World Religions.Cite Wienclaw, R. A. (2013a). World religions.docx

World Religions.
Cite: Wienclaw, R. A. (2013a). World religions. Research
Starters: Sociology.
Authors: Wienclaw, Ruth A.
Source:Salem Press Encyclopedia, 2019. 7p.
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: Religions
Abstract:
To understand the way people act toward each other, both as
individuals and as societies, it is often helpful to understand the
religious underpinnings that inform their beliefs and actions.
The belongingness that arises from identifying with a religious
group has shaped societies and political actions throughout
human history. Of world religions today, Christianity and Islam
both have roots in the monotheistic beliefs of Judaism. These
three major world religions, however, disagree strongly on core
tenets of their faiths. Hinduism and Buddhism are other major
world religions that are often more tolerant of other beliefs.
There are many other belief systems in the world today, ranging
from those that see the spiritual in everything around them to
those that deny the existence of a higher power or do not
believe that such existence can ever be proved. Social scientists
study the similarities and differences among major world
religions in order to better understand how these belief systems
affect societies, cultures, and interactions with others of
different beliefs.
Full Text
To understand the way people act toward each other, both as
individuals and as societies, it is often helpful to understand the

religious underpinnings that inform their beliefs and actions.
The belongingness that arises from identifying with a religious
group has shaped societies and political actions throughout
human history. Of world religions today, Christianity and Islam
both have roots in the monotheistic beliefs of Judaism. These
three major world religions, however, disagree strongly on core
tenets of their faiths. Hinduism and Buddhism are other major
world religions that are often more tolerant of other beliefs.
There are many other belief systems in the world today, ranging
from those that see the spiritual in everything around them to
those that deny the existence of a higher power or do not
believe that such existence can ever be proved. Social scientists
study the similarities and differences among major world
religions in order to better understand how these belief systems
affect societies, cultures, and interactions with others of
different beliefs.
Religions are institutional systems grounded in the belief in and
reverence for a supernatural power or powers considered to
have created and to govern the universe. One's faith informs not
only one's personal belief system, but also one's actions in the
world. Religions often inform one's ethical and moral belief
systems and how one interacts with other people or the greater
environment. For many people, religious identity (or lack
thereof) also increases one's feelings of association and
belongingness within a group composed of other adherents to
the same beliefs. This belongingness not only fulfills a basic
human need, but also has political and social ramifications. For
example, in the United States in the early twenty-first century,
the conservative Christian right has become a significant voting
bloc that may influence politicians and governments to create
and enforce laws that conform to their religious beliefs. This
belongingness can lead to an "us-them" mentality between
different groups, resulting in political sanctions, terrorism, and
wars.
Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are only three of a large
variety of religions and sects that can be found around the

world. In general, most countries have dominant religions. One
is more likely than not to encounter dissenting or alternative
views when discussing religion. There is a great range of
religious diversity across the planet not only based on belief
systems but also regarding the number of adherents, ranging in
the billions for Christianity and Islam to the fewer than a
million for Unitarian Universalism and Scientology. Figure 1
summarizes the percentage of adherents to various religions
across the globe.
Figure 1: Worldwide Percentage of Adherents by Religion
(2010)
The following sections briefly discuss some of the major belief
systems and representative religions within each group. There
are, of course, other religions in the world. The following
discussions are not meant to be a comprehensive review, but to
give the reader the salient points that differentiate religions.
Major Monotheistic Religions
Three of the major religions of the world are monotheistic (i.e.,
believe in one god) and trace their roots back to the patriarch
Abraham: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Although there are
commonalities between these religions, they are typically better
defined by their differences. Far from being minor (as may
appear at first glance to an outsider), to a great extent, these
differences define the identities of these groups and have served
as the basis for conflicts and wars.
Judaism
Judaism is the earliest of these three religions. This
monotheistic religion traces its roots to the ancient Hebrews and
Israelites. The spiritual and ethical principles of Judaism are
embodied primarily in the Hebrew Bible (also called the Old
Testament by Christians) and the Talmud, a collection of
ancient rabbinic writings that form the basis of religious
authority for orthodox Jews.
Although the story of humanity as described in the Hebrew
Bible goes back further, the history of Judaism arguably traces
back to God's promise to the ancient patriarch Abram (later

called Abraham) that he would make of him the father of many
nations. The Hebrews called God "YHWH," a name that they
did not pronounce out of respect to the supreme being. YHWH's
promise to Abraham included his descendents, Isaac, Jacob, and
subsequently all the Jews. One of Jacob's sons, Joseph, was
subsequently sold into slavery in Egypt, where he rose to power
under the pharaoh. During a time of famine, Joseph's 11
brothers came to Egypt in search of food, were reunited with
their brother, and stayed. According to the narrative in the
Hebrew Bible, their descendents, the Israelites, were eventually
enslaved by the Egyptians and then led to freedom by Moses
following a series of plagues and the death of the firstborn
children of the Egyptians. Jews still commemorate this
landmark event by the celebration of Passover.
In the twelfth century CE, Moses Maimonides condensed the
beliefs of Judaism into a creed. Observant Jews live according
to the tenets of the Hebrew Bible as well as the doctrines of the
Talmud, a body of rabbinical law tradition. Judaism can be
further broken down into several subcategories, including
Orthodox, Ultraorthodox, Reformed, and Conservative Judaism.
Christianity
One of the sticking points between Judaism and the other two
major monotheistic religions is the concept of the messiah. The
Hebrew term messiah basically means "the anointed one"
(christos, or Christ, in Greek). This ever-anticipated figure in
Judaism is expected to bring salvation for God's people (i.e., the
Jews) and usher in the Kingdom of God. It is at this point that
Christianity and Judaism differ. In its beginnings in the first
century CE, Christianity was considered a sect of Judaism that
differed from the main body of adherents by their belief that
Jesus was not only the expected messiah, or Christ, but also the
son of God. Because of this major doctrinal difference,
Christians in the first century systematically distanced
themselves from the Jews to become a new religion. The belief
that Jesus was the expected messiah who came in fulfillment of
prophecy, of course, was and is considered heresy by the Jews.

According to the Apostles' Creed, which is still cited by many
Christians as a fundamental doctrinal statement, Christians
believe in "God the Father Almighty," creator of both heaven
and earth. At this point, both Judaism and Christianity agree. It
is at the next statement, however, that these two major
monotheistic religions diverge. The Apostles' Creed goes on to
say that Jesus Christ is God's only son and was conceived by the
Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. Summarizing the story
of the Gospels, the creed goes on to say that Jesus suffered
under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. After
his death, the creed states that Jesus descended into hell, rose
from the dead on the third day, and ascended into heaven, where
he sits at the right hand of the creator, God the Father, and will
judge both the living and the dead. Due to various internal
disagreements over the past 2,000 years, Christianity can be
further broken down into the Eastern (or Orthodox) Church and
the Western Church, comprising the Roman Catholic Church
and numerous Protestant denominations.
It is on the doctrine of the person and substance of Jesus Christ
that Christians and Jews differ. Both religions are monotheistic.
However, rather than merely believing in God the Creator,
Christians believe in the Trinity, or the Godhead of Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit believed to be "three persons in one." In
addition, Christians believe that the New Testament is a
revelation from God and that it carries as much weight as the
Hebrew Bible, a view Jews do not hold. However, based on the
teachings of the Christian New Testament itself, most Christians
believe that there will be no further body of revelation from
God. It is at this point at which the teachings of Islam deviate
from those of Christianity.
Islam
Islam is also a monotheistic religion tracing its roots back to
Abraham. As a religion, Islam was founded around 600 CE. The
spiritual and ethical principles of Islam are embodied primarily
in the Quran. Muslims (the adherents of Islam) believe in Allah
to be the sole deity and Mohammad his last and chief prophet.

Although believing in the historical Jesus of the Christians,
Muslims believe that he was only one in a long line of prophets
tracing back through the Hebrew Bible and continuing after
Jesus through Mohammed, the greatest in the line of prophets.
Because Muslims do not believe that Jesus was God, they do not
believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
Although like Judaism and Christianity, Islam traces its origins
back to Abraham, a history of Islam actually starts around the
turn of the seventh century and the Prophet Mohammed. As he
grew older, Mohammed rejected the polytheism that was the
predominant religion in his culture and came to believe in only
one god, Allah. At the age of 40, Mohammed had his first
vision. Mohammed's revelations are written down in what has
come to be known as the Quran. At first, Mohammed was unsure
as to the source of these visions. However, his wife encouraged
him to believe that they were revelations from God. After
Mohammed's death, Islam separated into several sects as a
result of various controversies. One major group is the Sunnis.
This orthodox sect accepts the Quran, Islamic traditions, and the
four bases of Islamic law. The majority of Muslims are Sunnis.
The Shi'a, another major Islamic sect, follows the teachings of
Ali, a martyred adherent of early Islam. Part of the Shi'a
controversy revolves around the fact that some Muslims believe
that only direct descendents of Mohammed could be legitimate
caliphs and be given first place in the leadership of Islam. Ali,
however, was not of this line. Most of the Muslims in Iran are
Shi'a. Another major Islamic sect is the Sufis. This sect of
Islamic mystics arose in response to orthodox Islam and often
with the secular views of some early Islamic leaders. Probably
the best known of the Sufi orders is the Dervishes (i.e., "the
whirling Dervishes").
Major Nonmonotheistic Religions Hinduism
Despite their familiarity in the West, monotheistic religions are
not the only major religions of the world. In fact, worldwide,
Hinduism had more adherents than Judaism or any other world
religion with the exception of Christianity and Islam, as of

