英国教会争论的问题:神学和心理学的作用

IF 1.4 0 RELIGION Journal of Empirical Theology Pub Date : 2023-09-07 DOI:10.1163/15709256-20231170
A. Village
{"title":"英国教会争论的问题:神学和心理学的作用","authors":"A. Village","doi":"10.1163/15709256-20231170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis paper tests whether or not psychological type preferences predicted the extent of liberal versus conservative attitudes towards a range of controversial moral issues among 3,515 clergy and laity from the Church of England who took part in the 2013 Church Times survey. Summated rating scales were produced from Likert items related to four different issues: same-sex relationships, the ordination of women, divorce and remarriage, and cohabitation. After allowing for general theological stance, psychological type preferences for sensing over intuition and thinking over feeling were significantly associated with more conservative attitudes. For theological liberals, sensing types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did intuitive types, but there was no difference among theological conservatives. For theological conservatives, thinking types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did feeling types, but there was no difference among theological liberals.","PeriodicalId":42786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Theology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Debated issues in the Church of England: The Roles of Theology and Psychology\",\"authors\":\"A. Village\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15709256-20231170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis paper tests whether or not psychological type preferences predicted the extent of liberal versus conservative attitudes towards a range of controversial moral issues among 3,515 clergy and laity from the Church of England who took part in the 2013 Church Times survey. Summated rating scales were produced from Likert items related to four different issues: same-sex relationships, the ordination of women, divorce and remarriage, and cohabitation. After allowing for general theological stance, psychological type preferences for sensing over intuition and thinking over feeling were significantly associated with more conservative attitudes. For theological liberals, sensing types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did intuitive types, but there was no difference among theological conservatives. For theological conservatives, thinking types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did feeling types, but there was no difference among theological liberals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Empirical Theology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Empirical Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15709256-20231170\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15709256-20231170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文测试了参加2013年《教会时报》调查的3515名英国教会神职人员和俗人的心理类型偏好是否预测了他们对一系列有争议的道德问题的自由主义与保守主义态度的程度。综合评分量表是根据与四个不同问题相关的Likert项目制作的:同性关系、女性的圣职、离婚和再婚以及同居。在考虑到一般神学立场后,心理类型偏好感知而非直觉和思考而非感觉与更保守的态度显著相关。对于神学自由主义者来说,感知型的道德态度平均略高于直觉型,但神学保守派之间没有差异。对于神学保守派来说,思维型的道德态度平均略高于感觉型,但神学自由派之间没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Debated issues in the Church of England: The Roles of Theology and Psychology
This paper tests whether or not psychological type preferences predicted the extent of liberal versus conservative attitudes towards a range of controversial moral issues among 3,515 clergy and laity from the Church of England who took part in the 2013 Church Times survey. Summated rating scales were produced from Likert items related to four different issues: same-sex relationships, the ordination of women, divorce and remarriage, and cohabitation. After allowing for general theological stance, psychological type preferences for sensing over intuition and thinking over feeling were significantly associated with more conservative attitudes. For theological liberals, sensing types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did intuitive types, but there was no difference among theological conservatives. For theological conservatives, thinking types had slightly more conservative moral attitudes, on average, than did feeling types, but there was no difference among theological liberals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
The Effect of the Members’ Religious Activity and the Church’s Clergy on Church Growth by the Example of Estonian Protestant Churches Chaplains Forming a Meaningful Relationship with Older People With Dementia – Insights to Pastoral Care in Nursing Home Settings Reformatorian Youth in the Netherlands: Religiosity and Personality Traits Confirmation – a Space for Human and Divine Action. Traditional Ritual in the Process of Changes in Secular Czechia Purpose in Life: a Comparison between Communities of the Non-religious and the Religious
×
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