西北太平洋的宗教与区域文化:宗教文化深入到地方外文翻译资料

 2022-11-25 02:11

Religion and Regional Culture: Embedding Religious Commitment within Place

James K. Wellman, Jr.*

Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington

Katie E. Corcoran

Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University

PLACE AND THEORIES OF RELIGIOUS COMMITMENT

Iannacconersquo;s (1994), Stark and Finkersquo;s (2000), and Smith et al.rsquo;s (1998) theories of religious strength/religious commitment all incorporate the importance of environmental contexts. Iannaccone (1994) proposes that the more behavioral strictures a religious group has, the higher the grouprsquo;s average level of member commitment. This, he argues, is due to strict churches yielding greater benefits to members through excluding free-riders and providing social contexts for interaction with highly committed members (Iannaccone 1994). Yet, what is costly or strict depends on the environment in which a religious group resides. Church strictures regarding “diet, dress, grooming, and social customs” are costly only to the extent that they make religious members distinct, thereby making “participation in alternative activities more costly” (Iannaccone 1994:1118). Thus, the theory proposes that an optimal level of church strictness/costliness requires maintaining a certain amount of tension with the environment such that the religious group keeps its distinctiveness, while at the same time not becoming overly costly (Iannaccone 1994:1203). Furthering the concept of tension, Stark and Finke (2000) argue that it is not just behavioral restrictions that produce tension but also distinct beliefs. They define tension as the “degree of distinctiveness, separation, and antagonism between a religious group and the lsquo;outsidersquo; world” (Stark and Finke 2000:143) and propose that religious groups in high tension with the surrounding environment should have higher levels of religious commitment, because they offer their members greater benefits for participation (Stark and Finke 2000). Iannaccone (1994) and Stark and Finke (2000) use their theories to account for the high levels of commitment exhibited in strict or high-tension religious groups, such as Mormons, Pentecostals, and fundamentalist Christians.1 Religious groups are defined as high tension or strict based on the beliefs and/or behaviors of their denominations with little explicit consideration for the actual local context. Yet, the level of tension a religious group experiences is by definition relative to its environment. The same religious group may experience high tension in one environment and low-tension in another depending entirely on how distinct, separate, or antagonistic it is relative to its environment.

Smith et al.rsquo;s (1998) subcultural identity theory of religion also predicts that high-tension religious groups should have higher levels of commitment without assuming that individuals are seeking to gain benefits. Instead, the theory assumes that individuals need and seek collective identities that provide them with clear and strong moral guidelines. A collective identity is stronger the moredistinction there is between the group and nonmembers. The conflict that erupts from interaction with nonmembers serves to reinforce the collective identity by highlighting the differences between outsiders and group members. High-tension religious groups will consequently have strong collective identities as long as they do not become entirely countercultural (i.e., stop engaging with the culture). Since members depend on the group for their collective identity, the stronger the collective identity is the higher the level of member commitment. Smith et al.rsquo;s (1998) theory also rests on interaction between a religious group and its environment, such that conflict between the two results in a greater collective identity for the religious group. Similar to Stark and Finkersquo;s (2000) theory, although a religious group may experience conflict or tension in one environment, it may experience little conflict in another environment. Therefore, the interaction between a religious group and its environment is vital for understanding member commitment, yet Smith et al. (1998) mostly focus on comparing the beliefs and values of American evangelicals to other Americans, rather than investigating more local contexts.

For all three theories a religious grouprsquo;s surroundings matter, yet studies using these theories have failed to adequately take place into consideration. Instead theologically conservative religious groups (e.g., Evangelicals and Mormons) are labeled as distinctive, strict, or in conflict with society without considering whether these religious groups are actually distinct from or in conflict with their local environments. By identifying tension based on conservative expressions of religion, these studies implicitly assume a liberal environment. But environments are not always liberal; they may be conservative, churched, or unchurched, made up predominately of one religious tradition or religiously diverse traditions. They can also be secular and even anti-religious, including libertarian types whereby individualism trumps other collective values, as well as religion, whether conservative or liberal. Environments also exist at different levels, such as neighborhoods, cities, regions, states, and nations, all of which have different pressure points on religious groups, making generalizations based on religious tradition nearly useless in predicting how religious groups will experience their environments.

