Startseite Sozialwissenschaften House Divided? Evangelical Catholics, Mainstream Catholics, and Attitudes toward Immigration and Life Policies
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

House Divided? Evangelical Catholics, Mainstream Catholics, and Attitudes toward Immigration and Life Policies

  • David L. Leal

    David L. Leal is Professor of Government at the University of Texas at Austin. His interests include Latino politics, public policy, and religion and politics.

     EMAIL logo     und Jerod Patterson

    Jerod Patterson is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Government at the University of Texas at Austin and holds an M.Div. from Wake Forest University. His academic interests include religion and politics.
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 8. Februar 2014
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill
Informationen für Autor*innen Erkunden Sie dieses Fachgebiet
The Forum
Aus der Zeitschrift The Forum Band 11 Heft 4

Abstract

This article seeks to contribute to the scholarly understanding of both Catholicism and Latino religious beliefs. Our approach is to look within the Catholic category to test whether differing theological approaches have political implications. Using a recent Texas survey with a range of religious questions and an oversample of Latino respondents, we test whether intra-Catholic religious orientations help to structure attitudes toward immigration and life policies for Latinos and Anglos. For each group, we compare two kinds of Catholics – “Evangelical Catholics” (those who report evangelical-charismatic-literalist beliefs) and “Mainstream Catholics” (those who do not). This builds on McDaniel and Ellison’s findings by asking whether ostensibly similar religious beliefs may have different effects by race and ethnicity. Our aggregate data provide some evidence that intra-Catholic differences can influence policy opinions, and that race-ethnicity can play a mediating role.

Corresponding author: David L. Leal, Department of Government, University of Texas at Austin, 158 W 21st Street, A1800, Austin, TX 78712, e-mail:

About the authors

David L. Leal

David L. Leal is Professor of Government at the University of Texas at Austin. His interests include Latino politics, public policy, and religion and politics.

Jerod Patterson

Jerod Patterson is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Government at the University of Texas at Austin and holds an M.Div. from Wake Forest University. His academic interests include religion and politics.

  1. 1

    Nevertheless, Wald (2003) notes that “culture war” arguments are too simplistic to capture the diversity of opinions across and within denominations.

  2. 2

    Green uses data from the 2004 National Survey of Religion and Politics, conducted by the University of Akron. His measure of traditionalism is a composite of responses to questions on the frequency of Bible reading, church attendance, prayer, and participation in devotional groups; views of God, the Bible, life after death, and evolution; and contributions to the church. Those who are most traditional are considered “traditionalists,” those who are least traditional are considered “modernists,” and those in the middle are considered “centrists” (Green 2007, pp. 45–61).

  3. 3

    In Latin America, numerous Catholics consider themselves to be “spirit-filled” or “charismatic,” as Catholicism responds to the rapid growth of Pentecostalism and other charismatic Protestant churches (Jenkins 2002; Pew Forum 2006; Miller and Yamamori 2007; Patterson and Woodberry 2012).

  4. 4

    For research on how Catholic members of Congress follow (or do not follow) Church teaching, see Oldmixon and Hudson (2008).

  5. 5

    Although we might note that if Latino Catholics and Protestants are “more religious than Anglos” (Putnam and Campbell 2010, p. 301), the effect of intra-religious worldview differences might be less for Latinos than Anglos.

  6. 6

    For instance, see the Brookings Institution panel “Religious Activism and the Debate over Immigration Reform.” http://www.brookings.edu/events/2010/0615_immigration_religion.aspx

  7. 7

    “Migration and Refugee Services,” United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. http://www.usccb.org/mrs/bpbarnesmay17.pdf

  8. 8

    For dependent variables with two response options (such as “favor” or “oppose”), we examine the response most consistent with Church teaching (as indicated in the second row of each table). For questions with four response options (such as Strongly support, Somewhat support, Somewhat oppose, or Strongly oppose), we examine the combined responses to the two positions most consistent with Church teaching (unless otherwise indicated; for instance, Table 5 examines the “never” option for the abortion question).

  9. 9

    As we discuss above, we use this term in a different manner than Weigel (2013) intended, although perhaps consistent with a meaning that Cavadini (2013) suggests he may have nevertheless advanced.

The authors would like to acknowledge the Irma Rangel Public Policy Institute and the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin for survey support and assistance.

Appendix A: Question Wording

Policy

Q18. As you may know, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution says that all children born in the United States are automatically US citizens regardless of their parents’ legal status. Would you favor or oppose changing the Constitution to REPEAL this part of the 14th Amendment?

  1. Favor

  2. Oppose

  3. Don’t know

Q19. Some illegal immigrants were brought to Texas as children by their parents. Should these individuals receive in-state tuition rates at Texas public colleges and universities, or should they have to pay the higher tuition rate for out-of-state students?

  1. In-state tuition

  2. Out-of-state tuition

  3. Don’t know

Q32. What should be the priority for US immigration policy? Should it be allowing new immigrants who already have family members living in the US, or allowing new immigrants who already have useful job skills?

  1. Immigrants with family members living in US

  2. Immigrants with useful job skills

  3. Don’t know

Q33. Please indicate your opinion on the following proposals.

Q33a. Passing comprehensive immigration overhaul at the federal level that would provide a pathway to citizenship for most illegal immigrants currently living in the US.

  1. Strongly support

  2. Somewhat support

  3. Somewhat oppose

  4. Strongly oppose

  5. Don’t know

Q33b. Requiring businesses to verify the immigration status of every worker and fine businesses if they are caught intentionally employing illegal immigrants.

  1. Strongly support

  2. Somewhat support

  3. Somewhat oppose

  4. Strongly oppose

  5. Don’t know

Q33c. Requiring law enforcement officials to check someone’s immigration status when they suspect him/her of being in the country illegally.

  1. Strongly support

  2. Somewhat support

  3. Somewhat oppose

  4. Strongly oppose

  5. Don’t know

Q33d. Prohibiting businesses from soliciting laborers at day labor sites.

  1. Strongly support

  2. Somewhat support

  3. Somewhat oppose

  4. Strongly oppose

  5. Don’t know

Q21. What is your opinion on the availability of abortion?

  1. By law, abortion should never be permitted

  2. The law should permit abortion only in case of rape, incest or when the woman’s life is in danger

  3. The law should permit abortion for reasons other than rape, incest, or danger to the woman’s life, but only after the need for the abortion has been clearly established

  4. By law, a woman should always be able to obtain an abortion as a matter of personal choice

  5. Don’t know

Q23. Which of the following best characterizes your opinion on the death penalty for those convicted of violent crimes?

  1. Strongly support

  2. Somewhat support

  3. Somewhat oppose

  4. Strongly oppose

  5. Don’t know

Q24. In some states, it is legal for doctors to prescribe lethal doses of drugs so that a terminally ill patient can commit suicide. Do you approve or disapprove of laws that let doctors assist patients who want to end their lives this way?

  1. Approve

  2. Disapprove

  3. Don’t know

Religion

Do you consider yourself to be a “born again” or “evangelical” Christian?

  1. Yes

  2. No

Do you consider yourself to be a “spirit filled” or “charismatic” Christian?

  1. Yes

  2. No

Which of these statements comes closest to describing your feelings about the Bible?

  1. The Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word.

  2. The Bible is the word of God but not everything in it should be taken literally, word for word.

  3. The Bible is a book written by men and is not the word of God.

How important is religion in your life?

  • Extremely important

  • Somewhat important

  • Not very important

  • Not at all important

Do you consider social justice to be at the heart of the Gospel?

