The Western: Radical Forgiveness in Unforgiven

Unlike English and American Puritanism, German Pietism has hardly ever been used as an example in works on religious sociology and general modern history. Max Weber, in his famous study on The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, first published in 1904–5, pointed out that Pietism in Germany was, with regard to his thesis, in many ways similar to Puritanism in England and America. Yet those following the Weberian tradition and most of those studying religious sociology, or writing general modern history, rarely pay attention to German Pietism. This has meant that, first, most of the research on Pietism has been and is still being done by church historians. Accordingly, in works other than on church history, little can be found on Pietism. Second, until now there has been no thorough analysis or comprehensive description of the impact of Pietism on eighteenth- and nineteenth-century German society, culture, politics, or economics. Third, certain specific Pietist concepts, such as the concepts of ‘community’ and ‘work’, which possess a central position in modern sociology and were influential far beyond the ranks of the Pietists themselves, have not been investigated and thereby introduced into comparative studies.

M1AX WEBER'S essay on the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism represents a highly fruitful, if also controversial, encounter between history and sociology. Any adequate appraisal of the validity of Weber's thesis must necessarily look at both the empirical data and the theoretical propositions in two ways. These considerations have determined the structure of this paper. First, I shall indicate very briefly my understanding of Weber's thesis. Second, as the main burden of this paper, I shall look at seventeenth century American Puritanism. Finally, I shall try to indicate the place of these findings in the larger framework of Weber's preoccupation with the rise of modern capitalism. Weber's argument does not concern itself with the rise of capitalism as such and even less with accounting for the existence of human acquisitiveness. Both of these had existed long before Calvinism or Puritanism. The historical phenomenon to be explained is modern Western capitalism with its economic rationalism, formally free market, and formally free labor. What Weber sees in this capitalism is that it includes, among other dominant traits, a particular quality of mind, a set of attitudes towards economic activity. In Calvinism and more especially in Puritanism we find the formation of a character structure which is explicitly religious in intent but which nevertheless could contribute to the formation of an economic ethos. The religious ethic did not indeed approve of the quest for profits and ever-renewed profits; the goal of man's activity was to glorify God. But under conditions in which particular kinds of economic activity could flourish, once these activities were set in motion, the religious norms and impulses could fall away; men could continue to be diligent in worldly employments, find sufficient incentive in the rewards which their activities provided, and eventually find other ideological justifications for their enterprises. The religious forces had removed the inner resistance to the development of certain types of practical rational conduct. The rise of modern capitalism is thus an unanticipated consequence of the Protestant ethic.'

JENNIFER JORDAN BAKER "It is uncertain where the Fates will carry me": Cotton Mather's Theology of Finance In The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, first published almost a century ago, Max Weber argued that Puritan commercial energy was fueled by the spiritual anxiety that accompanied predestinar- ían theology. Calvinist predestinarians, Weber wrote, in trying to cope with the uncertainty of their spiritual destinies, often succumbed to the temptation to see material blessings as potential manifestation ofGod's blessing. Though they insisted that prosperity was the result of—and not the cause of—salvation, Puritans strove nevertheless to prove or "justify" publicly their divine election through the industrious and profitable pursuit of a calling.' As Weber and his scholarly successors also observed, such attempts to identify providential design were vexed at the outset, because predestinarianism ultimately denied the possibility of ever discerning God's plan with any certainty; these attempts were carried out, then, both as a result of and in contradiction to their belief that spiritual fate was predetermined and immutable. Though this thesis, as I will discuss, does not apply so easily to all American Puritans, the writings of Cotton Mather show signs of the bind Weber describes. While Mather insisted that God's grace brought "prosperity" in all its forms, he also maintained that economic culture offered no clues, no consolation for the individual looking to know the status of his or her soul. As I shall argue, this bind was complicated by Arizona Quarterly Volume 56, Number 4, Winter 2000 Copyright © 2000 by Arizona Board of Regents ISSN 0004- 1 6 10 Jennifer Jordan Baker the advent of financial credit systems and paper money in the 1690s and early 1700s. The New England economy, increasingly based on intangible and abstract forms of wealth during Mather's lifetime, only made more indecipherable the workings of providential dispensation. In Mather's writings, the credit instrument aptly evokes the precariousness of human existence. The coin, which despite appearances might actually be counterfeit or debased, served as a metaphor for the human soul that never fully reveals its status as saved or damned, and the financially speculative venture, undertaken with no guarantee of success , dramatized the predestinarían's always uncertain future. Though the financial themes of Mather's writings seem at first glance to reflect worldly concerns, such works never lose sight of the spiritual; rather, they are a vexed attempt to see spiritual and financial mechanisms at work simultaneously. Mather did not look to the economic world for answers; rather, he saw its inherent uncertainty as a test of human conviction. Financial vicissitudes were part of the human crisis and required a fortitude not unlike religious conviction. As he attempted to illustrate in The Life of William Phips, despair could devastate both the spirit and the precarious financial system built on public credit. Thus, Phips, a work of hagiography with a secular bent that has been the source of scholarly speculation, posits itself as an exemplum that is both theological and economic; it ultimately offers a lesson to readers —readers of credit bills, readers of providential dispensation, and readers of the biography itself—on how to maintain faith in the face of uncertainty. I turn to Mather not in an attempt to illuminate an overall New England Puritan mindset. Indeed, as Janice Knight has argued in her recent rereading of American Puritanism, this predestinarían anxiety and its resultant work ethic was not characteristic of all Puritans. "Preparationist " theology, which emphasized performance as a sign of salvation, gained ascendancy by the turn of the century and was enshrined in Mather's eccesiastical history of New England, Magnaiia Christi Americana . This theology ultimately came to represent Puritan orthodoxy in subsequent American historiography, and yet, Knight argues, another strain of American Puritan theology, which insisted on God's immediate and unconditional granting of grace and thus undermined the necessity ofpreparation and performance on the part of the recipient, had coexisted and challenged the latter theology throughout the seven- Cotton Mather's Theology of Finance teenth century (Knight 21 ).2 Anxiety, Knight concludes, was not the hallmark of all strains of Puritan piety, and so, if my readings of...

