Has The Theory of the Protestant Work Ethic Just Collapsed?

The Daily Telegraph (UK) ^ | 12/6/09 | Damian Thompson

[marshmallow]

Has a young Harvard graduate student in economics dealt a deadly blow to Max Weber’s theory that Protestantism favours economic development? Davide Cantoni has just produced a brilliantly argued paper which takes economic data from Catholic and Protestant cities in Germany from 1300 to 1900, subjects them to meticulous multivariate analysis, and finds no evidence that Protestantism per se made people richer.

Cantoni, whose CV reveals that he is a 28-year-old doctoral student with joint German and Italian citizenship, knows that he is walking into a minefield. Weber’s reputation as perhaps the greatest of all sociologists does not rest solely on his famous thesis; but it has iconic status and both drew on and developed the widely held belief that, to put it crudely, Protestants get out of bed earlier in the morning than Catholics.

Weber’s thesis proposes that the specifically Calvinist belief in predestination persuaded its adherents to pursue capitalism as an end in itself: there was nothing you could do to contribute to your salvation, so you might as well make money as an end in itself (and, in any case, a healthy bank balance could be a sign that you were among the elect). But, in fact, lots of thinkers before Weber had concluded that America, England and northern Europe were rich because they had freed themselves from superstitious, hierarchical popery.

It’s this broader version of the “Protestant work ethic” that Cantoni exposes to scrutiny, since the German cities of the Holy Roman Empire that he analyses were mostly either Lutheran or Catholic. (There were Calvinist cities, but their joyless creed doesn’t seem to have made a difference.) The abstract of his paper, which can be read in pdf format, reads as follows:

[marshmallow]

Provided for those who enjoy hard numbers and rigorous statistical analyses.

[GeronL]

Leftists culture goal was to destroy the work ethic as part of their plan.

[Mogollon]

Yep...obviously catholic countries like mexico, south america, etc. are richer than the USA which has historically had a protestant majority.

[muawiyah]

Guy stepped into a minefield ~ the correlation with Catholicism and Protestantism is derivative at best.

The NORTHERN European countries were suddenly more prosperous, had thriving manufacturing and were opening up educational institutions left and right because the Jews moved there. The SOUTHERN European countries were suddenly less propserous, less given to manufacturing anything, and actually less intellectually inclined because they kicked the Jews out.

For a variety of reasons Jews from Catholic Spain relocated to Protestant countries in the North, and then to Catholic Poland.

There's an awful lot more to the story than that of course.

[AzaleaCity5691]

Obviously true. This country was made what it was because of Catholic immigrants. And Episcopalians weren’t true Protestants anyway so they don’t count

America only became the powerhouse it did when the Irish, Italians, Polish, Hungarians and all the other ethinicities came to this country and worked in the mines, mills, stockyards and everywhere else.

America was made what it was by Catholics.

[dila813]

If they are in the same country, they are subject to the same system.

They guy must be an idiot.

You have to get two different societies to compare.

[oblomov]

Just because one does not find a relationship between two variables does not mean that it doesn’t exist.

[C19fan]

Regions of Catholic Europe were very pro-capitalistic, Northern Italy and Antwerp being the prime examples. Many of the Northern German cities that turned to Luther had already extensive ties to trade, such as the cities in the Hanseatic League. The story is much more complicated that Weber hypothesized in his ground-breaking work. What makes Weber so interesting is he turned Marx on his head. Instead of the economic system determing everything else in Marxian theory, Weber showed how people’s beliefs and culture has a maor influence on economic development. As we see in the world today, the Islamic world is still way behind the West in all aspects of development basically constantly importing Western technology and know how but never changing the culture or belief system that makes new discoveries in the Islamic world impossible.

[marshmallow]

If they are in the same country, they are subject to the same system. They guy must be an idiot. You have to get two different societies to compare.

Exactly wrong.

The whole idea of comparing cities in a single country is to minimize the number of possible confounding variables, such as culture, climate, political systems etc., which could affect the analyses.

By comparing neighboring cities where religion is the only major variable, other factors such as those listed above can be excluded.

