320 Rhys H. Williams
activists often reveal a bit of impatience with the tentativeness of clergy on their fa-
vorite issues (Williams and Blackburn 1996). But the organizational consequences show
why spinning off separate SMOs is an advantage.
In contrast, clerical hierarchies can provide important legitimacy and “cover” for ac-
tivist clergy. Sympathetic bishops can place these clergy in congregations (or nonparish
jobs) where their activism will not be as controversial. This may also have advantages for
the bishop – getting some activist work done without it having to be endorsed directly.
Much of the activism associated with liberal religious groups in the 1960s came from
clergy who were in campus ministries, or jobs in national denominational bureaucra-
cies, and thus insulated from the potential backlash of conservative parishioners (e.g.,
Hadden 1969; McNamara 1969). This dynamic can happen on the conservative side as
well. Some of the most active clergy in the early years of the Moral Majority used their
television and radio programs as the sites of their activism, giving them some distance
from their congregational activities (Frankl 1987).
In sum, religion can be an important source of cultural and organizational resources
for social movements. It brings people together, motivates them through their deeply
held beliefs and identities, and offers a continuity of effort and concern that can last
much longer than many ephemeral single-issue campaigns. While there is, of course,
always some resistance at mixing religion with politics – and religion’s importance
as a source of nurturing, comfort, and reconciliation can dim the fires of activism –
the fact that American social movements have so consistently emerged from religious
communities is an empirical fact that cannot be ignored.
THE CHANGING CHARACTER OF AMERICAN POLITICAL LIFE
How, where, against whom, and with what weapons religiously based movements en-
gage society depends on historical circumstances. These circumstances have changed
tremendously in the last half century. Over time, American social movements have
had to change their targets, strategies, and the nature of their constituencies in order
to keep up with these changes. As a general rule, American politics and public life have
become increasinglynationalizedandformally organized. Attempts at influencing it have
had to adjust accordingly.
For much of U.S. history, politics was intensely local. Locally prominent men di-
rected public affairs in various combinations and coalitions (Schudson 1998). Concerns
were local, causes were local, and the impact of political action was usually local (Shain
1994). Then, in the period just before the Civil War, political parties began to take the
basic shape we now recognize, aggregating local and regional interests into national
ones by means of campaign platforms, broad-based coalitions, and electioneering tech-
niques designed to reach mass audiences. Parties began to be professionalized, organiz-
ing themselves nationally and carving out a distinct set of tasks that were legitimately
and uniquely theirs.
During this antebellum period, religiously based social movements with national
implications emerged. The major ones concerned slavery, alcohol, and Catholics. These
movements tended to be episodic and ephemeral, and consistently had their issues si-
phoned off by the major parties. It was a pattern that continued into the twentieth
century. By then, new immigration had produced a second wave of nativism; industri-
alization had led to the crisis in agriculture that spawned populism; and both helped