While ground-breaking upon its introduction to the academic world, several problems in the Weber thesis have mostly discredited it to this day, and Andrew Greeley says that “a review of recent studies indicates that this hypothesis is anything but fruitful. It is suggested that the survival of the Protestant Ethic as a testable theory is due to... an oversimplification of history, an ignorance of the pluralistic nature of Catholicism, and a refusal to be persuaded by empirical data.”1
One significant problem appears to be in several underlying assumptions he has about capitalism. For instance, he says that “the capitalism of to-day, which has come to dominate economic life, educates and selects the economic subjects which it needs through a process of economic survival of the fittest.”2 This is a very optimistic view of early 20th century economics. He does not seem to consider the possibility that perhaps there is a significant aristocratic element to capitalism, whereby one's social standing and inheritance plays a significant part in his success. In this instance, it is not “survival of the fittest.” If it is not the case that truly the most successful workers will reap the greatest benefit, then the Protestant work ethic is not a viable answer as to why Catholics were less financially successful.
Furthermore, Weber's conclusion about the Protestant work ethic within Calvinist circles is dubious. So the argument goes, financial success is believed by Calvinists to be a sign of predestined salvation. Weber puts it this way: “in order to attain that self-confidence [in salvation,] intense worldly activity is recommended as the most suitable means.”3 Therefore, those who adhere to this theology would work hard in order to see if they have they are one of God's chosen.
This would, however, fatally suggest that those who do not reap as much success in capitalism would therefore conclude that they are not predestined to be saved. In this instance, any work ethic would simply melt into nihilism: why work if you are going to be in hell, anyway? If it is the case that “in the Protestant Ethic tradition a man [is] directly responsible for his own fortunes,”4 then why is there not a disproportionate number of people who live in Calvinist communities and are depressed, impoverished and irreligious? This, plus the fact that Calvinists frowned upon giving to charity, would demand that their communities yielded far more severe cases of poverty than Catholics. Weber's data, nor any data from the era, show this discontinuity.5
Another problem, and one that has resulted in the discrediting of the Weber thesis in many peoples' eyes, is that the phenomenon of the Protestant/Catholic financial gap appeared to be unique to Europe.6 On other continents, the difference was not so stark, especially in North America. If it is indeed fundamental Protestant theology that has resulted in the development of capitalism, why would this not be the case everywhere in the world, and only Europe? Though Weber only claims to be tackling the question of a certain period in Europe, there is no reason why the Protestant work ethic would not apply elsewhere, for Luther's secular vocations and Calvin's predestination are not confined to only the believers on the mainland.