[rbg81]

Follow-up questions:
— Does Judiasm make people richer?
— Does Islam make people [censored]?

[C19fan]

Hapsburg Spain at the heights of its power was in many ways a parasatic state. All of its power was based on importing silver and gold from the Americas then it was distributed throughout Europe. The major industry in Spain was will the wool trade and development in other areas of the economy was hampered by the government support of wool and a culture that looked down on trade. The area that gained the most from Spain’s empire in terms of trade was Antwerp but the Dutch Rebellion, the sacking of Antwerp by the unpaid Spanish mecenaries, and the closing of the Scheldt by the Dutch spelt its doom and shifted trade and finance to Amsterdam. I think you make a great point about how the religious intolerance of Spain and France really harmed them economically and destroyed the most productive subjects economically but Spain was very much an economic backwater even before the Moriscos were expelled.

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

something that post-Counter Reformation Catholic rulers nurtured alongside their Protestant opposite numbers

The "post" is an important point - after giving up the attempt to militarily extinguish protestantism, the Roman church itself made significant reforms and its relation to the state slowly changed.

Also, the decreasing importance of monkish organizations in dominating significant sectors of the economy helped (I have to admit some of them still make great beer!)

[C19fan]

p— Does Judiasm make people richer?

Jews in Europe were restricted in the careers they could pursue so money lending and other forms of trade were their only real options. Trade was very much looked down upon in proper European society but someone has to do it so Jews very often filled the gap. You saw a similiar in England where non-conformists were more likely to be represented in the new industries that sprung up in the Industrial Revolution. They suffered discrimination in many of the traditional occupations acceptable to proper society, for example Anglican clergy, so they were more open to trade to make a living.

[txhurl]

The non-tax-payers have finally out-numbered the tax-payers, and like (Tocqueville?) said, they now own the taxpayers.

[Radl]

“Protestants get out of bed earlier in the morning than Catholics. “

___________________________________

I was taught the Spaniards were a bunch of lazy people who took a three hour siesta. Only years later did I find out the reason for the siesta. Before AC it was too hot to work between 12-3. I also found out that they got out of bed later but they worked up to 10 or 11 in the evening while people in other parts of Europe were home watching the telly.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Weber’s thesis proposes that the specifically Calvinist belief in predestination persuaded its adherents to pursue capitalism as an end in itself: there was nothing you could do to contribute to your salvation, so you might as well make money as an end in itself

I've always wondered why the people who believe that man can do nothing and can only be a purely passive beneficiary of Divine salvation were so into the "root, hog, or die" mentality. Wow. I guess that explains it.

(and, in any case, a healthy bank balance could be a sign that you were among the elect).

Now, that doesn't make sense to me. Though, to be fair, the TaNa"KH and Prayerbook are replete with references to wealth, health, and long life as rewards from G-d. "I have been young, now I am old, and I have not seen the the righteous forsaken nor his seed begging bread."

[freespirited]

the correlation with Catholicism and Protestantism is derivative at best.

Yup. All sorts of factors correlate with capitalism. I've read Weber's book. Not impressed, but then again, very little from sociology makes sense to me.

[SoCal Pubbie]

You realize, of course, that Catholic immigration to the United States didn't really heat up until the mid 1800’s, when the U.S. had already become a continental power. They came precisely because opportunity was already here.

Furthermore, the bulk of predominately Catholic immigration did not take place till the early 20th century, by which time the U.S. was poised to supplant England as the premier industrial and military power in the world.

[Flying Circus]

Two groups subject to the same rules is the best way to test this kind of hypothesis, otherwise there become too many parameters to control for. There are an awful lot of factors in prosperity and trying to compare across societies where many of those factors are in play for a single ideological component is exceedingly difficult. Looking at a single country where the two groups are not treated in a fundamentally different legal manner helps to normalize many of those factors.

I cannot think of many countries outside of Germany where both Protestants and Catholics worked with similar autonomy and under the same legal rules. Countries like Italy, France and Spain have too many other cultural and legal influences not fundamentally linked to Catholicism to make a good comparison to Protestant countries in Northern Europe.

