Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Status Consistency Among The Clergy
(USC Thesis Other)
Status Consistency Among The Clergy
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
70- 16,878 MALESKE, Harold J., 1916- STATUS CONSISTENCY AMONG THE CLERGY. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1970 Religion University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan © HAROLD J. MALESKE 1970 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED STATUS CONSISTENCY AMONG THE CLERGY by Harold Maleske \ s. A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Socio logy) January 1970 UNIVERSITY O F SO U TH ER N CALIFORNIA TH E GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by under the direction of his.... Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Gradu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of Harold Maleske D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y t Dean D ate.. DISSERTATION COMMITTEE TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. THE APPLICATION OF STATUS CONSISTENCY Theory Status among Clergymen The Independent Variable: Status Consistency among Clergymen The Intervening Variables of Secular Association and Horizontal Mobility The Dependent Variable of Doctrinal Liberalism Hypotheses Population Sample Mailed Questionnaire Procedure Questionnaire Returns The Questionnaire Measuring the Independent Variable of Status Consistency The Consistency Scale Measuring the Intervening Variables Measuring the Dependent Variable of Doctrinal Liberalism Testing the Hypothesis THEORY TO THE CLERGY 1 II. METHOD 17 III. DATA AND FINDINGS 28 The Independent Variable The Intervening Variables The Dependent Variable The Correlations ii Chapter IV. DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS . . The High Degree of Status Inconsistency Agreement with Specific Doctrines Doctrinal Liberalism Status Inconsistency and Right-Wing Extremism The Intervening Variables Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism Inconsistency, the Intervening Variables, and Doctrinal Liberalism Summary of the Findings V. THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS VI. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ........... APPENDIX A. Survey Questionnaire ................. APPENDIX B. Letters to Respondents ............... SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................... iii Page 44 65 71 73 89 98 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Seminary Attended......................... 28 2. Father's Occupation ......................... 29 3. Ethnicity............................... 30 4. Synodical Elective Offices .................. 30 5. Status Consistency of Respondents ......... 31 6. Secular Organization Associations ......... 32 7. Horizontal Mobility.................... 32 8 . Agreement with Doctrines................ 34 9. Distribution of Doctrine Scores ........... 35 10. Inconsistency and Doctrine Score ........... 36 11. Inconsistency and Secular Organization Associations ............................... 38 12. Inconsistency and Horizontal Mobility . . . 39 13. Correlation Coefficients .................... 42 14. Ages of Respondents...................... . 55 15. Inconsistency and Age of Respondents .... 56 16. Date of Ordination of Respondents..... 57 17. Inconsistency and Date of Ordination .... 58 18. Location of Respondents................ 59 iv Table Page 19. Inconsistency and Geographic Location of Respondents............................. 60 20. Correlation Coefficients Involving Intervening Variables .................... 62 v CHAPTER I ! THE APPLICATION OF STATUS CONSISTENCY THEORY TO THE CLERGY Theory In his article, "Status Crystallization: A Non- 1 Vertical Dimension of Social Status," Gerhard Lenski states that most social philosophers and social scientists, from Aristotle to Marx to Warner, have described the vertical structure of human groups in terms of a single hierarchy, in which each person occupies a single position. However, since Max Weber's time, this traditional approach has been criticized by an increasing number of social scientists who argue that the unidimensional approach is i not adequate to describe accurately the complexities of group structure, maintaining that such structures normally involve the coexistence of a number of vertical hierarchies. Gerhard Lenski, "Status Crystallization: A Non- Vertical Dimension of Social Status," American Sociological Review, 19 (August, 1954), pp. 405-413. 1 2 2 usually imperfectly correlated. j If this new approach is valid, Lenski argued, the traditional concept of individual or family determinants would have to be revised radically. Instead of determining a person's status by using a single position in a unidimen-j | sional hierarchy, it was necessary to utilize a series of i ipositions in a series of related vertical hierarchies. How are these several positions interrelated? Theoretically, at least, it becomes possible to conceive of I a non-vertical dimension for observing individual or family status, i.e., a consistency dimension. In other words, i individuals may be compared to one another with respect to the consistency of their positions in several vertical See Emile Benoit Smullyan, "Status, Status Types and Status Interrelationships," American Sociological Review. 9 (April, 1944), pp. 151-161; Pitirim Sorokin, Social Mobility. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1927, pp. 11-12, and Society. Culture and Personality: Their Struc ture and Dynamics. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1947, p. 289; Werner S. Landecker, "Class Stratification" and "Stratification in the Urban Society," in Ronald Freedman et aJL., Principles of Sociology. New York: Henry Holt, 1952, pp. 228-239, 449-463, and "Class Crystallization and Its Urban Pattern," Social Research, 27 (Autumn, I960), pp. 308-320; Stuart N. Adams, "Status Congruency as a Variable in Small Group Performance," Social Forces. 32 (October, 1953), pp. 16-22; Gerhard E. Lenski, "Status Crystalliza tion: A Non-Vertical Dimension of Social Status," American Sociological Review, 19 (August, 1954), pp. 405-413. hierarchies. Individuals may be consistently high or _ consistently low, or they may be high in some status variables and low in others. Thus, a person may be dis- j tinguished roughly according to the consistency or incon- i I sistency of his multiple positions, i.e., according to the i presence or lack of a constant level. Once it is measured, status consistency can thus I jbecome an independent variable, and be related to a wide I t !range of dependent variables. To assess the utility of this dimension in prediction, Lenski undertook a study designed to test the hypothesis that "individuals charac- j terized by a low degree of status crystallization differ significantly in their political attitudes and behavior from individuals characterized by a high degree of status crystallization, when status differences in the vertical ! 3 dimensions are controlled." Lenski discovered that a person whose status was poorly crystallized occupied an ambiguous position in society, a position characterized by numerous unpleasant experiences in the normal course of social interaction. His finding that persons with poorly crystallized status j £!£• £i*L- > P • ^58. 4 displayed tendencies toward liberal socio-political orientations was interpreted as a response to such expe riences. He suggested that liberalism constituted advo cacy of change in a social system which the individual ' experienced as painful in its current form. I Lenski and other writers have also suggested that I status inconsistents labor under a variety of difficulties: I 4 unsatisfactory social relationships, unstable self- S 6 images, rewards out of line with aspirations, and social | ambiguity.^ Such a variety of findings lends considerable Everett C. Hughes, "Dilemmas and Contradictions of Status," American Journal of Sociology, 50 (March, 1944), pp. 353-359; Gerhard E. Lenski, "Social Participation and Status Crystallization," American Sociological Review, 21 (August, 1956), pp. 458-464; A. Zaleznik, C. R. Christensenj and F. J. Roethlisberger, with the collaboration of George j C. Homans, The Motivation, Productivity and Satisfaction of Workers: A Prediction Study, Boston: Harvard University Press, 1958, pp. 56-66. ^G. H. Fenchel, J. H. Monderer, and E. L. Hartley, "Subjective Status and the Equilibration Hypothesis," The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46 (October, 1951), pp. 476-479; Irwin W. Goffman, "Status Consistency and Preference for Change in Power Distribution," American Sociological Review, 22 (June, 1957), pp. 275-281; Seymour Martin Lipset and Reinhard Bendix, Social Mobility in Industrial Society, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959, p. 65. 6 Zaleznik «Jt a^., ojd. cit., pp. 50-56. ^Hughes, 0£. cit.; Goffman, 0£. cit.; Zaleznik et al., op. cit., pp. 56-66. | 5 i credence to Lenski's underlying assumption. And it was inevitable that this assumption should be applied to the | study of status within professional groups. In 1965 I | Shirley M. Kolack completed a study of status consistency among social work professionals and confirmed Lenski's results by showing the utility of status inconsistency i as an explanatory variable for political behavior and for I 8 !voluntary association patterns. | | The research to be reported inquired into the poten- ! i tially positive association between status inconsistencies and social liberalism. Unlike other studies, it intro duced certain empirical means for interpreting such an eventual relationship. Status among Clergymen There is also evidence of differential ranking systems among clergymen, and many clergymen find that their positions in one or more hierarchies are not comparable to their positions in others. The major task of this research g For a fuller treatment of the application of Lenski's theory to professionals see Shirley M. Kolack, "A Study of Status Inconsistency among Social Work Pro fessionals," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Boston University Graduate School, 1965. was to test the utility of the status consistency variable! in the prediction of specific role behaviors within this j ! profession. i ; | Lenski used four independent variables: income, : I ! occupation, education and ethnicity. Kolack used educa- ! tion, ethnicity, and job position. After consideration | of the several ranking systems operating among clergymen, I the following were selected as the most important ones on a list of 24 included in the original survey question naire (see Appendix A): prestige of the seminary attended^ prestige of father's occupation, ethnic prestige, and the j j i j number of elective church offices held. i I I ; Seminary Attended To understand the validity of the variables which were selected, one must consider the subculture of the j particular denomination sampled in this research, The | ! j Lutheran Church— Missouri Synod. There are two principal : seminaries from which practically all of the clergy of I i i this Synod graduate: the one in St. Louis, Missouri, and j the other in Springfield, Illinois. The St. Louis semi- i I | nary has been likened by Ross P. Scherer to the West Point! i ! i of the Army, while the Springfield seminary has been 7 Q compared to the Officer Candidate School of the Army. I Graduates of the St. Louis seminary enjoy higher status than graduates of the Springfield seminary. The inferior reputation of Springfield graduates stems from the fact that, especially in former years, they had less education than those from St. Louis. In addition, the seminary at Springfield has a less elaborate campus and is located in a poor section of the city, while the one in St. Louis was j patterned after an Ivy League campus and has ornate build ings located in a higher-class suburb of a metropolis. Furthermore, the faculty of the Springfield seminary has | been said by many to be inferior to the St. Louis faculty. In fact, Springfield faculty members who were considered to be outstanding tended to be called to St. Louis, and this was considered a kind of promotion. In addition to the graduates from these two seminaries, the Synod has a much smaller group of clergymen who are graduates of sem inaries in foreign lands, graduates of seminaries sponsored by other