342 Fred Kniss
become sharper within the Mennonite community and the number and intensity of
such conflicts would increase. Elsewhere (Kniss 1996), I have presented a comparative
historical analysis that finds support for these hypotheses.
Internal conflict within mainstream groups is also affected by their varying position
along the main diagonal. The current debates within U.S. Protestant denominations
over sexual orientation provide a good example. Within mainline or “liberal” Protes-
tant denominations, the fiercest debates are occurring in those denominations, such
as Presbyterians and Methodists, that were formed by earlier mergers of evangelical
and liberal wings of the tradition. In these denominations, the argument is rooted in
the moral authority dimension, and the two sides of the debate can legitimately draw
on differing paradigms within their tradition. The conflicts turn on the question of
whether collective canon law should prevail or whether actions should be determined
based on individual conscience and local pastoral concerns.
When denominations on the religious right, by contrast, fight about sexual orienta-
tion, the terms of the debate are different. Here, the moral authority of the collectivity
is taken for granted. The core question is: Which collectivity has the authority to de-
cide policies and procedures regarding sexual orientation? That is, do congregations
have the right to make their own decisions on these matters, or can the denomina-
tion set policies and hold congregations to them? This basic argument is at the core
of the various disagreements that have split the Southern Baptists over the past fifteen
years.
Impact of Peripheral Groups on the Mainstream
I have been making the point that bipolar conceptions of cultural conflict lead to ig-
noring or misunderstanding the experience of sectarian, utopian, or other peripheral
groups and movements. But some may argue that this is no great loss – that peripheral
groups may be interesting curiosities, but are, after all, peripheral and thus relatively in-
significant for understanding large-scale cultural conflicts occurring in the mainstream.
However, another implication of the moral order map I propose is that the interaction
between groups on and off the diagonal has an impact on both.
My analysis of intra-Mennonite conflict, by focusing on internal events as the de-
pendent variable, highlighted the causal effects of external factors on internal cultural
dynamics. But it is a logical implication of the model I propose that peripheral groups
like the Mennonites should also have an impact on the larger environment. This kind
of argument is much more difficult to make concisely or coherently because the de-
pendent variable, impact on the sociocultural environment, is so diffuse. However, if
we focus on specific characteristics of the environment, it is possible to make such an
argument.
Probably the best example in the case of Mennonites would be American govern-
ment policy toward conscientious objectors to war. The rapid succession of wars in the
twentieth century and the disastrous experience of Mennonites during the first one led
to their increasingly sophisticated dealings with the government (in cooperation with
other “peace churches”) in developing conscientious objection policies (Kniss 1997a).
The successful institution of such policies in U.S. law changed at least this one aspect
of the political environment, making conscientious objection to war more respectable
and more accessible to many people other than Mennonites. Institutionalizing and