The US has a much different cultural and legal framework than Mexico or even non-Catholic Europe that has contributed to its rapid expansion. We owe much to our specifically English inheritance, but shouldn’t overlook the psychology of mobility as a nation of immigrants. Where European countries and Mexico have fixed social strata and strong ties to the land or village community, we are populated by people who would cut ties from where ever home was and go where they could go to make their living. An independent and rugged people and healthy legal protections for property rights are the ideal ingredients for economic growth.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Yep...obviously catholic countries like mexico, south america, etc. are richer than the USA which has historically had a protestant majority.”

Waves of Catholic immigrants helped make this country rich. They worked hard. Don’t deny them what they achieved.

[Desdemona]

A few thoughts: I don't know that this theory would work in that modern countries like Germany and Italy didn't exist as countries in the 16th century. All the provinces were their own little countries, and, yes, I have ancestors carried papers from Baden and Bavaria when they emigrated in the 19th century. At that point, both were Grand Duchies. And talk about hard workers.

Also, one must remember that protestantism was a movement at that time among the "educated." The peasants didn't always go along. Perceived work ethic is different depending on social stratum. It's pretty subjective. I've seen individuals say they've "worked hard" decorating a Christmas tree by hanging three dozen ornaments and taking off for a beer when others are picking pine needles out of carpets.

This is one topic that's not going to be easy to prove or refute. It is true that after the 17th century, Holland, which went protestant in the north and England, which stamped out Catholicism as best it could, both made a lot of money, but at what cost? Amsterdam struck me as very narcissistic and the Gentlemen's Canal was really ostentatious, IMO. Remove the sense of humility and ego takes over.

I don't buy that an one work ethic is more concentrated than another. It's an individual thing. And, BTW, getting up in the morning - 6:30 am Mass?

[Desdemona]

Some of my ancestors were imported labor from Spain. They were foundry workers, but there was nothing lazy about them.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“The NORTHERN European countries were suddenly more prosperous, had thriving manufacturing and were opening up educational institutions left and right because the Jews moved there.”

Jews in Scandinavia? Iceland? Ireland? Scotland? Get real.

“The SOUTHERN European countries were suddenly less propserous, less given to manufacturing anything, and actually less intellectually inclined because they kicked the Jews out.”

Italy. Enormously rich city states that were the world leaders in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries in science, manufacturing, trade and to a certain extent exploration. Italy is in Southern Europe - in case you didn’t know. And there were plenty of Jews. And they had little to do with the Reniassance explosion of intellectual and artistic achievement in Italy.

“For a variety of reasons Jews from Catholic Spain relocated to Protestant countries in the North, and then to Catholic Poland.”

And yet Poland’s hayday was from the late 14th to the 17th century. When Poland’s Jewish population went up, Poland was dissected as a nation. I call it a coincidence. You would have to say it was the Jews’ fault. Nonsense.

Japan. World power. How many Jews? Not enough to matter.

Taiwan.

Korea.

India.

Jews? Not many.

[Desdemona]

the bulk of predominately Catholic immigration did not take place till the early 20th century

From Italy maybe, but the Germans (Bavaria and Baden) and the Irish came over hot and heavy in the mid-19th century. At least to the midwest. There's a reason why breweries are big out here.

[mountn man]

Seems you conveniently forgot that our founding fathers and most of the rest of the people in the colonies were protestant in one form or another. It was mainly protestants who planted the seeds of this great nation. The vast majority of catholics who came started arriving enforce about 100 years later, to reap the harvest of what was planted before hand.

One thing something like this does is blur lines. Just because someone "goes" to a certain church, doesn't mean they're a Christian. So to call a person a Catholic or Baptist or Presbyterian just because they happen to "belong" to that denomination means nothing.

Hey, Ted Kennedy called himself a Catholic.

There are plenty of atheists who work long hours and are wealthy. Plenty of true Catholics and Protestants who do the same. There are also some lazy slugs in each of those categories.

There ar some fine people, Catholic, Protestant or atheist who work very hard, and yet have barely 2 pennies to rub together.

