In an increasing proportion as time goes on， the anthropomorphic cult， with its code of devout observations， suffers a progressive disintegration through the stress of economic exigencies and the decay of the system of status. As this disintegration proceeds， there come to be associated and blended with the devout attitude certain other motives and impulses that are not always of an anthropomorphic origin， nor traceable to the habit of personal subservience. Not all of these subsidiary impulses that blend with the habit of devoutness in the later devotional life are altogether congruous with the devout attitude or with the anthropomorphic apprehension of the sequence of phenomena. The origin being not the same， their action upon the scheme of devout life is also not in the same direction. In many ways they traverse the underlying norm of subservience or vicarious life to which the code of devout observations and the ecclesiastical and sacerdotal institutions are to be traced as their substantial basis. Through the presence of these alien motives the social and industrial regime of status gradually disintegrates， and the canon of personal subservience loses the support derived from an unbroken tradition. Extraneous habits and proclivities encroach upon the field of action occupied by this canon， and it presently comes about that the ecclesiastical and sacerdotal structures are partially converted to other uses， in some measure alien to the purposes of the scheme of devout life as it stood in the days of the most vigorous and characteristic development of the priesthood.
Among these alien motives which affect the devout scheme in its later growth， may be mentioned the motives of charity and of social good-fellowship， or conviviality； or， in more general terms， the various expressions of the sense of human solidarity and sympathy. It may be added that these extraneous uses of the ecclesiastical structure contribute materially to its survival in name and form even among people who may be ready to give up the substance of it. A still more characteristic and more pervasive alien element in the motives which have gone to formally uphold the scheme of devout life is that non-reverent sense of aesthetic congruity with the environment， which is left as a residue of the latter-day act of worship after elimination of its anthropomorphic content. This has done good service for the maintenance of the sacerdotal institution through blending with the motive of subservience. This sense of impulse of aesthetic congruity is not primarily of an economic character， but it has a considerable indirect effect in shaping the habit of mind of the individual for economic purposes in the later stages of industrial development； its most perceptible effect in this regard goes in the direction of mitigating the somewhat pronounced self-regarding bias that has been transmitted by tradition from the earlier， more competent phases of the regime of status. The economic bearing of this impulse is therefore seen to transverse that of the devout attitude； the former goes to qualify， if not eliminate， the self-regarding bias， through sublation of the antithesis or antagonism of self and not-self； while the latter， being and expression of the sense of personal subservience and mastery， goes to accentuate this antithesis and to insist upon the divergence between the self-regarding interest and the interests of the generically human life process.
This non-invidious residue of the religious life -- the sense of communion with the environment， or with the generic life process -- as well as the impulse of charity or of sociability， act in a pervasive way to shape men's habits of thought for the economic purpose. But the action of all this class of proclivities is somewhat vague， and their effects are difficult to trace in detail. So much seems clear， however， as that the action of this entire class of motives or aptitudes tends in a direction contrary to the underlying principles of the institution of the leisure class as already formulated. The basis of that institution， as well as of the anthropomorphic cults associated with it in the cultural development， is the habit of invidious comparison； and this habit is incongruous with the exercise of the aptitudes now in question. The substantial canons of the leisure-class scheme of life are a conspicuous waste of time and substance and a withdrawal from the industrial process； while the particular aptitudes here in question assert themselves， on the economic side， in a deprecation of waste and of a futile manner of life， and in an impulse to participation in or identification with the life process， whether it be on the economic side or in any other of its phases or aspects.
It is plain that these aptitudes and habits of life to which they give rise where circumstances favor their expression， or where they assert themselves in a dominant way， run counter to the leisure-class scheme of life； but it is not clear that life under the leisure-class scheme， as seen in the later stages of its development， tends consistently to the repression of these aptitudes or to exemption from the habits of thought in which they express themselves. The positive discipline of the leisure猚lass scheme of life goes pretty much all the other way.
