“…Consistent with prior scholarship, several of Gordon's churches play a critical role in providing resources to vulnerable people, including food, showers, clothes, housing support, and meeting mental health needs (Docka‐Filipek and Timmer 2019; Wineburg 2001). For example, Monica, a stakeholder involved with various rural community health projects, but unaffiliated with any of the town's churches, asserted:… our faith‐based community is some of our most active coalition members… I think that churches are so service‐oriented that it's just natural that they're invested in the growth of their community… most of our pantries, I believe… are supported by churches.…”
Section: Findings: the Social Ecology Of Rural Churches And Religionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Before the twentieth century, churches were the main resourceproviders throughout the United States (Heist and Cnaan 2016); faithbased organizations continue to be important for vulnerable populations living in rural communities, such as those with HIV and those affected by climate disasters (Bradley et al 2018;Rivera and Nickels 2014). In this way, rural churches play an important cultural and political role by effectively leveraging their institutional power to respond to vulnerability (Docka-Filipek and Timmer 2019;Wineburg 2001). In turn, they act as a mediating force between vulnerable people and structural support (Garland 1988;Szott 2020).…”
Section: The Church As a Rural Resource-providermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We use this framework to uncover the ways hegemony interacts with rurality, religion, and resource‐provision. In particular, we use hegemonic Christianity to explain how prominent churches in a small community embody both hegemonic power and neoliberalism while providing—or gatekeeping—resources in the community (Docka‐Filipek and Timmer 2019).…”
With one‐third of rural areas in the United States living in persistently high poverty, churches are some of the most prolific—and often only—sources of resource‐provision in rural places. This paper qualitatively examines the complex role that churches play as resource providers in rural areas. Further, we examine the ways churches are helpful and/or harmful in meeting the needs of those experiencing vulnerability. We fuse hegemonic Christianity with social exclusion and neoliberalism to argue that rural people may not only experience ostracization and othering, but can also lose access to already‐limited resources in rural areas as a result. Using community‐based action research, ethnography, 47 semi‐structured interviews, and research participant‐driven photography from a town we call Gordon, we find that while churches are important resource‐providers, they perpetuate hegemonic Christianity, hold exclusionary power, and act as critical gatekeepers for resources. This often results in ostracization and jeopardizes resource provision for those most vulnerable. This is a critical finding that demonstrates the complexity of resource provision, church influence, and rurality. We highlight participants’ suggestions for ways to expand services in rural places without solely relying on religious organizations.
“…Consistent with prior scholarship, several of Gordon's churches play a critical role in providing resources to vulnerable people, including food, showers, clothes, housing support, and meeting mental health needs (Docka‐Filipek and Timmer 2019; Wineburg 2001). For example, Monica, a stakeholder involved with various rural community health projects, but unaffiliated with any of the town's churches, asserted:… our faith‐based community is some of our most active coalition members… I think that churches are so service‐oriented that it's just natural that they're invested in the growth of their community… most of our pantries, I believe… are supported by churches.…”
Section: Findings: the Social Ecology Of Rural Churches And Religionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Before the twentieth century, churches were the main resourceproviders throughout the United States (Heist and Cnaan 2016); faithbased organizations continue to be important for vulnerable populations living in rural communities, such as those with HIV and those affected by climate disasters (Bradley et al 2018;Rivera and Nickels 2014). In this way, rural churches play an important cultural and political role by effectively leveraging their institutional power to respond to vulnerability (Docka-Filipek and Timmer 2019;Wineburg 2001). In turn, they act as a mediating force between vulnerable people and structural support (Garland 1988;Szott 2020).…”
Section: The Church As a Rural Resource-providermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We use this framework to uncover the ways hegemony interacts with rurality, religion, and resource‐provision. In particular, we use hegemonic Christianity to explain how prominent churches in a small community embody both hegemonic power and neoliberalism while providing—or gatekeeping—resources in the community (Docka‐Filipek and Timmer 2019).…”
With one‐third of rural areas in the United States living in persistently high poverty, churches are some of the most prolific—and often only—sources of resource‐provision in rural places. This paper qualitatively examines the complex role that churches play as resource providers in rural areas. Further, we examine the ways churches are helpful and/or harmful in meeting the needs of those experiencing vulnerability. We fuse hegemonic Christianity with social exclusion and neoliberalism to argue that rural people may not only experience ostracization and othering, but can also lose access to already‐limited resources in rural areas as a result. Using community‐based action research, ethnography, 47 semi‐structured interviews, and research participant‐driven photography from a town we call Gordon, we find that while churches are important resource‐providers, they perpetuate hegemonic Christianity, hold exclusionary power, and act as critical gatekeepers for resources. This often results in ostracization and jeopardizes resource provision for those most vulnerable. This is a critical finding that demonstrates the complexity of resource provision, church influence, and rurality. We highlight participants’ suggestions for ways to expand services in rural places without solely relying on religious organizations.
Recent exponential growth in immersive God Pod units operating in US prisons has engendered many new but still unexamined practices. Loosely-modeled off a Christian seminary planted inside Louisiana State Penitentiary, newer programs deploy privately-funded religious educators for the credentialing and training of “inmate field ministers” assigned religious work duties in public prisons. Funded by private foundations and unregulated by government oversight, Christian educators operating inside public prisons today directly influence the material conditions of incarceration for thousands of inmates. While previous God Pod programs were declared unconstitutional for use of government funding in proselytizing Christianity, newer programs use private resources for conduct of Christian ministry inside public prisons. Drawing from on-site and archival research, this article documents a shift in focus within immersive God Pod units from providing religious education at one institution to credentialing prisoners for “Inmate Field Ministry” systemwide. The article traces the ad hoc beginnings of privately-funded religious education inside US prisons, to today's emphasis on establishing Christian ministry as correctional rehabilitation. The article argues newer God Pod units engender a novel form of religious neoliberalism, abandoning previous commitments to religious neutrality while highlighting “moral rehabilitation” and deemphasizing secular rehabilitation. Directions for future research are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
