{"id":297,"date":"2008-02-28T20:11:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-28T20:11:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/2008\/02\/28\/297\/"},"modified":"2011-04-19T19:49:19","modified_gmt":"2011-04-20T00:49:19","slug":"297","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/?p=297","title":{"rendered":"The Stats on Religion"},"content":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s statistics time again. Today\u2019s statistics are about religion, courtesy of a recently released study<\/a> by the Pew Foundation (more properly, the The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life). The Foundation recently commissioned a telephone survey of over 35,000 people living in America regarding religious preferences and backgrounds. The results are quite interesting for many reasons. But I would like to focus here on a small sub-set of the many statistics derived from this study, as a way to gauge the relative health and healthiness of the major religious choices available in the USA (evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox, Jewish, etc.). Admittedly, I\u2019m not ready to provide a precise definition of \u201chealth\u201d and \u201chealthiness\u201d with regard to religion. Perhaps the statistics themselves will help explain what I\u2019m after.<\/p>\n

The first thing that I\u2019m going to compare is the percentage of people who are still active in the religious tradition in which they were brought up in youth. That should tell you something about whether the religion in question is realistically addressing the life needs of its members, given the realities of life in our country today. The second statistic that I\u2019m interested in is the percentage of those people who have left the religion they grew up in and now practice no religion at all. This gives us some idea of how many people \u201cgot a bad flavor in their mouth\u201d from their childhood experiences of religion, and were then turned off to all thoughts of collective worship.<\/p>\n

The third statistic of interest is a bit of a \u201ccorrective\u201d for the first one. It regard the percentage of people in a particular religion who are immigrants. I think it can be fairly said that immigrants often prefer to stay involved in their childhood religion, because it provides social stability for them as they get used to living in a foreign land. That was certainly the case for my grandparents and those like them who came over from Poland many years ago. Only decades later did their wise-guy grandchildren (including myself) start questioning the old time religion.<\/p>\n

Well, let\u2019s take a look at the numbers from Pew and see what they might mean:<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

CHILDHOOD
RELIGION<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n
Percent
STILL INVOLVED<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Percent
NO RELIGION<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Percent
IMMIGRANT<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Evangelical Protestants<\/td>\n\n
71%<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
12%<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
7%<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mainline Protestants<\/td>\n\n
60<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
14<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
5<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Buddhist<\/td>\n\n
50<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
28<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
26<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Jehovahs Witness<\/td>\n\n
37<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
33<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
17<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Hindu <\/td>\n\n
84<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
8<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
86<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Jewish <\/td>\n\n
76<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
14<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
10<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Orthodox<\/td>\n\n
73<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
7<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
38<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mormon<\/td>\n\n
70<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
14<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
6<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Roman Catholic<\/td>\n\n
68<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
14<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
23<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Unaffiliated (atheist, agnostic, nothing)<\/span><\/td>\n\n
46<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
0<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
12<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Atheist<\/td>\n\n
40<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
?<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
?<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

I would think that the higher the \u201cStill Involved\u201d percentage is, the more healthy the religion is (if all else were the same, which it never is). The Hindus come in first here, at 84%. The Jehovah Witnesses are the worst at 37%. The next statistic, \u201cNo Religion\u201d (meaning \u201cleft the childhood faith and not practicing any religion now\u201d), goes the other way; the lower this number is, the more healthy the religion is, or would seem. The Hindus are almost the best in this, at 8% (only the Orthodox are slightly better at 7%). The Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses are again the worst, at 33%. It appears to me that a lot of people get burned out by the Witnesses. It\u2019s definitely a religion for special tastes, and not for children. As to the Hindus, they appear to be the most healthy, but we have to look to the third statistic to put their success into context. The Hindu religion is mainly practiced by immigrants; 86% of those surveyed who grew up in the Hindu religion were born abroad. So it\u2019s not that surprising that the Hindus get such good stats; it\u2019s a cultural thing. The average American thinking about converting to Hinduism would probably not experience the same satisfaction that current practitioners of Hinduism seem to enjoy.<\/p>\n

The next interesting thing that grabs my attention is the difference between the Mainline Protestant groups (Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Congregationalist) and the Evangelical Protestants (Baptists, Pentecostals, Holiness Churches, etc.). Both have very low percentages of immigrants; they are definitely American religions. But for whatever reason, the Evangelicals seem to be doing better than the more liberal Mainline churches. The Evangelicals held on to 71% of their childhood members in the survey, versus 60% for the Mainline churches. And a slightly lower percentage of childhood members of Evangelicals turned off to religion completely versus the Mainliners (12% versus 14%). I take my hat off to the social justice awareness of the Protestant Mainline churches, but it looks as though they are not doing enough to meet the personal needs of their members. It\u2019s too bad there has to be a dichotomy in that regard; it\u2019s too bad that religion can\u2019t find a way to minister to both those who have suffered injustice, and to those who are living an average American life.<\/p>\n

