would damage the royal revenue and His Majesty's other interests to a considerable extent, because as industrialists and as peasants the Mennonites were of the greatest benefit to the land and their presence guaranteed the royal coffers a considerable income. The king responded by granting the Mennonites the desired exemption and assuring them of royal protection on condition that they would found and develop textile factories. Thereupon most Mennonites returned to Koenigs- berg.14 The contemporary evidence concerning the economic efficiency of the Mennonites must have been impressive if officials of this particular king were willing to risk his displeasure, and the king permitted himself to be dissuaded from his previous course of action.

A number of other references to the then existing literature may be passed in briefer review. Weber noted William Petty's observations on the economic prosperity of Holland, which Petty attributed to the presence of religious dissent, an explanation which he formulated as a general principle.15 Weber also cites Eberhard Gothein who specifically emphasized the importance of the Calvinist diaspora as a seed-bed of capitalistic economy,16 and the similar theme, which recurs in the writings of J. E. T. Rogers."7 In referring to these 13 Weber, Protestant Ethic, p. 42. 14 See W. Mannhardt, Die Wehrfreiheit der Altpreussischen Mennoniten (Marienburg, B. Hermann Hemmpels WWe., 1863), pp. 118-120. I have no evidence that Weber used this particular publication, but it is the one dealing most specifically with the incident to which he referred. 15 See Charles H. Hull, ed., The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty (Cambridge, The University Press, 1899), I, pp. 261-264 and passim. 16 See Eberhard Gothein, Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Schwarzwaldes (Strassburg, Karl J. Trubner, 1892), pp. 673-714. 17 See J. E. T. Rogers, Holland (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1900), p. 51 (originally published in 1888); the same author's The Economic Interpretation of History (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1889), pp. 74-84 and The Industrial and Commercial History of England (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1892), pp. 35ff.




observations Weber pointed out that the evidence was rather equivocal, even though it suggested a general affinity between Protestantism and the promotion of trade. French, Spanish, Dutch, Austrian, and Prussian statesman had at times protected dissident Protestant minorities in an effort to promote trade and industry. But it was not clear whether the economic drive of these sectarian communities was to be attributed to the economic superiority of the culture from which they had come or "perhaps to the immense influence of exile in the breakdown of traditional relationships."'18 At any rate, the fact that in a good many cases Catholics in a minority position had not become prominent in trade and industry, argued against attributing too much importance to minority- status as an explanatory variable.19

There were still other writers to whom Weber referred in support of his view that there was some kind of relationship between Protestantism and the development of trade and industry. Manley, Temple, Montesquieu, Heine, Macauley, Carlyle, Wiskemann, and others are among the older writers mentioned; Ashley, Doyle, Bernstein, Cunningham, and Hermann Levy among the younger. These references to the literature are quite incidental and the omission of still other writers has no significance.20 What emerges from this survey is simply that Mel'gunov's brief essay is part of a considerable earlier literature commenting more or less fully on the relation between religious belief and economic behavior and in that context on the particular significance of Protestantism. Accordingly, Weber's seemingly casual comment should be taken seriously that the burden of proof was on those who denied this relationship. He took it as probably true but still in need of a more specific formu- lation and causal explanation. This particular focus is worth recalling in view of the large critical literature dealing with specific instances exemplifying, or "refuting" the relationship Weber had posited. The point is that in embryonic formn such a literature already existed at his time. He was aware of it and ap- parently believed that for purposes of understanding this posited relationship not much more could be gained by a further accumulation of instances. Even today students might read Weber's essay differently, if they were made aware that Weber assumed rather than tried to prove the existence of a positive relation between Protestant piety and economic growth. His effort was to

18 Weber, Protestant Ethic, p. 43. In a footnote Weber adds: "The migration of exiles of all the religions of the earth, Indian, Arabian, Chinese, Syrian, Phoenecian, Greek, Lombard, to other countries as bearers of the commercial lore of highly developed areas, has been of universal occurrence and has nothing to do with our problem." Ibid., p. 189, n. 13. 19 Ibid., pp. 39-40. 20 There is a relevant passage, for example, in Alfred Marshall which is among the more perceptive of these earlier commentaries. It links the "isolation of each person's religious responsibility" among Puritans with the "sturdy thoroughness of work in the manufacturing arts". See Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics (New York, Macmillan & Co., 1895), I, pp. 36-39. The book was originally published in 1890. My colleague Neil Smelser informs me that similar comments occur rather frequently among English writers of the early nineteenth century who discussed the development of trade and industry.



