Edwards_Race Religious Organizations and Integration

8/12/2019 Edwards_Race Religious Organizations and Integration

1/22

Race, Religious Organizationand Integration

Korie L. Edwards,1 Brad Christerson,2

and Michael O. Emerson3

1The Ohio State University, Department of Sociology, Columbus, Ohio 43210;email: [email protected]

2Department of Sociology, Biola University, La Mirada, California 90639;email: [email protected]

3Department of Sociology, Rice University, Houston, Texas 77005;email: [email protected]

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2013. 39:21128

First published online as a Review in Advance onMay 24, 2013

TheAnnual Review of Sociologyis online athttp://soc.annualreviews.org

This articles doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145636

Copyright c2013 by Annual Reviews.All rights reserved

Keywords

racial diversity, religious organizations, interracial, race, churches,

congregations

Abstract

We review the bourgeoning literature on multiracial religious org

nizations. Although scholars have paid attention to racial integrati

in congregations since the 1940s, only recently has there been a co

certed focus on this topic. This articlehaving reviewed the state

the fieldargues that research on this topic must engage in three

tal labors: explore more theory building or theory extension, inter

with the broader field of sociology, and explicate how religious rac

diversity contributes to or dismantles systems of social stratificatio

We discuss possible paths and approaches for future research on ra

religion, and integration.

211

Click here for quick links to

Annual Reviews content online,

including:

Other articles in this volume

Top cited articles

Top downloaded articles

Our comprehensive search

FurtherANNUAL

REVIEWS


2/22

INTRODUCTION

Religious congregations in the United States

are ubiquitouscurrently there are well over

300,000. To put that number in context, re-

ligious congregations are more common than

Subways, McDonalds, Burger Kings, Wendys,

Starbucks, Pizza Huts, KFCs, Taco Bells,

Dominos Pizzas, Dunkin Donuts, Quiznos,and Dairy Queens combined and multiplied

by three. And these congregations represent

millions of Americans. In fact, most Americans

regularly participate in or visit a congregation

in any given year (M.O. Emerson, unpublished

manuscript).

We also know that religious congregations

have profound and far-reaching effects on racial

and ethnic identity, segregation, friendshipnet-

works, racial and ethnic attitudes, and even in-

equality (e.g., Emerson & Smith 2000, Yancey1999). As such, we simply cannot and will not

fully understand race in the United States with-

out understanding race and religion. Indeed,

though largely a lone voice for his time, W.E.B.

Du Bois declared that segregation in congrega-

tions legitimated racial division by strengthen-

ing the conflation of whiteness and godliness

(cited in Blum 2007, p. 16).

However, in recent decades, religious

organizations have become more invested in

addressing issues of racial division throughmultiracial worship and have thus drawn the

attention of scholars. Multiracial congrega-

tions are in their infancy and so too are studies

of them. Most studies that have focused on

describing these organizations or explaining

how they work have used both micro- and

macro-level data. Work in the field so far has

produced exciting findings, but more needs

to be done. Our understanding is still limited

regarding the practices and beliefs that matter

for successful religious racial diversity (indeed,how to conceptualize successful is still in

debate), and we have much to learn about how

multiracial worship affects attendees attitudes

and behaviors and the extent to which these

effects spill over into other areas of attendees

lives. There is limited knowledgeabout howthe

broader society affects multiracial religious or-

ganization and even less about how multiracial

religious organizations matter for the broader

society.

This articlehaving reviewed the state

of the fieldultimately argues that research

on this topic must make a concerted effort

to engage in three vital labors. The first is

to explore more theory building (or at least

theory extension), no matter the methodology

or sample that is used. There has been some

movement in this direction, but researchers of

religious racial diversity have yet to fully exploit

the intersecting fault lines of race and religion

or to carve out new or extend existing theory in

these areas. The second labor is to consistently

connect to thebroader field of sociology. So far,

scholars have almost exclusively focused on the

social dynamics occurring within racially di-

verse religious organizations, making minimal

connections to sociological work on other insti-

tutions (e.g., politics or workplaces) or to other

areas of social inquiry (e.g., interracial social

networks, immigration patterns, neighborhood

life, or organizational leadership). The third,

which is related to the second, is to explicate

how religious racial diversity contributes to

or dismantles systems of social stratification.

Sociologys roots are located in the study of

social stratification, and the study of multira-

cial religious organizations offers a unique

opportunity to examine how two of the most

formidable cornerstones of American society

race and religionmatter for this social

phenomenon.

We organize the review by discussing,

first, conceptualizations for diversity, current

patterns of racial diversity in religious orga-

nizations, and changes in American diversity

and religion. Next, we highlight key findings

and main streams of thought on the topic. We

discuss some challenges and tensions within

this body of work. We conclude with a call

for scholars to extend and build theory and

connect work on race, integration, and religion

to broader sociological work and macro-level

processes.

212 Edwards Christerson Emerson


3/22

CONCEPTUALIZING DIVERSITYIN RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS

How diversity is conceptualized differs not

only across congregations but also across

researchers. The field of diversity and congre-

gations is varied, with different assumptions

and divergent theoretical and methodological

approaches that lead to debates within the field.Some scholars propose that diversity be con-

ceptualized as cultural (Garces-Foley 2008).

Others focus on ethnicity (such approaches are

just as interested in Korean-Japanese congre-

gations as they are in black-white-Asian con-

gregations) (e.g., Marti 2005, 2008a; Stanczak

2006). Some scholars employ organizational

approaches to understand diverse religious

congregations (e.g., Christerson & Emerson

2003, Emerson & Smith 2000), and still others

point to the role of social identity (Becker1998; Marti 2005, 2009; Stanczak 2006). But

this review zeroes in, most specifically, on the

implications of race for diverse congregations.

Undoubtedly, culture, ethnicity, organi-

zational characteristics, and social identity

all matter for diverse congregations. But, as

scholars have noted for decades, the concept

of race is uniquely powerful and is as closely

aligned with US national identity and character

as is immigration. Race, as currently conceived

in the United States, is typically thought tohave several select characteristics that set

it apart from ethnicity, culture, and related

concepts (Cornell & Hartmann 1988). In

the United States, race is the classification of

human groups as exclusive and discrete, based

on socially selected physical characteristics.

Americans believe that these groups have been

created or have evolved distinctly from one

another and that ones race is inherited from

ones biological parents. The understanding

that race is a distinct, inherited category isso socially real that if ones parents are

of different racial groups, one is thought to

be multiracialthe holder of two or more

distinct racial groups within one body (Lee

& Bean 2003). Most importantly, the outer

physical markers of race are thought to be

manifestations of peoples inner realities (i.e.,

stereotypes), and race is used to rank groups

along societys valued resources, from wealth

and education to power and prestige. These

outer physical markers have had a profound

effect on how people live and interact with one

another and with broader institutions. Indeed,

race arguably remains the most central orga-

nizing institution of social life in this country

(Bonilla-Silva 2001, Omi & Winant 1994).

DEFINITIONS ANDCONTEMPORARY PATTERNS OF

MULTIRACIAL RELIGIOUSORGANIZATIONS IN AMERICA

We can define a multiracial congregation either

in binary terms or on a continuum. In binary

terms, the most commonly used definition isa congregation in which no one racial group is

80% or more of the people (Emerson & Kim

2003, Emerson & Woo 2006). This definition

is used because (a) the presence of 20% or more

of racially different others is, research suggests,

a point of critical mass, switching minority

presence from that of tokenism to that of

having influence on organizational policies and

practices, and (b) mathematically, this level of

diversity means that, under the assumption of

random contact, the probability of cross-racecontact is 99%. Using this definition, what

percentage of congregations are multiracial?