2010, according to the Pew Research Center (See Figure 1).
Hinduism is a diverse, polytheistic religion native to India that
comprises various religious, philosophical, and social doctrines
including dharma (the obligation to fulfill one's duty),
pantheism (equation of God with the forces and laws of the
created universe), reincarnation (the successive rebirth of a soul
in a new body in a continuing cycle of progressive perfection or
salvation), karma (total effect of an individual's actions and
conduct in successive reincarnations), and nirvana (the final
state that transcends suffering and karma). The practice of
Hinduism includes various ritual and social observances, often
including mystical contemplation and asceticism.
Hinduism has a rich and complex history. In fact, it may be
better considered as a family of religions rather than a single
unified religion. As opposed to the major monotheistic religions
discussed above, Hinduism is a universal religion in that it sees
sameness in all religions rather than stressing the diversity in
them. As a result, Hinduism is tolerant of other religions. The
voluminous Hindu scriptures were written over a period of two
millennia starting at 1400 BCE. The oldest of the scriptures is
called the Vedas, which literally means "wisdom" or
"knowledge." The Vedas contain various hymns, prayers, and
rituals that were composed over the first millennium of
Hinduism. Another part of the Hindu scriptures is the
Upanishads. These are a collection of speculative treatises
composed between 800 and 600 BCE. The content of the
Upanishads marks a shift in emphasis from sacrifice and magic
to mystical ideas about humanity in the universe, in particular
the eternal Brahman (the basis of all reality) and the atman (the
self or the soul). The Upanishads are said to have a great
influence on Gautama Buddha, the founder of Buddhism. The
Ramayana comprises one of two major epic tales of India. This
work describes the life of Rama, a righteous king who was the
incarnation of the god Vishnu. The second epic, the
Mahabharata, is the story of the deeds of the Aryan clans.
Included in this work is the Bhagavad-Gita ("Song of the

Blessed Lord"). The Puranas comprise a collection of legends
about gods, goddesses, demons, and ancestors.
There are three ways to view the concept of salvation in
Hinduism. The way of works (karma marga) is the path of
salvation through religious duty. This path to salvation includes
performing prescribed ceremonies, duties, and religious rites. It
is believed that performing these activities can add favorable
karma to one's merit. The second path to salvation is the way of
knowledge (jnana marga). The philosophy underlying this
approach to salvation is that human suffering is caused by
ignorance and that human nature is at the root of humanity's
problems. According to Hinduism, however, this is an error
because humanity is not a separate and real entity. Rather, the
only real entity is Brahman. Humanity, therefore, is part of this
whole. Similarly, it is believed that this illusion is what causes
one to continue to be chained to the wheel of birth, death, and
rebirth. The way of knowledge has particular appeal to
intellectuals who are willing to go through the prescribed steps.
The third approach to salvation in Hinduism is the way of
devotion (bhakti marga). The way of devotion requires devotion
to a deity through public and private worship. Further, the way
of devotion requires that this attitude be extrapolated to human
relationships through love of family, love of one's master, etc.
Buddhism
Another major world religion is Buddhism. Although Buddhism
is found throughout eastern and central Asia, it originated in
India about 500 BCE. The impetus for the beginning of the
Buddhist belief system was disillusionment with various beliefs
of Hinduism, including the caste system and the belief in an
endless cycle of birth, death, and rebirth. Siddhartha Gautama,
the founder of Buddhism, who was later deified by his disciples,
was significantly affected by several encounters in his early
life. The first of these was the sight of an old man. The sight
was unusual, for the old and infirm had been ordered at that
time to stay indoors. When Siddhartha Gautama asked what had
happened to the man, he was told that it was only old age and

that it would happen to everyone one day. The second encounter
that affected Siddhartha Gautama's outlook was the sight of an
ill man. Again, he was told that all people were vulnerable to
sickness. The sight of a funeral procession again affected him
when he was told that death comes to all people. The final sight
was of a monk who was begging for food. The look of
tranquility on the man's face led Siddhartha Gautama to desire
the same life for himself. Although a prince, Siddhartha
Gautama left the palace that night to seek enlightenment. One
day as he was meditating under a tree, he reached the highest
degree of god-consciousness (nirvana). At this point in his
story, Siddhartha Gautama becomes known as the Buddha
("enlightened one").
The essence of Buddhism can be summed up by three
objectives: cease from all sin, acquire virtue, and purify the
heart. Buddhism is based on the philosophy that suffering is a
part of life but that one can be liberated from it through moral
and mental self-purification. There are a number of fundamental
beliefs in Buddhism. First, Buddhists are to show tolerance,
forbearance, and brotherly love to all people without distinction
as well as kindness toward all animals. The founding truths of
Buddhism are founded on the natural world. Buddhists also
believe that ignorance fosters desire as well as the belief that
rebirth is necessary. Perfection, however, can be obtained by
meditation once one learns to let go of the desire to live. As
with Hinduism, Buddhism includes the concept of karma.
Obstacles to obtaining good karma can be removed by not
killing, stealing, indulging in forbidden sexual pleasure, lying,
and drinking alcohol or taking drugs.
Other Approaches
There are also many primal/indigenous religions across the
world. This term comprises a general category of religious
practice and belief usually found in primitive societies.
Primal/indigenous religions are based on beliefs, superstitions,
and rituals that are passed on from one generation to the next
within a specific culture. Primal/indigenous religions include

animism (attribution of conscious life to nature or natural
objects) and shamanism (animistic religion in which mediation
between the visible and spirit worlds is mediated by shamans
who practice magic for purposes of healing, divination, and
control over natural events). Some examples of
primal/indigenous approaches to religion include the religious
beliefs of the North American natives and of traditional African
tribes.
Agnosticism & Atheism
There is a vast array across the globe of other religions with
fewer adherents, each with its own belief system. However, not
everyone believes. Although most people in the world ascribe to
various religious belief systems, a significant number do not. Of
these, there are those who are open to the possibility of a higher
power and those who are not. Agnostics believe that any
ultimate reality is unknown and unknowable. From a religious
point of view, therefore, agnostics do not confirm or deny the
existence of God and further believe that no proof of God's
existence can exist. Agnostics are distinguished from atheists,
who actively disbelieve in or deny the existence of any higher
power. As with religious beliefs, these belief systems also
affect the way that people act. Nonbelievers represent a
significant proportion of individuals in twenty-first-century
postmodern society. Like their religious counterparts, the
beliefs (or lack thereof) of nonbelievers also help shape society.
Applications
Since the turn of the twenty-first century, the terrorist attacks of
9/11 by radical Islamists, schism in the Anglican and Episcopal
Churches, and the unusual and often illegal activities of various
sects and cults have created news headlines implicating the role
of religion in these events. Religion can be the stuff of
controversy with one group arguing with another over who is
right and who is wrong. The attacks on the USS Cole, the World
Trade Center, and the London Underground and Tavistock
Square were all done in the name of religion. So, too, is the
fighting of the Israelis and the Palestinians as well as the

national Chinese persecution of the Falun Gong sect. Although
it would be easy to think that these contemporary examples
herald a disintegration of society, students of history know that
they are actually chillingly reminiscent of other religion-
inspired events of the past: the Crusades, the martyrdom of the
early Christians, the pogroms against Jews in eastern Europe,
and the conflicts between Hindus and Muslims on the Indian
subcontinent, among others.
Viewpoints
Religion is an important factor in the way that individuals and
groups act. Behavioral and social scientists need to understand
the role of religion in causing behavior including not only
disagreements over spiritual truth, but perhaps even more
importantly over the ethics and mores that permeate people's
lives and inform their behavior. The belief systems held by
adherents of a religion are often more than a matter of personal
preference. For example, the caste system of Hinduism that has
traditionally permeated Indian society specifies among other
things what types of jobs members of certain castes can hold.
Similarly, many Middle Eastern countries are considered
Islamic not only because the majority of their citizens are
Muslims, but also because the very laws governing these
societies are themselves Islamic in nature.
As is well illustrated by the frequent conflicts throughout
history between the three major monotheistic religions, even
religions that hold in common certain basic tenets may disagree
violently about other core beliefs and values. Therefore, it
would be inappropriate in most cases to link these together as a
single group for research or theoretical purposes. Similarly,
differences over beliefs even within sects and denominations of
a particular religion can make categorization into a unified
group ill advised. When theorizing about the theoretical
underpinnings of religions or their impact on culture and
society, it is extremely important to carefully and operationally
define one's terms based on the differences articulated between
adherents of various sects or religions. Otherwise, research

