The Dynamics of Role Leaving: A Role Theoretical Approach to the Leaving of Religious Organizations

Abstract

A Sister, member of a religious Congregation, and a priest, member of a religious Order, are led to admit that their mutual friendship has deepened to mutual love. This awareness engenders for both of them a conflict between their organizational roles and their need to bring this love to its normal issue. After a long period of selfanalysis and reflection, they decide to marry. The recognition of this most personal experience is delayed by the subjects' efforts to take refuge in their religious roles. Moreover, their decision to marry does not put an end to their difficulties. They find in their religious institutes, as well as in themselves, a strong resistance to the leaving of their organizational roles.

The concept of "organizational attraction" is presented as a synthetic concept relating the objective attractiveness of the organization to the personality of its members. Three types of organizational attraction are distinguished-coercive, referent, and expert. The emphasis on coercive attraction on the part of the organization results in the parting members' reevaluation of their ties with it.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cartwright, D. Achieving change in people: Some applications of group dynamics. Human Relat., 1951, 4, 381-393.

The church in our day. A collective pastoral of the American hierarchy. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1968.

Coser, R. L. Role distance, sociological ambivalence, and transitional status system. Amer. J. Sociol., 1966, 72, 173-187.

Deutsch, M. , Krauss, R. , & Rosenau, Norah . Dissonance or defensiveness? J. Pers., 1962, 30, 16-28.

Ehman, R. R. Personal love. The Personalist, Winter 1968, 116-141.

Erikson, E. H. Identity. Youth and crisis. New York: W. W. Norton, 1968.

Gluckman, M. Les rites de passage. In D. Forde , M. Fortes , M. Gluckman , & V. V. Turner , Essays on the ritual of social relations. Manchester, England: Manchester Univer. Press, 1962.

Goffman, E. Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis, Ind.: Bobbs-Merrill, 1961.

Goode, W. J. A theory of role strain. Amer. sociol. Rev., 1960, 25, 483-496.

10.

Gordon, A. E. Letter to the editor. Commonweal, 1968, 88, 86-86.

11.

Katz, D. , & Kahn, R. L. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley, 1966.

12.

Kavanagh, J. A modern priest looks at his outdated church. New York: Trident Press, 1967.

13.

Kelman, H. C. Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. J. Conflict Resolution, 1958, 2, 51-60.

14.

Levinson, D. J. Role, personality and social structure in the organizational setting. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1959, 58,170-180.

15.

Lewin, K. Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. New York: Harper, 1948.

16.

Merton, R. K. , & Barber, Elinor . Sociological ambivalence. In A. Tyriakin (Ed.), Sociological theory, values and sociocultural change. New York: Free Press, 1963.

17.

Yinger, J. M. Toward a field theory of behavior: Personality and social structure. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965.