This nation wasn't "made" great BECAUSE of the Catholics. This country was made great because people, whatever denomination, chose to put God first and to base itself on Gods laws and principles.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

[Gumdrop]

I think this is all a lot of bunk.

As a child I heard of the “German Work Ethic”. I never heard that it had anything to do with Protestant vs. Catholic.

I wonder if the true reason lies with the fact that life in northern countries demanded planning ahead for the long wintertime, and the culture developed of hard work for farming, storing, variety of diets, etc.. It was necessary to live that way to survive.

So, it’s entirely possible that the work ethic is not because of being Protestant, but because those folks were usually from northern countries.

Thomas Sowell wrote a book called “Black Rednecks and White Liberals”. One chapter was about the German farmers in Wisconsin who developed an expanding dairy industry within only a few decades of living in the USA - they built barns, developed butter and cheese production, and cooling systems, transportation systems, etc.. This book would seem to support the theory of immigrants from northern countries were more industrious than the southern whites and blacks who did not have to worry so much about tomorrow as the climate was not so severe.

I don’t think Germans had any more of a work ethic than Scandinavians or English or Dutch. The common denominator is the need to survive in a cold wintetr climate.

[dila813]

Look up Protestants, there are many different types.

They don’t all have the belief in the individual pursuit of success.

This was very much an American Invention. When people think Protestant, they think of American Protestant not European.

Its not the same.

Remember, when the Pilgrims came they had a collective system?

Sorry, still don’t get the study.

[dila813]

This article and those like it are an attack on Capitalism since it’s underpinnings are Protestant.

[malkee]

For some reason, this reminded me of the old saw “America was built on the backs of slaves.” And I am Catholic.

[mountn man]

When the Pilgrims landed in 1620, they established a system of communal property. Within three years they had scrapped it, instituting private property instead. Hoover media fellow Tom Bethell tells the story.

---

There are three configurations of property rights: state, communal, and private property. Within a family, many goods are in effect communally owned. But when the number of communal members exceeds normal family size, as happens in tribes and communes, serious and intractable problems arise.
[...]
Thirty years old when he arrived in the New World, Bradford became the second governor of Plymouth ... and the most important figure in the early years of the colony. He recorded in his history the key passage on property relations in Plymouth and the way in which they were changed. His is the only surviving account of these matters.
[...]
The colonists hoped that the houses they built would be exempt from the division of wealth at the end of seven years; in addition, they sought two days a week in which to work on their own “particular” plots (much as collective farmers later had their own private plots in the Soviet Union). The Pilgrims would thereby avoid servitude. But the investors refused to allow these loopholes, undoubtedly worried that if the Pilgrims—three thousand miles away and beyond the reach of supervision—owned their own houses and plots, the investors would find it difficult to collect their due.
[...]
By the spring of 1623, the population of Plymouth can have been no larger than 150. But the colony was still barely able to feed itself, and little cargo was returning for the investors in England. On one occasion newcomers found that there was no bread at all, only fish or a piece of lobster and water. “So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery,” Bradford wrote in his key passage on property.
Having tried what Bradford called the “common course and condition”—the communal stewardship of the land demanded of them by their investors—Bradford reports that the community was afflicted by an unwillingness to work, by confusion and discontent, by a loss of mutual respect, and by a prevailing sense of slavery and injustice. And this among “godly and sober men.” In short, the experiment was a failure that was endangering the health of the colony.
[...]
The problem that inevitably arose was the formidable one of policing this division of labor: How to deal with those who did not pull their weight?
The Pilgrims had encountered the free-rider problem. Under the arrangement of communal property one might reasonably suspect that any additional effort might merely substitute for the lack of industry of others. And these “others” might well be able-bodied, too, but content to take advantage of the communal ownership by contributing less than their fair share. As we shall see, it is difficult to solve this problem without dividing property into individual or family-sized units. And this was the course of action that William Bradford wisely took.
PROPERTY IS PRIVATIZED
Bradford’s history of the colony records the decision:
At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to go in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number.
So the land they worked was converted into private property, which brought “very good success.” The colonists immediately became responsible for their own actions (and those of their immediate families), not for the actions of the whole community. Bradford also suggests in his history that more than land was privatized.
The system became self-policing. Knowing that the fruits of his labor would benefit his own family and dependents, the head of each household was given an incentive to work harder. He could know that his additional efforts would help specific people who depended on him. In short, the division of property established a proportion or “ratio” between act and consequence. Human action is deprived of rationality without it, and work will decline sharply as a result.
[...]
Property in Plymouth was further privatized in the years ahead. The housing and later the cattle were assigned to separate families, and provision was made for the inheritance of wealth. The colony flourished. Plymouth Colony was absorbed into the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and in the prosperous years that lay ahead, nothing more was heard of “the common course and condition.”