Thus, theologically conservative religious groups may not always be distinct from or in con- flict with their local surroundings (e.g., Mormons in Utah), whereas other groups often not considered in tension, such as liberal Protestants, may be. Even religious groups that do experience tension with their local environment, in terms of feeling distinctive and separate (two components of tension according to Stark and Fi

剩余内容已隐藏,支付完成后下载完整资料


西北太平洋的宗教与区域文化:宗教文化深入到地方

宗教的位置和理论

Iannaccones(1994),Stark,Finke(2000)和Smith等(1998)的宗教力量/宗教理论都具有重要的环境背景。 Iannaccone(1994)提出更一个宗教团体的行为越是限制,团体的平均水平越高,这是由于通过排除和提供社会环境产生了更大的严格的教会,与高度忠诚的成员进行互动是有利于成员的(Iannaccone 1994)。但是,什么是真正严格的教会取决于宗教团体居住的环境。教会关于“饮食,礼服,梳洗和社会习俗”的坚持是一贯的,从没有变过的,只有他们使宗教成员变得不同,才能形成“参与替代活动更加一贯的坚持”(Iannaccone 1994:1118)。因此,这个理论提出了教会的严格度,并且最佳水平是需要与环境保持一定的张力宗教团体保持其独特性,而同时却不存在变得过于接近其他宗教水平(Iannaccone 1994:1203)。

进一步深化概念的话,Stark和Finke(2000)认为不仅仅是产生严格的行为限制,也因为是不同的信仰。他们将宗教团体与“外部”世界之间紧张的局势定义为“具有独特的,分离的和对抗的状态”(Stark and Finke 2000:143)并提出与周边环境高度紧张的宗教团体应该有更高层次的宗教承诺,因为他们提供他们的教员对参与有更大的好处(Stark和Finke 2000)。 Iannaccone(1994)和Stark和Finke(2000)使用他们的理论来说是在更加严格或高度紧张的宗教团体中展示的承诺水平,如摩门教徒,五旬节派和原教旨主义的基督徒。宗教团体是基于他们的信念或者是行为,被定义为高度紧张或严格的教派,但对于实际的本地语境却没有明确的考虑,而且宗教团体经历的紧张程度是根据其定义而定的环境。同一宗教团体可能会遇到高度紧张的一个环境和低调的另一个完全不同的环境,这取决于相对于它的周围环境和宗教团体反应的不同方式(即,对立,合作或两者是)。

Smith等人(1998)的亚文化身份认同理论也预言假设个人正在寻求获益的话,高层次的宗教团体应该有更高的承诺水平。相反,理论假设个人需要和寻求提供他们的集体身份具有明确而强有力的道德准则。组织和非成员之间的集体认同越强烈,冲突在成员与非成员之间的互动就有助于加强集体认同感,从而突出外部人员与群体成员之间的差异。因此,只要宗教团体就具有强大的集体认同感的话,他们是不会变得完全反文化(即停止接触文化)。由于成员依赖教会的集体身份,集体身份感越强,会员承诺水平越高。Smith等人(1998)的理论也取决于宗教团体之间的相互作用和它的环境,使两者之间的冲突成为更大的集体宗教团体的身份,这类似于Stark和Finke(2000)的理论,虽然一个宗教团体可能会遇到冲突或紧张的局面,在另一个环境中可能会遇到与之相比更少的冲突。因此,为了理解会员的承诺,宗教团体与其环境之间的相互作用至关重要,Smith等人(1998)主要关注的是将美国福音派的信仰和价值观与其他美国人进行比较,而不是调查更多的本地语境。

对于这三个理论来说,一个宗教团体的环境是重要的,但研究使用这些的理论却未能充分考虑进去。代替神学而且保守的宗教团体(例如,福音派和摩门教徒)是标示为独特的,严格的或与社会冲突的,而且他们不考虑这些宗教团体是否实际上与他们有着不同或相冲突的本地环境。通过认识这些基于保守表达的严苛宗教,这些研究会隐含地假定一个自由的环境。但环境并不总是自由的;主要是一种宗教传统或宗教多样的传统,,他们可能是保守的,教会的,没有过多修饰的。他们也可以是世俗的,甚至反宗教的,无论是保守的或自由主义者包括自由主义的类型,个人主义胜过其他集体价值以及宗教。环境也存在于不同层次,如社区,城市,地区,国家和国家,宗教团体都有不同的压力点,并且基于对宗教传统的概括几乎没有用在预测宗教团体如何适应他们的环境。因此,神学保守的宗教团体可能并不总是与之相区别与当地的周边地区(例如,犹他州的摩门教徒),而其他群体通常是不用特别去考虑这些地区冲突带来的问题,比如可能是自由的新教徒。再者,甚至宗教在当地环境中感受到严苛宗教的独特性和独立性(根据Stark和Finke的两个组成部分2000),也可能不会遇到对抗或冲突。强调较高的紧张关系与之对立关系的(即对抗或冲突)宗教团体及其环境,这些理论忽略了考虑宗教团体无论是否处于紧张状态,也可能与当地的环境合作并且成为合作关系。