In 1998, based on the National Congregations

Survey (NCS), 7.4% of all congregations

were racially mixed (see Figure 1a). As of

this writing, the most current data source

to estimate the presence of multiracial con-

gregations is the 2010 Faith Communities

Survey, which randomly sampled over 11,000

congregations. That survey found racially

mixed congregations, though still rare, becamemore common, with 13.7% of congregations

being racially mixed (seeFigure 1b).

Substantial variation exists across reli-

gious traditions, however. Using the NCS,

we can reliably estimate the percentage of

multiracial congregations for three categories:

www.annualreviews.org Race, Religion, and Integration 213


4/22

Homogeneous92.6%

Racially mixed7.4%

Racial composition of

US congregations in 1998

Racially mixed13.7%

Homogeneous86.3%

Racial composition ofUS congregations in 2010

a

b

Figure 1

Percentage of US congregations that can be definedas racially mixed or homogeneous, according to

available data from (a) the 1998 NationalCongregations Survey and (b) the 2010 FaithCommunities Survey. A racially mixed congregationis one in which no single racial group representsmore than 80% of the congregation. Adapted fromEmerson & Woo (2006, p. 36).

Catholic

Religious tradition

Percentage

s

Non-Christian0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Protestant

Figure 2

Percentage of multiracial congregations in theUnited States, by religious tradition, according toavailable data from the 1998 NationalCongregations Survey. Adapted from Emerson &

Woo (2006, p. 39).

Protestant, Catholic, and Other Religion (i.e.,

non-Christian religions). These, of course, are

far from ideal categories, but even with these

we see dramatic differences. For Protestantsonly 5% of congregations are racially mixed.

That figure triples to 15% for Catholics. For

Other Religion, that percentage jumps again to

about 27% (seeFigure 2). We discuss possible

reasons for these differences below.

Another approach to studying congrega-

tional diversity is to calculate it on a contin-

uum. One way to do this is to use the index of

dissimilaritywith scores that range from 0 to

1. This index is interpreted as the proportion of

one group or another that would have to strate-gically switch congregations to achieve com-

plete integration. Comparing white/nonwhite

congregational segregation, Emerson & Woo

(2006) find that for the non-Christian category

(an unfortunate and difficult-to-interpret

category), the index of dissimilarity is 0.75. For



5/22

Catholicism it is 0.81. Dividing Protestants

into mainline and conservative, the index of

dissimilarity is 0.85 for mainline Protestantism

and 0.91 for conservative Protestantism. These

are considered extreme levels of segregation. In

urban research, values over 0.60 are considered

to represent highly segregated cities. Thus,

all religious traditions measurable from the

NCS are highly segregated, particularly Chris-

tian traditions, which are hypersegregated

(Emerson & Woo 2006). For example, nearly

all whites would have to switch to nonwhite

congregations to eliminate racial segregation

between congregations.

Diversity can also be measured on a contin-

uum using a general heterogeneity index that

provides the probability that two randomly

selected people in a congregation will be of

different racial groups (Dougherty & Huyser

2008). Scores range from 0 (no probability that

two randomly selected people are of different

racial groups) to 1 (complete probability that

two randomly selected people are of different

racial groups). Using the NCS data, the median

congregational diversity is 0.02. To put this fig-

ure into context, Emerson & Woo (2006, ch. 2)

compare the diversity of the neighborhoods in

which the congregations reside to the diversity

of the congregations themselves. They find

that congregations are only one-tenth as

racially diverse as are the neighborhoods in

which the congregations reside.

Still, despite the persistence of racially

homogeneous congregations, we find that

predominately white congregations are less

white than they once were (Chaves 2011, p. 28).

In 1998, 20% of church attendees were in all-

white congregations. By 20062007, that figure

had dropped to 14%. Among Christian con-

gregations, this trend was strongest in Catholic

churches but was also evident in Protestant

churches (Chaves 2011, pp. 2831). Un-

doubtedly, the rapid growth of the immigrant

population specifically, and populations of

color generally, has contributed to this change,

as has the growth in racially mixed marriages.

Interestingly, however, the percentage of

predominately African American, Hispanic, or

Asian congregations that have white members

has not changed. Thus, the changemore

minorities in white congregations, but not vice

versaappears to be in the direction of access

to or assimilation with the dominant culture,

which conforms with Edwardss (2008a) thesis

that for racial diversity to occur in congrega-

tions it is the interests of whites that must be

served.

CHANGES IN US DIVERSITYAND RELIGION

Religious congregations have increasingly fo-

cused on issues of diversity since the early

twentieth century. But although religious lead-

ers and organizations have for some time pur-

sued religious racial integration (see studies by

Catchings 1952, Jack 1947, Loescher 1948),

only with the Civil Rights Movement of the

1960s and the 1965 overhaul of US immi-

gration laws did a movement occur toward

racially diverse congregations within American

religionone that was largely fueled by con-

servative Protestantism.

Out of the Civil Rights Movement emerged

a flow of Christians dedicated to what pro-

ponents called racial reconciliation, a move-

mentcentered in conservative Protestantcircles

that promoted social justice, racial equality, and

the building of cross-racial relationships. These

proponents shared several common character-

istics. They were African American, well versed

in American-style racialization, willing to asso-

ciate with whites, influenced by Martin Luther

King, Jr., and firm believers of the idea that

reconciliation is at the core of Christian life. In-

fluenced by their work, the evangelical (largely

white) mens movement of the 1990sPromise

Keepersadopted racial reconciliation as one

of its seven promises. This brought awareness

to a large contingent of Christians of the im-

perative of breaking down racial divisions, al-

though it was not entirely clear, at least to

whites, how to do so (Emerson & Smith 2000).

The 1965 immigration laws played a sim-

ilar role, by eliminating racial restrictions on

immigration and precipitating an astounding



6/22

growth of both Latino and Asian populations

in the United States. In 1970, Latinos repre-

sented 6.4% of the US population; by 2010,

that number had grown to 16.3%. In 1970,

Asians were less than 1% of the population, but

by 2010, they were 4.8% (Humes et al. 2011).

Such rapid growth further complicated the im-

perative of racial reconciliation for the faithful.

Racial reconciliation was no longer just a black-

white issue. Religious organizations, across re-

ligious traditions, needed to grapple with these

rapidly changing demographics.

Beginning around 2000, the messages of

racial diversityand racial reconciliation werein-

creasingly conflated and came to be interpreted

as Christians needing to worship in racially di-

verse congregations. A flow of important books

were published on multiracial congregations.

Internet sites sprung up focusing on helping

practitioners create and sustain multiracial

congregations. Blogs, Facebook pages, and

tweets on multiracial ministry were created.

Several parachurch organizations (e.g., Inter-

Varsity Christian Fellowship, The Leadership

Network), denominational bodies (e.g., the

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the

Roman Catholic Church, Southern Baptists,

the Christian Reformed Church, the Evangel-

ical Covenant, the Evangelical Free Church),

and various congregational networks (Mosaic

Alliance, Mosaix Global Network) explicitly

committed themselves to the imperative of

diversity, further encouraging pastors and con-

gregations to actualize successful integration.

Regional and national conferences on the issue

were also held, and even the national media

caught on to the movement. For example, in

July 2009, the PBS television showReligion and

Ethics Newsweeklyaired an episode on Interra-

cial Churches. And in 2010,Timemagazines

cover headline read, How Megachurches Are

Helping Bridge Americas Racial Divide (Van

Biema 2010).

In one generation, American religion had

transformed from comfortable acceptance of

being the nations most segregated institution

to becoming agitated by the reality of an

increasingly diverse nation and by religions

contributing role in the perpetual segregation

of races and ethnicities in this country. Today,

congregations and their leaders appear more

committed than ever to righting the past and

helping to bridge racial division.

FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH

RACIAL DIVERSITY INCONGREGATIONS

Over recent decades, research on multira-

cial congregations has increased dramatically

(Emerson 2008). The bulk of this literature ex-

amines factors associated with racial diversity

in religious congregations. However, to under-

stand the factors that increase the likelihood of

racial diversity in congregations, we first need

to understand why most congregations in fact

are racially homogeneous.

There are several key reasons that more

than 85% of congregations in America are

racially homogeneous. First, congregations

are voluntary organizations in a pluralistic

religious economy (Emerson & Kim 2003

Emerson & Smith 2000, Finke & Stark 1992),

providing myriad choices for those seeking a

congregation. Because people tend to choose

organizations composed of people similar to

themselves (McPherson et al. 2001), church at-

tendees tend to seek out a congregation where

the dominant group is racially and culturally

similar to them (Christerson & Emerson 2003,

Emerson & Smith 2000). Second, religious

congregationsin America havehistorically been

important safe havens and sites for political

mobilization for groups facing discrimination

in the larger society (Blau et al. 1998, DeYoung

et al. 2003, Emerson & Kim 2003). For African

Americans in particular, the church continues

to be an important source of empowerment and

identity formation (Billingsley 1999, Brown &

Brown 2003, Pattillo-McCoy 1998). For recent

immigrants, congregations have provided the

kinds of social support and social capital critical

for survival in an unfamiliar and often hostile

environment (Hirschman 2004, Levitt 2003,

Portes & Rumbaut 2006). Diverse congrega-

tions cannot play this empowering safe haven



7/22

role for marginalized groups to the same extent

as monoracial ones, and as such, many minority

group members will choose monoracial con-

gregations (DeYoung et al. 2003). Third, new

congregation members tend to be recruited

from the social networks of existing members

(Christerson & Emerson 2003, Emerson &

Kim 2003). Because social networks in America

tend to be racially homogeneous, monoracial

congregations are likely to remain so, given

that new recruitment comes from the networks

of existing members. Fourth, the membership

durations of attendees of interracial churches

who are in the numerical minority are shorter

than those of attendees in the numerical

majority, making it difficult to sustain racial

diversity over time (Scheitle & Dougherty

2010). Lastly, neighborhoods in America are

highly segregated by race (Emerson & Kim

2003, Massey & Denton 1993). As a result, con-

gregations that intentionally want to become

more diverse may not be able to do so if they

are recruiting primarily from their immediate

neighborhoods.

In spite of these confluent forces driving

congregations toward racial homogeneity, a

small but growing number of religious congre-

gations in America are racially and ethnically

diverse. As discussed above, 13.7% of US con-

gregations are racially mixed (i.e., less than 80%

of attendees represent a single ethnic group)

(Figure 1b). These more diverse congregations

have attracted the attention of scholars seeking

to understand how diverse congregations are

possible given the strong social forces pushing

congregations toward homogeneity. Strong as-

sociations between certain internal and exter-

nal factors and the racial and ethnic diversity of

congregations have been identified.

The bulk of the growing literature on re-

ligious racial diversity focuses on identifying

internal predictors of diversity in congrega-

tions. The most consistent predictor of reli-

gious racial diversity is religious tradition or

denomination. As noted above, non-Christian

congregations are the most diverse; among

Christian congregations, Catholic congrega-

tions are the most diverse (seeFigure 2).

The next predictor, at least for Christian de-

nominations, is historical position on race rela-

tions. Christian denominations with a long his-

tory of advocating for racial justice are more

likely to have racially diverse congregations

than are those that lack a sufficient history

of racial justice advocacy (Ammerman 2005,

Dudley & Roozen 2001, Hadaway et al. 1984).

Of all the Christian traditions and denomi-

nations that have advocated for racial justice,

Catholicism has demonstrated the most consis-

tent support and participation.

Scholars have posited that Catholic congre-

gations are more diverse because the Catholic

Churchs centralized governance facilitates a

unified stance against racial segregation among

its congregations, something that does not exist

for the more autonomous Protestant congre-

gations (Dougherty & Huyser 2008). Research

also finds that Protestant and Catholic diverse

congregations have different aims. According

to Garces-Foley (2008), even though both tra-

ditions often talk about unity, they mean dif-

ferent things because they draw on different

metaphors. For Protestants, unity often means

creating a new culture or finding what is com-

mon across cultures. It also means worshipping

together, almost always in the same language.

Because the Catholic perspective is based on

enculturation and hospitality, new immigrants

must be allowed to live out their religiocul-

tural traditions and worship in their own lan-

guages. As such, for Catholics, but rarely for

Protestants, the maintenance of cultural dis-

tinctions within the same congregation is ev-

idence of success of religious racial integration

rather than failure.

A third predictor of racial diversity in

congregationsin addition to religious tradi-

tion or denomination and historical position on

race relationsis whether congregations have

leaders who intentionally and regularly pro-

mote diversity (e.g., Christerson et al. 2005,

DeYoung et al. 2003, Kramer 1954, Yancey

& Emerson 2003). These congregations par-

ticipate in several strategies to foster racial

diversity. These include (a) diversifying pas-

toral and lay leadership (Christerson et al.



8/22

2005, DeYoung et al. 2003, Pittman 1945,

Yancey & Emerson 2003); (b) fostering small

groups within the congregation (Ammerman

1997, Dougherty 2003, Jenkins 2003), includ-

ing racially homogeneous ones (Christerson

et al. 2005, Marti 2010); (c) integrating music

genres in the worship service that incorporate

multiple racial groups (DeYoung et al. 2003,

Ganiel2008, Marti 2012, Yancey2003); (d)cre-

ating programs that specifically address racial

or ethno-cultural issues (Dougherty & Huyser

2008, Ganiel 2008, Hadaway et al. 1984);

(e) appealing to particularistic experiences

among racial/ethnic groups to increase diversity

(Garces-Foleys 2007, Marti 2010); and (f) re-

cruiting conspicuous diversity by diversifying

the leadership, or who is seen up front during

worship (Marti 2012). Although all these strate-

gies increase the likelihood of diversity, Yancey

& Emerson (2003) andChristerson et al. (2005)

find that creating a diverse leadership team is of

primary importance. Theyspecify thatthe lead-

ership not only must represent different racial

groups but also must be empowered to lead in

ways that are true to their cultural traditions.

Several other internal factors matter for

racial diversity in congregations. Congrega-

tions that embody a charismatic/Pentecostal

worship style are more likely than others

to be diverse (Dougherty & Huyser 2008,

Emerson & Woo 2006) because, it is argued,

worship that is more experiential (using eas-

ily accessible contemporary music, bodily re-

sponses, applause, jumping, saying Amen and

other verbal responses) creates an environ-

ment that is more inclusive and participatory

(Dougherty & Huyser 2008). Congregations

that are large and that have been founded re-

cently are more likely to have a diverse popu-

lation (Dougherty & Huyser 2008). And con-

gregations that have high-income and well-

educated attendees are more likely to be racially

diverse than are congregations that do not

(Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Emerson & Woo

2006, Parker 1968).

In addition to these internal factors, there

are three external factors that researchers

have shown are associated with higher levels

of racial diversity in congregations as well

urbanicity, neighborhood racial composition,

and geographic reach of a congregations

religious marketplace. Congregations in urban

areas are likely to be more diverse than those

in suburban or rural areas (Dougherty 2003,

Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Emerson & Woo

2006, Hadaway et al. 1984). Findings also show

that congregations located in racially diverse

neighborhoods are likely to be more diverse

than ones located in racially homogeneous

neighborhoods (Ammerman 1997, Becker

1998, Emerson & Kim 2003, Emerson & Woo

2006, Hadaway et al. 1984, Northwood 1958,

Yancey 2003, Wedam 1999). So, congregations

in racially diverse geographic areas, which also

tend to be urban, more easily attract and draw

a diverse population than do their counterparts

in racially homogeneous areas. Thus, as

Emerson & Kim (2003) assert, the larger the

geographic area from which a congregation

draws its worshippers, all other factors being

equal, the more racially diverse it will be.