(This is an excerpt. Read more at http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3507051.html )

[LastNorwegian]

Russia.
Greek settlers (in antiquity) vs northern Europeans.
Romans vs German tribes
The middle East before and after the muslim conquest.

It’s not abot the cold or climate. It’s about all-consuming and ever-present hierarchies. It’s about how people think and what their values are. Does a man get status from praying 5 times a day, killing his enemies in fair battle or obtaining great wealth through his labour? Is work ‘honest’ or something fit for the underclass?

The Catholic church along with its orthodox counterparts had a presence in peoples lives that no protestant church has ever had. Like it or not, but religions and cultures carry a set of values. And the protestant values proved themselves more profitable at the time in question.

Not to mention the northern countries had more democratic political systems/less powerful kings.

No matter where you look the societies and colonies that sprang from Northern Europe (in the modern era) outperformed their southern counterparts. It is highly unlikely that such consistent results are a coincidence.

One cannot compare two ideologies in the same country for the simple reason that ideologies shape the very laws ond societies we live in. There is already a bias in your sample. Have the laws and customs been shaped by protestantism/catholicism and so on..? You can’t compare liberal majority cities vs republican majority cities in the US and expect any sort of sensible result. Republicanism/liberalism already influence the result at a higher level than work ethic.

[Flying Circus]

When people think Protestant, they think of American Protestant not European.
Huh? This is a study by a German/Italian in Britain concerning the work of a German and you think these folks are concerned only with American Protestantism?

I think that by Protestant, the author tends to mean Calvinist. At the same time, he is refuting a previous study that played up the “Protestant Work Ethic.” It seems like you are criticizing a study for refuting a study that uses the same criteria you seem to consider poorly defined.

[xzins]

I think that by Protestant, the author tends to mean Calvinist

The "protestors" at the time were all advocates of "reformation" doctrine.

Both Luther & Calvin were protestors and reformers. They both did accept the reformation doctrine of "predestination."

Max Weber, as great a sociaologist as he was, sort of missed the boat on this one. The reason the Protestants worked had nothing to do with "predestined to heaven so we might as well spend our time working." It was a response to their "sola scriptura" (only scripture) doctrine. The bible said they should make their own living with their own hands. So they did.

That's not to say that others did not do the same. It's to say that they had a different motivation for the most part.

[Gamecock]

Weber’s thesis proposes that the specifically Calvinist belief in predestination persuaded its adherents to pursue capitalism as an end in itself: there was nothing you could do to contribute to your salvation, so you might as well make money as an end in itself (and, in any case, a healthy bank balance could be a sign that you were among the elect).

Clearly someone who doesn't understand the origins of the Protestant work ethic.

FWIW, the Protestant work springs from the idea that we bring glory to God in all we do, to include or daily secular callings. We work hard because it glorifies God. The worldly outcome of hard work is that often times it does bring about economic well being.
This is 180 degree change from medieval Catholicism in which only church vocations were considered honorable.

While the idea of the Protestant work ethic has been wounded by modern Evangelicals and their return to the Catholic view, it does remain alive and well.

[Dumb_Ox]

Also, the decreasing importance of monkish organizations in dominating significant sectors of the economy helped (I have to admit some of them still make great beer!)

In one reading of history, the confiscation and redistribution of Church lands put the "social security trust" into the hands of opportunistic "Reforming" aristocrats, who then used their excess economic power to outbid small landowners. This and the destruction of the Church security net boosted the supply of a cheap, landless laboring class while also creating a wealthy class that could become investors.

