The author attempts to answer the question: how relevant is the paradigm associated with the name of M. Weber, in which the development of capitalism is dependent on religious ethics? The article makes a distinction between the “spirit” of capitalism described by Weber and Zombart and the teachings of religious or other nature, which are ideologies that “justify involvement in capitalism”. The author describes such ideologies as intermediaries (mediums) between the “pure” spirit of capitalism that causes rejection and the entrepreneur or employee. One can see that they meet the objective needs of early capitalism in the promotion of value systems that maximally justify free labor for hired workers. Thus, they are trying to reduce the degree of commodification of labor by changing workers motivation to relatively non-“materialistic”. Protestantism turned out to be such a system of values in a certain historical period, which in many ways was a reaction to “revolution of diligence” and consumption of that period. The article substantiates that another religious, ethical and other teachings currently play the same role of the medium. Protestantism was just the first of them. This is the most significant of the revealed by M. Weber in the “Protestant Ethic”, which retains its relevance even now – but at a price of actually denying the unique role of Protestantism specifically.