Congregations that have a wider geographic

appeal, particularly if they are located in an ur-

ban area, will draw from various communities

that likely have residents from many different

racial backgrounds. However, congregations

that draw primarily from their immediate

neighborhood will be diverse to the extent that

the neighborhood remains diverse over time,

which is true of few neighborhoods in America

The research reviewed above consistently

shows that, given the right mix of internal

structures and incentives and certain external

conditions, congregations can become racially

diverse. However, this mix of internal and ex-

ternal factors rarely comes together for a single

congregation, thus making racial segregation in

American congregations the continued norm

Moreover, this body of work addresses only a

small number of external factors that matter

when it comes to racial diversity in religious

organizations. A host of other external factors

might affect the capacity of congregations to

become racially diverse and to sustain that

diversity, not to mention cross-racial relations

that might play out in multiracial religious



9/22

organizations. These factors include, but are

not limited to, the role of immigration policy,

immigrant migration patterns, and neighbor-

hood characteristics beyond racial composition

such as crime rates, family types, socioeco-

nomic composition, and social capital. These

factors also demand attention in the research

on racially diverse religious organizations.

EXPLANATIONS FOR RELIGIOUSRACIAL DIVERSITY

Why do multiracial churches work? Racial di-

versity is quite rare in most social institutions

in the United States, and despite a slight move-

ment toward religious racial diversity across

America, religion remains no exception. So,

what explanations do scholars offer for how re-

ligious organizations can encourage people to

voluntarily integrate across racial lines?

Broadly speaking, there are two. The

more common of the two explanations relates

to social identity. Religious organizations

deemphasize racial identitiesand the social

advantages or disadvantages associated with

themand emphasize an identity congregants

have in common, usually a religious identity

or some brand of a multiracial identity, in

an effort to generate unity among a diverse

body of people. In other words, religious

organizations elevate the importance of a

superordinate identity that all attendees share

over any subordinate identities of attendees,

ones that are particular only to subgroups.

Becker (1998) first presented a version of

this explanation in her ethnographic study of

two multiracial congregations in Oak Park,

Illinois, a racially diverse suburb of Chicago.

Becker studied two Christian congregations,

one affiliated with conservative Protestantism

and the other with liberal Protestantism. Given

the distinctive historical positions of these

traditions on race relations and the differences

in their contemporary sociopolitical persua-

sions, one might expect these congregations

to address racial diversity in different ways.

However, Becker found that this was not the

case. Despite their religious and sociopolitical

differences, the congregations handled reli-

gious racial diversity in quite similar ways. Both

downplayed race and stressed congregants

unity in Christ. Religious, social, and political

ideas or activities that potentially threatened

the internal unity of the congregation were

avoided. Moreover, race was personalized.

As Becker (1998, p. 469) explains, morally

informed discourse and action arise from and is

expressive of members own life experiences.

Making race about the personal and not the

structural was critical to these churches success

at building racially diverse congregations.

Other scholars have similarly noted how

congregations emphasize religious identities

over the meanings and consequences of racial

identities. Marti (2005), in an ethnographic

study of a congregation affiliated with the

Southern Baptist Convention in Los Angeles,

argues that the head pastor was so successful at

elevating the importance of attendees common

religious identity that racial differences became

irrelevant among congregants. Marti (2008a,

p. 14) later defined this process as ethnic tran-

scendence whereby individuals claim a new

shared identity based upon a unique and lo-

calized understanding of what it means to be

religious.

Jenkins (2003) and Stanczak (2006) con-

ducted ethnographic studiesindependent of

one anotherof racially diverse congregations

affiliated with the International Church of

Christ (ICOC). Both authors observed congre-

gations that were proud of being racially di-

verse, that had high expectations that mem-

bers would actively affirm this value, and that

were similar to the congregations in Beckers

(1998) and Martis (2005) studies in that the

structural realities of race were avoided. In the

end, the authors of both studies claim that the

congregations multiracial identities trumped

the racial identities of individual members, yet

they offer slightly different reasons for how

these churches were able to do this. Jenkins

(2003) focuses on the internal structure of the

congregation, arguing that the congregations

formal and informal norms regarding cross-

racial interaction and racial discourse limit[ed]



10/22

organizationalandindividualability to confront

and address the complexity of historical and

contemporary racial and ethnic social dynam-

ics (p. 407). Stanczak (2006), however, pro-

poses that congregations employ what he calls

strategic ethnicity. The multiracial identity

asserted by church leadership was a means to

an end, serving to distinguish their congrega-

tions from secular institutions and other re-

ligious organizations, broaden their niche in

the religious marketplace, and attract people of

varying races. This process meant that mem-

bers of color, especially, had to reconstruct

their racial selves to accommodate the ICOC

congregations brand of diversity, something

that Stanczak (2006) notes white members were

much less inclined to have to do.

Collectively, this line of work suggests that

some congregations can develop and sustain

racial diversity because they minimize the

importance of racial identities and maximize

the importance of a religious or multiracial

identity. The specific ways in which con-

gregations enact this strategy varies. Some

congregations highlight the importance of

a superordinate religious identity relative to

attendees other identities (Becker 1998, Marti

2005). Other congregations may highlight

their unique multiracial identity (Stanczak

2006). Still others may connect over a common

nonreligious identity, such as was the case in

the Hollywood multiracial church studied by

Marti (2008b), where congregants connected

because of a shared identity as artists. In the

process of establishing a multiracial identity,

still others may institute and reinforce clear

expectations guiding interracial interaction

and racial discussions ( Jenkins 2003). Yet in

the end, regardless of the specific approaches

employed, racially diverse congregations will

subvert or avoid the structural realities of race

for the everyday lives of their attendees [see

also Pitts (2010) critique of the plausibility of

religion being an effective tool for transcending

racial differences in multiracial congregations].

The second main explanation is that mul-

tiracial religious organizations are constrained

by broader racialized structures. This strand

of research does not necessarily contradict

work that uses social identity explanations

Most scholars who point to social identity

also acknowledge that elevating superordinate

religious identities is often done at the cost of

downplaying race. Thus, this second line of

research assumes a different approach to un-

derstanding these organizations. Where other

scholars focus on how congregations manage

the salience of congregants identities, ulti-

mately assuming a more micro-level approach,

these scholars link processes within multiracial

churches to broader social forces, specifically

racial patterns in society. Race, as a social

structure, is in one way or another implicated

in how and why multiracial religious organi-

zations workmanifesting in the leadership

structure, conflicts over worship practices, and

friendship networks, among other areas. Con-

sequently, multiracial religious organizations

cannot be understood apart from the larger

racialized context in which they are located.

Drawing from six case studies, Christerson

et al. (2005), for example, propose that race

structures nearly every level of church activity

in racially diverse religious organizations. It

impacts congregations worship style and struc-

ture, friendship networks, attendee turnover

rates, and leadership selection processes. It

even affects disputes among congregants

Disagreements over church activities fall along

racial lines, and attendees use theologically

informed arguments to provide support for

their racialized positions.

Priest & Priest (2007) focus on the worship

practices and leadership structures of mul-

tiracial religious organizations and propose

that these are manifestations of peoples racial

and class locations in society. In their study

of a merger of two South Carolina Baptist

churchesone predominately black and the

other predominately whitethey find that,

despite each congregations stated intent to

share power after the merger, white leaders

controlled the worship practices of the new

congregation by drawing upon dominant

values, in this case the value of higher ed-

ucation. By asserting that their advanced



11/22

degrees made them more qualified than their

African American counterparts, white leaders

laid claim to a supposedly more legitimate

authority over worship and implemented the

worship practices they viewed as normative.