[marshmallow]

FWIW, the Protestant work springs from the idea that we bring glory to God in all we do, to include or daily secular callings. We work hard because it glorifies God.

That's actually Catholic teaching. Yes, works are important and they do bring glory to God. Glad to hear you've seen the light. This teaching long predates the Reformation, unfortunately.

The Calvinist God, on the other hand, is in no way glorified by the works of man who is utterly corrupt and can add nothing to the already perfect splendor and glory of the Almighty, all powerful God.

[muawiyah]

Look, I stand by my statement. i just went through a detailed review of who, what, when, where for that whole period.

The release of the Jewish industrial and intellectual classes from Spain definitely had a positive impact on the rest of Europe ~ except South of Rome.

That area remained a Medieval mudhole right up to the 1960s.

Regarding Poland, they were totally destroyed as a nation state several times ~ jus' the way it is in the Second Millenium!

It's also not a piece of Northern Europe, but of Eastern Europe.

[Gamecock]

Not works.

Work, day to day activity. Building roads. Making shoes. Performing brain surgery.

As I said above, that is totally different than the medieval idea of only church vocations are have value.

Our work only glorifies God when seen through the lens of Christ.

And since you brought up works. Before faith our works are filthy rags. When we come to faith the works are pleasing to God.

Westminster Shorter Catechism:
Question 1 What is the chief end of man?
Answer: Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.

[the_conscience]

It was a response to their "sola scriptura" (only scripture) doctrine. The bible said they should make their own living with their own hands. So they did.

That's certainly part of it but not it's essence. God as providential ruler of the world CALLS people not only in a soteriological sense but as to vocation.

Here's a shortcut for Reformational doctrine: Guilt, Grace, and Gratitude. The Protestant work ethic is the Gratitude part of the Grace received.

[AD from SpringBay]

A work ethic is not a protestant theory, it is a Bible doctrine. It’s always interesting to look up passages about laziness and sloth.

[RFEngineer]

“America was made what it was by Catholics.”

Tribalist nonsense. However, you can look to Mexico and most of Latin America for countries if you want to correlate productive societies and religion. You might not like what you find, though.

[muawiyah]

BTW, the "Moors" really didn't leave the country. They "converted". In an earlier time when Spain was not a unitary state, you had this going on all the time. A new prince would take over and the people would become converts to his religion. By the late 1400s Spain improved under Ferdinand and Isabella by offering "conversion or leave" ~ so some people left. A review of any telephone or business manager lists in Morocco will give you an idea of where they went.

The "leave option" devastated the commercial classes in Spain Fur Shur but it eliminated the industrial classes entirely.

BTW, most folks aren't aware of it but Jews in Spain used a language called LADINO. Yiddish came later after they'd all left Spain. Anyway, many Jewish surnames appear to be strangely spelled "trade names" ~ and they are ~ they are spelled out after the conventions of LADINO. A good example is a surname I toss in every now and then ~ Schmidlap ~ in LADINO this German looking word means "paper maker" ~ a tradename that popped up in 14th century Spain. The "Schmid" is actually from "schmei de" meaning "maker of", "dyer" and "lap" meaning sheet, as sheet of paper. It has at least 20 different spellings that I've found ~ and there may be more.

Paper-making was a major industrial "mover" in the late Medieval period ~ had an effect rather like the computer on ours!

Spain kicked out the Schmidlaps because they wouldn't convert. They went through Belgium and the German states. They are all over the place. Some became Lutherans. Some are still Jewish. They carried the important technology of papermaking with them. One of them got into chemistry and launched the first known multi-stage rocket (I believe in the 1600s) .

Southern Europe lagged way behind after the Schmidlaps left Spain (along with all the other smart guys who knew how to make new things)

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“Look, I stand by my statement. i just went through a detailed review of who, what, when, where for that whole period.”

Not here you didn’t. Renaissance. That alone destroys your theory.

“The release of the Jewish industrial and intellectual classes from Spain definitely had a positive impact on the rest of Europe ~ except South of Rome.”

