A closer examination of the articles they cite by Ellison (1991:80) reveals
that he does see religion as enhancing well being although in a more restricted
sense. Basing himself on Berger ’s religious phenomenology, Ellison (1991:82)
argues that religion provides “existential coherence” for people confronting
“high levels of stress”. Ellison seeks to understand the relationship between
religiosity, stress and psychological well-being. In order to get at this rela-
tionship, he uses a group of “Trauma” variables from the General Social
Survey (hereafter GSS) (e.g., divorce, unemployment, bereavement, and hos-
pitalization/disability) (Ellison 1991:84). He finds that “religious faith buffers
the negative effects of trauma on well-being” (Ellison 1991:89). This effect is
greater upon individuals with less “sophisticated cognitive skills” (i.e. “lower
levels of formal education”). According to Ellison, “Religious faith makes
traumatic events easier to bear” (1991:90).
In a later article, Ellison (1994) takes this argument even further. He argues
that the involvement in religion may have beneficial effects on mental health
by decreasing the risk of several social stressors. These include “1) chronic
acute health problems, (2) marital discord and dissolution, (3) occupational
conflicts, (4) legal difficulties, and (5) parent-child conflicts” (Ellison 1994:91).
He concludes that religious involvement particularly in some conservative
denominations reduces the risk of social stressors (Ellison 1994:111).
We do not disagree with Ellison’s findings but with the way that Stark and
Finke interpret them. These findings do not disprove the theories of Marx,
Weber, and Freud on religion, but rather validate them. If religion helps peo-
ple deal with traumatic experiences, then couldn’t one see religion as a response
to trauma? If the wealthy and educated have higher attendance levels, they
would report lower levels of stress although this may be due to factors other
than religion (for example, income provides access to better health care, etc.).
The poor and uneducated, who have higher levels of stress, particularly if
they are not turning to religion (i.e., attendance), would have a more despon-
dent outlook.
This paper attempts to augment the existing literature in the following
ways: (1) we examine the effects of economic considerations on religiosity,
(2) we explore the extent to which economic factors vary by urban versus
more rural residence, (3) we assess the degree to which religiosity is a response
to psychological trauma, and (4) we use a quantitative approach to analyze
these relationships at three different intervals over a twenty-year period.
346 • David Gay, Warren S. Goldstein, and Anna Campbell Buck