Itwillbetothepoint，however，tonotethegeneraleconomiccharacterofdevoutconsumption，incomparisonwithconsumptionforotherpurposes。Anindicationoftherangeofmotivesandpurposesfromwhichdevoutconsumptionofgoodsproceedswillhelptowardanappreciationofthevaluebothofthisconsumptionitselfandofthegeneralhabitofmindtowhichitiscongenial。Thereisastrikingparallelism，ifnotratherasubstantialidentityofmotive，betweentheconsumptionwhichgoestotheserviceofananthropomorphicdivinityandthatwhichgoestotheserviceofagentlemanofleisurechieftainorpatriarch——intheupperclassofsocietyduringthebarbarianculture。Bothinthecaseofthechieftainandinthatofthedivinitythereareexpensiveedificessetapartforthebehoofofthepersonserved。Theseedifices，aswellasthepropertieswhichsupplementthemintheservice，mustnotbecommoninkindorgrade；theyalwaysshowalargeelementofconspicuouswaste。
Itmayalsobenotedthatthedevoutedificesareinvariablyofanarchaiccastintheirstructureandfittings。Soalsotheservants，bothofthechieftainandofthedivinity，mustappearinthepresenceclothedingarmentsofaspecial，ornatecharacter。Thecharacteristiceconomicfeatureofthisapparelisamorethanordinarilyaccentuatedconspicuouswaste，togetherwiththesecondaryfeature——moreaccentuatedinthecaseofthepriestlyservantsthaninthatoftheservantsorcourtiersofthebarbarianpotentate——thatthiscourtdressmustalwaysbeinsomedegreeofanarchaicfashion。Alsothegarmentswornbythelaymembersofthecommunitywhentheycomeintothepresence，shouldbeofamoreexpensivekindthantheireverydayapparel。Here，again，theparallelismbetweentheusageofthechieftain’saudiencehallandthatofthesanctuaryisfairlywellmarked。Inthisrespectthereisrequiredacertainceremonial“cleanness“ofattire，theessentialfeatureofwhich，intheeconomicrespect，isthatthegarmentswornontheseoccasionsshouldcarryaslittlesuggestionasmaybeofanyindustrialoccupationorofanyhabitualaddictiontosuchemploymentsasareofmaterialuse。
Thisrequirementofconspicuouswasteandofceremonialcleannessfromthetracesofindustryextendsalsototheapparel，andinalessdegreetothefood，whichisconsumedonsacredholidays；thatistosay，ondayssetapart——tabu——forthedivinityorforsomememberofthelowerranksofthepreternaturalleisureclass。Ineconomictheory，sacredholidaysareobviouslytobeconstruedasaseasonofvicariousleisureperformedforthedivinityorsaintinwhosenamethetabuisimposedandtowhosegoodreputetheabstentionfromusefuleffortonthesedaysisconceivedtoinure。Thecharacteristicfeatureofallsuchseasonsofdevoutvicariousleisureisamoreorlessrigidtabuonallactivitythatisofhumanuse。Inthecaseoffast-daystheconspicuousabstentionfromgainfuloccupationsandfromallpursuitsthat(materially)furtherhumanlifeisfurtheraccentuatedbycompulsoryabstinencefromsuchconsumptionaswouldconducetothecomfortorthefullnessoflifeoftheconsumer。
Itmayberemarked，parenthetically，thatsecularholidaysareofthesameorigin，byslightlyremoterderivation。Theyshadeoffbydegreesfromthegenuinelysacreddays，throughanintermediateclassofsemi-sacredbirthdaysofkingsandgreatmenwhohavebeeninsomemeasurecanonized，tothedeliberatelyinventedholidaysetaparttofurtherthegoodreputeofsomenotableeventorsomestrikingfact，towhichitisintendedtodohonor，orthegoodfameofwhichisfelttobeinneedofrepair。Theremoterrefinementintheemploymentofvicariousleisureasameansofaugmentingthegoodreputeofaphenomenonordatumisseenatitsbestinitsverylatestapplication。A
dayofvicariousleisurehasinsomecommunitiesbeensetapartasLaborDay。Thisobservanceisdesignedtoaugmenttheprestigeofthefactoflabor，bythearchaic，predatorymethodofacompulsoryabstentionfromusefuleffort。Tothisdatumoflabor-in-generalisimputedthegoodreputeattributabletothepecuniarystrengthputinevidencebyabstainingfromlabor。
Sacredholidays，andholidaysgenerally，areofthenatureofatributeleviedonthebodyofthepeople。Thetributeispaidinvicariousleisure，andthehonorificeffectwhichemergesisimputedtothepersonorthefactforwhosegoodreputetheholidayhasbeeninstituted。Suchatitheofvicariousleisureisaperquisiteofallmembersofthepreternaturalleisureclassandisindispensabletotheirgoodfame。Unsaintqu’onnech鬽epasisindeedasaintfallenonevildays。
