There is a popular perception that we (by “we” I unwittingly reveal my North American/Western bias) live in an increasingly secular society which has no room for religious values. We also tend to think of church as a waning institution, in some places struggling for its very existence. The last gasp will come as the baby boomers die off. The bubble will burst. Organized religion will be a minor blip on the margins of the social radar, reduced to pockets of overly polite misfits.
This perception has its roots in a number of sources. First are the proclamations that have come from and are maintained by the academy. Beginning with men like Marx and Nietzsche, we’ve come to believe in a kind of social determinism in which secularization is the natural process of an advancing civilization. Journalism tends to view itself as part of the intelligentsia, or at least its lackey, acting to popularize the truths which would only otherwise gather dust in ivory towers. And so the media daily reveal the operative assumption that society is primarily a secular proposition, and those who lay claim to spiritual beliefs are an aberration.
This perception also finds a footing in census data. Unfortunately, census data in both the U.S. and Canada is limited to a single question regarding religious affiliation. Placed in the hands of journalists, and filtered through rather unsubtle analysis, it would appear that, yes indeed, there is a rise of secularism and a corresponding demise of organized religion. So, for example, in Canada, respondents declaring “none” as their religious affiliation have steadily increased from 4 % in 1971, 7 % in 1981, 12 % in 1991 and 16 % in 2001. Read in conjunction with the General Social Survey, the situation looks even gloomier. “In 1946, about 67% of the adult population attended religious services on a weekly basis. According to the General Social Survey, by 2001 the weekly attendance rate had slipped to 20%; the monthly religious attendance rate also fell: from 43% in 1986 to 31% in 2001.” (Warren Clark, “Pockets of belief: Religious attendance patterns in Canada” in Canadian Social Trends (Spring, 2003), 2.) While these are Canadian statistics, the situation is similar in the U.S.
The problem is: few religious organizations have felt inclined to do any careful empirical work to determine whether or not the popular perceptions are justified. Very little data has been collected over time to provide us with a clear picture of social trends. We don’t know who these “nones” are, nor do we know much about the people who identify as religious but no longer attend religious services. In our ignorance, we have allowed other popular perceptions to bubble up: established faiths are losing ground to other world religions, or to entrenched atheism, or to new age groups or to a host of other body–snatchers. And, of course, mainline churches are only too ready to accuse evangelizing churches of sheep stealing.
But recent data reveals a different story. Our popular perceptions are misperceptions.
In the U.S., the Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion has initiated a detailed survey and is committed to tracking trends over time. The data from the first study has been published on its web site for analysis. The results are fascinating. For example, the survey revealed only 10.8 % religious nones (rather than 14% determined in comparable surveys). The Baylor Institute regards the 10.8 % figure as more accurate because of methodology—they required respondents to provide the name and address of their place of worship. Of those religious nones, only 37.1 % stated that they did not believe in God. This suggests that most religious nones nevertheless believe in something. Or to put it differently, only 4 % of all Americans have no place for the concept of a divinity in their lives. So much for a secular society.
Also interesting is the disparity between affiliation and attendance at worship services. According to the Baylor survey, 22.1 % of Americans identify as Mainline Protestant. But of these, only 24.3 % attend church weekly or more while 13.5 % never attend church. Compare Black Protestant (43.1 % and 10.6 % respectively), Evangelical Protestant (45.2 % and 11.8% respectively), and Catholic (32.8 % and 9.3% respectively).
Through vehicles like Project Canada, Reginald Bibby has gathered comparable data in Canada, but has been doing so for some time now, and so is able to speak with greater precision about “religious nones” and non–attenders. He published some of his findings in 2004 in Restless Churches. In general terms, here are some of his conclusions:
• We are as spiritually inclined as we’ve ever been, and a 500 year history of secular scientific rationalism has done nothing to change this.
• The proportion of “religious nones” is exaggerated. When tracked over time, most reveal a religious affiliation. Most are young and have loosened their ties to their affiliations. However, as they age and engage in celebrations of rites of passage (weddings, baptisms and funerals), they end up revisiting childhood ties.
• Lines of affiliation are far more entrenched than we have ever suspected. It turns out that switching denominations is extremely rare. Evangelicals are NOT stealing sheep.
Based on his observations, Bibby is able to offer some sensible advice to church groups which seek to grow their congregations.
• Evangelism across lines of affiliation will yield poor returns for the effort. Don’t waste your time.
• Evangelical congregations appear to thrive, not because they’re bringing scads of heathens into their sanctuaries, but because they have almost 100% retention of children.
• The stupidest thing a mainline protestant church can do is cull the rolls. We need to take our cue from Roman Catholics who treat people as part of the communion from cradle to grave, regardless of what those people actually think of themselves in relation to church.
• The most effective way to build a church community is to follow lines of affiliation. Exhume those old membership lists, review the names you find there, then start tracking them down. Why waste time wooing strangers who (probably) already have an affiliation and who suspect that you’re primary motive is to take their money in any event? Instead, work at nurturing existing ties. They are already predisposed to speak to you. And you might actually find that your efforts are rewarded.