6
representative. Hence, the second approach in studying elite influence concerns the degree to which elites
come into regular contact with the rank-and-file in order to effectively transmit cues on political and
social issues. Elites may be well-known figures in local circles, but, unless they are perceived as having a
reliable influence over a sizeable voting bloc, it is likely that their influence over political decisions is not
strong.
PARISH POLITICKING
Ecclesiastical elites, distinct from elites in other settings, derive their power and influence from
an intricate balance between their representation of divine authority, and their parishioners’ subsequent
willingness to heed these claims. If parishioners do not agree to confer legitimacy on the elites, as can be
the case in some religious communities, or if parishioners do not make regular contact with elites in the
ecclesiastical context, these elites experience a diminished level of cultural suasion locally. When
parishioner contact is relatively high, however, elite claims, and parishioner acceptance of these claims,
become mutually affirming conditions for elite-to-parishioner influence over not only religious concerns,
but political ones as well.
Starke and Finke describe the commitment of parishioners to their ecclesiastical communities as
the producer of a purposive benefit known as “religious capital” (2000, 120-121). It is suggested here that
such capital, in addition to its benefit for the individual parishioner, also exists in a form that helps the
ecclesiastical elites in their efforts at cultural and political influence.
2
Elite religio-political capital, as it is
termed here, can exist in varying degrees, and is based, in part, on the cohesion of elite cues transmitted to
the parishioners and community-at-large.
For instance, if certain elites have a reputation for possessing a consistent preference on a certain
policy (abortion, in this case), they are likely to have more religio-political capital to use to influence
local cultural orientation, and, by extension, representative abortion position. This increased amount of
2
Putnam’s concern with social capital as a conduit to a successful democratic government should not be associated with the
discussion of religious capital and/or religio-political capital (1993). There are important differences, not the least of which is that
ecclesiastical elites, and their counterparts in the abortion debate, are engaged in a largely zero-sum competition for political and
legal change. Thus, the goal of acquiring political capital in the context of abortion policy is not intended for the good of
democratic processes as much as it is political victory.
Convention