So you claim. It’s your theory. There seems to be no evidence for it.

“That area remained a Medieval mudhole right up to the 1960s.”

Don’t insult the Middle Ages by comparing it to modern Sicily. In the Middle Ages, Sicily was quite well off because of the Mediterranean trade. Trade routes would shift with the discovery of the New World. Sicily was left behind.

“Regarding Poland, they were totally destroyed as a nation state several times ~ jus’ the way it is in the Second Millenium!”

What? Poland was destroyed (twice) when its Jewish population was at its peak. Wouldn’t that tend to work against your theory?

“It’s also not a piece of Northern Europe, but of Eastern Europe.”

Did I say otherwise? And again, Scandinavia (that’s Northern Europe!) has had very few Jews in the last 1000 years and still does rather well economically. And Japan. And South Korea. And Taiwan. And now China.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“As I said above, that is totally different than the medieval idea of only church vocations are have value.”

That wasn’t a medieval idea. The people of the Middle Ages recognized labor - all labors - as having value. This is one of the reasons why there were guilds. Look at a illuminated book of hours, or stain glass windows and laborers of all types are shown adding to creation.

Nor surprisingly those who created beautiful things were more highly tauted than those who did not. Craftsmen were praied for their skills more than farmers, for instance.

[muawiyah]

The Renaissance was a “cultural” phenomenon. It had little to do with industrial development focusing as it did on earlier Greek and Roman development.

[marshmallow]

Not works. Work, day to day activity. Building roads. Making shoes. Performing brain surgery.

When done for the glory of God, these are indeed works and become salvific. There is no compartmentalization. All human activity, when animated by faith, becomes "works", whether it is feeding the poor or faithfully carrying out our daily duty in our employment.

As I said above, that is totally different than the medieval idea of only church vocations are have value.

Only Church vocations have value? Where did you get that idea? Sorry, that shtick won't fly. The Catholic Church has always taught that the priestly office is superior to the lay state but that both have their respective merits. This goes back to St. Paul and his doctrine of the Mystical Body when he says that "not all are teachers, not all are apostles, etc etc" but all contribute to the building up of the Body of Christ.

Our work only glorifies God when seen through the lens of Christ.

How does your work glorify God, exactly? You can't have it both ways. You can't claim that man is nothing and utterly corrupt and then claim that your work glorifies God.

Your work glorifies God, only, if through your free will, you voluntarily dedicate it to him and offer it to him. Therein lies the glory. That we freely offer it to him from our hearts.

A robot who has been predestined and preprogrammed offers no glory to God any more than a machine does. God wants our "yes" freely given.

And since you brought up works. Before faith our works are filthy rags. When we come to faith the works are pleasing to God.

True, that.

Westminster Shorter Catechism:
Question 1 What is the chief end of man?
Answer: Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.

Catholic Catechism:

THE LIFE OF MAN - TO KNOW AND LOVE GOD

1 God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Savior. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

2 So that this call should resound throughout the world, Christ sent forth the apostles he had chosen, commissioning them to proclaim the gospel: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."4 Strengthened by this mission, the apostles "went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it."5

3 Those who with God's help have welcomed Christ's call and freely responded to it are urged on by love of Christ to proclaim the Good News everywhere in the world. This treasure, received from the apostles, has been faithfully guarded by their successors. All Christ's faithful are called to hand it on from generation to generation, by professing the faith, by living it in fraternal sharing, and by celebrating it in liturgy and prayer.6

[RegulatorCountry]

America only became the powerhouse it did when the Irish, Italians, Polish, Hungarians and all the other ethinicities came to this country and worked in the mines, mills, stockyards and everywhere else. America was made what it was by Catholics.

While it's admirable to want to claim a part of the success that is (was?) America, and Catholics have played notable roles, as have members of every distinct group of people, this statement is disagreeable.

The waves of immigration to which you refer, were in response to a need. That need arose due to many factors, not the least of which was the efforts of all who came before, in building up the country, being favorable to business ventures, honoring contracts and just generally being willing to work for success.

