• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Exploring the Social Sources of Denominationalism: Schisms in AmericanProtestant Denominations, 1890-1980
Robert C. Liebman; John R. Sutton; Robert Wuthnow
 American Sociological Review
, Vol. 53, No. 3. (Jun., 1988), pp. 343-352.
Stable URL:http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28198806%2953%3A3%3C343%3AETSSOD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
 American Sociological Review
is currently published by American Sociological Association.Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/asa.html.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.http://www.jstor.orgThu Jul 5 00:04:02 2007
 
EXPLORING THE SOCIAL SOURCES OF DENOMINATIONALISM:SCHISMS IN AMERICAN PROTESTANT DENOMINATIONS,1890-1980"
ROBERT
C.
LIEBMAN JOHNR. SUTTON
Portland State University University of California, Santa Barbara
ROBERTWUTHNOW
Princeton University
Schisms are a major source of new religious denominations in America, but havereceived little attention in the sociological literature. This study is critical of theconventional assumption that schisms arise primarily from internal doctrinaldisputes. Drawing on the resource mobilization literature, we offer an alternativeargument that vulnerability to schism is related to the organizationalcharacteristics of denominations. We apply dynamic quantitative techniques tolongitudinal data on Protestant denominations in the
U.S.
to test hypothesesabout denominational centralization, linkages to the wider environment, anddemographic characteristics. Findings suggest that the larger the denomination,the greater the tendency to schism; the size effect is inhibited, however, whendenominations are linked to interorganizational federations.
Issues of denominationalism and sectarianism schisms (Stark and Bainbridge 1979). Sects,have long fascinated sociologists of organiza-in short, arise by breaking away from estab-tions, collective behavior, and religion, but lished religious organizations. Others havethey have paid little attention to schisms.shown that schisms constitute one of the sig-While schisms have been recognized as anificant ways by which religious organizationsmajor source of new religious denominations,adapt to changing political and economic en-empirical research on the determinants of vironments (Wuthnow 1986). At a more prac-schisms remains sparse. In this paper wetical level, religious leaders themselves havepresent initial findings from a comprehensivebeen much concerned about minimizing theanalysis of schisms in four major denomina-possibilities for schism within their own orga-tional families from 1890 to 1980. nizations. Their worries have not been ill-Asbackground to our results. we refer tofounded, as shown by the schismatic groups
"
theoretical and practical arguments concerning that have broken from the main bodies of Pres-the importance of schisms. Sociologists havebyterian and Methodist traditions in recent yearsargued, for example, that the clearest way to in the wake of large-scale mergers or by fearsdistinguish sects and cults is by regarding thevoiced periodically that even an organizationformer but not the latter as the product of such as the Southern Baptist Convention maybe tom asunder by schismatic strife.'Given the theoretical and practical signifi-
*
Direct all correspondence to Robert Liebman,
cance of religious schisms, we anticipated
Department of Sociology, P.O. Box
75 1,
Portland
finding a large body of published literature on
State University, Portland, OR
97207.
The authors' names appear alphabetically. We
this subject. However, a computerized biblio-
would like to thank Rochelle Knowles for alerting
graphic search, card catalogs at several major
us to the problem of schisms and locating data
research libraries, several recently published
sources; Ed Freeland for his thoughtful assistance
bibliographic guides to the scientific study of
in conceptualizing variables, finding data sources,
religion, and our own exploration of the
and coding; Charles Denk for providing invaluable
major journals, books, denominational histo-
methodological advice; Shafer Mahoney for library
ries, and unpublished papers netted only a
research; and Kevin Christian0 and Paul DiMaggiofor comments on preliminary drafts. This studywas funded by a grant from the PrincetonFor a discussion of the changing conflicts andUniversity Committee on Research in the Human-cleavages in denominations, see Wuthnow
(1988,
ities and Social Sciences.pp.
71-99, 132-72).