Similar processes are evident in Edwardss

(2008b) in-depth study of a Midwestern mul-

tiracial congregation. Stories emerging from

the case study highlight how racialized con-

flicts over religious and nonreligious practices

and leadership selection are resolved and how

white congregants tend to win out in these con-

flicts. Her analysis of the 1998 NCS affirms

thesefindings. Multiracial congregations, when

compared with both predominately white con-

gregations andcongregations of color,are more

inclined to participate in the kinds of religious

and extrareligious practices in which predomi-

nately white churches participate. Situating her

findings in critical whiteness theory, Edwards

(2008b) argues that because whites are accus-

tomed to being culturally normative and struc-

turally privileged and are unused to address-

ing issues of race, multiracial congregations will

need to minimize racial conflict and primarily

address the preferences and desires of whites if

they are to keep whites attending.

As we noted above, most ethnographic

studies of multiracial congregations have

focused on how whites and people of color

manage religious racial diversity, with whites

often being the ones who are aiming to create

a diverse religious space. However, there are

a handful of studies that specifically examine

how congregations of color make attempts at

racial integration. Thus far, the congregations

studied have been initially predominately Asian

aiming to attract non-Asian attendees, and the

findings do not yet suggest any overarching

patterns. This, we imagine, is due to the limited

work conducted on these kinds of organiza-

tions. Dhingra (2004), for instance, finds that

the three Korean American churches he studied

avoided discussions of racism and racial in-

equality. But Garces-Foley (2007) in her study

of a largely Asian congregation moving toward

racial diversity finds that the congregation as-

sumed what she refers to as a color-conscious

approach, which was intended to encourage

members to engage the personal and structural

challenges that accompany race. Thus, the

social dynamics that govern the structure

and culture of multiracial congregations that

originate as congregations of color are unclear.

Scholars are expanding our understanding

of how and why racial integration in religious

organizations works. Some point to micro-

level processes. Others connect their findings

to macro-level structures. Regardless of which

perspective scholars use to address religious

racial diversity, the fieldbarring a few notable

exceptionsdoes not attempt, at least in any

substantive way, to build new or stretch cur-

rent social theory or connect to the broader

field of empirical social scientific knowledge.

Most work, whether it relies on social identity

perspectives or race explanations, is more in-

terested in addressing what is going on within

multiracial religious organizations than what

the broader implications of these organizations

are for other institutions and macro-level pro-

cesses. This may be in part a result of key chal-

lengesand tensions withinthe field that have yet

to be resolved or exploited in a way that could

strengthen and expand intellectual inquiry

regarding not only religious racial diversity but

also racial stratification and religious change.

We turn to these challenges and tensions next.

CHALLENGES AND TENSIONS

The study of racially diverse religious orga-

nizations is a relatively recent area in sociol-

ogy. Although studies on multiracial churches

surfaced as early as the 1940s (e.g., Loescher

1948, Catchings1952), from then until the early

2000s, when the field expanded rather quickly,

there were just a handful of studies on multira-

cial congregations. The rapid growth of work

on this topic has left some important gaps in our

knowledge about the phenomenon of racially

diverse congregations, as well as the role of

these organizations in society at large.

A major gap in the field is in methodology,

particularly sampling. Most research is on

conservative Protestant congregations, in part



12/22

because of the highly influential racial recon-

ciliation movement of the 1990s highlighted

above. This was an interesting and surprising

social phenomenon given conservative Protes-

tants long history of reinforcing Americas

racial hierarchy. Yet despite the novelty of the

racial reconciliation movement, it is Catholic

and non-Christian religious congregations

that are the most likely to be racially diverse

(Dougherty & Huyser 2008). A handful of

studies address religious racial diversity in these

traditions. For instance, Yang & Ebaugh (2001)

in their study of immigration and religion in

Houston examine a racially diverse Buddhist

congregation composed mainly of Anglos and

Asian immigrants. This study and others like it

are most interested, however, in exploring the

role that religion plays in immigrants adapta-

tion process in the United States, not religious

racial diversity. There are also studies that

include survey-based analyses that control for

religion or Christian tradition (e.g., Dougherty

& Huyser 2008, Edwards 2008b, Emerson

& Woo 2006), but these studies do not

really grapple with how religion or Christian

tradition matter for religious racial diversity.

The research so far is disproportionately

based on studies of conservative Protestant

congregations and is thus telling only a small

part of the story of religious racial diversity.

A second methodological limitation is that

there are few studies dealing with religious

racial diversity based upon national-level data

developed using probability sampling. Re-

searchers have largely relied upon the NCS,

a representative, congregational-level survey.

Although quite useful when studying compar-

isons between racially diverse and racially ho-

mogeneous congregations, the NCS is less use-

ful when aiming to understand variation across

different kinds of interracial congregations be-

cause it has a relatively small number of in-

terracial congregations in the sample (7.4%,

of 1,506 congregations in Wave II of the sur-

vey) and was not designed to address questions

specific to racially diverse congregations, such

as what the racial composition is of the pas-

toral staff or whether the congregation has a

mission statement that states a commitment to

racial or ethnic diversity. Moreover, there is

to date no representative, national-level survey

of interracial congregations. There are other

studies that have used the Lilly Survey of At-

titudes and Social Networks, which was con-

ducted during 1999 and 2000, and the Portraits

of American Life Study, conducted in 2006.

Both studies are national-level surveys of indi-

viduals derived from a random sample that was

stratified by race. These are both comprehen-

sive studies that include questions relevant to

the area of religious racial diversity, thus allow-

ing researchers to explore how religious racial

diversity affects peoples religious and nonre-

ligious attitudes and behaviors. Nevertheless,

they offer a limited capacity for researchers to

address questions specifically about variation

across people who attend racially diverse con-

gregations. And, finally, none of the surveys

mentionedhereincludes a statistically sufficient

number of non-Christian congregations, which

are the most likely to be racially diverse.

Another challenge with the field is that it

lacks agreement as to why multiracial religious

organizations are of theoretical and, more

broadly, sociological importance. Many studies

are not clearly rooted in a theoretical frame

or are not linked to broader social scientific

research. For instance, a large, long-standing

body of work in the social psychology literature

examines how groups foster intergroup unity

by promoting and thereby increasing the

salience of a common identity among a diverse

group of people (e.g., Brewer 1991, 1999

Dovidio et al. 2005; Gaertner et al. 1989, 1999;

Gaertner & Dovidio 2000; Hehman et al. 2010

Newhall et al. 1993). This is precisely what

many scholars of racially diverse congregations

propose these organizations are doing, yet

their discussion of this body of work or the

theories developed about this social process

is minimal. Thus, the opportunity to expand

upon theories of social identity has so far been

inadequately explored.

The field also exhibits a familiar tension

in sociology more broadly between the micro

level and the macro level, or between symbolic



13/22

interactionist approaches (that emphasize how

people construct their environment and who

they are in relation to their environment)

and structural approaches (that connect the

interactions, behaviors, and views within

small group settings to the norms, values,

and social patterns in the broader society).

There is not a hard-lined dichotomy present

in the literature. Many scholars acknowledge

the potential of macro-level constraints on

local congregations and that, for instance, the

racialization of America or the laws governing

immigration affect congregations and how they

navigate racial diversity (e.g., Becker 1998,

Dougherty & Huyser 2008, Garces-Foley

2007). Nevertheless, scholars tend toward one

approach or the other when aiming to explain

how multiracial churches work, and most rely

upon micro-level explanations.

This tendency to rely upon micro-level ex-

planations may be due in part to methodology.

