Notes
81. Baxter (Saints' Everlasting Rest, p. 12) repudiates this with precisely the same reasoning as the Jesuits: the body must have what it needs, otherwise one becomes a slave to it.
82. This ideal is clearly present, especially for Quakerism, in the first period of its development, as has already been shown in important points by Weingarten in his Englische Revolutionskirchen. Also Barclay's thorough discussion (op. cit., pp. 519 ff., 533) shows it very clearly. To be avoided are: (i) Worldly vanity ; thus all ostentation, frivolity, and use of things having no practical purpose, or which are valuable only for their scarcity (i.e. for vanity's sake). (2) Any unconscientious use of wealth, such as excessive expenditure for not very urgent needs above necessary provision for the real needs of life and for the future. The Quaker was, so to speak, a living law of marginal utility. "Moderate use of the creature" is definitely permissible, but in particular one might pay attention to the quality and durability of materials so long as it did not lead to vanity. On all this compare Morgenblatt für gebildete Leser, 1846, pp. 216 ff. Especially on comfort and solidity among the Quakers, compare Schneckenburger, Vorlesungen, pp. 96 f.
83. Adapted by Weber from Faust, Act I. Goethe there depicts Mephistopheles as "Die Kraft, die stets das Böse will, und stets das Gute schafft".—Translator's Note.
84. It has already been remarked that we cannot here enter into the question of the class relations of these religious movements (see the essays on the Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen). In order to see, however, that for example Baxter, of whom we make so much use in this study, did not see things solely as a bourgeois of his time, it will suflSce to recall that even for him in the order of the religious value of callings, after the learned professions comes the husband-man, and only then mariners, clothiers, booksellers, tailors, etc. Also, under mariners (characteristically, enough) he probably thinks at least as often of fishermen as of shipowners. In this regard several things in the Talmud are in a different class. Compare, for instance, in Wünsche, Babyl. Talmud, II, pp. 20, 21, the sayings of Rabbi Eleasar, which though not unchallenged, all contend in effect that business is better than agriculture. In between see II, 2, p. 68, on the wise investment of capital: one-third in land, one-third in merchandise, and one-third in cash.
For those to whom no causal explanation is adequate without an economic (or materialistic as it is unfortunately still called) interpretation, it may be remarked that I consider the influence of economic development on the fate of religious ideas to be very important and shall later attempt to show how in our case the process of mutual adaptation of the "two took place. On the other haiid, those religious ideas themselves simply cannot be deduced from economic circumstances. They are in themselves, that is beyond doubt, the