results can be misleading and theories unlikely to reflect real
world realities.
Religion is an important motivator not only for individual
human behavior but also for the behavior of individuals within
groups. One's belief system affects not only how the person acts
in one-on-one situations with others, but also how adherents of
one religion treat those of other religions. In some cases, this
can be tolerance and acceptance. In other cases, however, it is
intolerance and conflict. Many religions are not unified and
have multiple belief systems even when they have common core
values. In order for social science research into religion to be
meaningful, researchers and theorists must carefully and
operationally define the terms that they used to describe
members of a religion.
Terms & Concepts
Denomination: A large group of congregations united under a
common statement of faith and organized under a single legal
and administrative hierarchy. Many individual congregations
include the name of their denomination in the title of their
church (e.g., First Baptist Church, St. Luke's Lutheran Church).
Doctrine: A principle (or body of principles) accepted or
believed by a religious group.
Monotheism: The doctrine or belief in only one god.
Mysticism: A belief in the existence and experience of realities
that cannot be perceptually or intellectually apprehended but
that can be directly accessed through subjective experience.
Because mystic realities are beyond both perception and
intellect, mystics typically find it difficult or impossible to
articulate their experience to others.
Operational Definition: A definition that is stated in terms that
can be observed and measured.
Orthodoxy: Beliefs or teachings that are in accordance with the
accepted or traditional teachings of an established faith or
religion. (cf. orthodoxy)
Polytheism: The belief and worship of multiple gods.
Religion: A personal or institutional system grounded in the

belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers
considered to have created and to govern the universe.
Sect: A distinct subgroup united by common beliefs or interests
within a larger group. In religion, sects typically have separated
from the larger denomination.
Bibliography
Ammerman, N. T. (2010). The challenges of pluralism: Locating
religion in a world of diversity. Social Compass, 57(2), 154-
167. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from EBSCO online database
SocINDEX with Full Text.
http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/login.aspx?direct
=true&db=sih&AN=51674171
Borowik, I. (2011). The changing meanings of religion:
Sociological theories of religion in the perspective of the last
100 years. International Review of Sociology, 21(1), 175-189.
Retrieved November 7, 2013 from EBSCO online database
Brown, R. R., & Brown, R. (2011). The challenge of religious
pluralism: The association between interfaith contact and
religious pluralism. Review of Religious Research, 53(3), 323-
340. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from EBSCO online database
Bruce, S. (2011). Defining religion: A practical
response. International Review of Sociology, 21(1), 107-120.
Goujon, A. (2014). The World's Religions in Figures: An
Introduction to International Religious Demography. Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion, 53(2), 446–47. Retrieved
January 22, 2015, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX

with Full Text.
=true&db=sih&AN=96408270&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Johnston, E. (2013). Mapping Religion and Spirituality in a
Postsecular World. Sociology of Religion, 74(4), 549–50.
Retrieved January 22, 2015, from EBSCO Online Database
=true&db=sih&AN=93066129&site=ehost-live&scope=site
McDowell, J., & Stewart, D. (1983). Handbook of today's
religions. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
Martin, J. P. (2005). The three monotheistic world religions and
international human rights. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 827-
845. Retrieved May 14, 2008 from EBSCO online database
SocINDEX with Full Text
=true&db=sih&AN=18856403&site=ehost-live.
Matthews, W. (2006). World religions. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing.
National and World Religion Statistics, Church Statistics,
World Religions. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from:
http://www.adherents.com/.
Suggested Reading
Beye, P. (2013). Religion in the context of globalization: Essays
on concept, form, and political implication. Abingdon, England:
Routledge. Retrieved November 7, 2013 from EBSCO online
database eBook Collection (EBSCOhost).
=true&db=nlebk&AN=615559&site=ehost-live
Healey, S. (2005). Religion and terror: A post-9/11
analysis. International Journal on World Peace, 22(3), 3-23.
Retrieved May 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database
SocINDEX with Full Text:
=true&db=sih&AN=19754697&site=ehost-live
Lee, M. R. (2006). The religious institutional base and violent