Lutheran bodies and, finally, clergymen who 9 Ross P. Scherer, "Ministers of The Lutheran Church— Missouri Synod: Origin, Training, Career Lines, Perceptions of Work and Reference," unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1963. attended no seminary but were received by colloquy. The ilatter group of clergymen generally has the lowest prestige , I | of all among the clergy. Father's Occupation I One does not have to be a student at one of the | i j Synod's colleges or seminaries or a pastor for very long j ! i iin order to notice that those whose fathers are or have i I | ! ibeen pastors in the same Synod have the highest status. j It is much easier for a pastor who is the son of a pastor i j I i to receive a call or to receive a call to a better congre gation, since the names of pastors are usually well known j in this tight-knit Synod. Second in prestige in this cate-| !gory are the sons of parochial school teachers. The Synod j I ; i has a large number of day-schools in operation throughout the country, and the names of the male teachers are almost | as well known as the pastors. If the pastor is a son of a layman he has the lowest status in this category among the clergy. Each year the names and addresses of the j I I pastors and the teachers are published in a Lutheran j Annual which is frequently found in the homes of lay mem- j bers, but always in the libraries of the clergy. j j Ethnicity ; This Synod was the subject of a series of studies b y Heinrich H. Maurer as early as 1925-1928; entitled |"Studies in the Sociology of Religion," they were reported ;in the American Journal of Sociology (Volumes 30, 31 and j 34). In these studies Maurer classified the Synod as a j ;closed German culture group. The Synod is German in | origin and, while it is not as closed today as it was j | formerly, having admitted many members of non-German jorigin, German ancestry is still accorded great prestige— I especially among the clergy. Since those studying for the j ! i ministry in the Synod were often together for periods j ranging from four to twelve years, their nationality back- | ground tended to be common knowledge. In addition, the j i clergy of this group fraternizes very little with the clergy of other denominations; but they do frequently interact among themselves in small "circuit conferences" and larger "pastoral conferences," during which they become quite intimately acquainted with each other on the i basis of nationality background; Thus German background is a visible source of status among the clergy in this Synod. ; Elective Church Offices A final status index is the number of elective | offices held within the District or the Synod. Naturally, I persons elected to these offices usually enjoy higher ! status among fellow clergymen, and the more offices held ; the higher is the status that has been achieved. There i is often a progression from a lower office to higher i | office. When the obituaries of clergymen are published, I I a list of District and Synodical offices held is usually ■ included in a conspicuous place. | A Final Note on Status among Clergymen It is not difficult to understand why the usual i prestige variables which have been used so often in other status consistency studies do not usually apply in systems ; such as those formed by the clergy of the Missouri Synod. The variables of education, occupation, and income are so similar in a group like this that they would not consti tute a suitable basis for differentiation. It is also for this reason, among others, that other variables were sought and believed to be useful indicators of vertical position in the present study. The Independent Variable; Status Consistency Among Clergymen The degree of congruence among statuses within these four hierarchies— seminary attended, father's occupation, ethnicity, and elective offices held— constituted the status consistency measure used in the research to be described. The Intervening Variables of Secular Association and Horizontal Mobility This work departs from its antecedents by consider ing the potential influence of intervening variables. Lenski associated status inconsistency with political liberalism. Are there,any intervening variables (including some like those he posited but did not measure) which may account for this association either wholly or in part? This study made use of two such variables: association patterns in secular organizations, and horizontal mobility. Association Patterns in Secular Organizations Even though Lenski in his second study (1956) found that persons with poorly crystallized status participate I 12 i j jless often in voluntary associations, it can also be hypothesized that poor status crystallization could influence them to escape the system by establishing and maintaining outside social relationships. All of the research on marginality, like that conducted by Liston Pope, Charles E. Hughes, Albert J. Reiss, and Melvin Seeman, is relevant here, for it points out how marginality produces cognitive imbalance, which, in turn, leads the marginal person to adopt innovation as a means to recon cile his differing perspectives. As far as the clergyman is concerned, this innovation is likely to induce him to join secular organizations. Furthermore, while doctrinal liberalism is also a measure of advocacy of change, accul turation and diffusion of innovation produced by his asso ciation with groups outside his denomination could reason ably be expected to produce additional innovation (in this case, additional doctrinal liberalism). It is for reasons like these that the number of secular organization associa tions formed by a clergyman was selected as a possible intervening variable in this study. Horizontal Mobility The reference here is to horizontal job mobility. 13 For the same reasons stated above, which may induce a clergyman to join secular organizations, and which, in turn, might increase his tendencies toward doctrinal lib eralism, clergymen who are status-inconsistent are likely to be highly mobile. This mobility, in turn, through the acculturation and diffusion inherent in new associations, both in his congregation and in the neighboring community, is likely to expose him to new ideas which may tend to liberalize his doctrinal stance. Such mobility becomes possible under the Synod's policy, which allows for the autonomy of the local congregation to "call" pastors from i other congregations, at which time they often request a list of candidates from the District president. Pastors desiring a call often make their desires known to the Dis trict president. A pastor may decline or accept a call from another congregation. Thus there are opportunities for dissatisfied pastors to receive calls, to accept them, and to move from one congregation to another. The Dependent Variable of Doctrinal Liberalism Following Lenski, social liberalism among the cleigy was felt to indicate their willingness to change a system which may have been relatively painful or dissonant to them. The terms "doctrine" and "tenet" will be used interchangeably. This has been done advisedly, since the Synod itself is currently studying the question: What is a doctrine? The writer believes that the survey of adherence to certain doctrines or tenets which was made in this study avoided many mistakes made in past attempts to conduct such a study of this church. To the best of his knowledge there have been three systematic, sociological surveys of adher ence to doctrines or tenets involving pastors of this Synod. In 1929 George H. Betts'^ published the results of his University of Chicago doctoral dissertation in which he included a survey of the doctrinal position of 104 Missouri 11 Synod pastors. In 1952 W. Marshon De Poister sought to make at least a partial replication of the Betts study, using a sample of 137 Missouri Synod pastors to determine their attitudes toward the doctrines of God, the Trinity, Jesus, the Bible, the Universe, Good and Evil, Prayer, and ■^George H. Betts, The Beliefs of 700 Ministers, New York: The Abingdon Press, 1929. "^Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1952. 15 I ! !the Future Life. More recently, in 1967, Jeffrey K. 12 Hadden published the results of a study in which he sampled the doctrinal position of a number of Missouri Synod clergy. These studies are cited to point out a glaring deficiency that characterizes all of them, a deficiency which the present writer sought to avoid in the present survey. The deficiency revolved about the ambiguity that exists among denominations and pastors with regard to the precise definition of a particular doctrine. In the present survey it was specified that the respondents were to understand the particular doctrines the way they were traditionally taught and as generally held by Drs. Franz Pieper and John Theodore Mueller in their respective books on Christian dogmatics; the tradi tional way and the Pieper-Mueller way are essentially in agreement. All those graduating from the Synod’s semi naries are acquainted with the contents of the aforemen tioned books. Jeffrey K. Hadden, ”A Protestant Paradox— Divided They Merge,1 1 Trans-Action, July-August, 1967, pp. 63-69. Hypotheses The following is the general hypothesis tested in this research: The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doc trinal position of his denomination. The following subsidiary hypotheses are also tested in this research: 1. The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination, in the light of the rela tively larger number of secular organizations with which he is associated when compared with his peers. 2. The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination, in the light of his greater horizontal mobility as compared with his peers. 3. The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination, in the light of both of the aforementioned intervening variables, taken together. CHAPTER II METHOD Population All of the Synod's pastors who were listed in the 1966 Lutheran Annual comprised the population. This offi cial register listed almost 6,000 pastors alphabetically. Sample The sample consisted of five per cent of the popula tion. The sample pastors were selected by including every twentieth name on the alphabetical list after a random start. Of the total number selected 276, or 80 per cent, replied to the survey questionnaire. Mailed Questionnaire Procedure A mailed questionnaire was used (see Appendix A). This questionnaire was first pretested at three different times, using random samples of the pastors of the Southern California District of this Synod. Letters (see Appendix B) with the accompanying survey questionnaire were then sent 17 18 by mail to the aforementioned systematic sample in September of 1966. Pastors residing in the United States who did not respond to the first mailing were sent a second letter in October with accompanying survey questionnaire. Those who still did not respond were sent a third letter in November with an accompanying survey questionnaire. A second letter and questionnaire, both translated into German, were sent to pastors in Brazil and Argentina in January of 1967, once returns from the two countries were found to lag, and it was discovered that many of the pastors in those countries did not understand English. In all the letters, the respondents were assured that their replies would remain anonymous; in fact, in succeed ing mailings a special method was devised by which they could assure their own anonymity (see the letters in Appendix B). Questionnaire Returns The following response rates occurred: Dates September 9 to October 15, 1966 October 16 to November 12, 1966 November 13, 1966 to January 20, 1967 After January 20, 1967 Per cent 71.3 19.9 7.3 1.5 19 j jEach period represents the time between mailings. It was considered to be remarkable that such a high percentage replied to the initial mailing, because only a minimal amount of information concerning the survey was conveyed in the accompanying letter (see the first letter in Appendix B). While the trust that pastors may have for their fellow pastors and the interest they may have in this subject may have played an important part in their response, it is still quite likely that it also demonstrates what other researchers have found, that sometimes it is possible to obtain a greater response by providing only a minimal amount of information regarding the survey. An opportunity was also given to respondents to express their reactions to the survey (see the last page of the questionnaire, Appendix A). Seventy-three per cent made no comment. The remaining 27 per cent made comments of the following nature: Nature of Comment Per cent of Total Commendatory 14 Condemnatory 2 * Questioning 8 Other 3 20 The commendatory remarks usually expressed gratification that a study of this kind was being undertaken. The con demnatory ones expressed some doubts, principally about the methodology, although there was no concurrence about any particular aspect of methodology that needed improve ment . The Questionnaire Examination of the survey instrument reveals that the first questions deal with the individual pastor’s attitude toward doctrines or tenets which the writer knows to be in some current dispute within the Synod. A pamph let entitled Reasons for Leaving the Missouri Synod and Staying with the Lutheran Church.