Authoritarian or Authority-Minded? The Cognitive Commitments of Fundamentalists and the Christian Right

Abstract

One of the more consistent characterizations of both American Fundamentalism and other versions of conservative Evangelicalism is that these groups represent authoritarian religious and social systems. Such characterizations are not entirely without some basis in fact. Fundamentalism will almost always appear authoritarian, and so too will forms of Pentecostalism which, like Fundamentalism, place a heavy emphasis on correct thinking and combine a belief in the infallibility of scripture with a commitment to literal readings. Outsiders are sometimes disconcerted to find that “authoritarian” and related concepts are not assessed negatively in conservative Evangelical circles. Quite the contrary is the case: the Bible, infallible, inerrant, “God-breathed,” is the clear center of Evangelical authority. Many a Fundamentalist sermon has sought to clinch its case with the phrase, “on authority of the holy Word of God.”

Religious Value Priming, Threat, and Political Tolerance

“…Dogmatism is not the only religious belief mechanism affecting tolerance. Religious people may place a higher value on authority, which groups with unconventional views and practices may be seen to undermine (Owen, Wald, and Hill 1991;Wald, Owen, and Hill 1989). By now, a broad literature has shown that authoritarianism predicts political attitudes, including tolerance (e.g., Barker and Tinnick 2006;Feldman 2003;Mockabee 2007).…”

The values of religious nones, dones, and sacralized Americans: Links between changes in religious affiliation and Schwartz values

“…Indeed, evangelical Protestantism is associated with threat perception (Eisenstein, 2006), support for a strong military (Schwadel, 2017), “authority‐mindedness” (Owen et al. 1991), an emphasis on family and tradition (Bendroth, 1999), and in‐group loyalty (Smith, 1998), which align with the security, conformity, tradition, and benevolence values. The centrality of the values should matter in their eventual residual effects.…”

Moralizing to the Choir: The Moral Foundations of American Clergy*

“…Though these two notions are related, of course, they can be disentangled in order to ask if the content of these beliefs are driving opinions or whether it is the form in which they held that matters most. In previous work, there is evidence that religious authority is the primary driver of opinions (e.g., Jelen and Wilcox 1991;Owen, Wald, and Hill 1991), with links to authority-mindedness, lower commitment to democratic norms, and intolerance (Burge, Djupe, and Lewis 2016) and democratic practice in congregations (Burge and Djupe 2015). It is straightforward to link religious authority to the MF dimensions -those high in religious authority subjugate the individual to religious truths and leaders and hence should value the binding Foundations (Authority, Loyalty, Purity) at higher rates and individualizing at lower rates.…”