crime in rural areas. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 45(3), 573-579. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from EBSCO
online database SocINDEX with Full Text:
Miles, J., Doniger, W., Lopez, D. S., & Robson, J. (2015). The
Norton anthology of world religions (Vols. 1–2). New York,
NY: W.W. Norton, 2015.
Sharot, S. (2001). A comparative sociology of world religions:
Virtuosos, priests and popular religion. New York, NY: New
York University Press.
Turner, J. (2006). Contemporary religious violence: Rational
reaction to the brutality of globalization. Conference Papers --
American Sociological Association, 2006 Annual Meeting,
Montreal, 1-19. Retrieved May 12, 2008 from EBSCO online
database SocINDEX with Full Text:
Walsh, T. G. (2012). Religion, peace and the postsecular public
sphere. International Journal on World Peace, 29(2), 35-61.
~~~~~~~~
Essay by Ruth A. Wienclaw, Ph.D
Dr. Ruth A. Wienclaw holds a Doctorate in
Industrial/Organizational Psychology with a specialization in
Organization Development from the University of Memphis.
She is the owner of a small business that works with
organizations in both the public and private sectors, consulting
on matters of strategic planning, training, and human/systems
integration.
Copyright of World Religions -- Research Starters Sociology is
the property of Great Neck Publishing and its content may not

be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.
Sociological Theories of Religion: Structural Functionalism.
Cite: Wienclaw, R. A. (2013b). Sociological theories of
religion: Structural functionalism. Retrieved Authors:
Wienclaw, Ruth A.
Source: Salem Press Encyclopedia, 2019. 6p.
Subject Terms: Functionalism (Social sciences) Religion &
sociology
Abstract:
Functionalism is a theoretical framework used in sociology that
attempts to explain the nature of social order, the relationship
between the various parts (structures), and their contribution to
the stability of the society. Functionalists examine the
functionality of each structure to determine how it contributes
to the stability of society as a whole. When applied to the
sociological study of religion, this approach views religion as a
functional entity within society because it creates social
cohesion and integration by reaffirming the bonds that people
have with each other. In the functionalist view, religious rituals
express the spiritual convictions of the members of the religion
and help increase the belongingness of the individuals to the
group. Although functionalism may be useful for explaining
how religious phenomena occur, it is less useful for explaining
why they occur. Similarly, it fails to explain—or even
adequately define —religion as a whole.
Sociological Theories of Religion: Structural Functionalism
Functionalism is a theoretical framework used in sociology that
attempts to explain the nature of social order, the relationship
between the various parts (structures), and their contribution to
the stability of the society. Functionalists examine the

functionality of each structure to determine how it contributes
to the stability of society as a whole. When applied to the
sociological study of religion, this approach views religion as a
functional entity within society because it creates social
cohesion and integration by reaffirming the bonds that people
have with each other. In the functionalist view, religious rituals
express the spiritual convictions of the members of the religion
and help increase the belongingness of the individuals to the
group. Although functionalism may be useful for explaining
how religious phenomena occur, it is less useful for explaining
why they occur. Similarly, it fails to explain—or even
adequately define —religion as a whole.
Keywords Belief System; Collective Consciousness;
Functionalism; Postmodernism; Religion; Ritual; Worldview
Sociology of Religion > Sociological Theories of Religion:
Structural Functionalism
Overview
To make sense of the world around them, people make and
revise theories in order to develop models of real world
phenomena and behavior that will help them better understand
and interact with others. To the extent that these models work
(i.e., adequately and accurately portray the real world and the
interaction of the various parts), the models are retained. To the
extent that they do not work, they are revised or discarded. In
the social sciences, one of the phenomena that many scientists
try to explain is what makes a society stable and why change in
one part does not result in anarchy. Functionalism (also called
structural functionalism) is a theoretical framework used in
sociology that attempts to explain the nature of social order, the
relationship between the various parts (structures), and their
contribution to the stability of the society by examining the
functionality of each part to determine how it contributes to the
stability of society as a whole. Using this framework, structures
are analyzed in terms of their functions or the role that each
plays in maintaining or altering a society. Structural
functionalism attempts to explain the highly cohesive nature of

societies with unified by a belief system and the relatively less
cohesive nature of those societies that are not (i.e., are more
diffuse or have competing belief systems).
When applied to the sociological study of religion by such
theorists as Émile Durkheim, structural functionalism views
religion as a functional entity within society. Religion creates
social cohesion and integration by reaffirming the bonds that
people have with each other. In the functionalist view, religious
rituals express the spiritual convictions of the members of the
religion and help increase the belongingness of the individuals
to the group. Examples of such religious rituals include
Christians' pilgrimages to the holy land or Muslims' pilgrimages
to Mecca. Religious rituals occur in smaller ways as well. For
example, the daily prayers and cleansing rituals of Islam or the
forms and rites of Sunday morning worship in Christian
churches serve to unite those who enter into the forms and
rituals and separate them from others who do not. According to
Durkheim, these reminders of religious belongingness create,
express, and reinforce the cohesion of a social group.
According to functionalism, individuals who perform a religious
ritual or practice do so not only for spiritual reasons, but also to
express their identification with the religion and its adherents as
a whole. Further, religious rituals serve to remind individuals of
the tenets of the religion. For example, in part, the daily Islamic
prayers remind one of the transcendence of God while Christian
participation in the Eucharist (Communion) reminds one of the
price of salvation. Durkheim further believed that one of the
roles of religion was to confer identity on an individual. He
believed that religion allowed individuals to transcend their
individual identities and, instead, identify as part of a larger
group. The wearing of religious symbols in (e.g., the yarmulke
of Judaism, the cross of Christianity, or the hijab of Islam), for
example, declares to the world one's religious identity and
connection with others of similar religious beliefs. According to
the functionalist perspective, religion helps establish a
collective consciousness (common beliefs of a group or society

that give members a sense of belongingness) that helps bind
individuals together.
According to the functionalist perspective, there is another
component to religion: emotion. Religion allows both the
expression and control of emotion which in turn enables the
attachment of individuals to one another and thereby increases
the cohesiveness of the group as well as reinforces the norms of
the group. The expression of emotion can be seen in such
examples as the emotional displays at revival meetings or in
charismatic worship. However, religious controls on emotion
and its display are enforced through definitions of proper versus
improper behavior and standards for legitimate behavior within
society. This sets social controls that help the society to
function.
Applications
Shortcomings & Criticism
Structural Functionalism & Post Modern Society
Like the sociological frameworks provided by conflict analysis,
structural functionalism is an approach to studying religion
from a sociological perspective that is arguably of interest
primarily from a historical view. However, many contemporary
theorists no longer see these approaches to be very applicable
from a practical point of view. Theorists have argued over why
this is true. For example, one of the difficulties with the
functionalist approach as applied to religion today is that the
role of religion is different in the postmodern era than it was in
the modern era in which societies were viewed as totalities
(Denzin, 1986). In order for postmodern theories of religion to
adequately and accurately reflect the reality of the religious
experience and its impact and influence on society, theorists
need to work within postmodern reality and leave behind the
assumptions of the modern era (such as viewing societies as
totalities). This does not necessarily mean that modern work
(including Durkheim's) needs to be thrown out without further
thought. However, it does mean that it needs to be reevaluated
within the realities of postmodern societies. It is only in this

way that such theories (or any theories at all) can truly model
the postmodern experience.
Eliminating the Divine
In addition, all too often social theories— including
functionalism—try to take the concept of the divine out of the
equation and view religions not as faith systems but as social
systems despite the fact that this was neither their intent nor the
reason that they attract adherents. Even during the period of
modernity, these theoretical frameworks fell short. As Stark
(2003) rightly points out, to leave the concept of the divine or
supernatural out of the sociological theory of religion is to
doom the theory to failure from the start. Yet, this is what many
such historical theories do. However, as Stark goes on to argue,
most religious people find the concept of God or the gods to be
integral to their definition of religion.
Stark examined Durkheim's structural functionalist approach to
studying religion and concluded that the omission of the
concept of the divine from Durkheim's theory was in error.
Structural functionalism and other early sociological theories of
religion emphasized how religion was used within society while
deeming the concept of gods as unimportant. For example,
structural functionalism viewed the rites and rituals— rather
than their underlying meaning— as the important elements of
religion. In fact, Durkheim advocated that sociology pay little
or no attention to the differences in the ways that people
conceptualize the divine or the mysterious. Rather, Durkheim
and others advocated that religion be viewed as a purely
sociological phenomenon. According to Durkheim, the purpose
of religion was to strengthen the ties between religious
adherents and their society, with the concept of God merely
being a symbol for society. In this worldview, religion becomes
nothing more than a series of rites and rituals in which
individuals participate. Stark maintains that focusing on the
trappings of rituals and rites is in essence focusing on
peripheral matters rather than attempting to understand the heart
of the religious experience itself. Social scientists that do not

understand these underlying concepts (e.g., the divine,
spirituality) force their own worldview upon religion, ignore
what they do not understand, and attempt to make sense of the
rest. Perhaps most importantly, omitting such a variable from
research is not in keeping with the scientific method and is
unlikely to result in a theory that will adequately and accurately
explain religion.
Rodney Stark's Research & Findings
Based on his views, Stark conducted research to test two
conclusions: the effects of religiosity on individual morality are
contingent on images of gods as conscious, morally concerned
beings; and participation in religious rites and rituals will have
little or no independent effect on morality. Stark analyzed data
from thirty-four nations including the United States. Of the
twenty-seven nations where the primary religion was
Christianity, he found that the greater the importance subjects
placed on the concept of God, the less likely they were to
participate in activities that they believed to be immoral (e.g.,
buying stolen goods, failing to report their involvement in an
automobile accident, smoking marijuana). These findings were
consistent across Protestant and Catholic nations whether or not
church attendance was high. In fact, contrary to the theory
underlying many studies of religiosity (which tend to show
mixed or unreplicable results), attendance at weekly church
services was only weakly linked with morality. In Stark's study,
it was not the outward show of religiosity that determined
individuals' moral values, but their deeply held religious
beliefs. Similar results were found in the analysis of data from
primarily Muslim nations. The importance placed on Allah was
very strongly correlated with morality, whereas attendance at
mosque services was not. On the other hand, in Japan where
religion is polytheistic and people believe that the gods have
little interest in the morality or immorality of humans, the link
between the data showed no connection between religion and
moral outlooks. Similar results were found in the analysis of
data obtained from China, with the exception that the more an

individual prayed, the more likely the individual was to
participate in immoral behavior. Stark interprets this result to
reflect the nature of the Chinese gods, to whom one prays for
self-centered or self-serving reasons rather than to establish and
maintain a relationship as in the monotheistic religions. In
general, therefore, contrary to the predictions of the structural
functionalist perspective, Stark's research showed that rites and
rituals have little or no effect on the universally perceived
major aspect of religion: moral order. Adherents' perceptions of
God or gods as conscious, powerful, beings concerned about
morality and who pay attention to the lives and action of
humans, however, did.
Based on these findings, Stark concluded that contrary to the
theory of Durkheim and structural functionalists, rituals and
rites are not the essence of religion. Further, Stark concluded
that the omission of the concept of the divine from sociological
theories of religion is an error. Stark goes on to point out that
although the theories of Durkheim and structural functionalism
have had great impact on the way that sociologists view and
research religion, this is an unfortunate influence as the data do
not support the theory. Stark goes on to urge theorists and
researchers to include the concept of gods in the work in order
to better explain the effect of religion and understand its role in
society.
Contreras-Véjar's Criticism
There are other criticisms of Durkheim's theory of religion as
well. Contreras-Véjar (2006) points out that Durkheim and
structural functionalism fail to capture what makes religion
distinctive from other social structures. Further, Contreras-
Véjar concludes that it is essential that social scientists define
religion if they wish to scientifically study it. As discussed by
Stark, to leave essential elements out of the definition (such as
the blatant rejection of the concept of the divine in much
sociological work on the subject) is to guarantee that any
resultant theory will not adequately or accurately describe
religious phenomena or advance the theory or religion. Further,

religion is not a sociological phenomenon per se, although it
does have sociological implications such as its ability to effect
social change. Therefore, religion cannot be studied as a purely
secular, sociological phenomenon as was done by Durkheim.
Durkheim argued that individuals are tabulae rasae (blank
slates) on which society inscribes various categories. In this
way, individuals are the expression and product of society and,
in fact, that society can be viewed without taking into account
individuals at all. This may be an interesting thought and one
that allows the sociologist to look "objectively" at social
phenomena. However, this "objectivity" comes at a price: not
truly understanding the underlying causes and influences that go
to making up reality. Ignoring the data that are not convenient
to one's theory does not make the resultant project more
objective; it makes it less realistic. For Durkheim, individuals
had their roles defined by society. This approach, however, is
unable to explain the problem of individuals who break with the
mold, hold different opinions, or dissent within society in a way
that creates social change within a religion (e.g., the Protestant
Reformation) and within society itself.
An increasing number of social scientists, philosophers, and
scholars of religion question the ability of functionalism to
explain religion. In fact, it has been noted that functionalism
does not explain religion so, therefore, does not aid in the study
of religion. Burhenn (1980) notes, however, that this may be too
all encompassing a denouncement of the functionalist approach.
He furthers this discussion by arguing that functional
explanations are best used in determining how religious
phenomena occur rather than why they occur. Burhenn notes
that functional explanations typically do not meet the standard
for implementing the scientific method. However, he goes on to
state that functional analyses can possibly answer other
questions and further our level of understanding about religious
and other phenomena.
Conclusion
As applied to the sociological study of religion, functionalism

views religion as a functional entity within society because it
creates social cohesion and integration by reaffirming the bonds
that people have with each other. Structural functionalism as
laid out by Durkheim helps one understand the highly cohesive
nature of societies with a unified belief system and the less
cohesive nature of those societies which do not (i.e., are more
diffuse or have competing belief systems). In the functionalist
view, religious rituals express the spiritual convictions of the
members of the religion and help increase the belongingness of
the individuals to the group. However, although functionalism
explains some parts of religious phenomena, it fails to
explain— or even adequately define—religion as a whole. This
may be due to a number of reasons including the fact that it
fails to take into consideration the concept of the divine and the
spiritual aspect of the religious experience. In addition, it has
been observed that the functional approach is a product of
modernity and, therefore, may not adequately reflect and
address the realities of the postmodern experience. However,
when applied properly to questions about how religious
phenomena occur rather than why they do so, functionalism still
may have applicability today.
Terms & Concepts
Agnostic: An individual who does not deny (or confirm) the
possibility that the God may exist, yet concomitantly does not
believe that proof of the existence of God can exist.
Atheist: An individual who denies the existence of God or gods.
Belief System: One's ideology (a body of ideas and belief
system that reflects the social needs and aspirations of an
individual, group, class, or culture) and/or worldview (broad
framework of ideas and beliefs used by an individual, class, or
culture to interpret the data received from the world and
determine the appropriate way of interacting with the world).
Collective Consciousness: Common beliefs of a group or society
that give its members a sense of belongingness.
Functionalism: A theoretical framework used in sociology that
attempts to explain the nature of social order and the

relationship between the various parts (structures) in society.
Also investigates the contribution of these structures to the
stability of the society by examining the functionality of each.
Also referred to as structural functionalism.
Model: A representation of a situation, system, or subsystem.
Conceptual models are mental images that describe the situation
or system. Mathematical or computer models are mathematical
representations of the system or situation being studied.
Mysticism: A belief in the existence and experience of realities
that cannot be perceptually or intellectually apprehended but
that can be directly accessed through subjective experience.
Because mystic realities are beyond both perception and
intellect, mystics typically find it difficult or impossible to
articulate their experience to others.
Norms: Standards or patterns of behavior that are accepted as
normal within the culture.
Postmodernism: A worldview beginning in the latter half of the
twentieth century that questions or rejects claims of absolute
certainty and objective truth.
Religiosity: The quality of being religious; the intensity and
consistency of one's practice of a religion. Religiosity is
measured by asking about religious beliefs, measuring
membership in religious organizations, and measuring
attendance at religious services. The term religiosity can also be
used to refer to an excessive devotion to religion.
Ritual: An act or series of symbolic or ceremonial activities.
Scientific Method: General procedures, guidelines, assumptions,
and attitudes required for the organized and systematic
collection, analysis, interpretation, and verification of data that
can be verified and reproduced. The goal of the scientific
method is to articulate or modify the laws and principles of a
science. Steps in the scientific method include problem
definition based on observation and review of the literature,

formulation of a testable hypothesis, selection of a research
design, data collection and analysis, extrapolation of
conclusions, and development of ideas for further research in
the area.
Social Change: The significant alteration of a society or culture
over time. Social change involves social behavior patterns,
interactions, institutions, and stratification systems as well as
elements of culture including norms and values.
Worldview: Broad framework of ideas and beliefs used by an
individual, class, or culture to interpret the data received from
the world and determine the appropriate way of interacting with
the world.
Bibliography
Andersen, M. L. & Taylor, H. F. (2002). Sociology:
Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Burhenn, H. (1980). Functionalism and the explanation of
religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 19, 350-
360. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database
Contreras-Véjar, Y. (2006). What is religion? An analysis of
some sociological attempts to conceptualize religion.
Conference Papers — American Sociological Association,
Montreal, 1-20. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from EBSCO Online
Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Denzin, N. K. (1986). Postmodern social theory. Sociological
Theory, 4, 194-204. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from EBSCO
Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Marangudakis, M. (2012). Multiple modernities and the theory
of indeterminacy—On the development and theoretical

foundations of the historical sociology of Shmuel N.
Eisenstadt. Protosociology: An International Journal Of
Interdisciplinary Research, 2, 97-25. Retrieved October 31,
2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Powell, J. L. (2012). A Short Introduction to Social Theory.
Hauppauge, N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers. Retrieved October
31, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database eBook Academic
Collection.
=true&db=nlebk&AN=601315&site=ehost-live
Stark, R. (2003). Why gods should matter in social science.
Chronicle of Higher education, 49, B7-B9. Retrieved May 26,
2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Tanaka, S. (2013). Nationalization, modernization and symbolic
media—Towards a comparative historical sociology of the
nation-state. Historical Social Research, 38, 252-267. Retrieved
October 31, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX
with Full Text.
Suggested Reading
Appelrouth, S. A. & Edles, L. D. (2012). Classical and
Contemporary Sociological Theory: Text and Readings.
Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.
Balée, W. L. (2012). Inside Cultures: A New Introduction to
Cultural Anthropology. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Fenn, R. (1981). Religion. International Social Science Journal,
33, 285-306. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from EBSCO Online
Garrett, W. R. (1974). Troublesome transcendence: The

supernatural in the scientific study of religion. Sociological
Analysis, 35, 17-180. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from EBSCO
Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Robertson, R. (1985). Beyond the sociology of religion?
Sociological Analysis, 46, 355-360. Retrieved May 26, 200,
from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Stark, R. (2001). Gods, rituals, and the moral order. Journal for
the scientific Study of Religion, 40, 619-636. Retrieved May 26,
2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
~~~~~~~~
Essay by Ruth A. Wienclaw
Dr. Ruth A. Wienclaw holds a PhD in industrial/organizational
psychology with a specialization in organization development
from the University of Memphis. She is the owner of a small
business that works with organizations in both the public and
private sectors, consulting on matters of strategic planning,
training, and human/systems integration.
Copyright of Sociological Theories of Religion: Structural
Functionalism -- Research Starters Sociology is the property of
Great Neck Publishing and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Sociological Theories of Religion: Conflict Analysis.
Citation: Wienclaw, R. A. (2013c). Sociological theories of
religion: Conflict analysis.
Authors: Wienclaw, Ruth A.
Source: Salem Press Encyclopedia, 2019. 6p.