^ constituted the major source of items. In it were listed allegedly false teach ings in the Synod. Eventually a list of sixteen disputed doctrines was assembled, and this list was used as a measure of the extent of doctrinal liberalism of the respondents. Each respondent was asked first to indicate the degree of ^This pamphlet was authored by the Rev. Roy B. Faulstick and is available from Trinity Lutheran Church, 480 Church Street, Wayland, Michigan. ! 21 I I importance he attached to each of these doctrines (ques tion 1). Then he was asked to state the extent of his agreement with each of these doctrines (question 2). Finally, as an additional measure to be utilized in deter mining the extent of a respondent's liberalism, he was asked to indicate his own self-concept regarding the ex tent of his liberalism. Although sixteen doctrines or tenets were included in the questionnaire, it was found, after subjecting the replies to the first three questions to a correlational and factor analysis, that only ten of the doctrinal state ments were suitable for precise differentiation between conservatism and liberalism. Doctrinal statements b, d, f, g, i, 1 and o (see Appendix A) had a loading of at least .79 on both the importance and agreement scales. But statement g produced generally low correlation coefficients (product-moment) with other items and a low coefficient of .25 between agreement and self-concept; therefore, it was eliminated. Doctrinal statements e and n had loadings of at least .82 on either the importance or the agreement scale. Both of these were eliminated, however, because of their relatively low correlations with other items and comparatively lower coefficients of .30 22 j land .24, respectively, between agreement and self-concept. Doctrinal statements c, k and p all had two or more high loadings on both the importance and the agreement scales, but produced comparatively low correlations with other items and comparatively low correlations between agreement and self-concept; they were also eliminated. Statements a, h, j and m were retained; each of these had high load ings on both the importance and agreement scales and produced comparatively high correlations with other items and between agreement and self-concept. Thus, of the original sixteen doctrinal statements, ten were retained for further use in this study, while six (c, e, g, k, n and p) were eliminated. The remainder of the questionnaire included ques tions about twenty-four social characteristics of the respondent. The two intervening variables were eventually selected from among these items, as well as the four status variables and three additional variables used to interpret some of the results. Measuring the Independent Variable of Status Consistency The four status dimensions have been described in Chapter I. At this point an explanation is given of how these dimensions were measured in this study. i Seminary Attended The logical divisions into which respondents were categorized were the following, as far as "seminary at tended" was concerned: St. Louis Highest status, scored 2 | Springfield Scored 1 Other Scored 0 Father's Occupation Here again, each respondent was categorized accord ing to one of the following three classifications: Pastor Highest status, scored 2 Parochial school teacher Scored 1 Layman Scored 0 Ethnicity Again there was a threefold natural division with respect to the variable of ethnicity: All-German Highest status, scored 2 Part-German Scored 1 Non-German Scored 0 ■Elective Church Offices The fourth independent variable also fell naturally into three divisions for purposes of analysis: Two or more offices Highest status, scored 2 One office Scored 1 j None Scored 0 The Consistency Scale In the estimation of the writer, the method used by 2 Elton J. Jackson for determining an individual's status crystallization is superior to that used by Lenski, and overcomes some of the objections to Lenski's method. Accordingly, Jackson's method was adapted for present use in characterizing an individual's status pattern in terms of the four status variables. The following scale of consistency resulted: Possible Status Status Description________ Patterns_________ Highly Same rank on all four 3333, 2222, 1111 Consistent dimensions 2 Elton F. Jackson, "Status Consistency and Symptoms of Stress," American Sociological Review, 27 (August, 1962), pp. 469-480. Status Description 25 Possible Status Patterns Moderately Consistent Three like ranks and one one rank removed 3332, 3222, 2221, 1112 Slightly Consistent Three like ranks and one two ranks removed 3331, 1113 Slightly Inconsistent Two like ranks and two one rank removed 3223, 3221, 1221 Moderately Inconsistent Two like ranks and one one rank removed and one two ranks removed 3231, 3112 Highly Inconsistent Two like ranks and two two ranks removed 3113 Measuring the Intervening Variables Association Patterns in Secular Organizations Each respondent was placed along a continuum of association in secular organizations according to the number of such organizations to which he belonged. The number ranged from zero to five. Horizontal Mobility The extent of a respondent's horizontal mobility was determined by an index which resulted from dividing the number of years a respondent had spent in the ministry — . - T6— since ordination by the number of congregations he had served during that period. The resulting value placed him along a continuum which ranged from one (highest j imobility) to fifty-three. Measuring the Dependent Variable of Doctrinal Liberalism A simplified system was used to place each respond ent on a conservative-liberal continuum regarding his doctrinal beliefs. It was decided to use the answers to Question 2; not only does "agreement" with doctrine seem logically to be a better indicator of conservatism- liberalism than "importance" of doctrine, but the factor analysis referred to previously also revealed slightly higher loadings for items in Question 2. Accordingly, the answer to each part of Question 2 (excluding doctrines c, e, g, k, n and p for the reasons given previously) was given a point value ranging from 0 ("agree completely") to 4 ("disagree completely"). Each respondent was then assigned the total of his answers to the doctrines in Question 2. This total provided an index of conservatism- liberalism which ranged from 0 (most conservative) to 40 (most liberal). 27 Testing the Hypothesis Verification of the hypothesis was attempted by computing zero-order (product-moment) or partial coeffi cients which assessed the following relationships: a. Correlation between the independent variable and the intervening variables. b. Respective correlations between the independent variable and the intervening variables. c. Respective correlations between the intervening variables and the dependent variable. d. Correlation between the independent variable and the dependent variable, holding the first intervening variable constant. e. Correlation between the independent variable and the dependent variable, holding the second intervening variable constant. f. Correlation between the independent variable and the dependent variable, holding both inter vening variables constant. CHAPTER III DATA AND FINDINGS The Independent Variable This chapter presents a statistical summary of the principal findings of the research. The reader will recall that four status indices were used: seminary attended, father's occupation, ethnicity, and synodical elective offices held. The dis tribution of the findings regarding the first of these variables is shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 SEMINARY ATTENDED Seminary Number Per cent St. Louis 212 76.8 Springfield 63 22.8 Other 1 0.4 Total 276 100.0 The frequency distribution of the sample closely approximates that currently provided by the Synod's Statistical Bureau, which listed the following percentages: St. Louis 71.1 per cent, Springfield 25.5 per cent, and Other 3.4 per cent. Table 2 describes the sample according to father's occupation; Table 3 shows its ethnic composition; and the distribution of offices held is exhibited in Table 4. TABLE 2 FATHER'S OCCUPATION Occupation Number Per cent Pastor 70 25.4 Teacher 7 2.5 Layman 199 72.1 Total 276 100.0 Classification of the respondents according to the Status Consistency Scale described in the preceding chapter resulted in the distribution displayed in Table 5. TABLE 3 ETHNICITY Nationality of Respondent Respondents Number Per cent All German 210 76.1 Part German 39 14.1 Non-German 27 9.8 Total 276 100.0 TABLE 4 SYNODICAL ELECTIVE OFFICES Number of Offices Respondents Number Per cent Two or more 36 13.0 One 90 32.6 None 150 54.4 Total 276 100.0 31 TABLE 5 STATUS CONSISTENCY OF RESPONDENTS Degree of Consistency Number Per cent Highly Consistent 7 2.5 Moderately Consistent 27 9.8 Slightly Consistent 52 18.8 Slightly Inconsistent 37 13.4 Moderately Inconsistent 84 30.5 Highly Inconsistent 69 25.0 Total 276 100.0 The Intervening Variables The distribution of memberships in secular organiza tions is summarized in Table 6, and that of horizontal mobility in Table 7. It would be expected that those with only a few years of service would tend to have a low average number of years in a parish, and that retired pastors would tend to show a higher average number of years in a parish. For this reason, the possibly confounding effects of age upon this variable are considered in the pages that follow. 32 TABLE 6 SECULAR ORGANIZATION ASSOCIATIONS Number of Number of Organizations Respondents None 151 One 69 Two 38 Three 14 Four 3 Five 1 TABLE 7 HORIZONTAL MOBILITY Average Years Number of Average Years Number of in Parish Respondents in Parish Respondents 1 23 14 4 2 21 15 3 3 38 4 29 16 9 5 31 17 2 18 2 6 25 19 1 7 17 20 1 8 12 9 18 21 0 10 4 22 1 23 0 11 15 24 0 12 6 25 2 13 3 TABLE 7 (continued) 33 Average Years Number of Average Years Number of in Parish Respondents in Parish Respondents 26 0 31 1 27 1 32 0 28 0 33 2 29 0 34 1 30 1 More than 34 3 The Dependent Variable In order to establish the conservative or liberal status of the respondents, the extent of agreement was determined with the ten selected doctrines. The results appear in Table 8. Scoring the respondents according to the ten doc trines taken together, yielded the distribution shown in Table 9. The Correlations Table 10 shows the degree of contingency between the independent variable (inconsistency) and the dependent variable (doctrinal liberalism). A high score indicates liberalism, in the latter instance, and a low score 34 TABLE 8 AGREEMENT WITH DOCTRINES Doctrines Degree of Agreement 0) < V ■u x: 0) a ) U 5 - 1 ■u 5 - 1 < u O C O b O P H M ■u < b O i —c o C O Q J. 4 - 1 Q J 4J C O M ‘ C O (0 C O C U'■U 1 ( 1 ) Hi Q J • r l o J - C C U < urH 0 ) X! P b O s W) I —I r - 4 < u & < u • u 4 J C O C O CU C O 0 n c o •H C O C U C O 0 + J t o OO W) o C U O •H X! •H o O < U «J & S !3 P ■U P o H A. Inspiration of the Bible B. Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch D. Literal interpretation of the fall of man F. Infallibility of the entire Bible 222 31 14 169 200 215 H. Old Testament prophecies 240 fulfilled in Jesus Christ I. Literal interpretation 177 of creation J. Immortality of the soul 230 58 41 39 31 27 9 3 53 32 19 7 16 23 10 10 2 11 0 3 276 276 276 276 276 276 276 L. Historicity of the Jonah account M. The Lutheran Confes sions 194 33 33 11 5 276 188 75 8 5 0 276 0. Authorship of Isaiah 174 34 43 15 10 276 35 TABLE 9 DISTRIBUTION OF DOCTRINE SCORES Doctrine Number of Score Respondents 0 132 1 23 2 23 3 4 4 6 5 9 6 10 7 5 8 4 9 3 10 6 11 6 12 10 13 4 14 2 15 3 16 4 17 3 18 2 19 2 20 1 Doctrine Number of Score Respondents 21 1 22 1 23 0 24 3 25 2 26 3 27 0 28 0 29 0 30 0 31 0 32 1 33 0 34 0 35 0 36 0 37 0 38 1 39 0 40 0 N H H H H O v O O O M O v I —* I —* I —* I —* I —* U l - P * to tO l- » O ' O O O v l O ' O O O O O t— 1 O O O t— 1 J _ i ( _ 1 o I —‘ H - » O N H H H O O O t— 1 O O O O t— ' t— 1 O O M I - 1 I - 1 H O U 4^- H O H H O N H O O U H H- 1 H - 1 tO tO t o ■ ! > ■ tO N J jS O C T N I — * O I — * I — * H - 1 O 1 —1 O O I —1 to O o t o to to H H H* OM0 4>>UlO In to M H O O O O O I -1 to to OUO-P-LnO to H O H H tO O \ lOONVOvlH to ■P-HOOO^vO to to to vo c y > •P' to to to O w o o o O rt n n f l > H- 03 3 fi> Highly Consistent Moderately Consistent ^ 09 Slightly n > Consistent ( D O H i Slightly Inconsistent §* 3 Moderately “• Inconsistent ” Highly g Inconsistent ^ Total INCONSISTENCY AND DOCTRINE SCORE - P * C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O C O to to N 5 N 5 N > N 5 N 3 to to Ovooo^Jcyi C n co N H o vo oo -j o\ cn -P - co to t-1 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O O t— 1 O OOOOO O O O O t-1 1— » o o o o OOOOO O O O O t-1 o o o o o o o o o o OOOOO OOOOO O O O O t-1 f— 1 C * J o o o OOOOO OOOOO O O O O t-1 OOOt-* 0 0 0 t - * 0 O O O O t-1 OOOOCO to W O H H o 03 o o o O rt M H f l > W C O p ( D Highly Consistent Moderately Consistent Slightly Consistent Slightly Inconsistent Moderately Inconsistent Highly Inconsistent Total CO ^4 Degree of Consistency 38 indicates conservatism. A scattergram indicated that the : I association is zero. The correlation coefficient (product- j moment) is .026; P is greater than .05 and thus is not significant. Table 11 shows the relationship between inconsistency and secular organization association (an intervening vari- j able). A scattergram of this distribution revealed a negative association. The correlation coefficient (product-j moment) is -.089; P is greater than .05 and thus is also j j not significant. i | TABLE 11 INCONSISTENCY AND SECULAR ORGANIZATION ASSOCIATIONS _ _ Number of Secular Organizations Degree of -_ Consistency 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total 27 ! ! 52 I i i 37 Highly Consistent Moderately Consistent Slightly Consistent Slightly Inconsistent 2 3 2 9 13 5 27 17 6 18 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 39---1 TABLE 11 (continued) Degree of Consistency Number of Secular Organizations 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total Moderately Inconsistent 51 10 15 7 1 0 84 Highly Inconsistent 44 16 5 4 0 0 69 Total 151 69 38 14 3 1 276 The relationship between inconsistency and the other intervening variable, horizontal mobility, is shown in Table 12. A scattergram revealed that the association is practically zero. The correlation coefficient (product- moment) is .058; P is greater than .05 and thus is not significant. TABLE 12 INCONSISTENCY AND HORIZONTAL MOBILITY Degree of Average Years in One Parish Consistency 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 Highly Consistent 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 Moderately Consistent 0 0 4 5 2 3 3 0 4 0 0 0 Slightly Consistent 0 3 3 6 4 9 1 1 3 0 6 1 TABLE 12 (continued) _ „ Average Years in One Parish Degree of -------- ---------------------------- Consistency 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 11 Slightly Inconsistent 0 4 2 7 6 3 4 0 1 1 1 0 Moderately Inconsistent 0 9 6 12 6 7 4 5 6 2 5 3 Highly Inconsistent _0 _7 __6 _8 10 _7 _3 _5 __4 _1 _3 2 Total 0 23 21 38 29 31 17 12 18 4 15 6 TABLE 12 (continued) Average Years in One Parish Consistency 12 13 14' 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Highly Consistent 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Moderately Consistent 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slightly Consistent 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Slightly Inconsistent 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Moderately Inconsistent 0 2 0 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Highly Inconsistent 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 3 4 3 9 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 TABLE 12 (continued) Degree of Average Years in One Parish Consistency 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 33-- Highly Consistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 TABLE 12 (continued) Degree of Consistency Average Years in One Parish 1 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 33f Moderately Consistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 ! Slightly Consistent 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 i : Slightly Inconsistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i Moderately Inconsistent 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o i i Highly Inconsistent 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Total 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 3 Tables showing the distributions of status incon- ! i i sistency and the intervening variables and of doctrinal j liberalism and the intervening variables have not been j included, for it was thought that they were too lengthy to be informative, or not essential to an understanding of the results. The correlation between inconsistency and secular organization associations was found to be -.089; a scattergram indicated a negative association; P is greater | than .05 and not significant. The correlation between inconsistency and horizontal mobility was found to be .058; a scattergram indicated an almost zero association; P is greater than .05 and not significant. The correlation 42 between doctrinal liberalism and secular organization associations was found to be .164; a scattergram revealed a positive association; P is less than .01 and is signifi cant. The correlation between doctrinal liberalism and horizontal mobility was found to be .145; a scattergram revealed a positive association; P is less than .05 and is significant. Table 13 lists the coefficients which have already been described, as well as the remaining ones indicated by the hypotheses at the end of Chapter II. It should be noted that a correlation of .16 is necessary for signifi cance at the .01 level, and a correlation of .12 at the .05 level. TABLE 13 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS Distributions Correlated Coefficient and Significance Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism .026 ** Inconsistency and Secular Organization Associations -.089 ** Inconsistency and Horizontal Mobility .058 ** Secular Organization Associations and Doctrinal Liberalism 164 * TABLE 13 (continued) 43 Distributions Correlated Coefficient and Significance Horizontal Mobility and Doctrinal Liberalism .145 * Secular Organization Associations and Horizontal Mobility .036 * * Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism, Holding Secular Organization Associations Constant .044 * * Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism, Holding Horizontal Mobility Constant .018 * * Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism, Holding Secular Organization Associations and Horizontal Mobility Constant .037 ** * Significant ** Not significant CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS The High Degree of Status Inconsistency The data indicate a high degree of status inconsist ency, as was displayed in Table 5 (cf. supra, page 31). Two thirds (65.8 per cent) of the respondents revealed more inconsistency than consistency of status. Thus, consistency was atypical, and inconsistency may actually have received normative support within the clergy. Agreement with Specific Doctrines In analyzing agreement with doctrine (Table 8), it was noted by the investigator, himself a clergyman within the Synod, that the more important the doctrinal statement, the more agreement with it there was. The Synod under study emphasized the varying degrees of importance of its doctrines. In its dogmatics books, for example, it fre quently distinguished "fundamental" doctrines (necessary for salvation) from "non-fundamental" doctrines (not necessary for salvation). Questions concerning authorship 44 45 of certain biblical books have never been considered to be j "fundamental" issues. Thus there was little surprise in j finding that the lowest levels of agreement occurred with doctrines b and c, which had to do with the authorship, respectively, of the Pentateuch and Isaiah. At the other j extreme were doctrines a, f, h and j, which had to do with the inspiration, inerrancy, and prophecies of the Bible, j I as well as the immortality of the soul. Occupying a mid- j position in agreement were doctrines d, i, 1 and m, which j referred to the fall of man, divine creation, the histor icity of Jonah, and the confessions of the church. In the case of doctrinal statements d, i and 1, it may be assumed that current claims by modern Bible scholars of myths in the Bible have produced diminishing agreement on the part of the respondents. Doctrinal Liberalism The reader may be surprised that so little doctrinal liberalism appeared to be revealed by the data (see Table 9 on page 35). In fact, 47.8 per cent of the respondents showed absolutely no liberalism. Taking the mid-point score of 20 as an arbitrary division, only 5.1 per cent leaned more toward liberalism than toward conservatism. 46 There is some reason to believe, on the other hand, that a major difference exists between political and religious doctrines. Admittedly, many feel strongly in their political convictions. However, the greater import ance of religious beliefs may be assumed in the case of most clergymen. Thus, distinctions should be made between Lenski's political liberalism and this Synod's doctrinal liberalism. First, Lenski studied the general population of a large city. Within it, one might suppose, were some persons who took their politics seriously and others to whom it was less serious. The present study referred to individuals who tended to be serious indeed about the attitude assessed. Hence, differing results could be expected. A second consideration here is that, unlike political beliefs, religious beliefs have more serious consequences for those who hold them. The political beliefs which Lenski studied had only temporal significance, whereas most religious beliefs have eternal connotations. There fore, a person might be expected to retain his religious beliefs more firmly than his political beliefs. And, since earlier religious beliefs such as those studied here tended to be more conservative than those surrounding contemporary 47 politics in the United States, one should again expect to find less liberalism in religious beliefs than in political beliefs. | Third, the clergymen of this particular denomination | take a vow at ordination time to adhere to certain specific j religious teachings. No such loyalty is expected of a political adherent in this country. Thus, for this reason also, clergymen would be less inclined to liberalize their religious views. Fourth, a person who changes or liberalizes his political beliefs is generally not subjected to severe | pressure, to investigation, or to possible loss of position. On the other hand, if a clergyman of the Synod were to express a liberal attitude toward his church teachings, he would be subject to investigation and to possible de frocking, loss of pastorate, and removal from the Synodical roster. Thus, group pressures operate in the direction of conservatism. For these reasons, the inclination to remain con servative is much stronger for a clergyman of the Synod studied than for a holder of certain political beliefs within a Western democracy. 