Hearing Clergy Speak About Social and Political Issues: Examining the Effects of Religious Tradition and Personal Interest*

Abstract

Objective. The goal of this research is to identify factors that affect the likelihood that a congregational attendee will report hearing their clergyperson speak about certain social or political issues. Methods. The data used for this research come from the 2010 Religion and Public Life Survey. We examine three outcomes measuring whether the respondent reports hearing his or her clergy speak about abortion, homosexuality, or the environment. Results. We find that an individual's personal interest in particular social issues increases the likelihood of reporting hearing about those issues from his or her clergyperson. There are also significant religious tradition effects, with Catholics being most likely to report hearing about abortion. Conclusion. These findings shed light on what congregational attendees say they are hearing from their clergy about key social and political issues, which could be very different from what clergy report they are saying, as attendees' reports will be shaped by their attention to, interest in, and interpretation of the clergy's messages.Social scientists have long identified religious congregations as potentially important motivators and organizers of social and political engagement (Morris

Political Speech in Religious Sermons

“…Similar levels of political discussions were identified in observations of 95 different worship services (Brewer, Kersh, and Petersen 2003). In evaluating what the religiously faithful remember hearing, Scheitle and Cornell (2015) find that 62% of respondents reporting hearing about abortion and just under half heard discussions about homosexuality and the 2 We also make the software available to the broader research community to assist in estimating supervised generative models for political text environment.…”

“…Similar levels of political content were identified in observations of 95 different worship services (Brewer, Kersh, and Eric Petersen 2003). In evaluating what the religiously faithful remember hearing, Scheitle and Cornell (2015) find that 62% of respondents reported hearing about abortion and just under half heard content about homosexuality and the environment. However, the authors also note that most of these discussions are simply “passing mentions” in the service but not part of the sermon.…”

Gender, Religion, and Pro-Life Activism

“…The study clearly confirms the consequences of social networks to abortion activism (Gross 1995; Kaysen and Stake 2001). Pro-life activists were more likely to belong to families and religions that routinely spoke about politics (Gross 1995; Munson 2009; Scheitle and Cornell 2015). Favorable conversations about pro-life activism could have attained even stronger connections to activism but the mere presence of political discussions seems to boost and sustain pro-life activism.…”

“…Religious settings can provide opportunities to hear anti-choice discourse and meet anti-abortion activists (Djupe and Gilbert 2009). Prayers and sermons by Protestant clergy often tell their members to be politically engaged and offer information about elected officials and political events (Brewer, Kersh, and Petersen 2003) while priests-newsletters in Catholic Churches often tell congregants to be against abortions and how to vote on morality amendments and political candidates (Scheitle and Cornell 2015; Holman and Shockley 2017). People who are highly religious often seek an end to legal abortions (Bolzendahl and Myers 2004; Elder and Greene 2016) as do people who regularly attend religious services (Begun and Walls 2015; Allen, McCright, and Dietz 2017).…”

Religion and Non‐traditional Families in the United States

“…Alternatively, however, some research conceives of religious attendance more structurally, as an indicator of embeddedness within a moral community with particular views toward homosexuality that either reinforce individuals' previously held beliefs or offer alternative interpretations of the morality of homosexuality that they come to adopt as their own (Perry ; Scheitle and Cornell ). Considering the importance of religious community outside of the congregational context, Merino () found that while conversations with gays and lesbians generally promoted support for legalizing same‐sex unions, having a greater number of close relationships with religious conservatives actually negated the influence of these conversations.…”