ECONOMICS AS RELIGION: The Godfather is not about the mafia, but about capital

Guido Alfani / unibocconi.it

Protestants believed that economics and prayer were closely connected, and this was brilliantly explored by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. The philosophy of capitalism’s economy as a religion was described by philosopher Walter Benjamin. American economist and Nobel laureate Wassily Leontief pointed out that economists do not confirm their theories in the same way physicists do, but rather by simply taking objective data into account. If Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan had not «bought into» Milton Friedman’s faith in the advantages of the free market, he might have remained a minor scholar. The economy, like religion, is a matter of faith. For example, it is by no means indifferent to it whether you are a Christian and who your godfather is.

NOT BY THE MAFIA ALONE…

uido Alfani is a professor of economic history at Bocconi University in Milan. Specializing in historical demography and the study of economic inequality, he is the author of a number of highly unusual studies. His work helps us better understand the past and the present, allowing us to view economic processes from an unexpected angle. Alfani shows how deeply they are rooted in the spiritual and cultural sphere. Take, for example, the phenomenon of the «godfather». Many of us may have one, and many of us may ourselves be godparents to someone.

Under the spell of Francis Ford Coppola’s brilliant film The Godfather, when we utter these words we mostly think of the Italian mafia. At the same time, we fail to realize just how profoundly godparenthood influenced the economic life of medieval — and ultimately modern — Europe. Long before mass culture began associating it with organized crime, baptism significantly reshaped social relations, fostering trust between professional and estate-based groups. In essence, it became a mechanism of social integration that favored the development of the European economy and trade.

THREE TYPES OF SOCIAL TIES

There are several types of social ties. Strong ties connect blood relatives and close friends; weak ties link neighbors and coworkers. The rite of baptism represents a third type of «fictive», or spiritual, kinship, emphasizing shared spiritual values, mutual assistance, and gift exchange. The formation of the system of godparental relations was especially influenced by the Council of Trent, convened at the initiative of Pope Paul III on December 13, 1545. Before the council, spiritual kinship created a flexible society that was not so hierarchical. A single child could have a large number of godparents.

In Swabia, for example, having an economically active member of the community in the role of a «godparent-intermediary» was quite advantageous, since they acted as a guarantor of fair trade transactions. In Greece, farmers — whose social status was considered higher than that of herders — often became godparents to the children of shepherds. A side effect of this phenomenon was a fair exchange of the products produced by these population groups.

IS THE GODFATHER UNPLEASING TO GOD?

Protestants were the first to see in such relationships something resembling a godless «mafia structure». Martin Luther objected to baptism at an infant’s age. He considered baptism an insufficient condition for salvation and insisted on abolishing the exclusive institutions of spiritual kinship. After all, all Christians are already brothers and sisters in Christ by definition. Seeking an influential and wealthy godfather is a sign of mercantile behavior unworthy of a Christian. And in many respects, judging by the realities of that time, Luther was right. Indeed, even today, when choosing godparents for a child, we often look for a «good match» — a long-term and reliable life support in the person of the godfather.

It should be noted that before the Council of Trent there were not just two godparents. There could be many, and they differed greatly in social status. At the same time, the active participation of wealthy and influential aristocrats in the baptism of children from non-aristocratic families was the norm. This resembled the conclusion of an agreement for unconditional mutual assistance, but on a spiritual rather than a notarial basis. Acting as guarantors of the child before God, godparents gave the child a name and, from early childhood, made them a full member of their «network of trust», thereby determining their socio-economic role and career trajectory.

THE RUPTURE OF A UNIFIED SOCIAL FABRIC

The decisions of the bishops of the Council of Trent, which were a response to the reproaches of the leaders of the Reformation, produced a real revolution within the Catholic spiritual community. They led to the destruction of the familiar «network of trust». The permitted number of godparents was reduced to two under the ostensibly noble pretext of combating «spiritual incest». The principal — and perhaps even the sole — meaning of godparenthood was declared to be responsibility for the Christian upbringing of the child.

At first glance, the Church seemed to have done everything right, demonstrating concern for the spiritual development and moral character of its flock. However, an unpleasant side effect of these innovations was social alienation among the four main strata of society: sengnears (the nobility), masters (members of craft guilds), reverendus (the clergy), and the lower estate (everyone else). The baptismal reform tore apart their spiritual unity, and communication between these groups ceased to be fluid, provoking social egoism. Previously, godparents had performed a crucial social function, supporting their godchildren in the most difficult life situations, such as the death of loved ones or obtaining an education. Now, this involvement gradually declined.

THE FIRST STEP TOWARD WOMEN’S EMANCIPATION

Women were the ones who clearly benefited from the decisions of the Council of Trent. The average age at which a man became a godparent ranged from 18 to 22 years. The baptism of an infant, the act of spiritual adoption, served as an indicator of adulthood and spiritual maturity. But after Trent, «resource-rich» men increasingly lost interest in participating in this sacrament. Their wives and daughters more and more often took up the role. Before the Council, in some regions women were considered «ecclesiastically deficient» and were forbidden to baptize children.

By the end of the sixteenth century, however, the situation had changed, and women became actively involved in forming ties of spiritual kinship. Young women often sought to become godmothers even before marriage. In this way, they sent potential suitors a signal of their readiness for motherhood and for a responsible marriage. Moreover, this represented a first step toward a kind of emancipation, because a godmother’s «career» granted both married and unmarried women a certain degree of freedom and opened up opportunities for social creativity.

BACK TO PRE-CHRISTIAN TIMES?

As different social groups became isolated from one another, the nobility began choosing godparents from among the nobility, notaries from among notaries, and artisans from members of their own guilds. But what certainly did not change with the onset of the Modern era was the attitude toward spiritual kinship as a mechanism that provides business protection and social support. Here, even Luther and other leaders of the Reformation proved powerless — so important were the rituals of godparenthood for trust-based entrepreneurship and for the business system as a whole.

Yet since, ultimately, it is safest to trust one’s relatives, a peculiar mix of blood and spiritual kinship emerged. In a sense, this marks a return to pre-Christian notions. Today we see that in many families parents prefer to invite close relatives to be godparents to their children — they are far less likely to disappear from the life horizon of their spiritual charges. Thus, before our eyes, spiritual kinship is gradually becoming indistinguishable from blood kinship, ceasing to be a form and foundation for broader social interaction. But if you can trust only your family, this will inevitably affect the nature of economic relations in society as well.

Original research: