absence is felt as they take with them their social capital and their volunteer labor. The chapter concludes by outlining four themes the authors gleaned from their interviews about why church refugees are done with church: “They wanted community . . . and got judgment. The wanted to affect the life of the church . . . and got bureaucracy. They wanted conversation . . . and got doctrine. They wanted meaningful engagement with the world . . . and got moral prescription” (p. 28). Chapters two through five are named for those four themes or contradictions and are somewhat repetitive of what is introduced in chapter one. As the chapters beyond the first one expand on these themes a bit, they also feel wordy at times and not essential to gain insight from this book. Chapter one is key. Chapter six, “Being the Church No One Wants to Leave,” is presumably written to the white American evangelical pastor, as the one who would be able to change the church into one that the church refugees will not want to leave. The chapter details suggestions on how to engage church members on those four themes or contradictions spelled out in chapter one. Chapter seven, “Church for the Dechurched,” opens by returning to the titled metaphor of being a refugee. Refugees leave home to save their lives, but some of the culture and meaning of home goes with them. Likewise, here, the authors describe the church refugees as holding on to their faith in God but purportedly no longer ascribing to a legalistic system of right belief. The book concludes with a reminder once again that the church refugees left church in order “to do more, not less” (p. 137), and therefore, that retaining the dones before they leave church could mean holding on to some people who could be a key outreach tool to the nones, thereby shaping the church’s future. There is an excellent TRAILS resource that could be used before covering this text in the Sociology of Religion class in order to frame this book as a sociological reading rather than a religious one. Tal Peretz (2015) has created an activity titled “A Cost/Benefit Analysis of Religion’s Effects in Society,” which can help students think sociologically when they might be unclear how to do so with religion. The goals of the activity include helping students to view any religion “as a social construction, a set of institutions, a resource mobilized by social actors, and an instantiation of power” (Peretz 2015). This activity, followed by discussion of Church Refugees, could together help graduate and undergraduate students to develop their sociological imagination through a sociology of religion discourse. RefeRenceS

中文翻译：

---

书评：一点一滴：数字时代的社会研究

当他们带走他们的社会资本和他们的志愿劳动时，就会感到缺席。本章最后概述了作者从采访中收集到的四个主题，这些主题是关于为什么教会难民与教会息息相关的：“他们想要社区。. . 并得到了判断。想要影响教会的生活。. . 并得到官僚主义。他们想要交谈。. . 并得到教义。他们希望与世界进行有意义的接触。. . 并得到了道德处方”（第 28 页）。第二至第五章以这四个主题或矛盾命名，与第一章介绍的内容有些重复。随着第一章之后的章节对这些主题进行了一些扩展，它们有时也会让人觉得冗长，对于从本书中获得洞察力来说并不是必需的。第一章是重点。第六章“做教会没有人想离开，”大概是写给美国白人福音派牧师的，因为他能够将教会变成教会难民不愿离开的教会。本章详细介绍了如何让教会成员参与第一章中阐明的四个主题或矛盾的建议。第七章，“离异者的教会”，以回到作为难民的隐喻开始。难民离开家园是为了挽救他们的生命，但家的一些文化和意义伴随着他们。同样，在这里，作者将教会难民描述为坚持他们对上帝的信仰，但据称不再归因于正确信仰的律法主义体系。这本书的结尾再次提醒人们，教会难民离开教会是为了“做得更多，而不是更少”（第 137 页），因此，在他们离开教堂之前保留已完成的工作可能意味着留住一些人，他们可以成为非人的关键外展工具，从而塑造教会的未来。在宗教社会学课程中涵盖本书之前，可以使用一个极好的 TRAILS 资源，以便将本书定位为社会学阅读而不是宗教阅读。Tal Peretz (2015) 创建了一项名为“宗教对社会影响的成本/收益分析”的活动，可以帮助学生在不清楚如何处理宗教时进行社会学思考。该活动的目标包括帮助学生将任何宗教视为“一种社会建构、一套制度、一种由社会行动者动员的资源，以及一种权力的实例化”（Peretz 2015）。这项活动，然后是讨论教会难民，可以通过宗教话语社会学共同帮助研究生和本科生发展他们的社会学想象力。参考