American Sociological Review,
1988,
Vol. 53 (June:343-352)
343
 
few studies. These were all case studies ofschisms (see especially Dornbusch and Irle1959; Tubeville 1949; Vrga and Fahey 1970;Harrison and Maniha 1978; Steed 1986). Nota single study attempted to develop asystematic quantitative set of data on schismsand their antecedents. Lacking systematicempirical data, none of these studies containsa focused theoretical discussion about thepossible correlates of
schism^.^
Nevertheless, it would be incorrect tosuggest that the literature contains no cluesabout the possible origins of schisms. Conven-tional impressions tend to point toward bothdisputes over doctrine and problems of churchgovernance and organization as the drivingforces behind schisms. For example, awidespread view-popularized by reports onthe New Christian Right in recent years-isthat theologically conservative denominationsare more prone to schisms than liberal ones.Conservatism, according to this view, gener-ates dogmatism, which decreases tolerance ofinternal diversity, increasing the chances ofdissident factions breaking away to form theirown organizations.Another impression-one that comes fromthe literature on churches and sects-is thatschisms may originate as a kind of reactionagainst the seemingly inevitable tendency ofsectlike groups to take on the characteristicsof churchlike organizations. That is, theremay be something about the sheer growth ofreligious organizations, or their tendency tobecome more bureaucratized and formalized,that leads minorities within these organiza-tions to break away in pursuit of the original,purer values of their founders.Still another impression-one we gainedfrom talking with denominational bureaucratsduring the early stages of our research-isthat the potential for schisms is differentacross denominational families. Some denom-inational traditions, we were told, simplyprovide stronger precedents for breakingaway. Or, as other leaders described it, somedenominational families seem to be morerigid organizationally. Consequently, theyexperience the difficulties often encounteredby movements in authoritarian states: forprotest to be heard, some faction has toorganize a palace revolution, and if the
A
brief introduction to the topic of schisms ispresented in Wilson
(197
1)
and Stark and Bain-bridge
(1985).
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEWrevolution fails, the faction may be forcedinto exile or may voluntarily withdraw toform a separate organization.
By
implication,other denominational polities may have struc-tures better suited to accommodating diversityand absorbing dissent.The most influential study on this topic isH. Richard Niebuhr's
Social Sources ofDenominationalism
(1929). Influenced by thework of Weber and Troeltsch, Niebuhrattacked the conventional interpretation thatdenominationalism is largely the product ofdoctrinal disputes, and argued instead that thefracturing of religious communities is drivenby social factors-especially, in the Americancase, social differentiation in terms of race,class, and sectionalism. His work, especiallyhis critique of doctrinal explanations, is astarting point for a sociological analysis ofdenominationalism, but for our purposes it isincomplete. Niebuhr's purpose was not tooffer a theory of schisms, but rather toaccount for denominational diversity. Hisaccount focuses more on the societal factorsassociated with denominational diversity thanon variation across denominations in vulnera-bility to schism and secession.In this study, we follow Niebuhr inemphasizing the social, rather than purelydoctrinal, sources of schisms. But, to develophypotheses about why some denominationsare more prone to schisms than others, wetreat denominations as organizational sys-tems, similar in many ways to firms, socialmovements, professional associations, andarmies. We define a schism as the successfulformation of a new denomination as a resultof a break from a pre-existing denomination.Schisms, it seems to us, were probablyaffected by characteristics of the parent bodyin much the same way that challengingmovements are affected by the larger organi-zational structures in which they appear.Thus, we draw on the resource-mobilizationliterature, particularly the work of Gamson(1975) and Zald and Berger(1978), todevelop indicators of denominational struc-ture that suggest the kind of resources andopportunities available to potential secession-ists. We focus on the effects of centralization.size, and membership in interdenominationalfederation on vulnerability to schism. Ourgoal is to define and test a set of theoreticallyinspired hypotheses, but because this is anexploratory study, our indicators and resultsshould be judged on their own merits, rather
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...