  • Yes

  • No

References

Allen, John L. Jr. 2009. The Future Church: How Ten Trends are Revolutionizing the Catholic Church. New York: Doubleday.Suche in Google Scholar

Aquila, Samuel J. 2007. “The Sanctity of Human Life from Conception to Natural Death.” Speech at Loyola College, Baltimore, MD. November 15,http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/bishop-aquila-s-address-on-absolutes-in-life-issuesSuche in Google Scholar

Bernardin, Joseph. 2008. The Seamless Garment: Writings on the Consistent Ethic of Life. New York: Orbis.Suche in Google Scholar

Campbell, David E. 2004. “Acts of Faith: Churches and Civic Engagement.” Political Behavior 26: 155–180.10.1023/B:POBE.0000035961.78836.5fSuche in Google Scholar

Cavadini, John. 2013. “Church as Sacrament: A Review of Evangelical Catholicism.” First Things. August/September.Suche in Google Scholar

Chaves, Mark. 2004. Congregations in America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674262621Suche in Google Scholar

De La Torre, Miguel A., and Edwin David Aponte. 2001. Introducing Latino/a Theologies. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.Suche in Google Scholar

DeSipio, Louis. 2007. “Power in the Pews? Religious Diversity and Latino Political Attitudes and Behaviors.” In From Pews to Polling Places: Faith and Politics in the American Religious Mosaic, edited by, J. Matthew Wilson. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Djupe, Paul A., and Christopher P. Gilbert. 2003. The Prophetic Pulpit: Clergy, Churches, and Communities in American Politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Suche in Google Scholar

Djupe, Paul A., and Christopher P. Gilbert. 2009. The Political Influence of Churches. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511819117Suche in Google Scholar

Donovan, Jeffrey. 2010. “Pope Benedict Creates New Vatican Office to ‘Re-Evangelize’ Secular World.” Bloomberg, October 23, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-12/pope-benedict-creates-new-vatican-office-to-re-evangelize-secular-world.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Evans, James H., Jr. 1992. “Black Theology.” In The New Handbook of Christian Theology, edited by Donald W. Musser and Joseph L. Price. Nashville: Abingdon Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Fowler, Robert B., Allen D. Hertzke, Laura R. Olson, and Kevin R. Den Dulk. 2004. Religion and Politics in America: Faith, Culture, and Strategic Choices. 3rd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Green, John C. 2001. “Believers for Bush, Godly for Gore: Religion and the 2000 Election in the South.” In The 2000 Presidential Election in the South: Partisanship and Southern Party Systems in the 21st Century, edited by Robert P. Steed and Laurence W. Morland. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Suche in Google Scholar

Green, John C. 2007. The Faith Factor: How Religion Influences American Elections. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Suche in Google Scholar

Hornsby-Smith, Michael P. 2006. An Introduction to Catholic Social Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511607455Suche in Google Scholar

Hunter, James Davison. 1983. American Evangelicalism: Conservative Religion and the Quandary of Modernity. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Hunter, James Davison. 1991. Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America. New York: Basic Books.Suche in Google Scholar

Ibarra, Joanne D., and David L. Leal. 2013. “Latinos, Religion, and Political Engagement: Revisiting the Catholic Demobilization Hypothesis.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Political Science Association. Hollywood, CA: May 27–30.Suche in Google Scholar

Jenkins, Phillip. 2002. The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195146166.003.0009Suche in Google Scholar

Jones-Correa, Michael A., and David L. Leal. 2001. “Political Participation: Does Religion Matter?” Political Research Quarterly 54: 751–770.10.1177/106591290105400404Suche in Google Scholar

Kellstedt, Lyman A., and John C. Green. 1993. “Knowing God’s Many People: Denominational Preference and Political Behavior.” In Rediscovering the Religious Factor in American Politics, edited by David C. Leege and Lyman A. Kellstedt. New York: M.E. Sharpe.Suche in Google Scholar

