Religious Organizations as Racialized Organizations: Loose Coupling and Symbolic Allyship Between Denominational Racial Justice Statements and Congregational Practice

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q2 ETHNIC STUDIES Sociology of Race and Ethnicity Pub Date : 2024-05-31 DOI:10.1177/23326492241254790
Tim A. Lauve-Moon
{"title":"Religious Organizations as Racialized Organizations: Loose Coupling and Symbolic Allyship Between Denominational Racial Justice Statements and Congregational Practice","authors":"Tim A. Lauve-Moon","doi":"10.1177/23326492241254790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the post-Civil Rights era, many predominantly white religious denominations issued statements denouncing racism and challenging their congregations to take organizational action to undo racism, but do these statements translate into actions? New institutionalism theorizes that loose coupling between statements and actions is normative for organizations as they balance signaling support to their external environment while simultaneously maintaining the good faith of internal membership, but Ray contends that because organizations are racialized, this disconnect maintains racial inequality. Building on new institutionalism, I develop the concept of symbolic allyship: symbolic actions that mark the organization as an ally, but these symbolic actions vary in the degree to which they pose organizational risk in maintaining member confidence. Using a nationally representative sample of American congregations within predominantly white denominations that have implored their congregations to act to address racism, I employ latent class analysis to test the prevalence and shape of congregational loose coupling between symbolic statements and symbolic actions. Results suggest that loose coupling between statements and actions is the norm. Further, results provide some evidence that congregations trend toward engaging in symbolic actions that have lower potential costs to the good faith of members. Because these forms of symbolic allyship signal support to the outside world, they may also mask lower levels of organizational change and reinforce racial inequality. Finally, regression analysis illustrates that the ideological mismatch between more progressive denominational statements and more conservative local political and theological cultures helps in understanding this pervasive loose coupling.","PeriodicalId":46879,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Race and Ethnicity","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of Race and Ethnicity","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23326492241254790","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the post-Civil Rights era, many predominantly white religious denominations issued statements denouncing racism and challenging their congregations to take organizational action to undo racism, but do these statements translate into actions? New institutionalism theorizes that loose coupling between statements and actions is normative for organizations as they balance signaling support to their external environment while simultaneously maintaining the good faith of internal membership, but Ray contends that because organizations are racialized, this disconnect maintains racial inequality. Building on new institutionalism, I develop the concept of symbolic allyship: symbolic actions that mark the organization as an ally, but these symbolic actions vary in the degree to which they pose organizational risk in maintaining member confidence. Using a nationally representative sample of American congregations within predominantly white denominations that have implored their congregations to act to address racism, I employ latent class analysis to test the prevalence and shape of congregational loose coupling between symbolic statements and symbolic actions. Results suggest that loose coupling between statements and actions is the norm. Further, results provide some evidence that congregations trend toward engaging in symbolic actions that have lower potential costs to the good faith of members. Because these forms of symbolic allyship signal support to the outside world, they may also mask lower levels of organizational change and reinforce racial inequality. Finally, regression analysis illustrates that the ideological mismatch between more progressive denominational statements and more conservative local political and theological cultures helps in understanding this pervasive loose coupling.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为种族化组织的宗教组织:宗派种族正义声明与会众实践之间的松散耦合和象征性同盟关系
在后民权时代,许多以白人为主的宗教教派发表声明谴责种族主义,并要求其教众采取组织行动消除种族主义,但这些声明是否转化为行动?新制度主义理论认为,声明与行动之间的松散耦合对组织来说是规范性的,因为它们既要向外部环境发出支持的信号,又要维持内部成员的诚意,但雷认为,由于组织是种族化的,这种脱节维持了种族不平等。在新制度主义的基础上,我提出了 "象征性盟友关系"(symbolic allyship)的概念:象征性行动标志着组织是一个盟友,但这些象征性行动在维持成员信心方面带来的组织风险程度各不相同。我使用了一个具有全国代表性的美国会众样本,这些会众主要是白人教派,他们曾恳求其会众采取行动解决种族主义问题,我采用了潜类分析法来检验会众在象征性声明和象征性行动之间松散耦合的普遍性和形态。结果表明,声明与行动之间的松散耦合是常态。此外,结果还提供了一些证据,表明会众倾向于参与对成员的诚意具有较低潜在成本的象征性行动。由于这些象征性的盟友关系向外界发出了支持的信号,因此也可能掩盖了较低水平的组织变革,强化了种族不平等。最后,回归分析表明,较为进步的教派声明与较为保守的地方政治和神学文化之间的意识形态不匹配有助于理解这种普遍存在的松散耦合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
62
期刊最新文献
Aníbal Quijano: “Rejecting the Shackles of the Eurocentric Worldview” The “People’s Tour” as Conflict Pedagogy: Using Site Visits to Engage Students with the Struggle for Civil Rights Sixty Miles Upriver: Gentrification and Race in a Small American City Students Want to Build Anti-racist Praxis: How to Support Them in the Classroom with Grassroots Organizers Food Power Politics: The Food Story of the Mississippi Civil Rights Movement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1