Besidesthistitheofvicariousleisureleviedonthelaity，therearealsospecialclassesofpersons——thevariousgradesofpriestsandhierodules——whosetimeiswhollysetapartforasimilarservice。Itisnotonlyincumbentonthepriestlyclasstoabstainfromvulgarlabor，especiallysofarasitislucrativeorisapprehendedtocontributetothetemporalwell-beingofmankind。Thetabuinthecaseofthepriestlyclassgoesfartherandaddsarefinementintheformofaninjunctionagainsttheirseekingworldlygainevenwhereitmaybehadwithoutdebasingapplicationtoindustry。Itisfelttoheunworthyoftheservantofthedivinity，orratherunworthythedignityofthedivinitywhoseservantheis，thatheshouldseekmaterialgainortakethoughtfortemporalmatters。“OfallcontemptiblethingsamanwhopretendstobeapriestofGodandisapriesttohisowncomfortsandambitionsisthemostcontemptible。“Thereisalineofdiscrimination，whichacultivatedtasteinmattersofdevoutobservancefindslittledifficultyindrawing，betweensuchactionsandconductasconducetothefullnessofhumanlifeandsuchasconducetothegoodfameoftheanthropomorphicdivinity；andtheactivityofthepriestlyclass，intheidealbarbarianscheme，fallswhollyonthehithersideofthisline。Whatfallswithintherangeofeconomicsfallsbelowtheproperlevelofsolicitudeofthepriesthoodinitsbestestate。Suchapparentexceptionstothisruleasareafforded，forinstance，bysomeofthemedievalordersofmonks(themembersofwhichactuallylaboredtosomeusefulend)，scarcelyimpugntherule。Theseoutlyingordersofthepriestlyclassarenotasacerdotalelementinthefullsenseoftheterm。Anditisnoticeablealsothatthesedoubtfullysacerdotalorders，whichcountenancedtheirmembersinearningaliving，fellintodisreputethroughoffendingthesenseofproprietyinthecommunitieswheretheyexisted。
Thepriestshouldnotputhishandtomechanicallyproductivework；butheshouldconsumeinlargemeasure。Butevenasregardshisconsumptionitistobenotedthatitshouldtakesuchformsasdonotobviouslyconducetohisowncomfortorfullnessoflife；itshouldconformtotherulesgoverningvicariousconsumption，asexplainedunderthatheadinanearlierchapter。Itisnotordinarilyingoodformforthepriestlyclasstoappearwellfedorinhilariousspirits。Indeed，inmanyofthemoreelaboratecultstheinjunctionagainstotherthanvicariousconsumptionbythisclassfrequentlygoessofarastoenjoinmortificationoftheflesh。Andeveninthosemoderndenominationswhichhavebeenorganizedunderthelatestformulationsofthecreed，inamodernindustrialcommunity，itisfeltthatalllevityandavowedzestintheenjoymentofthegoodthingsofthisworldisalientothetrueclericaldecorum。
Whateversuggeststhattheseservantsofaninvisiblemasterarelivingalife，notofdevotiontotheirmaster’sgoodfame，butofapplicationtotheirownends，jarsharshlyonoursensibilitiesassomethingfundamentallyandeternallywrong。
Theyareaservantclass，although，beingservantsofaveryexaltedmaster，theyrankhighinthesocialscalebyvirtueofthisborrowedlight。Theirconsumptionisvicariousconsumption；
andsince，intheadvancedcults，theirmasterhasnoneedofmaterialgain，theiroccupationisvicariousleisureinthefullsense。“Whetherthereforeyeeat，ordrink，orwhatsoeveryedo，doalltothegloryofGod。“Itmaybeaddedthatsofarasthelaityisassimilatedtothepriesthoodintherespectthattheyareconceivedtoheservantsofthedivinity。sofarthisimputedvicariouscharacterattachesalsotothelayman’slife。Therangeofapplicationofthiscorollaryissomewhatwide。Itappliesespeciallytosuchmovementsforthereformorrehabilitationofthereligiouslifeasareofanaustere，pietistic，asceticcast——wherethehumansubjectisconceivedtoholdhislifebyadirectserviletenurefromhisspiritualsovereign。Thatistosay，wheretheinstitutionofthepriesthoodlapses，orwherethereisanexceptionallylivelysenseoftheimmediateandmasterfulpresenceofthedivinityintheaffairsoflife，therethelaymanisconceivedtostandinanimmediateservilerelationtothedivinity，andhislifeisconstruedtobeaperformanceofvicariousleisuredirectedtotheenhancementofhismaster’srepute。Insuchcasesofreversionthereisareturntotheunmediatedrelationofsubservience，asthedominantfactofthedevoutattitude。Theemphasisistherebythrowonanaustereanddiscomfortingvicariousleisure，totheneglectofconspicuousconsumptionasameansofgrace。
