Divine Providence in Early Modern Economic Thought
本书考察了16至18世纪经济作家如何运用基督教天意教义，分析其从传统神学观念向自然神论和世俗化转变的过程，对经济思想史研究者有重要参考价值。
A vital tenet of Christian theology from its origins has been the doctrine of divine providence. How the Church's teaching on providence has impacted economic discourse has largely been ignored. Jacob Viner's (1972) study, the only significant treatment of providence in economic thought for several generations, addressed how “providentialism” was used in early modern economic treatises to shape national policies with respect to trade and inequality. Divine Providence in Early Modern Economic Thought aims to expand beyond Viner's contribution by analyzing how the classic view of divine providence was drawn upon by sixteenth- and seventeenth-century economic writers and then transformed by Enlightenment suppositions. In so doing, Joost Hengstmengel seeks to demonstrate that though providence was naturalized and demystified, belief in divine purposeful interaction with the world persisted and was applied in economic reasoning well into the nineteenth century.Divine Providence provides eight chapters in support of its thesis. After overviewing the rise of political economy as a science in the introduction, the book surveys the Greco-Roman and Christian origins of providence in chapter 2. Of particular note is its treatment of biblical teaching on providence, which is marked by an emphasis on God's creation and sustaining of the world and active direction of historical events. Patristic and Scholastic sources elaborated on the significance of God's providential intervention in history by means of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. By the seventeenth century, the classic (traditional) view of providence was established in both Roman Catholic and Protestant creeds. It affirmed the personal activity of God to accomplish both general care for the world and spiritual benefits in particular for Christian believers by directing all of reality simultaneously in a manner that was not fully comprehensible to humans.Hengstmengel identifies several core responses by “moderate Enlightenment” figures that shaped the economic interpretation of providence in early modern Europe. Emerging in association with the Deist movement, thinkers such as Bernard Mandeville, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, and David Hume held that the regularities of nature are best seen as acts of general providence, and affirmed that God's will was accomplished only by use of natural means (thus rejecting the notion of divine supernatural intervention, such as miracles, associated with special providence). Providence was given a fundamental end of fostering benevolence toward humanity. It depended upon human cooperation to realize a range of opportunities implanted in the creation by divine purpose.How was this perspective of natural theology on providence employed in addressing economic questions? Evincing a bilateral relationship, theologians drew on commerce for examples of God's working in the world, while simultaneously “natural-theological language found its way into the economic literature of the period” (44). For example, God's ordering of the natural world for long-distance trade through means such as the oceans, winds facilitating long-distance shipping, and coasts furnished with natural harbors is affirmed by the Protestant dissenter (and political economist) Daniel Defoe and John Wesley, the founder of Methodism. In turn the English economic pamphleteer Gerard Malynes attributes to providence the centrality of navigation for trade, and adds, “God by his divine providence hath made all things subject to number, weight, measure,” facilitating the counting, weighing, and measuring required in setting contractual terms of exchange (50).Divine Providence explores particular economic themes that draw on providence in the next five chapters. These include international trade, the division of labor, value and price, self-interest, and poverty and inequality, respectively. In regards to international trade, English and French mercantile handbooks avowed the universal economy doctrine: God had fashioned creation to encourage commerce between nations by unevenly endowing them with resources so that they would be “mutually dependent” in trade (57). Yet a key theme for numerous mercantilist treatises was the particular economic advantages held by their own country for its own benefit. Divine Providence rightly observes a tension in their works in this era of “jealousy of trade,” for “the cosmopolitan idea of a divinely sanctioned international economy seems hard to reconcile with the nationalism and exclusivism that characterized much of its economic thought” (73–74).Both the social division of labor and the self-interest of individuals were understood to be regulated by divine order. Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the English Puritans emphasized that each person has a duty to work in the calling that divine providence has bestowed on them. Eighteenth-century political economists appealed to the significance of the providential provision of differing tasks in society as they sought to demonstrate how the benefits of specialization were dispersed across society. Similarly, a range of writers claimed providential design ensured that the pursuit of self-interest in economic activity accomplished the common social good. Josiah Tucker, Pierre de Boisguilbert, and Ferdinando Galiani each presented a legitimation of self-interest that anticipated Adam Smith's conception of the invisible hand. They offered the market as a salutary example of “spontaneous economic order” stemming from divine providence (151).Early modern treatises on providence sought to unpack the mystery of wide economic disparities found under the domain of a benevolent God. The Protestant reformer Calvin declared, “The unequal distribution of material goods was a special dispensation of divine providence” (171). Hengstmengel affirms such an approach challenged the dominant theme of “most early theologians,” who stressed how economic inequality was not part of the Creator's intention but arose from “the injustice and excessive accumulation of men” (181). Yet Divine Providence does not offer any representative Patristic examples to support this claim. In fact, a dominant Patristic theme is that the divine design is for economic inequality to give the rich a spiritually beneficial opportunity by sharing out of their abundance with the poor (Rhee 2012). Divine Providence is on more solid ground in showing that eighteenth-century Scottish and French Enlightenment thought did not invoke the need for economic reforms to reduce inequality but instead appealed to the benefits of peace and order that flowed from divinely appointed socioeconomic disparities.In its final chapter, Divine Providence identifies the secularization that characterizes the transformation of the traditional conception of providence in early modern economic literature. In Hengstmengel's framing of the phenomenon of secularization, it is manifested in the use of a natural theology framework that for the most part lacks a direct appeal to the Bible or Church teaching. Divine providence is depicted “as an impersonal force” (202) that makes provision not for “spiritual salvation” but human “material wellbeing” (203). A “providential optimism” (29) buttresses the prospect of incremental economic progress, particularly according to Scottish Enlightenment authors. These observations are relevant for the issue of Smith's position on providence, which Hengstmengel discusses briefly. He observes that in The Wealth of Nations, Smith “used providential language sparingly” (206), not employing it with respect to international trade or the division of labor. He applies it to economic topics only in addressing self-interest (Smith [1776] 1981) and inequality (Smith [1759] 1982); in both cases it is linked to the metaphor of the invisible hand. Given the prevalence of “economic providentialism” (205) in the eighteenth century, Divine Providence raises the need for a deeper understanding of Smith's stance on providence and the economic order. While there is a growing literature on this particular topic, Hengstmengel's thesis more broadly suggests significant questions for further exploration regarding how the Scottish Enlightenment and Smith's work in particular mark a key turning point on the path of the secularization of economic thought.Divine Providence has several outstanding features. Hengstmengel's work makes the relevant primary sources the central element in its analysis. Indeed, one of the key strengths of the book is its perceptive, detailed exploration of the writings of a range of contributors, including English political economists, French Catholic theologians (including the Jansenists), Dutch ministers, German Protestant natural-law philosophers, cameralists, and Scottish Enlightenment moral philosophers. In addition, a lucid explanation most often undergirds Divine Providence's case, which Hengstmengel makes carefully by avoiding overstatement and shapes with nuance. This volume offers a laudatory examination of the “providential interpretation of the economic order” (7) of the early modern era and a largely persuasive argument for its transformation over several centuries. It is worthy of careful consideration by historians of economic thought who will be rewarded with a salient entry into this subject and encouragement toward further research on the theological origins of economic reasoning.