As may already be clear, ethnographies are the

most common approach employed by scholars

to explain how and why racial integration in

congregations works. Ethnographies are by

definition conducted at the micro level. They

are long-term observations of and interactions

with geographically and time-bounded natural

settings. This approach has its limits. With

ethnographies we learn about what is going on

in a certain space during a specific time period,

but the findings cannot be generalized to other

settings. Nor can they be replicated. Two

congregations may be affiliated with the same

denomination, have nearly the same racial

composition, and be located in the same neigh-

borhood, but there will remain a host of other

variables that affect the goings-on of congrega-

tions that simply cannot be duplicated because

the people who populate congregations and

their interactions are unique. Not only are find-

ings of ethnographic studies not generalizable,

but subsequent research cannot test them.

Nevertheless, although ethnographic re-

search is not replicable or generalizable, it can

do much more than reveal local knowledge or

lead to theories about specific, localized set-

tings. An in-depth study of a select social setting

allows for an account of how broader social pro-

cesses are manifest in everyday settings. Why?

Because the macro is reflected in the micro. Put

another way, the micro is the macro up close.

One challenge with many ethnographic

studies of racially diverse congregations is that

they do not exploit the theoretical potential of

the data for understanding the macro-level so-

cial processes impacting and underlying mul-

tiracial worship. Scholars employing ethno-

graphic methods would do well to employ an

approach that enables the production and ex-

tension of macro-level social theory.

The extended case method offered by

Burawoy (1998) offers another approach that

unleashes the capacity of ethnographic exam-

ination for theory expansion and development

and for building bridges between micro-level

social processes and the broader social struc-

ture. It encourages engagement with a social

setting and the explication of social processes.

But it further proposes that scholars account for

patterns in the everyday by connecting these

patternsto macro-level structuralforces, situate

that social setting within the historical context,

and aim to theorize about the processes ob-

served. This approach is not unlike that of Mills

(1959)in The Sociological Imagination. For schol-

ars of racially diverse congregations, thismeans,

at a minimum, that they situate their sites of

studywithin the historicalcontext of multiracial

worship in the United States and intellectually

engage knowledge regarding broader structural

forces that impinge upon these social spaces.

In short, many existing studies of multira-

cial churches are relatively narrow, focusing

mainly on Christian congregations, particu-

larly conservative Protestant ones. This work

is also largely descriptive, suggestive, or limited

to localized theory. The field needs to expand

beyond such circumscribed contributions and

theorize about what multiracial congregations,

across religions and Christian traditions, tell us

about broader sociological processes. Without

more rigorous theory building or testing, the

field cannot make the kinds of contributions to

sociology or social science generally that it is

poised to make.



14/22

CONCLUSION

Research thus far has produced several inter-

esting insights regarding racial diversity in reli-

gious congregations and the internal dynam-

ics of racially diverse religious organizations.

We could categorize the conclusions into two

types: (a) those that explore how religious iden-

tities can supersede racial identities, which inturn can allow for the existence and continued

survival of multiracial religious congregations;

and (b) those that emphasize how the dynam-

ics of a racialized society are replicated within

religious congregations, causing conflicts and

inequalities within the congregation. Although

this literature is of great interest to practition-

ers (especially those who would like to see more

racial integration in the religious congregations

they lead) and to scholars of religion, the con-

tribution of this literature to the larger field ofsociology is less clear.

The discipline of sociology has long been

interested in race. Its focus has been primar-

ily on how racial hierarchies are established

and reproduced in society as a whole. The dis-

cipline has also long been interested in reli-

gion as a social phenomenon. Beginning with

Marx and Weber, sociologists have examined

the extent to which religion legitimates and re-

produces social inequalities and the extent to

which religion can act as a force for social struc-tural change. The fact (only recently admitted

among sociologists) that religion remains a po-

tent macro-social force even in modern society

has increased the interest in religion among so-

cial scientists of all stripes.

We propose that the juncture of race, re-

ligion, and social stratification is where re-

search on multiracial congregations can make

a larger contribution to the discipline of sociol-

ogy. In other words, macro-level questions re-

garding social stratificationspecifically racialstratificationought to be more rigorously

engaged: Do multiracial congregations legiti-

mate and reproduce racial stratification in soci-

ety? Do they represent the potential for social

change leading to greater racial equality in so-

ciety? Do they facilitate the development and

distribution of social capital and other valuable

resources to lower status people?

Research has provided some cluesalbeit

contradictory onesto the answers to these

questions. On the one hand, findings suggest

that most multiracial congregations require

an avoidance of discussions of racism, racial

inequality, and politics and that members

downplay their racial identity in favor of their

religious identity in order to incorporate mul-

tiple racial groups into a single congregation.

Similar forms of racial inequality that exist in

society often arise in multiracial congregations

as white leaders and members have an outsized

influence on how the congregations are struc-

tured and organized. Thus, it appears that, on

the whole, multiracial congregations are not

increasing consciousness of racism and racial

inequality. If anything, multiracial congrega-

tions are legitimating and reproducing racial

inequality rather than challenging it. Indeed,

monoracial congregations of color seem to

have more potential for challenging racial

inequality, evidenced in the well-documented

role of African American congregations in

political mobilization for greater equality (e.g.,

Morris 1984, Pattillo-McCoy 1998) and in the

role of immigrant congregations to provide re-

sources and social capital that facilitate upward

mobility (Hirschman 2004, Portes & Rumbaut

2006, Warner 1993, Warner & Wittner 1998).

On the other hand, however, segregation in

religious organizations can also reinforce white

dominance in society (Emerson & Smith 2000)

Monoracial white congregations can and do

legitimate and reinforce white supremacy in

many ways. There is also some evidence in the

literature that diverse congregations, such as

the one Garces-Foley (2007) examined, can

be places where a greater understanding and

consciousness of racism and racial inequality

can take place. And multiracial congregations

tend to have more inclusive attitudes than

monoracial congregations when it comes to

socioeconomic diversity (Yancey & Kim 2008).

Still, there is little evidence that this is the norm

or that, as a whole, the growth in the number

of multiracial congregations in America has



15/22

produced anything like a movement for greater

racial equality in the larger society.

If scholars interested in multiracial congre-

gations are to make a more significant contri-

bution to the field of sociology, they ought to

consider moving beyond micro-level analyses

of internal organizational dynamicsfocusing

on factors related to religious racial diversity or

how religious racial diversity worksto a larger

discussion regarding macro-level processes

that produce or dismantle racial stratification in

society as a whole. The question of whether the

growth of multiracial religious organizations

represents a potential force for social change

toward greater equality or simply another

setting where racial hierarchies are reproduced

is an urgent and important one as these organi-

zations expand and increase across society. Not

only does the broader social structure affect the

internal dynamics of racially diverse religious

organizations, but what happens in multiracial

congregations will have a reciprocal effect on

the broader society. There is some evidence

that racial structures are being reproduced

in racially diverse congregations (Christerson

et al. 2005, Edwards 2008b). Still, more rig-

orous theoretical expansion and development

as well as intellectual engagement with big

questions about the role of race and religion

in macro-level social stratification are needed.

There is no better modern social site by which

to understand how religion reinforces racial

stratification (or not) than racially diverse

religious organizations.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The authors are not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings that

might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.

LITERATURE CITED

Ammerman NT. 1997. Congregation and Community. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press

Ammerman NT. 2005.Pillars of Faith: American Congregations and Their Partners. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

Becker PE. 1998. Making inclusive communities: congregations and the problem of race. Soc. Probl.

45:45172Billingsley A. 1999.Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Blau JR, Redding K, Land KC. 1998. Ethnocultural cleavages and the growth of church membership in the

United States, 18601930. In Sacred Companies: Organizational Aspects of Religion and Religious Aspects of

Organization, ed. NJ Demerath, PD Hall, T Schmitt, RH Williams, pp. 13253. New York: Oxford

Univ. Press

Blum EJ. 2007.W. E. B. Du Bois: American Prophet. Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press

Bonilla-Silva B. 2001.White Supremacy and Racism in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner

Brewer MB. 1991. The social self: on being the same and different at the same time. Personal. Soc. Psychol.