Reply to Lutz Kaelber Jere Cohen Lutz Kaelber, in The Canadian Journal of Sociology, issue 28(4), wrote a review of my book, Protestantism and Capitalism: The Mechanisms of Influence, which was a critique as well as a review. I am pleased at this chance to reply to some of the points made in the critique. Professor Kaelber said that my book met one of his expectations, providing new evidence documenting ascetic Protestants' business activities in the early modern period, but not his other two, that it be attentive to, inter alia, Weber's replies to Fischer and Rachfal as well as Stephen Kalberg's (2002) new translation of The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, and that it be broadly comparative like Weber's seminal study. My study was virtually completed by the time the new translations became available, but I am now familiar with Kalberg's translation and Weber's replies, and can say that they would have made little difference in my analysis. Although the Kalberg translation brings out some points, emphases, and nuances more clearly than the Parsons' version that I used, it neither adds to nor contradicts the Parsons' version. And since Kaelber calls my interpretation of Weber's argument "razor-sharp," the translation I used doesn't seem to have hurt. An advantage of the Parsons' translation is its familiarity: it is the Weber thesis that most people know and care about. Relatedly, many have a copy of it and can check my page references, whereas not so many have the Kalberg on their shelves. Weber's replies to his critics do change my reasoning on a couple of points, and I'll elaborate on that momentarily. The third expectation, that I do a comparative study, would have hurt more than it helped because it would have spread out efforts and ultimately thinned my evidence in any one area. Since Weber has already shown the comparative scope of the Protestant ethic thesis, I believe that it was better at this point to [End Page 620] analyze one key religion thoroughly than many superficially. I worked on the English Puritan case for many years, and couldn't have done the other cases, too, especially where many or most references are in languages besides English. I do consider these other cases important, though; hope someone will do Holland, the Mormons, American Puritanism, Methodism, and so on; and will not be surprised if things come out differently in these studies than in mine. For example, prima facie, Mormonism seems to fit Weber's model better than English Puritanism. Obviously, I agree with Professor Kaelber that the last word on this topic has not been spoken. Given that my analysis is essentially a case study of English Puritanism, Professor Kaelber reasons that the book's title should reflect that. However, the English Puritans are not just another case, but the one that Weber considered most important and most likely to support his theories. My findings have implications for the whole Protestantism-capitalism question. Also, some of the findings, notably concerning the work ethic, pertain to a number of Judeo-Christian religions, not just to the single Puritan case. Hence, my title places the book in its context better than the alternate proposed in the review. Kaelber also wonders why I call the book broad when it focuses mostly on one religion. The answer is that it deals with the work ethic, sect discipline, religious anxiety, the quest for certainty of salvation, the legitimation of capitalism and more, a broad survey of the mechanisms through which Protestantism might be expected to influence capitalism. I argue that we should now focus on Protestantism's early influence on the growth of capitalism rather than its influence on the spirit of capitalism. I reason that the spirit of capitalism is unproved because there never has been a valid example of it, and call for a moratorium on it until its existence can be verified. Professor Kaelber lists several examples, drawn from the research literature, which purport to have identified the spirit of capitalism, but on inspection I found no evidence in any of them for a duty to make money, acquisition...

<i>Jeremiah’s Scribes: Creating Sermon Literature in Puritan New England</i>. Meredith Marie Neuman. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013. Pp. vi+265.