Religion as Social Capital: Producing the Common Good

13. Religion, Social Capital, and Democratic Life: Concluding Thoughts

Over the past two decades, the concept of social capital has drawn a great deal of scholarly attention among social scientists, and it has fostered considerable research related to its presence, its availability, and its consequences. Not only has scholarly interest been generated, but considerable scholarly debate has emerged as well. This volume adds to that discussion and debate, though it does so by focusing on a particular kind of social capital—social capital that is tied to religious life—and the kinds of consequences that flow from its presence. The authors of these chapters have addressed different issues and have presented assorted observations, analyzed particular data, and offered various explanations. Together, these chapters have helped to enhance our understanding of the complexity and richness of the interplay among religion, social capital and democratic life. WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? As was noted in the introductory chapter, the social capital framework of analysis stresses the socialization of individuals that results from participation in associational groups and how this socialization serves to instill certain shared norms and encourage cooperative societal action. Advocates of the social capiChapter 13 Religion, Social Capital and Democratic Life Concluding Thoughts Corwin Smidt 211 tal framework posit that associational life functions to produce the trust, foster the extended social networks, and establish the social norms that sustain and enable healthy democratic systems (Foley & Edwards 1998, 12). Those analysts who are skeptical of the social capital account of democratic life generally contend that the framework is too simplistic and that it neglects or downplays the important role that institutional structures play in fostering democratic life. They contend that the state is not simply a recipient of the social capital generated through associational life, but instead frequently plays an important role itself in the formation and continuation of associational life. Thus, according to such critics, the process of social capital production has both social and structural antecedents. While most chapters of the volume did not address this particular theoretical issue directly, the previous chapter by Robert Wuthnow stands as a clear exception. Wuthnow does not dispute the important role that social capital may play in shaping civic engagement, but he does challenge any focus on the role of social capital that suggests it constitutes the only, or even the primary, factor in shaping the character of civil society or democratic life. Efforts to comprehend and foster vital civil societies and healthy democracies need, according to Wuthnow, to give particular attention to the role of social institutions, and not simply social capital, in the forging of such societies and democracies. Wuthnow’s caution shifts the focus of analysis and the kinds of questions to be addressed because it places greater emphasis on institutions and the particular context in which social capital is forged: different institutions can foster, color, and restrict patterns of social interaction differently. But, Wuthnow’s chapter also complements, in many ways, the discussion and analyses of social capital in the other chapters. His caution reminds us that the role of religion in fostering vibrant civil societies and healthy democracies is broader than that of social capital generated through religious means. Other chapters of this volume address this theoretical issue more indirectly. The chapters by Warren and Wood point, in part, to the important role of institutions in civil society. Warren’s analysis of the differences in the success of IAF in organizing Roman Catholic and African-American communities indicates that the institutional structures of a religious community have important consequences in fostering civic engagement beyond the consequences associated with the social networks fostered within those religious communities. Likewise, Wood’s comparison of religiously and racially generated social capital highlights the importance of institutions in mobilizing individuals for civic engagement, pointing out that different institutions occupy different structural positions in the public arena that shape their abilities to project and advance power in a democratic fashion. Generally speaking, most analysts have contended that the social capital generated through religious institutions varies in relation to the ecclesiastical structure of such religious institutions: congregationally based ecclesiastical structures are more likely than hierarchically based structures to foster greater organizing and civic skills because of their higher levels of lay participation in 212 Religion, Social Capital, and Democratic Life church work (e.g., Verba et al. 1995). Accordingly, Harris contends in Chapter 8 that African Americans gain civic skills through the horizontally structured Protestant churches they typically attend; were they as...