This is the final issue that we have prepared as editors for Politics and Religion. Across these five volumes, we have overseen the journal transition from 3 to 4 issues a year and from 7 to 8 articles an issue. Submissions have increased by about 25% so that we expect to receive well over 100 manuscripts a year from which to choose the 32 slots in the journal. The journal continues to attract submissions from across the world in all of the subfields of political science. The journal has acquired an Impact Factor (continue to cite Politics and Religion work!) and is widely indexed. In short, we are proud of the scope and reach that the journal has attained.
More so, we are proud of the work we have been able to handle as editors. Authors continue to send us excellent research that makes real contributions to the literature. With such a wide remit as this journal, it has felt like a 5 year intensive seminar in the vast array of issues related to politics and religion. We have had the luxury of taking some time with each manuscript, which means we cannot help but to have learned a tremendous amount and to have acquired a stronger sense of the bounds of what we can call our expertise.
Though this is based on no systematic study, we have the sense that the study of politics and religion is stronger than it has been. It is easy to point to the numerous journal outlets and the proliferation of book series (such as at Cambridge, Palgrave, and Temple), but we also note the incredible diversity of authors who contribute here. Clearly some of them have made Politics and Religion their life's work and are serial contributors. But many are not. This is important because it means that knowledge of the literature is sufficiently broad to give potential contributors a sense of viable problems. It means that data are sufficiently available to enable investigation. And it suggests that review committees are willing to recognize work in Politics and Religion as merit worthy. These are good signs for the future of the subfield.
This current issue is no exception. It mixes seasoned and new scholars making contributions in newer as well as well-trod areas of research. We hope you enjoy these articles as much as we did shepherding them through the system to publication.
We have great faith in the incoming editorial team and wish them all the luck in the world with recruiting reviewers. Please say yes to their requests or at least decline with dispatch and offer suggestions for other reviewers. Thank you a last time to the editorial board, those who submit, those who review, and those who read and cite Politics and Religion work. We are deeply appreciative.
Before we go, we have one last order of business. It is with great pleasure that we announce the creation of and inaugural citation for
The Ted G. Jelen Award for Best Article in Politics and Religion
Created in 2016, the Ted G. Jelen Award will be given yearly to the best article published in each volume of the journal as chosen by a select committee determined by the editors (the award also carries a cash award provided by the organized section). Ted (Ph.D. from Ohio State University in 1979) is an outstanding political scientist with a special relationship to the subfield and journal. He was a founding member of the organized section and co-founded the journal with Sabrina Ramet in 2007, handing it over to us in great shape after five years (volumes from 2008–2011). But that scratches the surface of Ted's service to the subfield. Ted has served on innumerable award committees, was the editor of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, and has shared his expertise regularly with authors as panel discussant. There is arguably no political scientist who has helped other scholars more to move their religion and politics ideas to print than Ted.
We have a wealth of articles from which to choose the inaugural award winner and it was difficult to settle on just one. In the end, we chose:
Gershon, Sarah Allen, Adrian D. Pantoja, and J. Benjamin Taylor. 2016. “God in the Barrio?: The Determinants of Religiosity and Civic Engagement among Latinos in the United States.” Politics and Religion 9:84–110.
The piece challenges the conventional wisdom that religious engagement is tightly tied to political activity, finding that the tether weakens across the generations of Latinos in the United States. The paper also demonstrates that Latinos are secularizing along with other Americans, but is able to conclude that a vibrant public sphere does not have to suffer as a result.