48 Status Inconsistency and Right-Wing Extremism ] A study by Gary B. Rush tested the hypothesis that ! i i right-wing extremism is a possible political response to j status inconsistency. In an article describing this j i studyRush pointed to the earlier observation by Lipset and Bendix that class discrepancies seemed to predispose j | groups or individuals to accept extremist views. Lipset I i | had noted that five national right-wing movements— ! McCarthyism, Poujadism, Italian Fascism, and Nazism— had j appealed principally to the self-employed urban and middle classes, whose status was in the process of decline. This j and other evidence pointed to the possibility that poorly crystallized status or status inconsistency could also contribute to a predisposition to right-wing extremism. I Lenski himself admitted this possibility when he wrote: In connection with this finding, Gordon has commented that this may be but part of a still more general tendency for persons with poorly ^Gary B. Rush, "Status Consistency and Right- Wing Extremism," American Sociological Review, 32 (February, 1967), pp. 86-92. 49 crystallized status to adopt extreme political positions, whether on the extreme left or the extreme right.2 Rush tested this hypothesis and found that a rela tionship did exist between inconsistent status and right- wing political extremism. Thus, the possibility must be j considered that the high level of doctrinal conservatism j evoked in the present study may be a consequence of the j appreciable rates of status inconsistency among_the clergy- j j men involved. In terms of Rush's findings, it does seem possible that both consistency and inconsistency could have had the same effect, but for different reasons. The Intervening Variables Also surprising are the low membership rates in secular organizations (see Table 6, page 32). More than half of the respondents claimed no such association. Perhaps this is a carryover from the separationist, isola tionist, closed-cultural and ethnocentric outlook that pervaded the Synod in past years. For most of its years, the Synod had very little to do with any ecumenical Gerhard E. Lenski, "Status Participation and Status Crystallization," American Sociological Review. 21 (August, 1956), footnote 3, p. 459. 50 “ ] i : i movements among churches. In fact, it even had little | fellowship with other Lutheran church groups. Under these I circumstances it is understandable that the clergy of the j Synod would be slow to form even secular associations. j j The respondents' horizontal mobility (see Table 7, j pages 32-33) displays a different pattern. There appears to have been a moderate amount of horizontal mobility j among the clergy of this church group. This, also, is j I understandable. Whereas frequent changing of pastorates j tends to be frowned upon, and switching pastorates after only one or two years of service is generally discouraged, it is still not considered totally unacceptable to leave a pastorate after only three years of service. A pastor leaves a parish and accepts a call to another parish when he feels divine inspiration to do so. According to church practice, there can be no argument about a matter so per sonal. Another factor that influences greater mobility is the recent shortage of pastors in this Synod, a situa tion that offers greater opportunities for pastors to receive calls to other congregations. This more recent phenomenon is offset, however, by the overproduction of pastors during the years of economic depression in this country. 51 I t Inconsistency and Doctrinal Liberalism j r " " " Table 13 (cf. supra t pages 42-43) showed the insig- j nificant correlation of .026 between inconsistency and ! doctrinal liberalism. Skewness in the latter variable j i prevented the search for a U-shaped bivariate distribution implied by the Rush study. The absence of correlation might lead to the supposition at once that the general j i hypothesis of this research failed to be supported. If this interpretation is correct, further evidence has been j provided against the universality of Lenski's assertion that status inconsistency produces political liberalism. It has been noted that the Rush study showed a positive association between status inconsistency and political right-wing extremism. It should also be noted that Kenkel's replication of Lenski's original study produced contradictory evidence. Kenkel discovered that respond ents who were classified as status consistent or status I inconsistent did not differ from one another in their 3 William F. Kenkel, "The Relationship between Status Consistency and Political Economic Attitudes," American Sociological Review, 21 (June, 1965), pp. 365- 368. 52 j 4 political attitudes. More recent findings by Brandmeyer i and Kelly and Chambliss'* also yielded results which differed from Lenski's original findings. Inconsistency, the Intervening Variables. j i and Doctrinal Liberalism j Although the failure of status inconsistency to predict doctrinal orientations removed a necessary condi tion for partial analyses which made use of the interven ing variables, the partial correlation coefficients were computed and are discussed here as a heuristic aid to the reader who may be unfamiliar with this mode of causal analysis. The intervening variables introduced were secular organization associations and horizontal mobility. Table 13 also indicated the correlation between inconsistency and secular organization associations, which proved to be -.089. As indicated in the preceding chapter, this correlation is I »■! ■■■ I ■■ I »l I I I » I I ........ ...... ■ I I ■ M I I ■■■< — ^ — 1 ■ ... ■— ■■■ .1— . i ^G. Brandmeyer, "Status Inconsistency and Political Behavior: A Replication and Extension of Research," Sociological Quarterly, 6 (Summer, 1965), pp. 241-256. ^K. D. Kelly and W. J. Chambliss, "Status Incon sistency and Political Attitudes," American Sociological Review. 31 (June, 1966), pp. 375-382. 53 not curvilinear, and it is not significant. When secular i organization associations were viewed in terms of doctrinal j liberalism, however, a positive correlation of .164 was j i obtained, and this correlation is significant at the .01 j l I level. Because of the negative correlation between incon- j sistency and secular organization associations a low coef- ! ficient of .044 was obtained when inconsistency was examined in terms of liberalism while holding secular organizations constant. This partial coefficient failed to achieve significance and thus failed to depart from its zero order counterpart. j Similar results were obtained when horizontal mobility was used as an intervening variable. The correla tion coefficient between inconsistency and horizontal mobility was .058, as was seen in Table 13, pages 42-43. The relationship is neither curvilinear nor significant. When the association between horizontal mobility and doc trinal liberalism was examined, the coefficient was found to be .145 (see Table 13). This value is significant at the .05 level. But, introduction of mobility failed to alter the conclusion of no association between inconsist ency and liberalism (the partial coefficient shown in Table 13 was .018). « 54 Holding both of the intervening variables constant at once again failed to yield a significant relationship between inconsistency and doctrinal liberalism (a partial coefficient of .037 was given in Table 13). In the search for other correlates of the dependent variable, one might expect the younger pastors to be more inclined than others to move away from doctrinal conserv atism. There are two reasons why this might hold true. First, it is only in recent years that general Protestant liberalism has increased rapidly. Second, it is accepted in many quarters that the faculties of the Synod's prepar atory colleges and seminaries, especially the St. Louis seminary, have become doctrinally more liberal. Accord ingly, respondents' ages were considered. Data summarized in Table 14 pertain to the age groupings of the sample, and those displayed in Table 15 pertain to the distribu tion of inconsistency and age. The correlation coefficient yielded by this bi- variate distribution is .082, a value which is not sig nificant. When age was considered with doctrinal liber alism, however, a correlation of .313 was obtained, and this correlation is significant at the .01 level. As might be expected, the correlation between inconsistency TABLE 14 AGES OF RESPONDENTS Age Group Number of in Years Respondents 106-110 2 101-105 0 96-100 1 92-95 1 86-91 0 81-85 5 76-80 7 71-75 9 66-70 18 61-65 19 56-60 16 51-55 24 46-50 34 41-45 33 36-40 30 31-35 40 26-30 37 21-25 __0 Total 276 TABLE 15 INCONSISTENCY AND AGE OF RESPONDENTS Number of Respondents in Age Groups o m o 1 — 1 o o m O m rH i— i 1 — 1 Ov Ov 00 1 V O i t— i V O i— i V O r 4 O o Ov Ov 00 00 i — i l —! o m o m o m o m o m o m .........„. _. oor^r'.'£>vDmm<i-<i-c’ OcocM Degree of i i i > ■ ■ • f ' * 1 • ■ * • ° . vOr-lvOr-llOi-llOTHlO>-llOr-<iOi-1vOHlOi-< Consistency o o ov ov oo co r-.r'~ioiomin<i-'d-oococ\jcM Total Highly Consistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 7 Moderately Consistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 5 4 4 4 4 0 0 27 Slightly Consistent 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 2 6 2 5 3 6 5 6 7 4 0 52 Slightly Inconsistent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 5 7 5 6 4 5 0 37 Moderately Inconsistent 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 7 7, 6 b 9 10 9 10 15 0 84 Highly Inconsistent 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 7 7 4 15 13 0 69 Total 2 0 1 1 0 5 7 9 18 19 16 24 34 33 30 40 37 0 276 57 i and doctrinal liberalism was still virtually zero when age was held constant (r is .001) . Length of career could also have had some influence upon the results. It was considered possible that those who were in the pastorate for the shortest length of time might display more liberal views toward doctrine. Dates of ordination were used to compute length of career, and their distribution is displayed in Table 16. TABLE 16 DATE OF ORDINATION OF RESPONDENTS Date of Ordina- Number of tion Period Respondents 1881-1890 0 1891-1900 1 1901-1910 4 1911-1920 23 1921-1930 35 1931-1940 37 1941-1950 60 1951-1960 65 Over 1960 51 Total 276 58 The bivariate distribution which was formed by inconsistency and date of ordination is presented in Table 17. TABLE 17 INCONSISTENCY AND DATE OF ORDINATION Degree of Consistency 4J 4J d d d JJ >> 4J 4J o> ! > t <D 0 ) d«-<d d w h u .u at <u <u >.<u > % t n < u t o m 4-> 4-J 4J H 4J H * H 4J W ( 0 C O 4 J C O W M (0 O) >tlO . , - i H . r l H * H X S - H J 3 d H d r - « C Period of .d t o < u w wjcn mo c u o £ 0 . . ood-dd-Hd-rio’ do mo . Ordination - h o oot-ior-idod jjd Total W o a o coo coh an K h 1881-1890 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1891-1900 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1901-1910 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 1911-1920 0 3 5 2 5 8 23 1921-1930 1 3 7 2 14 8 35 1931-1940 2 4 6 5 11 9 37 1941-1950 4 9 11 10 16 10 60 1951-1960 0 4 13 13 16 19 65 After 1960 0 4 _6 _5 22 14 51 Total 7 27 52 37 84 69 276 This distribution yielded a correlation coefficient of .09, a value which is not significant. When the asso ciation between date of ordination and doctrinal liberalism 59 was considered, however, a correlation coefficient of .345 was observed. This value is significant at the .01 level. But introduction of the date of ordination as a test variable yielded the anticipated insignificant partial coefficient of .01 between inconsistency and liberalism. Location might also have affected the results. For many years it has been said that pastors in the north eastern section of the country, as well as pastors of the English District of the Synod were more inclined toward liberal doctrines and practices than were the pastors in other districts of the Synod. At the same time, pastors of those districts are also generally known to be more ecumenically minded. The following Table 18 shows the distribution by location of clergymen. TABLE 18 LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS Geographic Location Number of Respondents Northeast and English 29 Other 247 Total 276 60 The distribution of inconsistency by location is displayed in Table 19. TABLE 19 INCONSISTENCY AND GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS Degree of Consistency Geographic Location of Respondents Northeast and English Other Total Highly Consistent 1 6 7 Moderately Consistent 1 26 27 Slightly Consistent 10 42 52 Slightly Inconsistent 3 34 37 Moderately Inconsistent 6 78 84 Highly Inconsistent 8 61 69 Total 29 247 276 The correlation between these variables is an insignificant .025. When the association between location and doctrinal liberalism was considered, a correlation of .152 was observed, which is significant at the .05 level. Introduction of location as a test variable yielded the 61 anticipated insignificant partial correlation of .029. Additional partial analyses were conducted in the light of the appreciable correlations between liberalism and the three additional intervening variables which had | been introduced. The question whether these findings could j t not explain the association between liberalism and the j I initial two intervening variables of secular organization j t associations and horizontal mobility required answer. | Table 20 provides the necessary zero order correlation coefficients. It may be observed that only horizontal mobility considered in conjunction with age and date of ordination yielded significant correlation coefficients. Indeed, these variables did prove capable of explaining the association between mobility and liberalism, the respective partial correlation coefficients being -.065 and -.08. Retrospectively, mobility and seniority may have borne an artifactual relationship to one another, since earlier jobs tend to be less stable than later ones. Thus the socializing influences of recent training eras, location in an innovative area, and secular member ships outside the church appeared to account for doctrinal liberalism— but only in part. Other influences have yet to be explored in other research. 