Subject Terms: Conflict theory Religion & sociology
Abstract:
The conflict perspective is an approach to analyzing social
behavior which is based on the assumption that social behavior
is best explained and understood in terms of conflict or tension
between competing groups. When applied to religion, conflict
analysis posits that religion is a source of conflict that divides
or stratifies society. Marx argued that religion is a tool which
helps maintain the status quo in society by making the lower
classes content with promises of great rewards in the life after
death. The conflict perspective can explain many conflicts seen
around the world not only throughout history, but also today.
However, this approach does not adequately explain all the data
of the religious experience. In reality, religion is often found to
be a liberating force within society; promoting equality rather
than inequality.
Sociological Theories of Religion: Conflict Analysis
behavior which is based on the assumption that social behavior
is best explained and understood in terms of conflict or tension
between competing groups. When applied to religion, conflict
analysis posits that religion is a source of conflict that divides
or stratifies society. Marx argued that religion is a tool which
helps maintain the status quo in society by making the lower
classes content with promises of great rewards in the life after
death. The conflict perspective can explain many conflicts seen
around the world not only throughout history, but also today.
However, this approach does not adequately explain all the data
of the religious experience. In reality, religion is often found to
be a liberating force within society; promoting equality rather
than inequality.
Keywords Conflict Perspective; Ethnocentrism;
Fundamentalism; Ideology; Operational Definition; Religion;

Social Change; Spirituality
Conflict Analysis
Overview
It is probably safe to assume that most adherents of religion
believe that religion makes a difference in their lives. Most
religions have stories of people who have changed their lives as
the result of a mystical encounter. However, even more
commonplace are the benefits religion offers people: a sense of
meaning and peace; a feeling of belonging to a group; and a
belief that a higher power is watching over them. Theologically,
one may talk about the power of conversion or the intervention
of God in people's lives. Sociologists, however, typically try to
analyze the power of religion by taking God or other higher
powers out of the equation and explaining the phenomenon of
religion in purely secular terms. This approach, of course,
makes certain assumptions about the validity (or invalidity) of
various religious beliefs. Whether or not these assumptions are
true is open to debate.
Conflict Perspective
One of the frameworks that can be applied in a sociological
study of religion is conflict perspective. This approach is based
on the assumption that social behavior is best explained and
understood in terms of conflict or tension between competing
groups. Karl Marx in particular looked at religion as a source of
conflict—a divisive rather than a cohesive power within society.
Marx argued that religion is a tool that helps maintain the status
quo in society by making the lower classes content with
promises of great rewards in the life after death. Marx is often
quoted as saying that "religion is the opium of the people." He
advocated that people should reject other-worldly values in
order to focus on the here and now and work for rewards in this
life. Marx maintained that the happiness and rewards promised
by religion are merely illusions. In this view, religion helps
maintain social inequality by justifying oppression and is an
institution that justifies and perpetuates the ills of society.

