{"title":"科学与讲坛美国神职人员对科学与宗教的看法","authors":"Shiri Noy, Timothy L. O'Brien","doi":"10.1111/jssr.12917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although public perceptions of science and religion are the focus of a large body of scholarship, we know much less about religious leaders’ views of science and its relationship to religion. Using data from a national survey of religious leaders in the United States, our latent class analysis finds three underlying groups of clergy based on their engagement with science and their beliefs about its interface with religion. Those with a <i>modern clerical</i> perspective on science and religion (40 percent) accommodate mainstream scientific theories alongside their religious beliefs and they discuss science frequently with congregants. Those with a <i>traditional clerical</i> perspective (29 percent) are dismissive of mainstream scientific theories although they rarely discuss science with congregants. Those with a <i>critical clerical</i> perspective (31 percent) are also skeptical of science, yet these clergy frequently discuss science with their congregants. We also find that these latent classes cut across religious traditions and political ideologies and are associated with clergy's social views and political participation. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings in light of religious leaders’ roles in their congregations and communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":51390,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion","volume":"63 3","pages":"716-737"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jssr.12917","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Science and the Pulpit: Clerical Perspectives on Science and Religion in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Shiri Noy, Timothy L. O'Brien\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jssr.12917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Although public perceptions of science and religion are the focus of a large body of scholarship, we know much less about religious leaders’ views of science and its relationship to religion. Using data from a national survey of religious leaders in the United States, our latent class analysis finds three underlying groups of clergy based on their engagement with science and their beliefs about its interface with religion. Those with a <i>modern clerical</i> perspective on science and religion (40 percent) accommodate mainstream scientific theories alongside their religious beliefs and they discuss science frequently with congregants. Those with a <i>traditional clerical</i> perspective (29 percent) are dismissive of mainstream scientific theories although they rarely discuss science with congregants. Those with a <i>critical clerical</i> perspective (31 percent) are also skeptical of science, yet these clergy frequently discuss science with their congregants. We also find that these latent classes cut across religious traditions and political ideologies and are associated with clergy's social views and political participation. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings in light of religious leaders’ roles in their congregations and communities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion\",\"volume\":\"63 3\",\"pages\":\"716-737\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jssr.12917\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jssr.12917\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jssr.12917","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Science and the Pulpit: Clerical Perspectives on Science and Religion in the United States
Although public perceptions of science and religion are the focus of a large body of scholarship, we know much less about religious leaders’ views of science and its relationship to religion. Using data from a national survey of religious leaders in the United States, our latent class analysis finds three underlying groups of clergy based on their engagement with science and their beliefs about its interface with religion. Those with a modern clerical perspective on science and religion (40 percent) accommodate mainstream scientific theories alongside their religious beliefs and they discuss science frequently with congregants. Those with a traditional clerical perspective (29 percent) are dismissive of mainstream scientific theories although they rarely discuss science with congregants. Those with a critical clerical perspective (31 percent) are also skeptical of science, yet these clergy frequently discuss science with their congregants. We also find that these latent classes cut across religious traditions and political ideologies and are associated with clergy's social views and political participation. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings in light of religious leaders’ roles in their congregations and communities.
期刊介绍:
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion is a multi-disciplinary journal that publishes articles, research notes, and book reviews on the social scientific study of religion. Published articles are representative of the best current theoretical and methodological treatments of religion. Substantive areas include both micro-level analysis of religious organizations, institutions, and social change. While many articles published in the journal are sociological, the journal also publishes the work of psychologists, political scientists, anthropologists, and economists.