Bull.17:47582

Brewer MB. 1999. The psychology of prejudice: ingroup love or outgroup hate? J. Soc. Issues55:42944

Brown RK, Brown RE. 2003. Faith and works: church-based social capital resources and African-American

political activism.Soc. Forces82:61741Burawoy M. 1998. The extended case method. Sociol. Theory16:433

Catchings LM. 1952. Multiracial activities in southern churches. Phylon13:5456

Chaves M. 2011.American Religion: Contemporary Trends. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press

Christerson B, Edwards KL, Emerson MO. 2005. Against All Odds: The Struggle for Racial Integration in

Religious Organizations. New York: NYU Press

Christerson B, Emerson MO. 2003. The costs of diversity in religious organizations: an in-depth case study.

Sociol. Relig.64:16382



16/22

Cornell S, Hartmann D. 1988. Mapping the terrain: definitions. In Ethnicity and Race: Making Identities in a

Changing World, ed. S Cornell, D Hartmann, pp. 1537. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge

DeYoung CP, Emerson MO, Yancey GA, Kim KC. 2003. United by Faith: The Multiracial Church as the

Answer to the Race Problem. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Dhingra P. 2004. Were not a Korean American church any more: dilemmas in constructing a multi-racial

church identity.Soc. Compass51:36779

Dougherty K. 2003. How monochromatic is church membership? Racial-ethnic diversity in religious

community.Sociol. Relig.64:6585

Dougherty KD, Huyser KR. 2008. Racially diverse congregations: organizational identity and the accommo-dation of differences.J. Sci. Study Relig. 47(1):2343

Dovidio JF, Gaertner SL, Hodson G, Houlette M, Johnson KM. 2005. Social inclusion and exclusion:

recategorization and the perception of intergroup boundaries. In The Social Psychology of Inclusion and

Exclusion, ed. D Abrams, JM Marques, MA Hogg, pp. 24664. Philadelphia: Psychology

Dudley CS, Roozen DA. 2001. Faith Communities Today: A Report on Religion in the United States Today.

Hartford, CT: Hartford Inst. Relig. Res.

Edwards KL. 2008a. Bringing race to the center: the importance of race in racially diverse religious

organizations.J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:59

Edwards KL. 2008b. The Elusive Dream: The Power of Race in Multiracial Churches. New York: Oxford Univ.

Press

Emerson MO. 2008. Introduction: Why a forum on racially and ethnically diverse congregations? J. Sci.

Study Relig.47:14Emerson MO, Kim KC. 2003. Multiracial congregations: an analysis of their development and a typology.

J. Sci. Study Relig. 42:21727

Emerson MO, Smith C. 2000.Divided By Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America. New

York: Oxford Univ. Press

Emerson MO, Woo R. 2006. People of the Dream: Multiracial Congregations in the United States. Princeton,

NJ: Princeton Univ. Press

Finke R, Stark R. 1992. The Churching of America, 17761990: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press

Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF. 2000.Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadelphia

Psychology

Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF, Nier JA, Ward CM, Banker BS. 1999. Across cultural divides: the values of a

superordinate identity. In Cultural Divides: Understanding and Overcoming Group Conflict, ed. DA Prentice,

DT Miller, pp. 173212. New York: Russell Sage Found.

Gaertner SL,Mann J, Murrell A, Dovidio JF. 1989. Reducing intergroup bias: thebenefits of recategorization

J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 57:23949

Ganiel G. 2008. Is the multiracial congregation an answer to the problem of race? Comparative perspectives

from South Africa and the USA.J. Relig. Afr.38:26383

Garces-Foley K. 2007. Crossing the Ethnic Divide: The Multiethnic Church on a Mission . New York: Oxford

Univ. Press

Garces-Foley K. 2008. Comparing Catholic and Evangelical integration efforts.J. Sci. Study Relig.47:1722

Hadaway CK, Hackett DG, Miller JF. 1984. The most segregated institution: correlates of interracial church

participation.Rev. Relig. Res.25:20419

Hehman E, Mania E, Gaertner SL. 2010. Where the division lies: common ingroup identity moderates the

cross-race effect.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.46:44548

Hirschman C. 2004. The role of religion in the origins and adaptation of immigrant groups in the UnitedStates.Int. Migr. Rev.38(3):120633

Humes KR, Jones NA, Ramirez RR. 2011. Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. US Census Briefs

C2101BR-02, US Census Bur., Washington, DC. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/

c2010br-02.pdf

Jack HA. 1947. The emergence of the interracial church.Soc. Action13:1

Jenkins KE. 2003. Intimate diversity: the presentation of multiculturalism and multiracialism in a high-

boundary religious movement.J. Sci. Study Relig.42:393409

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf


17/22

Kramer A. 1954. Racial integration in three Protestant denominations. J. Educ. Sociol.28:5968

Lee J, Bean FD. 2003. Beyond black and white: remaking race in America. Contexts2:2633

Levitt P. 2003. You know, Abraham was really the first immigrant: religion and transnational migration. Int.

Migr. Rev.37(3):84773

Loescher FS. 1948.The Protestant Church and the Negro: A Pattern of Segregation . Westport, CT: Negro Univ.

Press

Marti G. 2005.A Mosaic of Believers: Diversity and Innovation in a Multiethnic Church . Bloomington: Indiana

Univ. Press

Marti G. 2008a. Fluid ethnicity and ethnic transcendence in multiracial churches.J. Sci. Study Relig.47:1116Marti G. 2008b.Hollywood Faith: Holiness, Prosperity and Ambition in a Los Angeles Church . New Brunswick,

NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press

Marti G. 2009. Affinity, identity, and transcendence: the experience of religious racial integration in diverse

congregations.J. Sci. Study Relig.48(1):5368

Marti G. 2010. The religious racial integration of African Americans into diverse churches.J. Sci. Study Relig.

49(2):20117

Marti G. 2012. Worship Across the Racial Divide: Religious Music and the Multiracial Congregation. New York:

Oxford Univ. Press

Massey D, Denton M. 1993. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard Univ. Press

McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. 2001. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks.Annu. Rev.

Sociol.27:41544Mills CW. 1959.The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Morris A. 1984.The Origins of the Civil Rights Movement: Black Communities Organizing for Change . New York:

Free Press

Newhall AM, Miller N, Holtz R, Brewer M. 1993. Cross-cutting category membership with role assignment:

a means of reducing intergroup bias.Br. J. Soc. Psychol.32:12546

Northwood LK. 1958. Ecological and attitudinal factors in church desegregation. Soc. Probl.6(2):15063

Omi M, Winant H. 1994. Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York:

Routledge

Parker JH. 1968. The interaction of Negroes and whites in an integrated church setting.Soc. Forces46:35966

Pattillo-McCoy M. 1998. Church culture as a strategy of action in the black community. Am. Sociol. Rev.

63:76784

Pitt R. 2010. Fear of a black pulpit? Real racial transcendence versus cultural assimilation in multiracialchurches.J. Sci. Study Relig.49:21823

Pittman RH. 1945. Building a multiracial church.Sociol. Soc. Res.29:297303

Portes A, Rumbaut R. 2006.Immigrant America. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

Priest KB,Priest RJ. 2007. Divergentworship practices in theSunday morning hour: analysis of a multiracial

church merger attempt. In This Side of Heaven: Race, Ethnicity, and Christian Faith, ed. RJ Priest, AL

Nieves, pp. 27593. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Scheitle CP, Dougherty KD. 2010. Race, diversity and membership duration in religious congregations.

Sociol. Inq.80:40523

Stanczak G. 2006. Strategic ethnicity: the construction of multi-racial/multi-ethnic religious community.

Ethn. Racial Stud.29:85681

Van Biema D. 2010. The color of faith.Time, Jan. 11, pp. 3841

Warner RS. 1993. Work in progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological study of religion in theUnited States.Am. J. Sociol.98:104493

Warner RS, Wittner JG, eds. 1998. Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities and the New Immigration.

Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press

Wedam E. 1999. Ethno-racial diversity within Indianapolis congregations. Res. Notes 2(4). http://hdl.

handle.net/2450/3635

Yang F, Ebaugh HR. 2001. Religion and ethnicity among new immigrants: the impact of majority/minority

status in home and host countries. J. Sci. Study Relig.40:36778

http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635http://hdl.handle.net/2450/3635


18/22

Yancey G. 1999. An examination of the effects of residential and church integration on racial attitudes of

whites.Sociol. Perspect.42:279304

Yancey G. 2003. One Body, One Spirit: Principles of Successful Multiracial Churches. Downers Grove, IL:IVP Press

Yancey G, Emerson M. 2003. Integrated Sundays: an exploratory study into the formation of multiracial

churches.Sociol. Focus36:11127

Yancey G, Kim YJ. 2008. Racial diversity, gender inequality, and SES diversity in Christian congregations

exploring the connections of racism, sexism, and classism in multiracial and nonmultiracial churches

J. Sci. Study Relig. 47:10311



19/22

Annual Review

of Sociology

Volume 39, 2013Contents

Frontispiece

Charles Tilly xiv

Prefatory Chapter

Formations and Formalisms: Charles Tilly and the Paradox

of the Actor

John Krinsky and Ann Mische 1

Theory and Methods

The Principles of Experimental Design and Their Application

in Sociology

Michelle Jackson and D.R. Cox 27

The New Sociology of Morality

Steven Hitlin and Stephen Vaisey 51

Social Processes

Social Scientific Inquiry Into Genocide and Mass Killing:

From Unitary Outcome to Complex Processes

Peter B. Owens, Yang Su, and David A. Snow

69

Interest-Oriented Action

Lyn Spillman and Michael Strand 85

Drugs, Violence, and the State

Bryan R. Roberts and Yu Chen 105

Healthcare Systems in Comparative Perspective: Classification,

Convergence, Institutions, Inequalities, and Five Missed Turns

Jason Beckfield, Sigrun Olafsdottir, and Benjamin Sosnaud 127

Institutions and CultureMulticulturalism and Immigration: A Contested Field

in Cross-National Comparison

Ruud Koopmans 147

Sociology of Fashion: Order and Change

Patrik Aspers and Frederic Godart 171

v


20/22

Religion, Nationalism, and Violence: An Integrated Approach

Philip S. Gorski and G ulay Turkmen-Dervisoglu 193

Formal Organizations

Race, Religious Organizations, and Integration

Korie L. Edwards, Brad Christerson, and Michael O. Emerson 211

Political and Economic Sociology

An Environmental Sociology for the Twenty-First Century

David N. Pellow and Hollie Nyseth Brehm 229

Economic Institutions and the State: Insights from Economic History

Henning Hillmann 251

Differentiation and Stratification

Demographic Change and Parent-Child Relationships in Adulthood

Judith A. Seltzer and Suzanne M. Bianchi 275

Individual and SocietyGender and Crime

Candace Kruttschnitt 291

White-Collar Crime: A Review of Recent Developments and

Promising Directions for Future Research

Sally S. Simpson 309

From Social Structure to Gene Regulation, and Back: A Critical

Introduction to Environmental Epigenetics for Sociology

Hannah Landecker and Aaron Panofsky 333

Racial Formation in Perspective: Connecting Individuals, Institutions,and Power Relations

Aliya Saperstein, Andrew M. Penner, and Ryan Light 359

The Critical Sociology of Race and Sport: The First Fifty Years

Ben Carrington 379

Demography

The Causal Effects of Father Absence

Sara McLanahan, Laura Tach, and Daniel Schneider 399

International Migration and Familial Change in Communitiesof Origin: Transformation and Resistance

Patricia Arias 429

Trends and Variation in Assortative Mating: Causes and Consequences

Christine R. Schwartz 451

vi C on te nt s


21/22

Gender and International Migration: Contributions and

Cross-Fertilizations

Gioconda Herrera 471

LGBT Sexuality and Families at the Start of the Twenty-First Century

Mignon R. Moore and Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer 491

Urban and Rural Community Sociology

Housing: Commodity versus Right

Mary Pattillo 509

Indexes

Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 3039 533

Cumulative Index of Article Titles, Volumes 3039 537

Errata

An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Sociologyarticles may be found athttp://soc.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml

Contents v ii


22/22

ANNUAL REVIEWSIts about time. Your time. Its time well spent.

ANNUAL REVIEWS | Connect With Our Experts

New From Annual Reviews:

Annual Review of Statistics and Its ApplicationVolume 1 Online January 2014 http://statistics.annualreviews.org

Editor: Stephen E. Fienberg, Carnegie Mellon University

Associate Editors: Nancy Reid, University of Toronto

Stephen M. Stigler, University of Chicago

TheAnnual Review of Statistics and Its Applicationaims to inform statisticians and quantitative methodologists

well as all scientists and users of statistics about major methodological advances and the computational tools t

allow for their implementation. It will include developments in the field of statistics, including theoretical statistic

underpinnings of new methodology, as well as developments in specific application domains such as biostatist

and bioinformatics, economics, machine learning, psychology, sociology, and aspects of the physical sciences

Complimentary online access to the first volume will be available until January 2015.

TABLEOFCONTENTS:

What Is Statistics? Stephen E. Fienberg

A Systematic Statistical Approach to Evaluating Evidence

from Observational Studies, David Madigan, Paul E. Stang,

Jesse A. Berlin, Martijn Schuemie, J. Marc Overhage,

Marc A. Suchard, Bill Dumouchel, Abraham G. Hartzema,

Patrick B. Ryan

The Role of Statistics in the Discovery of a Higgs Boson,

David A. van Dyk

Brain Imaging Analysis, F. DuBois Bowman

Statistics and Climate, Peter Guttorp

Climate Simulators and Climate Projections,

Jonathan Rougier, Michael Goldstein

Probabilistic Forecasting, Tilmann Gneiting,

Matthias Katzfuss

Bayesian Computational Tools, Christian P. Robert

Bayesian Computation Via Markov Chain Monte Carlo,

Radu V. Craiu, Jeffrey S. Rosenthal

Build, Compute, Critique, Repeat: Data Analysis with Latent

Variable Models, David M. Blei

Structured Regularizers for High-Dimensional Problems:Statistical and Computational Issues, Martin J. Wainwright

High-Dimensional Statistics with a View Toward Applicat

in Biology, Peter Bhlmann, Markus Kalisch, Lukas Meie

Next-Generation Statistical Genetics: Modeling, Penaliza

and Optimization in High-Dimensional Data, Kenneth Lan

Jeanette C. Papp, Janet S. Sinsheimer, Eric M. Sobel

Breaking Bad: Two Decades of Life-Course Data Analysi

in Criminology, Developmental Psychology, and Beyond,

Elena A. Erosheva, Ross L. Matsueda, Donatello Telesca

Event History Analysis, Niels Keiding

Statistical Evaluation of Forensic DNA Profile Evidence,

Christopher D. Steele, David J. Balding

Using League Table Rankings in Public Policy Formation

Statistical Issues, Harvey Goldstein

Statistical Ecology, Ruth King

Estimating the Number of Species in Microbial Diversity

Studies, John Bunge, Amy Willis, Fiona Walsh

Dynamic Treatment Regimes, Bibhas Chakraborty,

Susan A. Murphy

Statistics and Related Topics in Single-Molecule Biophys

Hong Qian, S.C. Kou Statistics and Quantitative Risk Management for Banking

and Insurance, Paul Embrechts, Marius Hofert

Access this and all other Annual Reviews journals via your institution at www.annualreviews.or

Documents

Edwards_Race Religious Organizations and Integration