Specifically, rather than resolving conflict or curing social
injustice, the conflict analysis approach views religion as the
basis of intergroup conflict. Further, the inequalities and social
injustices that exist in society are reflected within the religious
institutions themselves (e.g., race, class, or gender
stratification). Conflict analysis theorists also posit that religion
provides legitimization for oppressive social conditions, thereby
supporting and maintaining the status quo. Similarly, religious
practices and rituals define group boundaries within society,
thereby supporting an us-them mentality.
According to Marx, religion is a matter of ideology not of faith,
focusing more on social needs and aspirations than on
spirituality. In particular, Marx believed that religion is an
ideology of the ruling class and, therefore, supported the status
quo. In this approach to explaining religion, subordinate groups
come to believe in the legitimacy of the social order that
oppress us them by internalizing the ideology of the ruling
class. Rather than supporting social change and growth, Marx
believed that religion actually impedes them by encouraging
lower stratum social groups to focus on the otherworldly things.
Real World Examples
Examples supportive of this theory are the stuff of today's
headlines. The conflict between Catholics and Protestants in
Northern Ireland, clashes between the Jews and the Muslims in
the Middle East, ethnic cleansing against Bosnian Muslims, and
the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and
the underground at Tavistock Square in London are all examples
of religious conflict. In fact, world history is full of such
examples including wars, terrorism, and genocide all performed
in the name of religion. All too frequently, and particularly in
the more fundamentalist sects, the picture of religion is one in
conflict itself: piety and contemplation on the one hand and
wars and battles on the other. Part of the reason for this conflict
is ethnocentrism, or the belief that one's own group is superior
to other groups. Even religions that teach tolerance and share
many of the same moral and ethical principles such as Judaism,

Christianity, and Islam, can be in conflict with one another
despite their commonalities. This is well illustrated by the
medieval Crusades and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Since
most religions have historically been patriarchal in nature, this
us-them mentality also extends to stratification of genders, with
males often being allowed positions of power and authority
while women are assigned to subservient roles. This approach
can also be used to explain the conflict over gay rights and
ordination of gays and lesbians within many churches today.
The Hindu Caste System
Perhaps one of the best examples of religion encouraging the
stratification of society is found in the Hindu caste system. This
hierarchical religious system influences the social system,
defining not only the manifestations of the religion, but also the
jobs to which one can aspire and the resulting socioeconomic
status and religious privilege of members of that caste. Within
Hinduism, the highest caste is the Brahmins. Individuals in this
caste are honored by all, and become priests and philosophers.
Under the Brahmins, is the Kshatriya caste, the Hindu upper-
middle class. Individuals in this caste are considered lower in
status than the Brahmins. The Kshatriays take jobs as
professionals and government officials. The next lower caste
comprises the Vaisyas, who are merchants and farmers. Below
them are the Sudras. The duty of members of this caste is to
serve as laborers and servants to members of higher castes.
Sudras are not only limited both in society in the types of jobs
that they can take but also within the religion as they are barred
from participating in many rituals. Dalits are traditionally
viewed as polluting or “untouchable” outcastes and relegated to
tasks considered too degrading or menial for caste members to
perform, such as human waste removal, leatherworking, and
cobbling (Rathore, 2013; Ghatak & Udogo,2012).
Applications
Women & Christianity
Social stratification occurs and affects the secular culture in
many places around the world. An example in the United States

is the treatment of women within the Christian Church,
particularly as illustrated by the issue of whether or not women
are allowed to be ordained to become priests or ministers. The
biblical evidence can be interpreted to either support or prohibit
the ordination of women. The New Testament states that "there
is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:28), a statement that
would seem to support women's ordination. Elsewhere,
however, other biblical passages make such statements as "I do
not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man;
she must be silent" (1 Timothy 2:12), a statement that would
seem to prohibit it. However, there is also evidence in the
Christian New Testament that women were the leaders of house
churches and were ordained as deacons in the Church.
Similarly, archeological evidence supports the fact that women
were not only leaders in the early Church, but also were
ordained both as priests and as deacons. So, even in the first
century when women were typically subservient to men in most
areas, the Church ordained women to the priesthood. It can be
argued, in fact, that the acceptance of women as clergy was
changed to reflect the secular social structure rather than being
implemented from the start as a support system to maintain
women in subservient positions.
Gradually, the attitude toward women in the church changed and
women's ordination was no longer permitted by many
denominations. For example, the Roman Catholic Church today
still does not permit the ordination of women as either priests or
deacons and appears unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future.
However; within recent decades, some Protestant religions have
permitted the ordination of women to the priesthood. American
Baptists, Evangelical Lutherans, United Methodists,
Presbyterians, and Episcopalians all now ordain women as
priests and ministers. Conflict theory would argue that this
change came after the women's liberation movement in the
1960s and '70s which brought about more opportunities and
greater equality for women in the workplace. In this view, the
ordination of women in the church is merely a reflection of the

pervading culture. Although a few women had been ordained in
modern times before this movement, it was not until the 1970s
that women were regularly ordained. However, the position of
ordained women in the church reflects that of women outside
the church.
The Glass Ceiling
Feminists often speak of the glass ceiling that women encounter
in business. This expression is used to refer to the fact that in
practice women often find that they cannot attain the highest
level of jobs or pay within an organization while men can. This
does not mean that all women are stopped at this invisible
ceiling. However, many still are. Similarly, in ecclesiastical
circles, ordained women talk about the "stained glass ceiling" to
describe the same phenomenon in the Church. Depending on the
denomination, ordained women may find that they are less able
to find attractive churches or postings as compared to their male
counterparts and also that they do not receive the same pay as
male clergy. Further, in hierarchical denominational structures,
it has been observed that it is often more difficult for women to
be ordained as bishops than it was for them to be ordained to
the priesthood. However, it must also be noted that it is
similarly difficult for ordained men to become bishops just due
to the small numbers of openings. It should also be noted that a
woman has recently been elected to be primate of the Episcopal
Church, the American arm of the worldwide Anglican
Communion. This is the highest level which any member of the
Episcopal clergy can attain and the primate is considered the
national leader of the Episcopal Church.
In many ways, the status of women clergy within the Episcopal
Church is a good case study to examine the applicability of the
conflict perspective. Sullins (2000), for example, performed an
analysis of the status of ordained women within the Episcopal
Church. Sullins's hypotheses were that:
· "Women have more subordinate or lower status positions than
men do and that this inequality is persistent" (p. 248).
· Gender "inequality is greater among the more 'loosely coupled'

positions, and these positions are in congregations" (p. 249).
· Gender "inequality is smallest at the beginning of the clergy
career" (p. 249).
The results of the study analysis found that within local
churches, there remains strong resistance to the ordination and
deployment of female priests. However, this inequality does not
exist in the attitudes of the church hierarchy. Based on his
analysis, Sullins concluded that these disparities are cultural
because they can be seen elsewhere in the culture (e.g., the
glass ceiling phenomenon). However, Sullins goes on to discuss
the fact that these disparities may possibly also be accounted
for by the differences in career choices that are often made by
men and women. He also notes that sometimes opposition to
female clergy is organizational and that it may arise from
perceived difficulties with organizational maintenance if women
are admitted to the ranks of clergy in large numbers. Sullins
concludes that a better analogy for denominations and churches
in the way that they view women clergy is "family."
Shortcomings of Conflict Theory
As illustrated by this study, conflict theory does not adequately
account for all the evidence.
· First, if conflict theory is correct and religion serves to
stratify rather than liberate, no denomination would permit the
ordination of women.
· Second, even today in the early twenty-first century with its
emphasis on equality for all, more conservative or
fundamentalist denominations and sects—including the Roman
Catholics—do not ordain women. According to social conflict
analysis, keeping women in a subservient position is evidence
of religion supporting and reinforcing the values of the status
quo. However, this approach does not necessarily explain why
an increasing number of denominations today are allowing the
ordination of women. Conflict analysis cannot sufficiently
account for the differences between denominations on the
matter of women's ordination.
· Third, conflict analysis does not explain why in the early days

of Christianity women were not only ordained to the diaconate
and the priesthood, but also to the bishopric.
· Fourth, even within some broad denominational categories,
there is disagreement over the ordination of women. For
example, whereas American Baptists do ordain women as
ministers, Southern Baptists (as a whole) currently do not.
Further, for some time, Southern Baptists did ordain women.
However, in the 1990s they changed this policy and forbad the
ordination of women (and have actually requested that the
women who are already ordained be rescinded). Although
conflict theory could account for some of this body of evidence,
it cannot account for it all or explain well why there is so much
variation in this matter.
Conclusion
behavior that is based on the assumption that social behavior is
best explained and understood in terms of conflict or tension
between competing groups. When applied to religion, this
theory states that religion is a tool that helps maintain the status
quo in society by making the lower classes content with
promises of great rewards in the life after death. However, the
conflict perspective cannot account well for all the evidence of
the interaction of religion and society. In fact, religion has been
known to be an instrument of social change. Contrary to the
predictions of conflict analysis, religions and their concomitant
belief systems have been shown to positively affect social
change in many situations and countries around the world.
Many religions today teach about human rights, social justice,
and social responsibility. In those religions, individuals are
more likely to go out into the world and put their faith into
practice, thereby righting social injustices rather than
reinforcing them. For example, African American churches had
a prominent role in leadership during the civil rights movement
in the United States; churches gave rise to leaders of the civil
rights movement and also served as headquarters for protesters,
clearing houses for information, and meeting places to develop

strategies and tactics. Further, the association of the Church
with the activities of the civil rights movement went at the
moral authority and helped reinforce the rightness of the
movement based on religious values. This is in direct
contradiction to the conflict perspective. Even at the time of the
Civil War, the Church did not uniformly support the status quo.
In fact, the Southern Baptist Convention actually resulted as a
break from the mainline Baptist group at the time due to
disagreement over slavery. Although an argument could be
made that the southern branch of the Church was supporting the
status quo in the South, the majority of the Church did not.
Similarly, Islam has made positive changes in the lives of many
Black Muslims. Islam includes strict dietary regulation and
prohibits many socially undesirable behaviors such as drinking,
gambling, and drug use. Based on the tenets of their religion,
Black Muslims emphasize self-control, self-reliance, and
traditional African identity rather than an identity with their
past of slavery. As a result, Black Muslims are often critical of
white power structures, thereby giving them a radical political
dimension rather than supporting the status quo.
Researchers and theorists working in the area of the sociology
of religion have a difficult obstacle to overcome: the
operational definition of terms such as spirituality, faith, and
belief as in reference to intangible things. Some theorists such
as Karl Marx and his conflict perspective choose to ignore such
concepts and consider them to be irrelevant manifestations of a
nonexistent construct. However, this approach is bad science
and forces the assumptions of one worldview onto another
worldview. Ignoring the assumptions or experience of another
group does not make those assumptions or experiences
irrelevant; it only means that any resulting theory cannot
account for all the data because it has not considered all of it.
Certainly, it is very difficult to operationally define many of the
concepts that religious individuals purport to experience
regarding their spiritual or mystical experiences. However, this
does not mean that the concepts can be ignored or that they are

