Doctrines of election make prejudice while doctrines of compassion unmake it

Evidence

Perhaps in future research we need to consider the specific religious teachings internalized by the devout, intrinsic believer. All major world religious teach universal tolerance and compassion; such teachings are a defining feature of a world religion (Burtt, 1957). All major western religions also teach that the faithful follower has special status as one of “God’s chosen people,” the elect, or the saved. As Allport was well aware, religion can serve esteem-enhancing (see Brown & Zagefka’s ch. 4 this volume) and system-justifying (see Jost & Hamilton’s ch. 13 this volume; see also Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) functions. Internalization of a doctrine of universal compassion as a master motive may unmake prejudice; internalization of a doctrine of election may make it. Although a bit too neat, the relative emphasis placed on these two doctrines characterizes what are described as liberal and conservative branches of a given religion, respectively. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2573

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The distinction between compassion-doctrine and election-doctrine internalization as the mechanism linking religiosity to prejudice is a paradigm-refining insight that reframes how we interpret decades of religiosity-prejudice correlations.
• SEED: Could angle an essay on how ‘God’s chosen people’ theology functions as a built-in system-justification for in-group privilege across religious traditions, from Protestant election to Jewish chosenness to Islamic ummah exceptionalism.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2573