62 TABLE 20 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS INVOLVING INTERVENING VARIABLES Coefficients and Distributions Correlated Significance Secular Organization Associations and Horizontal Mobility .036 * * Secular Organization Associations and Age .115 * * Secular Organization Associations and Date of Ordination .112 * * Secular Organization Associations and Location .007 * * Horizontal Mobility and Age .600 * Horizontal Mobility and Date of Ordination .602 * Horizontal Mobility and Location -.036 ** Age and Doctrinal Liberalism .313 * Date of Ordination and Doctrinal Liberalism .345 * Location and Doctrinal Liberalism .152 * Horizontal Mobility and Doctrinal Liberalism, Holding Age Constant -.065 ** Horizontal Mobility and Doctrinal Liberalism, Holding Date of Ordination Constant -.080 ** * Significant * * Not significant 63 Summary of Findings The general hypothesis in this study was the following: The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination. Using a sample of the clergy j of The Lutheran Church— Missouri Synod, it was found that the correlation between status inconsistency and doctrinal liberalism was not significantly different from zero. In view of the reasons stated earlier, it is possible to understand the rationale behind this negative finding. The first subsidiary hypothesis in this study was as follows: The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doc trinal position of his denomination, in the light of the relatively larger number of secular organizations with which he is associated when compared with his peers. Non-confirmation of the main hypothesis meant non confirmation of the present one. The second subsidiary hypothesis was as follows: The greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination, in the light of his greater horizontal mobility. The second subsidiary hypothesis also failed ■ | to be confirmed, again because of failure in the confirma- j tion of the main hypothesis. The same held true of the final subsidiary hypothe sis, which held that the greater his status inconsistency, the more liberal is the clergyman's attitude toward the doctrinal position of his denomination, in the light of both of the aforementioned intervening variables taken together. On the other hand, the initial two intervening variables, plus the three additional intervening variables had their anticipated positive effect upon doctrinal lib eralism. Perhaps because of marked skewness in the latter variable, these effects were not always pronounced, even though they were significant. Of the intervening variables, horizontal mobility was eliminated as a factor when both age and date of ordination proved capable of explaining its association with doctrinal liberalism. Thus, secular organization associations, age, date of ordination, and location did demonstrate some effect upon doctrinal liberalism. CHAPTER V THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS The growing number of journal articles, dissertations and book chapters concerned with status consistency is one indication of reasonably widespread acceptance of the con cept's theoretical utility. From the very beginning of its i appearance in the sociological literature, however, ques tions have been raised about the reliability and validity of its assessment. Reference has already been made to some lack of reliability witnessed by research which produced ! results contradictory to Lenski's findings and which also suggested vagueness, ambiguity and imprecision in the concept. The present study, related as it is to Lenski1s study, also produced results at variance with his; it thus also points to ambiguity in the concept, or at least to problems in its operational definition. It is the validity of status consistency theory, however, which has come under increasingly sharp criticism. The findings of the present study also contribute to this 65 66 trend. Much past criticism of the concept has stemmed from methodological and statistical sources. Blalock'*' I has treated the "identification problem" at length, main taining that the effects of status per se and of incon sistency are confounded in these studies; also that j ] inconsistency is a variable composed of the difference of j i several other variables and is not itself a separate entity.j Furthermore, the variables which are often used to test ! consistency (variables such as income, education and occu pation) are not mutually independent, but rather, are quite I ! highly intercorrelated; thus, it becomes a nearly impossible I task to separate their differential effects. The present study, aimed at partial replication of Lenski's studies, could not very well avoid the "identifi cation problem" which Blalock had described. It is felt, H. M. Blalock, Jr., "Comment: Status Inconsistency and the Identification Problem," Public Opinion Quarterly, 30 (Spring, 1966), pp. 130-132; "The Identification Problem and Theory Building: The Case of Status Inconsistency," American Sociological Review, 31 (February, 1966), pp. 52-61; "Tests of Status Inconsistency: A Note of Caution," Pacific Sociological Review, 10 (Fall, 1967), pp. 69-74; "Status Inconsistency, Social Mobility, Status Integration and Structural Effects," American Sociological Review, 32 (October, 1967), pp. 790-800; "Status Inconsistency and Interaction: Some Alternative Models," American Jour nal of Sociology, 73 (November, 1967), pp. 305-315. ;however, that the second methodological problem— one of the nonindependence among variables— has been avoided, and perhaps this is one reason for results which differed from those of Lenski. It appears that there are much more important reasons for the difference in results. The following considerations led to its recognition. The theory of status consistency is sequential in the sense that certain status configurations lead to stress which, in turn, produces strain-reducing behavior. It can be argued, however, that it is not the status con figuration but the stress which produces such strain- reducing behavior as political liberalism. Viewed in a related way, it is not the theorist or the investigator who determines whether the respondent is consistent or inconsistent; rather, it is the respondent himself who 2 makes this determination. Thus, it is stress subjec tively experienced rather than status consistency objec tively defined which determines the strain-reducing behavior of the respondents. From this it may also be 2 Credit for many of the viewpoints expressed in this and the following chapter belongs to Nico Stehr and his article, "Status Consistency: The Theoretical Concept and Its Empirical Referent," Pacific Sociological Review, 11 (Fall, 1968), pp. 95-99. inferred that status inconsistency is not necessarily related to stress. Finally, it should also be noted that stress could result from other factors likely to be found in certain status configurations, factors such as socio logical ambivalence, multiple reference groups, or differential role expectations.^ There also is evidence in the present findings that the theoretical concept of status consistency defined by Lenski needs further study with special attention di rected to its empirical referent. This study suggested that it is stress subjectively experienced rather than status consistency objectively defined which produces strain-reducing behavior such as doctrinal liberalism. Statistically significant correlations were found between doctrinal liberalism on the one hand and secular organiz- tion associations, age, date of ordination, and location on the other. The latter variables may be taken as indi cators of the presence of stress in the respondent, which 3 For further suggestions concerning status incon sistency concepts reformulated in terms of behavior con flict theory, see D. W. Lachenmeyer, "Status Inconsistency as a Subset of Behavioral Conflict," Pacific Sociological Review, 11 (Fall, 1968), pp. 81-94. This article is also to be credited with furnishing insights into Blalock's criticisms referred to in this chapter. 69 has been alluded to in previous sections of this study. It is evidently such stress, rather than the status incon sistency per se, that produced doctrinal liberalism. This seems to support the contention that status inconsistency j is not necessarily related to stress, and that stress can be produced by other factors likely to be associated with ! | certain status configurations. In addition, very little has been written regarding the liberalism that status inconsistency has been assumed to produce. The present study was not able to confirm this finding by Lenski. This points to the possibility that the idea of a liberal reaction must also be qualified. Admittedly, as many others have demonstrated, stress does produce unpleasant experiences which may, in turn, produce liberalism. What seems to have been overlooked, in the main, is that circumstances must admit liberalism, whether political or religious, as a possible reaction. Evidently, as in the present study, there sometimes are deterrents to employing liberalism as an outlet for dissatisfaction. In the present study, liberalizing attitudes toward doc trine involved denial by the respondents of a vow of loyalty to the stated doctrines of the church. There may also have been other undetected factors which prevented I dissatisfied clergymen from adopting liberal attitudes toward their church's doctrines. Similarly, Lenski's political liberalism should also be considered in con junction with the factors which might prevent or encourage its occurrence among certain respondents. Thus, while the present study has been successful in demonstrating the effects of both youth and outside association upon departure from the ideology of a social system, it also, like others before it, points to the need for reevaluation of the empirical referents of both status inconsistency and the liberalism it theoretically produces. CHAPTER VI SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH A significant contribution which the present study has made to status consistency theory is to have high lighted the necessity and importance of the intervening variable. For reasons suggested in the preceding chapter, the intervening variable can help to solve some of the theoretical questions posed by conceptions of status inconsistency and the liberalism which it is supposed to produce. The part played by status inconsistency in effecting liberalism could have been isolated through the simultaneous use of several intervening variables, had such a part been found. Some such variables, which might be controlled wherever Lenski's hypothesis receives support, include the definition of status by significant others in the status groups, the degree to which inconsistency is sub jective or objective, the individual psychological mechanisms and/or group supportive mechanisms which 72 !might operate to reduce stress, the age of the respondent, the type of society with which he interacts, and the extent of his mobility (horizontal or vertical). In short, the test variables should shed light upon two important factors: the importance of a certain status pattern to an individual and its relevance to the individual in social interaction. The intervening variables should be individual and group-specific, rather than universal and societal. In the case of the present study, it would be advisable to attempt replication, but adding intervening variables such as those listed above. Introduction of one intervening variable is especially important— namely, the pressures to attitudinal conformity which exist in the particular group. This would help to answer the principal question posed by the results which were dis cussed in earlier chapters: Is Lenski's theory of status consistency invalid, or has the present study concerned itself with clergymen who are characteristic neither of all clergymen nor of the population in general? I i APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ! i i 73 74 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Suppose you were asked to judge whether a certain pastor of our Synod is in good standing doctrinally in our Synod. How important in your estimation would it be that he adhere to each of the following doctrines or tenets? (Please check only one in each of the items below.) In most cases these items are self-explanatory. If there is any question as to the meaning of any tenet please use the connotation of that tenet as tradition ally taught in the Synod and as generally held by Franz Pieper or J.T. Mueller in their respective books both titled Christian Dogmatics. a. The verbal and plenary inspiration of the Bible. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. b. The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. c. The resurrection of the body. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. i The literal interpretation of Genesis 3 (the fall of man) . of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The inerrancy and infallibility of the entire Bible. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The deity of Christ. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The teaching that there are Old Testament prophecies of the Savior that have been ful filled in Jesus Christ. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 (creation). of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The immortality of the soul. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. iii 77 1. The historicity of the Jonah account. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. m. The teaching that The Lutheran Confessions are completely a correct exposition of the Scriptures of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. n. The teaching that salvation is alone through faith in Jesus Christ. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. o. Isaiah's authorship of the entire book of Isaiah. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. iv 78 p. The doctrine of the Trinity. of greatest importance. of great importance. of neither great nor little importance. of little importance. of no importance. 2. Indicate your personal agreement or disagreement with the tenets listed below; each tenet is to be under stood as traditionally taught in the Synod and as generally held by Pieper and Mueller in their respec tive books both titled Christian Dogmatics. (Please check one of the five possible replies in each of the items.) a. The verbal and plenary inspiration of the Bible. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. b. The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. v The resurrection of the body. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. The literal interpretation of Genesis 3 (the fall of man). I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. The inerrancy and infallibility of the entire Bible. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. 80 The deity of Christ. I' agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. The teaching that there are Old Testament prophecies of the Savior that have been fulfilled in Jesus Christ. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. _ I disagree entirely. The literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 (creation). I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. The immortality of the soul. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. vii k. The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. 1. The historicity of the Jonah account. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. m. The teaching that The Lutheran Confessions are com' pletely a correct exposition of the Scriptures. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. n. The teaching that salvation is alone through faith in Jesus Christ. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. viii 82 o. Isaiah's authorship of the entire book of Isaiah. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. p. The doctrine of the Trinity. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. 3. As far as Lutheran doctrine is concerned, I consider myself completely liberal. liberal for the most part. neither liberal nor conservative. conservative for the most part. completely conservative. 4. In the last ten years I have become doctrinally more liberal. more conservative. unchanged. ix 83 5. My interest in liturgies could be described as very high. high. low. medium. very low. 6. A member of an unchristian lodge or fraternal organiza tion ordinarily should not be admitted to communicant membership in congregations of our Synod. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. 7. A congregation should have a parochial school where possible. I agree entirely. I agree for the most part. I neither agree nor disagree. I disagree for the most part. I disagree entirely. 8. My present age (in years) is: ______________ . 9. My nationality background is (German, English, French-German, etc.): ;10. I am: married. single. x 84 11. The Lutheran Synod in which I was confirmed was: 12. I was reared in: a rural-farm area. a rural non-farm area. a village of less than 2,500 population. a city of 2,501 to 10,000 population. a city of 10,001 to 100,000 population. a city of over 100,000 population. 13. The communicant membership of the largest congrega tion I served was (or is) : 14. The population of the largest city where I served as pastor was (or is): If rural-farm area, check here:_______ If rural non-farm area, check here:___ 15. My father's religious affiliation for most of his life was (include Synod, if applicable): My mother's religious affiliation for most of her life was (indicate Synod, if applicable): 16. Before courtship my wife was: a communicant member of The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod. a communicant member of a Lutheran church of another synod. riot a communicant member of a Lutheran church. xi .. 85 17. The principal occupation of my father is or was (please be specific; e.g., not just "teacher," but "elementary Lutheran school teacher"): 18. The number of years I attended a Lutheran elementary school was: . 19. The number of years I attended a Lutheran high school (including synodically operated high schools j at our junior colleges) was: _____________ . j i 20. Colleges and seminaries of our . ynod which I attended | were: I 21. Other colleges I attended and number of courses taken j (e.g., Northwestern University— 6 courses): I i in 22. Area (or areas) of study in the colleges listed i question 21 (e.g., theology, sociology, etc.): 23. I read regularly the following religious periodicals (please check): The Lutheran Witness and Reporter. Concordia Theological Monthly. The Confessional Lutheran. The American Lutheran. Dialog. The Lutheran Layman. The Christian Century. Lutheran News. Una Sancta. Christianity Today. xix 86 This Day. The Lutheran Scholar. Arena. Others (Please list): _______________________ 24. My position in Synod is: parish pastor. emeritus pastor. candidate (c.r.m.). foreign missionary. _faculty member of a synodical college or “seminary. other (state which):______________________ 25. The year I was ordained 26. I now hold or have held the following District or Synodical elective offices: 27. During my ministry I have served the following number of congregations ____________ . 28. The District of Synod to which I belong is: 29. I would characterize my political leanings as: conservative Republican. liberal Republican. conservative Democratic. liberal Democratic. xiii 87 f j | ________ independent. other (state which):_______________________________ 30. I now hold or have held membership in the following secular organizations: 31. Besides the Bible, the following book or person (name ! and position) or religious movement influenced me most, doctrinaTTy: 32. The school having the greatest influence on me, doctrinally, was: the synodical junior college I attended. the synodical senior college I attended. the synodical seminary I attended. the non-synodical college I attended. other (state which):_________________________ ANY OTHER COMMENT YOU CARE TO MAKE: xiv THANK YOU VERY MUCH APPENDIX B LETTERS TO RESPONDENTS 89 90 LETTERS TO RESPONDENTS First Letter to All Respondents September 10, 1966 A.D. Dear Brother: I am making a study of the doctrinal leanings, together with some possible social correlates, of the pastors of our synod. Your name was chosen in a random sample to be one of the respondents. I will greatly appreciate your cooperation in this study, which is merely an attempt to determine the status quo. Please fill out the enclosed survey questionnaire. Experience has shown that it takes only a few minutes to do so. Your replies will also be kept strictly anonymous and will be used for tabulation purposes only. You will note that we have a number on the upper right corner of the questionnaire to identify this reply. As soon as we receive your filled-out questionnaire, we will clip off this identifying number, and your replies will remain completely anonymous. Be sure to answer each question. After you have filled out the questionnaire com pletely, place it into the enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope and drop it into the mail. I will appreciate very much if you can do this at your earliest convenience. Right now if possible. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. I wish you every success in your efforts for the Kingdom. Yours fraternally, (signed) Harold J. Maleske Second Letter to Respondents in the United States October 15, 1966 A.D. j i "Was ist los?" | j About a month ago I asked your help in my study, but I haven't heard from you, although I did hear from j a good many others. Did you lose the questionnaire? Another is enclosed. Did you forget about it? This will serve as a reminder. Tired of answering questionnaires? I feel this one is very important, and it really does only take a few minutes to complete. Some expressed their delight that it actually did take only a few minutes. Afraid your identity will be revealed? You have my word as a fellow pastor that your identity will never be revealed. But, if you still have doubts, clip off the identifying number, and send the completed questionnaire anyway. But, so that I may know that you have returned your questionnaire, send in the enclosed self-addressed card after writing your name on it. Then I won't bother you anymore. In fact, you might even ask your post master to cancel the stamp on the reply envelope without putting the name of your town on it. Or you might send it to your brotherinlaw in Cherokee Creek and ask him to mail it for you. In fact, you can also answer all the questions in such a way that you could not ever be identified as the respondent. Always remember, I will protect your identity completely. Hundreds have thus far shown their trust in me. Won't you? Who is Harold J. Maleske? My congregation just celebrated my 25th anniversary, and I am sending you the service program which includes a brief biography. ' 92 Who is sponsoring this project? Only myself, and at this point I want to tell you about my twofold interest! in it. It will serve as a basis for a dissertation in | sociology, but through it I want to do what I consider a real service for our Synod. I believe that such a study would be valuable, if only to serve as a basic study from which other studies can be made over time, to detect trends in Synod. Incidentally, I am also