I wanted to recommend this article on religion, movements, and EA. I haven't seen it discussed in these circles; it's very long, but well worth a read, with many good learnings. Excerpting some of my favorite points below:

Quakers, truthfulness, and its effect as a community

The Quakers earnestly enforced a near-militant allegiance to the truth. Through meetings, through discipline, through expulsion, a friend who cheated a customer or misrepresented a product faced not only civil liability but spiritual reckoning before his entire community.

Everyone knew this, and everyone could trade with them safely as a result. You could trade with a Quaker even across the ocean with minimal contracts because the contract was already written in something more binding than paper: a spiritual agreement. In a place like early England where transaction costs – entire apparatus of verification, enforcement, legal recourse – were extremely high, and which in turn made long-distance commerce expensive and slow, the Quakers were able to drive that cost to nearly zero.

Adam Smith was more than a free market proponent

The Wealth of Nations warns that businessmen will conspire against public interest at every opportunity, and that the division of labor renders workers stupid if unchecked and that employers will always collude to suppress wages. He did not believe that markets alone, left to themselves, would produce good outcomes. He believed that markets populated by morally formed people devout in their faith, operating within communities of mutual accountability, tended towards good outcomes.

He assumed of his readers that they were fully formed in Christian ethics before they even entered the market. Formed by the church, by families, by guilds, and by the dense web of obligation and expectation that life in Scotland in the 18th century made inescapable. The market rewarded the qualities of Christian life: sympathy, honesty, and the capacity to think long beyond your own life. And in this way it cultivated something much deeper and older.

Of course, criticism of EA (but, thoughtful!)

EA had, and still has, quasi-religious features: a clear doctrine, demanding standards, a community of believers with shared language and shared institutions, apocalyptic urgency through existential risk and longtermism. It has everything that a religion has, except for the one thing that makes religion work: it forms you through practice and through community and through discipline over a lifetime and does not let you leave when it becomes costly.

...
The problem with this manufactured eschatology is that it has two dial settings and no stable middle. It either burns too hot, producing the manic urgency that convinced SBF and others that the stakes were so high that ordinary morality was a luxury that they could not afford. Or it burns out entirely when the catastrophe remains abstract year after year after year and the daily sacrifices start to feel arbitrary. Religious traditions solve this problem over centuries through ritual, through community, through liturgical calendars that modulate the intensity of faith and practice across seasons, through narrative structures that sustain commitment across generations without requiring constant threat of judgment. These are technologies of moral formation that are extraordinarily difficult to build de novo.

Craftsmanship itself as sacred, beyond earning to give

Sayers was one of the sharpest theological minds in wartime Britain, a close friend and intellectual peer of C.S. Lewis, and one of the first women to receive a degree from Oxford. In 1942, in the middle of the war, she delivered an essay called “Why Work?” to a gathering in Eastbourne, just a few hundred miles south of where that first blast furnace was lit. We believe it to be one of the most important things written about labor in the twentieth century and almost no one has read it.

Her argument was that the church had catastrophically failed the working person by treating work as merely instrumental — a way to earn money for living and giving rather than as something sacred in its own right. The church told the carpenter not to drink and to come to services on Sunday. It never told him that the quality of his carpentry was itself the religious act. Sayers thought this was a disaster and said so:

“The church’s approach to an intelligent carpenter is usually confined to exhorting him not to be drunk and disorderly in his leisure hours, and to come to church on Sundays. What the church should be telling him is this: that the very first demand that his religion makes upon him is that he should make good tables.”

The work, for Sayers, was prayer. The shoemaker makes good shoes because that is what shoemakers do, because the object leaving his hands will either participate in the work of glorifying creation or degrade it. Christ was a carpenter. Moses was a shepherd. Paul made tents.