I developed two other stats regarding crossover between Mainline and Evangelical Protestants. In which direction is the traffic heavier? As you might guess, the traffic is heavier for Mainlines going over to the Evangelical side. About 15% of people surveyed who were born in the Mainline tradition went over to an Evangelical church, whereas only 9% of Evangelicals went over to a Mainline church. For better or for worse, the Evangelical Protestants have a better handle on what the average American family seems to expect from religion.<\/p>\n

The Jews show a good retention rate of 76%, despite a relatively low immigrant rate of 10%. However, those who do leave Judaism often stay away from religion co
\nmpletely (14% of those who grew up Jewish became non-religious). The Mormons aren\u2019t much different from the Jews here; they have a retention rate of 70%, an immigrant rate of 6%, and a \u201cno religion anymore\u201d rate of 14%. The two \u201ccatholic\u201d style faiths, the Orthodox and the mainstream Roman Catholics, have interesting differences. The Orthodox seem \u201chealthier\u201d with a 73% retention rate and a 7% no-religion rate, versus 68% and 14% for Roman Catholicism. However, some of this difference is explained by immigrant status; about 38% of the Orthodox in the poll were born abroad, whereas 26% of Catholics were immigrants. So you would expect the Orthodox to do somewhat better, although perhaps not by that much. Recall, though, that the Orthodox church is small potatoes in the USA; there are almost 40 Roman Catholics for every Orthodox Catholic.<\/p>\n

The Catholics still appear to be doing better than the Mainline Protestant churches. However, if you were to adjust for the higher percentage of immigrants amidst the Catholics, the Catholics wouldn\u2019t seem that much better. The survey didn\u2019t break out numbers for native-born Catholics, but based on the numbers for Hindus and Orthodox, you would expect the retention rate for native-born Catholics to be around 64 or 65%; i.e. not that much better than the Mainliners\u2019 60%.<\/p>\n

As to Islam, unfortunately the Survey did not have good numbers, since the percentage of Muslims is relatively low. What few statistics the Survey does show regarding Islam suggest general stability and high rates of immigrant status, similar to the Hindus.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the Buddhists and the \u201cUnaffiliateds\u201d (atheists, agnostics and \u201cnothing in particular\u201d) don\u2019t look very \u2018healthy\u2019 at all. Despite the attractiveness of Buddhism to many disenchanted Catholics and Mainline Protestants, those who are born Buddhist often don\u2019t stay; their retention rate is a relatively low 50%. However, when people leave Buddhism, they often follow the spirit of the Buddha and stay away from religion completely. That percentage is 28%. The Buddhists in the survey were mostly native born, but 26% were immigrants, similar to the Catholics. So, despite cultural ties for the immigrant faction, born Buddhists still seem to be streaming for the doors.<\/p>\n

The Unaffiliateds did even worse (these include atheists, agnostics, and \u201cnothing in particular\u201d, whether or not they believed in the supernatural). Only 46 percent of people who grew up in the \u201cunaffiliated\u201d status had stayed in it. The survey said that most of those who left became involved in some religion. The survey provided a statistic for the atheist component alone, showing that only 40% of people growing up in atheist households still considered themselves atheists! Unfortunately, there was not any follow-up on this group regarding what they had become \u2013 were they now regularly going to a church or a temple, or were they simply shifting over to \u201cagnostic\u201d or \u201cunaffiliated believer\u201d status? Unfortunately, Pew left us hanging here. Still, the atheist perspective is obviously a tough sell. Many people adopt it in adulthood, but it obviously doesn\u2019t leave a good taste if you were brought up as a child in it.<\/p>\n

So you see a lot of \u201cdo your own religion thing\u201d here in America, especially for the native-born. Many people who were born into a religion eventually become \u201cunaffiliated\u201d with any religion, but those born \u201cunaffiliated\u201d often become religious. The Jews and Mormons seem to be religions where you usually are born into it and stay in it, even though they are both highly Americanized. The Hindus and Muslims may go that route too in the future. The Mainstream Protestants by contrast are an all-American Church in a nosedive; the native-born component of the Catholic religion isn\u2019t doing that much better. They both seem to fulfill predictions that the secularization trend going on in western Europe will take hold in America; i.e. the Christian churches will become mostly for immigrants. However, the Evangelical Protestants seem to be bucking this trend; they may attain the \u201cborn into and hold onto\u201d status of the Mormons and Jews, but on a much larger scale. They are obviously going to remain a political force. They may be tuning into something uniquely American in character and circumstance.<\/p>\n

And finally, as to the no-religion or almost-no-religion (Buddhism) options: these factions may be growing in influence in Europe, but they don\u2019t seem to be catching fire here in the USA. Before they can present a relevant alternative for the human family as a whole, they will need to do better with their own children. Otherwise, they won\u2019t ever amount to much more than a refuge for burnt-out adults (like myself) who eventually slip thru a hole in the proverbial fisherman\u2019s net of established religion.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s statistics time again. Today\u2019s statistics are about religion, courtesy of a recently released study by the Pew Foundation (more properly, the The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life). The Foundation recently commissioned a telephone survey of over 35,000 people living in America regarding religious preferences and backgrounds. The results are quite interesting for […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/297"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=297"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/297\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2043,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/297\/revisions\/2043"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=297"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=297"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimgworld.com\/blog1\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=297"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}