footing all expenses (which is not easy on a preacher's salary). Does the study have official synodical sanction? This is not sponsored by Synod, but both the president of Synod and of my District were informed of the project and okayed my surveying pastors of our District in the pretesting of the questionnaire. How valid is the questionnaire? It's not perfect, but it has been carefully pretested and guided also by a number of knowledgeable sociologists and a Ph.D. in religion in our own Synod. There are good reasons why it appears in its present form, even though you may have some question about some of its parts. Will the results be published? So many have asked to see the results, and we hope to make them known if the final results of the study indicate that it would be helpful to do so. In the latter case, we would probably offer the information to the mass media of Synod. Since some Synod-wide survey results have been widely criticized, it is easy to chicken out in the matter of publishing such information. There! I have given you the kinds of information that you may have desired before you would fill out the questionnaire. If you need further information, please write to me. But by all means, please fill out the questionnaire, for the closer I get to a 100% response the more reliable the results will be. Do it now! Thank you! (signed) Hal Maleske 93 Third Letter to U. S. Respondents November 12, 1966 A.D. Dear Brother: The current (Nov. 6) Lutheran Witness Reporter exemplifies the importance of the kind of study that I am undertaking. It contains information on the Opinions of some of our pastors regarding woman sufferage in the church; how much better we could evaluate this problem if a reliable survey were made of our pastors1 opinions in this matter. The Reporter also carried news about the ALC advocating altar and pulpit fellowship with us in 1968. I thought of a question I have in my ques tionnaire on the subject, and it made me feel good to know that I would be in a position to give our synod some idea of how our pastors felt about it. What I am saying is that a study such as I am making is an important study from many points of view. The CTM thinks so also, for I have been asked if I would permit them to publish the results. I am happy to state that, because so many of our pastors share this view of the study, enough have re sponded to make the results sufficiently reliable. On the other hand, the reliability will be even more greatly enhanced the closer we get to a 100% response. So I am coming to you for a third time to ask your cooperation. If you have any question about any part of the questionnaire I wish you would write me, as others have done. For example, one pastor was concerned about what use I intended to make of replies to questions 31 and 32. I assured him that no person or school would be connected with liberalism or conservatism, that I was not out to vi.lify or embarrass anyone or any institu tion, and that I had hoped that the brethren would view my handling of such information in the framework of 94 Christian love and brotherliness. As a result of these assurances, he sent in his completed questionnaire. I am also enclosing a self-addressed card which you may return with your name on it if you decide to clip off the identifying number. You may also use it to submit any question, or to tell me the reason you do not intend to answer. I am interested in the latter, very much. And be assured, once again, that your replies will be handled with complete anonymity. After these further explanations, I hope you will complete the enclosed questionnaire. Thank you very much! Yours for mutual advancement of the Kingdom, (signed) Hal Maleske 95 Second Letter to Brazil and Argentina (in German) January 16, 1967 A.D. Lieber Bruder: Vor einiger Zeit sandte ich Ihnen einen Fragebogen, den ich Sie auszufuellen und an mich zurueckzuschicken bat. Da ich denselben noch nicht zurueckerhielt, erlaube ich mir einen anderen mit einigen zusaetzlichen Mitteilungen, die Sie vielleicht haben maechten ehe Sie antworten. Wenn die englische Sprache Ihnen Schwierigkeit macht, so erlaube ich mir, Ihnen auf deutsch zu schreiben und sende beiliegend auch den Fragebogen ins Deutsche uebersetzt mit. Auf dem Gebiet der Soziologie bin ich an der Ausarbeitung einer Dissertation. Ich waehlte diesen besonderen Gegenstand, urn dadurch Information zu erhalten, die auch unserer Synode nuetzlich sein koennte. Ich repraesentiere lceine besondere Gruppe innerhalf der Synode, und ich Bezeuge ihnen, dass lceinem Einzelnen daraus Nachteiliges erwachse. Ehe ich den Fragebogen aussandte benachrichtigte ich den Synodalpraeses und auch meinen Distriktspraeses ueber mein Vorhaben, und sie hatten nichts dagegen. Wie ich in meinem ersten Schreiben sagte, so wiederhole ich hier, dass Ihre Antwort ganz anonym gehalten werden wird and dass diese Information nur fuer diesen Zweck einer Umfrage gebraucht werden soil. Wenn Sie darueber Bedenken hegen sollten, so lassen : Sie much Ihnen bezeugen, dass Sie mir vollkommen als einem Amtsbruder trauen koennen. Hunderte haben schon geantwortet und dadurch Ihr Zutrauen zu mir : bewiesen, wozu ich Sie auch einlade. 96 Sollten Sie irgenwelche andere Fragen ueber diese Umfrage haben, so schreiben Sie mir bitte ganz offen darueber. In meinem ersten Brief legte ich genuegend "postage coupons" bei fuer Ihren Gebrauch beim Abschicken Ihrer Antwort per Luftpost. Bitte machen Sie davon Gebrauch, um den jetzt beiliegenden Fragebogen, beanwortet im auch beiliegenden Umschlag zu senden. Wir haben auch "extra" coupons beigelegt. Wenn ich bitten darf, so tun Sie es jetzt, bald! Und vielen Dank! Ihr Bruder im HERRn, (signed) Harold J. Maleske 97 Second Letter to Foreign Missionaries January 20, 1967 A.D. Dear Brother: i Several months ago I sent you a questionnaire asking | that you please complete it and return it to me. So far j I haven’t received your completed questionnaire, so I am ! sending another one and adding a few items of informa tion that you may want to have before replying. I am making this study for a dissertation in sociol ogy, but I chose to make this type of study in order to gain information that may prove helpful to our Synod. I represent no group in Synod, and I guarantee that this study will embarrass no individual or institution. j Before sending out the questionnaires I informed j the president of Synod and also my District president j of the project, and they voiced no objecti.on to it. j As I stated in my previous letter, I will also keep your reply anonymous and use the information only for tabulation purposes. If you are concerned about that, be assured that you can trust me as a brother in the ministry. Hundreds have replied and showed their trust, and you can do so also. If you have any other question about the study feel free to write me about it. In my first letter I enclosed enough postage coupons for you to use to return the questionnaire by airmail. Please use this postage to return the enclosed ques tionnaire in the enclosed self-addressed envelope. Please do it now! Thank you! Yours fraternally, (signed) Harold J. Maleske SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Blalock, Hubert M., Jr. "Comment: Status Inconsistency and the Identification Problem," Public Opinion Quarterly. 30 (Spring, 1966), pp. 130-132. _______ . "Status Inconsistency and Interaction: Some Alternative Models," American Journal of Sociology, 73 (November, 1967), pp. 305-315. _______ . "Status Inconsistency, Social Mobility, Status Integration and Structural Effects," American Sociological Review, 32 (October, 1967), pp. 790- 801. i _______ . "The Identification Problem and Theory Building: j the Case of Status Inconsistency," American Sociological Review, 31 (February, 1966), pp. 52-61. _______ . "Tests of Status Inconsistency Theory: A Note of Caution," Pacific Sociological Review, 10 (Fall, 1967), pp. 69-74. Hyman, M. D. "Determining the Effects of Status Incon sistency," Public Opinion Quarterly, 30 (Spring, 1966), pp. 120-129. Jackson, Elton F. "Status Consistency and Symptoms of Stress," American Sociological Review, 27 (August, 1962), pp. 469-480. Kelly, K. Dennis, and Chambliss, William J. "Status Inconsistency and Political Attitudes," American Sociological Review, 31 (June, 1966), pp. 375-382. Kenkel, William F. "The Relationship Between Status Inconsistency and Political Economic Attitudes," American Sociological Review, 21 (June, 1956), pp. 365-368. Kolack, Shirley M. "A Study of Status Inconsistency among Social Work Professionals," Social Problems, 15 (Winter, 1968), pp. 365-376. Lachenmeyer, C. W. "Status Inconsistency as a Subset of Behavioral Conflict," Pacific Sociological Review, 11 (Fall, 1968), pp. 81-94. Lenski, Gerhard E. "Comment," Public Opinion Quarterly, 28 (Summer, 1964), pp. 326-330. _______ . "Social Participation and Status Crystalliza tion," American Sociological Review, 21 (August, 1956), pp, 458-464. ________. "Status Crystallization: A Non-Vertical Dimension of Social Status," American Sociological Review, 19 (August, 1954), pp. 405-413. ________. "Status Inconsistency and the Vote: A Four Nation Test," American Sociological Review, 32 (April, 1967), pp. 298-301. Mitchell, R. E. "Methodological Notes on a Theory of Status Crystallization," Public Opinion Quarterly, 28 (Summer, 1964), pp. 315-325. Rush, Gary B. "Status Consistency and Right-Wing Extremism," American Sociological Review, 32 (February, 1967), pp. 86-92. Segal, David R. "Status Inconsistency, Cross Pressures, and American Political Behavior," American Socio logical Review, 43 (June, 1969), pp. 352-359. Stehr, Nico. "Status Consistency: The Theoretical Concept and Its Empirical Referent," Pacific Sociological Review, 11 (Fall, 1968), pp. 95-99.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Referential Dissociation And Response To Stress
PDF
The Construction And Empirical Test Of A Theory Based On Selected Variables In Small-Group Interaction
PDF
Differential Fertility Behavior And Values In Rural And Semi-Urban Costa Rica
PDF
An Empirical Examination Of The Relationship Of Vertical Occupational Mobility And Horizontal Residential Mobility
PDF
Transformational Processing Of Sentences Containing Adjectival Modifiers
PDF
Social Components Of Housing Cost In The Western Metropolis
PDF
Ecology Of Negro Communities In Los Angeles County: 1940-1959
PDF
Resource allocation among organizations within urban communities
PDF
The Impact Of The Local Metropolitan Environment On The Patterning Of Social Contact
PDF
Reference Group Theory, Selection, And The Images Of Professions
PDF
The Career Business Executive As A Definitive Occupational Type
PDF
Economic Differentiation And Social Organization Of Standard Metropolitanareas In The United States: 1950
PDF
A Study Of Factors Related To Police Diversion Of Juveniles: Departmentalpolicy And Structure, Community Attachment, And Professionalization Of Police
PDF
Bam: An Innovative Change Model--Barriers Encountered In The Implementation Of A Classical Research Design To Modify The Behavior And Attitude Of Staff And Inmates In A Correctional Institution
PDF
Some Behavioral Consequences Of Career Success: A Synthesis Of Reward Andbalance Approaches
PDF
Employment Distribution, Income, And City Size: A Statistical Analysis
PDF
Prediction Of Overt Behaviors In Hospitalized Psychiatric Patients
PDF
Structural Factors Affecting Fertility In Large United States Cities
PDF
The Major League Professional Baseball Player: A Sociological Study
PDF
Determinants Of Intercounty Migration: California, 1970-1973
Asset Metadata
Creator
Maleske, Harold J.
(author)
Core Title
Status Consistency Among The Clergy
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Sociology
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
OAI-PMH Harvest,religion, general
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Turk, Herman (
committee chair
), Myerhoff, Barbara G. (
committee member
), Van Arsdol, Maurice D., Jr. (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-404627
Unique identifier
UC11361175
Identifier
7016878.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-404627 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
7016878.pdf
Dmrecord
404627
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Maleske, Harold J.
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
religion, general