272 REINHARD BENDIX

understand the relation on the assumption that it existed. In more modern terminology: once a correlation has been demonstrated, even if it is a weak one, it still needs to be interpreted.2'

Weber's interpretation took the form of an ideal typical construction; his reasoning may be restated in the following form. Assume the existence of a positive relation of undetermined magnitude between Protestant piety and the "capitalist spirit". Isolated instances of a relation between certain religious doctrines and capitalist enterprise, and also isolated instances of the capitalist mentality unrelated to religious belief, have occurred throughout history, but the first development of a capitalist system occurred in Western Europe and specifically in England. Since the material preconditions of that system have existed elsewhere, but did not give rise to an economic development com- parable with that of England, some part of this "breakthrough" must be attributed to favorable cultural factors. And since the previous literature had shown many divergent relations between Protestantism and capitalist enterprise, the task as Weber saw it was to isolate conceptually how certain religious beliefs and a particular mentality of economic behavior could be related to one another. All this is evident enough in Weber's original text which em- phasizes that the moral awakening which seriously affected practical life, can only be understood in the light of the dogmatic beliefs which influenced the men of that day to an extent that is difficult to appreciate today. Weber states that he would present these religious ideas

... in the artificial simplicity of ideal types. For just because of the impossibility of drawing sharp boundaries in historical reality we can only hope to understand their specific importance from an investigation of them in their most consistent and logical forms.22

As long as one does not deny the influence of the "great traditions" (Redfield) on behavior, analysis of their patterns is likely to proceed along such lines as Weber suggested. Yet ideal typical constructions of this kind pose special problems. They deliberately simplify and exaggerate the evidence in order to "draw sharp boundaries in historical reality". Thereby analysis is removed from the ambiguities and complexities of the behavioral context, and special steps are needed in the subsequent analysis of the latter.23 This distance between

21 That it might be weak on occasion was clear not only from Buckle's discussion, among others, but was explicitly stated by Weber himself. After emphasizing the combination of "capitalistic business sense" and the "most intensive forms of piety" especially in the case of Calvinism, Weber adds the footnote: "This, of course, was true [of Calvinism] only when some possibility of capitalistic development in the area in question was present." See Protestant Ethic, p. 190, n. 16. 22 Ibid., pp. 97-98. Note also Weber's statements on pp. 90-92 where the purpose of his study is carefully delimited. Not many of Weber's critics have been nearly as careful in this respect. 23 For this aspect of Weber's methodology in a comparative context cf. Reinhard Bendix, "Cultural-Educational Mobility and Development: Japan and the Protestant Ethic", in S. M. Lipset and Neil Smelser, eds., Social Structure and Social Mobility in Economic Development (Chicago, The Aldine Press, 1966), pp. 262-279.




concept and evidence is a general problem, of course. But it may be suggested that with regard to the issues posed by Weber's analysis, historical developments since his day have substantially increased our opportunities of utilizing his insights in a wider framework.

Other cultural patterns than those of sectarian Protestantism have produced that work-ethic and systematization of economic behavior which Weber called "innerworldly asceticsm". Accordingly, it is possible to broaden the scope of Weber's analysis in keeping with his own approach to comparative analysis. Once attention shifts away from the focus on the peculiarities of Western civilization, one can reverse the Weberian approach by starting with evidence of "innerworldly asceticism" and then search for the factors (many of them secular rather than religious) which have contributed towards such patterns of economic behavior. Such analyses, say of Russian or Japanese developments, can only gain from a precise understanding of Weber's original con- tribution. To assist in this respect has been the purpose of the foregoing comment.

REINHARD BENDIX

University of California, Berkeley



Documents

The Protestant Ethic - Revisited