irrelevant. Defining religiosity, for example, in terms of church
attendance or membership does not begin to touch on the
religious experience. Similarly, describing the societal role of
religion without attempting to account for the true meaning of
the religious experience is also doomed to fail. A theorist such
as Marx who a priori does not believe in God or the religious
experience is unlikely to develop a theory that will adequately
explain this experience. As far as the conflict perspective of
religion is concerned, in the end it must be remembered that
Marxism failed in practice. The official ban on religion in
Communist states, for example, did not eradicate it but forced it
to go underground. After the fall of communism, there was a
resurgence of religion in the states that had previously banned it
in keeping with Marxist principles. During the Communist era,
the number of churches in Russia decreased to only a tenth of
what they had been before the Russian Revolution. However,
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, between 50 and 75
percent of Russians once again admitted to believing in God and
nearly 25 percent of the Russians who once called themselves
atheists professed a belief in God. The conflict perspective
cannot explain this phenomenon.
Terms & Concepts
Conflict Perspective: An approach to analyzing social behavior
that is based on the assumption that social behavior is best
explained and understood in terms of conflict or tension
between competing groups.
Denomination: A large group of congregations united under a
common statement of faith and organized under a single legal
and administrative hierarchy. Many individual congregations
include the name of their denomination in the title of their
church (e.g., First Baptist Church, St. Luke's Lutheran Church).
Ethnocentrism: The belief that one's own group is superior to
other groups.
Fundamentalism: A theological movement within many
religions (e.g., Christianity, Islam) that attempts to reject the
tenets and influences of contemporary secular culture and return

to the basics (i.e., fundamentals) of the faith, typically through
the literal interpretation of scripture.
Ideology: A body of ideas and belief system that reflects the
social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or
culture.
Operational Definition: A definition that is stated in terms that
can be observed and measured.
Religiosity: The quality of being religious; the intensity and
consistency of one's practice of a religion. Religiosity is
measured by asking about religious beliefs, measuring
membership in religious organizations, and measuring
attendance at religious services. The term religiosity can also be
used to refer to an excessive devotion to religion.
Sect: A distinct subgroup united by common beliefs or interests
within a larger group. In religion, sects typically have separated
from the larger denomination.
Secularization: The process of transforming a religion to a
philosophy and worldview based primarily on reason and
science rather than on faith and supernatural concepts. Through
the process of secularization, religious groups and activities
lose their religious significance.
Social Change: The significant alteration of a society or culture
over time. Social change involves social behavior patterns,
interactions, institutions, and stratification systems as well as
elements of culture including norms and values.
Social Justice: A striving to achieve justice in every aspect of
society not merely through the application of the law. Social
justice is based on the principle of universal human rights and
works to ensure that all individuals receive fair treatment and
equally share the benefits of society.
Socioeconomic Status (SES): The position of an individual or
group on the two vectors of social and economic status and their
combination. Factors contributing to socioeconomic status

include (but are not limited to) income, type and prestige of
occupation, place of residence, and educational attainment.
Spirituality: The quality or state of being in which one is
concerned with intangible things of the spirit as opposed to
tangible or material things.
Bibliography
Andersen, M. L. & Taylor, H. F. (2002). Sociology:
Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Ghatak, S., & Udogu, E. (2012). Human rights issues of
minorities in contemporary India: A concise analysis. Journal
Of Third World Studies, 29, 203-230. Retrieved November 1,
2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Rathore, Dinesh Singh. Dalit & Human Rights. New Delhi:
Black Prints, 2013.
Schaefer, R. T. (2002). Sociology: A brief introduction (4th
ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Stockard, J. (2000). Sociology: Discovering society (2nd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Sullins, P. (2000). The stained glass ceiling: Career attainment
for women clergy. Sociology of Religion, 61, 243-266.
Retrieved October 21, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database
Suggested Reading
Andronovien, L. (2013). Leadership as a virtuous practice:
Reflections on women and stained-glass ceilings. Baptistic
Theologies, 5, 119-132. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from
EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
=true&db=a9h&AN=88906564
Davis, N. J. & Robinson, R. V. (2006). The egalitarian face of
Islamic orthodoxy: Support for Islamic law and economic