Kenski, Henry C., and William Lockwood. 1991. “Catholic Voting Behavior in 1988: A Critical Swing Vote.” In The Bible and the Ballot Box: Religion and Politics in the 1988 Election, edited by James L. Guth and John C. Green. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kerwin, Donald. 2007. “The Natural Rights of Migrants and Newcomers: A Challenge to U.S. Law and Policy.” In A Promised Land, a Perilous Journey: Theological Perspectives on Migration, edited by Daniel G. Groody and Gioacchino Compese. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.10.2307/j.ctv19m641k.16Suche in Google Scholar

Kohut, Andrew, John C. Green, Scott Keeter, and Robert C. Toth. 2000. The Diminishing Divide: Religion’s Changing Role in American Politics. Washington, DC, USA: Brookings Institution Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Layman, Geoffrey C. 2001. The Great Divide: Religious and Cultural Conflict in American Party Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Leal, David L. 2007. “Latinos and Religion.” In A Matter of Faith: Religion in the 2004 Presidential Elections, edited by David E. Campbell. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Leal, David L. 2010. “Religion and the Political and Civic Lives of Latinos.” In Religion and Democracy in the United States Danger or Opportunity? edited by Alan Wolfe and Ira Katznelson. Princeton: Princeton University Press & New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Suche in Google Scholar

Leonard, Bill J. 1990. God’s Last and Only Hope: The Fragmentation of the Southern Baptist Convention. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.Suche in Google Scholar

Longfeld, Bradley. 1991. The Presbyterian Controversy. New York: Oxford Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Magana, Lisa, and Erik Lee, eds. 2013. Latino Politics and Arizona’s Immigration Law SB 1070. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-0296-1Suche in Google Scholar

Marsden, George. 2006. Fundamentalism and American Culture. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

McDaniel, Eric. 2008. Politics in the Pews: The Political Mobilization of Black Churches. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.10.3998/mpub.322916Suche in Google Scholar

McDaniel, Eric, and Christopher Ellison. 2008. “God’s Party? Race, Religion, and Partisanship over Time.” Political Research Quarterly 61: 180–191.10.1177/1065912908314197Suche in Google Scholar

Miller, Donald, and Tetsunao Yamamori. 2007. Global Pentecostalism: The New Face of Christian Social Engagement. Berkley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520940932Suche in Google Scholar

Mockabee, Stephen T. 2007. “The Political Behavior of American Catholics: Change and Continuity.” In From Pews to Polling Places: Faith and Politics in the American Religious Mosaic. edited by J. Matthew Wilson. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Oldmixon, Elizabeth A., and William Hudson. 2008. “When Church Teachings and Policy Commitments Collide: Perspectives on Catholics in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Politics and Religion 1: 113–136.10.1017/S1755048308000060Suche in Google Scholar

Olson, Laura. 2000. Filled with Spirit and Power: Protestant Clergy in Politics. New York: State University of New York Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Patterson, Jerod. 2010. “Interdenominational Agencies: Working Together in Common Cause.” In The Handbook of Denominations in the United States, 13th ed. edited by Craig Atwood, Samuel Hill, and Frank S. Mead. Nashville: Abingdon Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Patterson, Jerod, and Robert Woodberry. 2012. “The Impact of Renewalist Religious Movements on Civic Participation in the United States and Latin America.” Paper presented at the XXX International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association. San Francisco, CA, May 23–26.Suche in Google Scholar

Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. 2006. Spirit and Power: A 10-Country Survey of Pentecostals. Washington, DC: Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.Suche in Google Scholar

Pew Research Center. 2012. How the Faithful Voted: 2012 Preliminary Analysis. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center’s Religion and Public Life Project.Suche in Google Scholar

Pope John Paul II. 1995. The Gospel of Life {Evangelium Vitae}. New York: Times Books.Suche in Google Scholar

Putnam, Robert D., and David E. Campbell. American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Suche in Google Scholar

Public Religion Research Institute. 2013. “2013 Hispanic Values Survey: How Shifting Religious Identities and Experiences are Influencing Hispanic Approaches to Politics.” http://publicreligion.org/research/2013/09/hispanic-values-survey-2013/.Suche in Google Scholar

Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Touchstone.10.1145/358916.361990Suche in Google Scholar

Rieff, David. 2006. “Nuevo Catholics.” New York Times Sunday Magazine, December 24, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/magazine/24catholics.t.html?src=tpSuche in Google Scholar

Smith, Christian. 1998. American Evangelicalism: Embattled and Thriving. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226229225.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Verba, Sidney, Kay Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Volunteerism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctv1pnc1k7Suche in Google Scholar

Wald, Kenneth D. 2003. Religion and Politics in the United States. 4th ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Suche in Google Scholar

Weigel, George. 2013. Evangelical Catholicism: Deep Reform in the 21st-Century Church. New York: Basic.Suche in Google Scholar

Wilcox, Clyde, and Carin Larsen. 2006. Onward Christian Soldiers: The Religious Right in American Politics. 3rd ed. Boulder: Westview Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Wilson, J. Matthew. 2007. “The Changing Catholic Voter: Comparing Responses to John Kennedy in 1960 and John Kerry in 2004.” In A Matter of Faith: Religion in the 2004 Presidential Elections, edited by David E. Campbell. Washington, DC, USA: Brookings Institution Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Wolfe, Alan, and Ira Katznelson. 2010. Religion and Democracy in the United States: Danger or Opportunity? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press & NY: Russell Sage Foundation.10.1515/9781400836772Suche in Google Scholar

Yamane, David. 2005. The Catholic Church in State Politics: Negotiating Prophetic Demands and Political Realities. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Suche in Google Scholar

Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511818691Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2014-02-08
Published in Print: 2013-12-01

©2013 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Masthead
  2. Masthead
  3. Editorial
  4. Introduction
  5. The Catholics and the Others: The Denominational Backdrop to Modern American Politics
  6. House Divided? Evangelical Catholics, Mainstream Catholics, and Attitudes toward Immigration and Life Policies
  7. Catholic Politics in the United States: Challenges in the Past, Present, and Future
  8. The American Catholic Church as a Political Institution
  9. Catholic Partisanship and the Presidential Vote in 2012: Testing Alternative Theories
  10. The Optional Preference? American Catholic Economic Advocacy and the Culture Wars
  11. The Politics of Denying Communion to Catholic Elected Officials
  12. John F. Kennedy and the Irish Catholic Political Tradition
  13. Catholic Social Teaching and American Politics: How Can a Church Contribute to Civic Dialogue in a Liberal Democracy?
  14. The Roman Catholic Church in “Protestant” America Today
  15. Book Reviews
  16. Wilson
  17. Fighting for the Speakership: The House and the Rise of Party Government
  18. The Substance of Representation: Congress, American Political Development, and Lawmaking
https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2014-0009

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Masthead
  2. Masthead
  3. Editorial
  4. Introduction
  5. The Catholics and the Others: The Denominational Backdrop to Modern American Politics
  6. House Divided? Evangelical Catholics, Mainstream Catholics, and Attitudes toward Immigration and Life Policies
  7. Catholic Politics in the United States: Challenges in the Past, Present, and Future
  8. The American Catholic Church as a Political Institution
  9. Catholic Partisanship and the Presidential Vote in 2012: Testing Alternative Theories
  10. The Optional Preference? American Catholic Economic Advocacy and the Culture Wars
  11. The Politics of Denying Communion to Catholic Elected Officials
  12. John F. Kennedy and the Irish Catholic Political Tradition
  13. Catholic Social Teaching and American Politics: How Can a Church Contribute to Civic Dialogue in a Liberal Democracy?
  14. The Roman Catholic Church in “Protestant” America Today
  15. Book Reviews
  16. Wilson
  17. Fighting for the Speakership: The House and the Rise of Party Government
  18. The Substance of Representation: Congress, American Political Development, and Lawmaking
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2026 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 11.1.2026 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/for-2014-0009/pdf
Button zum nach oben scrollen