This goes back to the earliest days of the colonial era, which was overwhelmingly Protestant. This continent was populated in large part by people fleeing religious persecution. As far as the colonial era, bias against Catholics was common, due to the perceptions of those who had established themselves here seeing Catholicism in the role of their persecutors in "the old country."

There was, however, one of the colonies, that was established by and for Catholics, who were themselves fleeing England in the early colonial era, with "roundheads" and "papists" see-sawing back and forth, causing much conflict, so the story of the country is not entirely one of Protestantism. That colony was Maryland. Mary's Land. There were Catholics who played a part in establishing our nation as a constitutional republic, under our Constitution.

Saying that immigrants in the late 1800's and early 1900's "made" America, though, is as questionable as the claim from several years ago, by advocates for "undocumented" immigrants, that they built this country.

The one single thing, if there is a single thing, that "made" this country, when you get right down to it, is the Constitution and those who fought and died for it.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“The Renaissance was a “cultural” phenomenon.”

No. It was not a phenomenon. It was a movement or great development. And in case you didn’t know, and I bet you didn’t, “cultural” things often come with great material shifts: industrialization, trade, ship building, manufacturing, etc. It is not an accident that the age of exploration began DURING the Renaissance. Did that ever occur to you? Go to any Italian city look at the city Renaissance era halls, cathedrals made of stone, fortifications, canals, ports, piazzas, etc. and tell me it’s just ‘cultural’. No, it was INDUSTRIAL. Ever read Ross King’s Brunelleschi’s Dome: How a Renaissance Genius Reinvented Architecture? He goes into wonderful and fascinating detail about the connections that the artists and architects had with industry. They all had to work together and produce the new tools necessary for the construction of the world’s largest dome (at that time). To write that (and so much more) off as merely a ‘cultural phenomenon’ is bizarre.

“It had little to do with industrial development focusing as it did on earlier Greek and Roman development.”

You’re completely wrong. You can read Luca Mola’s
The Silk Industry of Renaissance Venice (that’s TEXTILES!), or Evelyn S. Welch’s Shopping in the Renaissance: Consumer Cultures in Italy, 1400-1600 (which shows the connection between consumer demand and rapidly responsive industry) or Lisa Jardine’s Worldly Goods: A New History of the Renaissance (which shows the amazing international trade that went on), etc. None of this was possible without industry. Ships, ports, ropes, sails, trading houses, a wool industry, a silk industry started by people who had to learn from the Chinese!, bankers, lawyers, government officials, paper makers, contracts, etc., etc. etc.

[muawiyah]

Exploration ~ started by the Portuguese (an Iberian country) and carried out incredibly successfully by the Spanish (also an Iberian country).

Italy did what? They lost Columbus to Spain (he was probably a member of the former ruling family in Anjou (ie the Valois). They lost Leonardo to France (courtesy of the Duke of Brittany).

The major languages in America are, of course, Spanish, Portuguese, English, French ~ not Italian.

You want you should learn Italian, go to Indiana University ~ they teach all of'em.

BTW, the Greeks didn't do all that well for about 500 years after they were taken over by the Turks.

You must take a position here ~ we are speaking of the Protestant Work Ethic ~ my contention was it was a derivative of a different sort of event that broke down on the lines of official national religion. The official Catholic countries had a hard time keeping Jewish intellectuals and engineers. The official Protestant countries had a less difficult time keeping Jewish intellectuals and engineers.

Being an engineer was big time stuff in an age without many engineers. Wars were fought over Leonardo da Vinci, not because he painted pretty pictures, or did disections ~ rather, they were fought so that he could teach engineering ~ for example "nuts and bolts" were a really new high tech thing. He invented them (others invented the screw earlier). The King of France built him a univesity. Christopher Columbus was actually involved in the battle of Padua ~ working for Rene of Anjou.

Regarding shipping, the discovery of iron in Sweden/Finland ~ a vast storehouse of iron unkown in any other place on Earth ~ definitely changed things.

It doesn't take much work to find the smart guys fleeing Greece and Italy, and then finally, fleeing Spain because of a self-inflicted excess interest in religious purity.