宗教社会学研究表明宗教团体如何能够在当地环境中利用资源,并结合周边环境地方文化融入其宗教信仰和做法中,可以促进“宗教和地区文化499”的成功。这些合作关系可能是有意识的和战略性的,或者是无意识的居住在特定环境中的考量。例如,Pogorelc(2011)展示了芝加哥的自由主义,社会活动精神及其历史优先性是参与天主教行动的自由主义社会活动家的文化资源,这是根植于天主教会的社会运动组织,这种形式和 Dubrow(2005)确定了的大都会教会的各种背景与之特定的策略适应城市变化的条件是一样的。这些文献有助于理论通过展示与当地的合作关系来展现宗教承诺环境也可能促进宗教承诺。

目前研究的目的不是要检验这些宗教承诺的理论而是要在更加符合本地的情况下检查宗教团体形成和反应之间与当地环境的紧张关系,以及这些反应是否可能是对立的关系,或者合作的关系,又或是两者都是。通过分别考察宗教信仰的紧张关系,探索紧张关系在宗教团体和他们的当地环境之间的立场,我们做了几个对文学的重要贡献:(1)我们展示宗教团体如何经历了相对于当地的情境,而不仅仅是关于不定形的“环境” (2)我们展示宗教团体如何因为“低压”可能会与其特定的当地环境经历紧张关系进行传统分类,同时反映出他们之间的成果;(3)宗教团体如何传统上被归类为“高度紧张”的立场,即使与他们经历紧张,可能有协作关系与他们的当地环境。要做到这一点,我们需要专注于一个特定的地方环境那就是区域文化。

西北太平洋的区域文化和宗教信仰

当美国地区的某些社会人口特征正在变得更加趋于均衡时,区域宗教差异依然存在(Hill,1985)。 宗教的类型及其实践的方式以及实践程度“是与国家不同地区的公共文化相联系; 他们的形成程度由他们自己决定的”(Silk 2005:265)。Silk和Walsh(2008)提供的区域文化影响宗教团体的实证证据显示,同一区域内的群体可能比彼此更相似的其他地区的自己的宗教团影响要深。从而,区域是一个重要的地方环境。

普遍认为西北太平洋地区——阿拉斯加州,俄勒冈州和华盛顿州有一个相当均匀的宗教市场,Killen(2004)提供了西北太平洋的区域其主要的城市中大约63%的西北太平洋地区的居民与宗教团体无关,而 在美国全国约占41%。这个以宗教例外主义而闻名的国家,比欧洲更具有更高的宗教信仰度(Stark和Finke 2000),西北太平洋地区也是例外。当西北太平洋地区的很多人被问及他们是否有宗教信仰时,他们会声称“无”,这比在美国的任何其他地区要更多(Killen 2004:9)。 因此,该地区已被适当地标记为“无宗教信仰区域”(Killen,2004)。

Shibley提出,世俗精神与教会的人口形成紧张关系原因。在这其中,仍然有一群相当普遍的人认同上帝的存在。在西北太平洋地区中三分之二的“无宗教信仰人”认为上帝是存在的,并且表明“世俗但精神存在”(Shibley 2004)。 Shibley(2004)提出了“自然宗教”——“自然是该地区的主要民间宗教”。 西北太平洋地区的人经常把自然看作为他们的“圣所”和“小教堂”以及荒野的户外美景也是体验神圣的地方(Shibley 2004,2011)。

西北太平洋地区宗教区域文化基本上一直是这样(Killen 2004),几乎没有研究(参见Killen and Silk 2004; Silk和Walsh 2008; Wellman 2008为了标明的例子)。尤其是 Wellman的(2008)的书阐明了福音派和自由主义新教徒的道德世界观在西北太平洋地区中是如何影响他们的活力和塑造他们的仪式,组织结构和游行任务。 Wellman的研究报告广泛比较西北太平洋地区福音派的信仰,价值观和做法和自由的新教徒之间的差异发现,它不关注他们与西北太平洋地区的互动文化。因此,我们对教会与本区域文化附属少数民族的经验知之甚少,本研究旨在纠正。西北太平洋地区提供了调查冲突和紧张局势的机会(即区分,分离和/或对抗),在宗教团体与他们的世俗精神上与周围环境和宗教团体反应的不同方式(即对立,合作或两者是)。

剩余内容已隐藏,支付完成后下载完整资料


资料编号:[26345],资料为PDF文档或Word文档,PDF文档可免费转换为Word

原文和译文剩余内容已隐藏,您需要先支付 30元 才能查看原文和译文全部内容!立即支付

以上是毕业论文外文翻译,课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。