justice in seven Muslim-majority nations. American
Sociological Review, 71, 167-190. Retrieved October 21, 2008,
from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
Farris, J. (2013). Demonizing the Other: An analysis of moral
conflict, violence, and spirituality. Journal Of Spirituality In
Mental Health, 15, 277-292. Retrieved November 1, 2013 from
EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.
=true&db=a9h&AN=90503463
Hinojosa, V. J. & Park, J. Z. (2004). Religion and the paradox
of racial inequality attitudes. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, 43, 229-238.
Jelks, R. M. (2004). Religious dimensions of the American civil
rights movement. Church History, 73, 822-833. Retrieved
October 21, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX
with Full Text.
Kijima, Y. (2006). Caste and tribe inequality: Evidence from
India, 1983-1999. Economic Development and Cultural Change,
54, 269-404. Retrieved October 21, 2008, from EBSCO Online
Rawat, Ramnarayan S. (2011).Reconsidering untouchability:
Chamars and Dalit history in North India. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Smith, C. & Faris, R. (2005). Socioeconomic inequality in the
American religious system: An update and assessment. Journal
for the Scientific Study of Religion, 44, 95-104. Retrieved
October 21, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX
with Full Text.

~~~~~~~~
Essay by Ruth A. Wienclaw, Ph.D.
Dr. Ruth A. Wienclaw holds a PhD in industrial/organizational
psychology with a specialization in organization development
from the University of Memphis. She is the owner of a small
business that works with organizations in both the public and
private sectors, consulting on matters of strategic planning,
training, and human/systems integration.
Copyright of Sociological Theories of Religion: Conflict
Analysis -- Research Starters Sociology is the property of Great
Neck Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to
multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.Sociological
Theories of Religion: Symbolic Interactionism.
Abstract:
The symbolic interaction perspective posits that one's self
concept is created through the
interpretation of the symbolic gestures, words, actions, and
appearances of others that are observed during social
interactions. This perspective considers immediate social
interactions to be the place where society exists. In this view,
humans give meaning to their behavior through reflection and
interpret the meaning of behaviors, events, and things. Symbolic
interactionists study society through the interpretation of
objects, events, and behaviors by the members of that society.
The symbolic interactionist perspective assumes that social
order is constantly being negotiated and recreated through the
interpretations of the people who give it meaning. This is a
helpful construct to better understand differences that arise in
interpretation of religious tenets or writings and other
difficulties encountered in religious circles.
Sociological Theories of Religion: Symbolic Interactionism
The symbolic interaction perspective posits that one's self
concept is created through the interpretation of the symbolic

gestures, words, actions, and appearances of others that are
observed during social interactions. This perspective considers
immediate social interactions to be the place where society
exists. In this view, humans give meaning to their behavior
through reflection and interpret the meaning of behaviors,
events, and things. Symbolic interactionists study society
through the interpretation of objects, events, and behaviors by
the members of that society. The symbolic interactionist
perspective assumes that social order is constantly being
negotiated and recreated through the interpretations of the
people who give it meaning. This is a helpful construct to better
understand differences that arise in interpretation of religious
tenets or writings and other difficulties encountered in religious
circles.
Keywords Conflict Perspective; Denomination; Eisegesis;
Exegesis; Functionalism; Personal Identity; Religion; Social
Identity; Symbolic Interactionism; Vatican II
Symbolic Interactionism
Overview
Symbolic Interactionism
Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical framework that assumes
that one's self-concept is created through the interpretation of
the symbolic gestures, words, actions, and appearances of others
as observed during social interactions. Along with the conflict
perspective and the structural functional perspective, symbolic
interactionism is one of the three major frameworks for
sociological theory. As opposed to these other two perspectives,
the symbolic interactionist perspective considers immediate
social interactions to be the place where society exists.
According to this perspective, humans give meaning to their
behavior through reflection and interpret the meaning of
behaviors, events, and things in this manner. Therefore, the
symbolic interactionist perspective examines the subjective
meanings that individuals impose on objects, events, and
behaviors because this is what people believe to be true (as

opposed to what is objectively true). From the symbolic
interactionist perspective, therefore, society is constructed by
the interpretation of objects, events, and behaviors by the
members of that society. Further, this perspective posits that
meaning is constantly modified through social behavior in order
to better reflect "reality" as interpreted by its members. As
people interpret each other's behavior, social bonds are formed
(Andersen & Taylor, 2002).
The symbolic interactionist perspective assumes that social
order is constantly being negotiated and recreated through the
interpretations of the people who give it meaning. Since society
is, therefore, in a constant state of flux, symbolic interactionists
do not look for "truth," but look instead for social constructions
or the meanings that are attached to various things and actions
including concrete symbols and nonverbal behavior. Further, the
construct "society," from a symbolic interactionist point of
view, is highly subjective, existing only in the minds of its
members, despite the fact that its effects are real and
observable. This emphasis on subjectivity has been one of the
major criticisms of the symbolic interactionist perspective
(Andersen & Taylor, 2002).
Using this framework, religion is seen as a socially constructed
reality in which the sacred provides security and permanence
for society as long as its members do not realize that religion is
socially constructed. Symbolic interactionists believe that
religion is socially constructed and emerges when there is
historical or social change. In this sociological view of religion,
religious practices and rituals are viewed as symbolic activities
that help define the identities of individuals and groups.
Religious beliefs, therefore, are viewed as being subject to
interpretation.
In general, the symbolic interactionist approach to
understanding sociological phenomena tries to answer the
question of how action and belief are socially constructed and
how these help people form a collective religious identity.
Because of the wealth of symbol and ritual in most religions,

therefore, religion is an excellent area of study for the
application of symbolic interactionism. The symbolic
interaction perspective recognizes the fact that various religious
beliefs and practices arise out of different social or historical
contexts. As a result, symbolic interactionism takes into account
these contexts in order to better understand the framework in
which religious behavior occurs.
Constructing Meaning
When applied to religion, one of the emphases of the symbolic
interactionist perspective is on meaning construction. This
emphasis helps those applying the symbolic interactionist
perspective to explain conundrums that cannot be well answered
using other perspectives, such as how the same body of
religious faith in a text (such as the Bible) can be differently
interpreted either by different groups in different places or at
different times within the same religion. For example, by
definition, adherents of the Christian religion hold in common
certain tenets and beliefs based on the scriptural texts (i.e., the
Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament). Not all
Christians, however, interpret all passages within this canon in
the same way. For example, archaeological evidence has
revealed that the early church supported the ordination of
women to both the priesthood and the bishopric. Over time, this
practice changed until eventually only men were allowed to
become clergy. However, with the rise of the women's liberation
movement in the 1960s and 1970s, an increasing number of
individuals within Christianity began to rethink the prohibition
against women clergy. As a result, a number of Protestant
religions and churches today do ordain women and within some
denominations women are even allowed to be ordained to the
bishopric.
However, this is not a universal state of affairs within
Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, still
does not ordain women deacons or priests. The Southern Baptist
Convention allowed the ordination of women as ministers
during much of the latter half of the twentieth century.

However, in the 1990s, they rescinded this permission. Since
the Southern Baptist denomination is Congregational in nature,
the selection of individuals for ordination is left up to the
individual churches. As a result, many individual Southern
Baptist churches even today continue to ordain women, even
though the denomination as a whole has demanded that
ordination of women be rescinded. The symbolic interactionist
perspective would explain these phenomena by positing that
religious texts do not define the entirety of "truth" but rather
have meaning and implications from their interpretation by
various social actors (e.g., clergy, denominational leaders, men,
women).
From the symbolic interactionist perspective, religious texts are
seen as only one religious meaning system. This view, for
example, can explain such current debates in ecclesiastical
circles as the disagreements among the worldwide Anglican
Communion over the ordination of individuals who are openly
homosexual. Using the same scriptural texts, a liberal group
within the Episcopal Church (the American branch of the
worldwide Anglican Communion) ordained an openly gay man
to the bishopric due to their interpretation of Christian scripture
as a living document that is best interpreted in view of
contemporary society. Some conservative Episcopal churches
(and the majority of other churches within the worldwide
Anglican Communion), on the other hand, disagree with this
approach to interpretation of scripture as well as with the
interpretation itself. As a result, some of the more conservative
churches have seceded from the Episcopal Church and some
pundits predict that a schism between the Episcopal Church and
the worldwide Anglican Communion may occur. This fluid view
of sacred texts, of course, is not universally hailed. Many
Christians view the sacred texts as the immutable word of God
that can be interpreted only after careful exegesis in order to
understand the truth of the matter. From the symbolic
interactionist perspective, truth itself is not immutable so that
interpretation of sacred texts needs to be done in light of

current thinking. This leads to accusations of eisegesis and
heterodoxy from those who view society from different
perspectives.
The symbolic interactionist perspective is not only applicable to
the Christian religion. Within Islam, for example, some
individuals and groups believe that the Islamic faith mandates
the second-class position of women within society while others
believe that Islam provides a more egalitarian view of the
positions of men and women within society. As with the
examples cited above within the Christian religion, this
situation is also a matter of the interpretation of sacred texts
and the tenets of the religion. Through the application of the
symbolic interactionist perspective, therefore, one can
understand how some Islamic feminists can support efforts to
make women more equal to men within Islamic society without
rejecting the Islamic faith.
Applications
Personal Identity & Symbolic Religious Dress
Michelman (1997) examined the change in dress of Roman
Catholic women religious (i.e., noncloistered nuns) from a
symbolic interactionist perspective in order to better understand
how the change in religious habit following the Second Vatican
Ecumenical Council (Vatican II) in the 1960s. Michelman's
research used symbolic interactionism as a framework to
examine how the social identity symbolized by a religious habit
communicated an image that was incompatible with the personal
identitites of the women who wore them. Her study conducted
open-ended interviews with twenty women religious who were
members of active orders in western Massachusetts and were
engaged in nursing and social service professions. Of these
individuals, all but one had adopted secular dress during the
period following Vatican II.
Much of the work using the symbolic interactionist framework
has focused on personal identity, which assumes that one
individual can be differentiated from all other individuals.
Although this aspect of the symbolic interactionist framework

has been frequently researched, the similarities and differences
between personal and social identities have been addressed less
often. Michelman's research provides much-needed data about
this under investigated area of symbolic interactionism.
The study analyzed the attitudes of Roman Catholic women
religious regarding their attitudes towards their change in dress
from religious habit to secular attire following Vatican II. Prior
to this time, women religious were required to wear full habits
that covered them from neck to ankle, had long sleeves, covered
their hair, and in general gave them a rather androgynous
appearance. Prior to Vatican II, it was easy to distinguish a nun
from other people by her habit. Because of their clothing, nuns
were immediately recognized and afforded a certain perception
associated with one who had devoted her life to the church.
However, from an individual point of view, this association was
not necessarily positive.
In Michelman's interviews, some of the women religious
complained that wearing habits gave little privacy when
working in the world (e.g., because people thought that the nuns
were always ready to listen and did not need time for
themselves) and brought with it negative connotations in the
minds of many people that made it difficult for them to do their
job. Further, many felt that the habits gave them a group social
identity that inhibited the expression of their personal identity,
and made them feel less than fully human. The fact that these
women dressed in religious habit from the time they got dressed
in the morning until they retired in the evening made personal
and social identities completely congruous. In other words, by
adopting the habit, women religious embraced a social identity
that distanced them from communicating personal identities. All
this changed following Vatican II, when ecclesiastical laws
were changed and women religious were given the choice to
wear secular clothing, a full habit, or a modified habit. Today,
most women religious have adopted secular clothing, and full
habits are typically worn only by cloistered nuns (Michelman,
1997).

Social vs. Personal Identity
According to symbolic interactionist theory, one's self is
established, maintained, and altered through communication.
Personal identity in this framework can be defined as self
designations and attributions that occur during the course of an
interaction. Some symbolic interactionists extend its perspective
to include appearance as a nonverbal method of communication
of individual identity. In this regard, the religious habit is most
certainly a method of communication. Further, the religious
habit can be seen as a type of uniform and, as such, is useful to
communicate both personal and social identities. However,
symbolic interactionist theory does not well address the tension
between the personal and social identity of an individual. To
expand the usefulness of the symbolic interactionist framework,
Michelman's research focused on the management of the
tensions between social and personal identities. Some symbolic
interactionists theorize that identity is established by two
processes: apposition (bringing together) and opposition
(setting apart). Specifically, an individual as a social object is
brought together with other social objects in a way that
associates an individual with some of the objects and distances
the individual from other objects. In other words, to have a
social identity means that one is joined or associated with some
while distanced or disassociated from others (what often refers
to as role embracement and distancing).
According to symbolic interactionist theory, habits identify the
individual as a member of a group and help ensure that the
goals of that group will be met. For example, one woman
interviewed in the study talked about making the announcement
to 700 of her fellow religious that she was going to take the
position of Director of Education for the order. Although it was
after Vatican II and she had already adopted secular clothing,
she made the conscious decision to wear a full habit to make the
announcement at a meeting so that people would pay attention
to her and not her clothing. In addition, wearing the habit gave
her a level of perceived authority that she did not feel she

World Religions.Cite Wienclaw, R. A. (2013a). World religions.docx

World Religions.Cite Wienclaw, R. A. (2013a). World religions.docx

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Plus de dunnramage

Plus de dunnramage (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

World Religions.Cite Wienclaw, R. A. (2013a). World religions.docx