A theory of liberal churches

Marginal Revolution: A theory of liberal churches

From Michael Makowsky:

There is a counterintuitive gap in the club theory of religion. While it elegantly accounts for the success of strict sectarian religious groups in recruiting members and maintaining commitment, it is less satisfactory when attempting to account for groups requiring neither extreme nor zero sacrifice. Moderate groups are always a suboptimal choice for rational, utility maximizing agents within the original representative agent model. The corner solutions of zero and absolute sacrifice, however, are rarely observed empirically compared to the moderate intermediate. In this paper, we extend the original model to operate within an agent-based computational context, with a distribution of heterogeneous agents occupying coordinates in a two dimensional lattice, making repeated decisions over time. Our model offers the possibility of successful moderate groups, including outcomes wherein the population is dominated by moderate groups. The viability of moderate groups is dependent on extending the model to accommodate agent heterogeneity, not just within the population of agents drawn from, but heterogeneity within groups. Moderate sacrifice rates mitigate member free riding and serve as a weak screening device that permits a range of agent types into the group. Within-group heterogeneity allows agents to benefit from the differing comparative advantages of their fellow members.

Holy cow! I don't know who is worse when it comes to writing this stuff ... sociologists or economists.

My interpretation is that moderate sacrifice (as opposed to extreme or zero sacrifice) by group members creates loyalty and solidarity, while weeding out freeloaders. Diversity makes the group stronger through competitive advantage.

I think this also links to Robert Putnam's observations about diversity. He has concluded that diversity for diversity's sake is destructive of community. But diversity among people committed to a common vision or goal is very healthy for a community.

Comments

[Viola Larson]

I'm so glad you interpreted that. My first reaction was 'What?!"

[JMorrow]

Even as a potential PhD student, I had to laugh at the writing. That prose is about as dense as poundcake.

All that being said, firmly agree that diversity for diversity's sake in Church context mistakes the gift for the giver. Only an appreciation of the ultimate goal will help us to best use the gifts we have been given.

As well, this is another sign that for "moderate" congregations as for all, evangelism is so vital. The addition of fresh voices and investors in our work gives all congregations much needed vitality, perspective and a less myopic stance.