Adoubtwillpresentitselfastothefulllegitimacyofthischaracterizationofthesacerdotalschemeoflife，onthegroundthataconsiderableproportionofthemodernpriesthooddepartsfromtheschemeinmanydetails。Theschemedoesnotholdgoodfortheclergyofthosedenominationswhichhaveinsomemeasuredivergedfromtheoldestablishedscheduleofbeliefsorobservances。Thesetakethought，atleastostensiblyorpermissively，forthetemporalwelfareofthelaity，aswellasfortheirown。Theirmanneroflife，notonlyintheprivacyoftheirownhousehold，butoftenevenbeforethepublic，doesnotdifferinanextremedegreefromthatofsecular-mindedpersons，eitherinitsostensibleausterityorinthearchaismofitsapparatus。Thisistruestforthosedenominationsthathavewanderedthefarthest。Tothisobjectionitistobesaidthatwehaveheretodonotwithadiscrepancyinthetheoryofsacerdotallife，butwithanimperfectconformitytotheschemeonthepartofthisbodyofclergy。Theyarebutapartialandimperfectrepresentativeofthepriesthood，andmustnotbetakenasexhibitingthesacerdotalschemeoflifeinanauthenticandcompetentmanner。Theclergyofthesectsanddenominationsmightbecharacterizedasahalf-castepriesthood，orapriesthoodinprocessofbecomingorofreconstitution。Suchapriesthoodmaybeexpectedtoshowthecharacteristicsofthesacerdotalofficeonlyasblendedandobscuredwithalienmotivesandtraditions，duetothedisturbingpresenceofotherfactorsthanthoseofanimismandstatusinthepurposesoftheorganizationstowhichthisnon-conformingfractionofthepriesthoodbelongs。
Appealmaybetakendirecttothetasteofanypersonwithadiscriminatingandcultivatedsenseofthesacerdotalproprieties，ortotheprevalentsenseofwhatconstitutesclericaldecoruminanycommunityatallaccustomedtothinkortopasscriticismonwhataclergymanmayormaynotdowithoutblame。Eveninthemostextremelysecularizeddenominations，thereissomesenseofadistinctionthatshouldbeobservedbetweenthesacerdotalandthelayschemeoflife。Thereisnopersonofsensibilitybutfeelsthatwherethemembersofthisdenominationalorsectarianclergydepartfromtraditionalusage，inthedirectionofalessaustereorlessarchaicdemeanorandapparel，theyaredepartingfromtheidealofpriestlydecorum。
ThereisprobablynocommunityandnosectwithintherangeoftheWesterncultureinwhichtheboundsofpermissibleindulgencearenotdrawnappreciablycloserfortheincumbentofthepriestlyofficethanforthecommonlayman。Ifthepriest’sownsenseofsacerdotalproprietydoesnoteffectuallyimposealimit，theprevalentsenseoftheproprietiesonthepartofthecommunitywillcommonlyassertitselfsoobtrusivelyastoleadtohisconformityorhisretirementfromoffice。
Fewifanymembersofanybodyofclergy，itmaybeadded，wouldavowedlyseekanincreaseofsalaryforgain’ssake；andifsuchavowalwereopenlymadebyaclergyman，itwouldbefoundobnoxioustothesenseofproprietyamonghiscongregation。Itmayalsobenotedinthisconnectionthatnoonebutthescoffersandtheveryobtusearenotinstinctivelygrievedinwardlyatajestfromthepulpit；andthattherearenonewhoserespectfortheirpastordoesnotsufferthroughanymarkoflevityonhispartinanyconjunctureoflife，exceptitbelevityofapalpablyhistrionickind——aconstrainedunbendingofdignity。
Thedictionpropertothesanctuaryandtothepriestlyofficeshouldalsocarrylittleifanysuggestionofeffectiveeverydaylife，andshouldnotdrawuponthevocabularyofmoderntradeorindustry。Likewise，one’ssenseoftheproprietiesisreadilyoffendedbytoodetailedandintimateahandlingofindustrialandotherpurelyhumanquestionsatthehandsoftheclergy。
Thereisacertainlevelofgeneralitybelowwhichacultivatedsenseoftheproprietiesinhomileticaldiscoursewillnotpermitawell-bredclergymantodeclineinhisdiscussionoftemporalinterests。Thesemattersthatareofhumanandsecularconsequencesimply，shouldproperlybehandledwithsuchadegreeofgeneralityandaloofnessasmayimplythatthespeakerrepresentsamasterwhoseinterestinsecularaffairsgoesonlysofarastopermissivelycountenancethem。
