Catholic Summer

It is almost Memorial Day, that special time when Americans pause to honor soldiers who died in military service. It is also traditionally the long weekend that represents an unofficial start of the summer. Many will visit newly opened community pools and spark up the barbecue for the first time of the year.

I often tell my "Introduction to the Social Sciences" students you can study virtually anything! Even Memorial Day. Need to know how many Catholics have served in the military or reserves (formerly or on current active duty)? Simple. There’s a poll for that. More than 8.5 million self-identified Catholics in the United States or currently serving overseas report that they are or were in the military or reserves at some point in their life. Overall, 47% of self-identified Catholics have either served themselves or have a close family member or other relative who has served in the military.

On to something a bit more lighthearted... What do Catholics think about summer? They love it. Like those of other faiths, Catholics are most likely to pick (about half or more) summer as the season where most of their best memories reside. Only Evangelical Protestants stand out from the crowd with disproportionate numbers choosing spring and fall. Catholics are remarkable in that fewer than one in ten cite autumn as a favorite (i.e., my personal choice… What’s not to like about football, falling leaves, All Hallows Eve, new school supplies, and October Mass attendance headcounts?).

So what’s on the menu this weekend? Beef. If you are dining with Catholics expect steaks, hamburgers, or beef ribs. This is another area where Catholics stand out among the faith crowd. No other group loves beef this much with the Nones—those without a religious affiliation—shunning it the most at a paltry 30% preference rate. If you are planning on dining with Evangelicals this weekend expect to eat chicken (…their most preferred pick at 37%).

What will Catholics do after resting the required one hour after lunch or supper to prevent cramping? They’ll likely swim (…nearly four in ten). One in four will walk and nearly one in five will garden. Biking and reading may consume some of the time. Expect to see Mainline Protestants and Nones at the pool as they are even more enthusiastic about swimming (44% and 47%, respectively). Nones may be the most likely to wear inappropriate swimwear (I don’t have any polling data for this… it’s just a hypothesis). Watch out for Evangelicals on the bike paths (12% preference rate). If you need to borrow some gardening supplies talk to those affiliated with a non-Christian faith (22% prefer gardening). 

In the same survey, a majority of people who say they go to the beach in each faith group report that they "always" wear sunscreen (53% of Catholics). The only exception here is with those affiliated with a non-Christian faith. Only 47% of this group indicates consistent sunscreen use. So on your way back from swimming at the beach or a pool if you happen to run into a neighbor of a non-Christian faith that is out gardening offer them some sunscreen. Everyone hates skin cancer.

We should see nearly four in ten Catholics attending Mass on Pentecost Sunday. With many traveling this weekend they may need MassTimes to find a parish. So expect to see some out-of-towners in the pews if you live in a resort area.

Have a good weekend!

Above photo courtesy of Gepat at Flickr Creative Commons.  

Late-term Abortion: Polls and Scientific Observations from a Non-Human

While religious liberty appears to be in the early lead for primary theme of Election 2012 for the Catholic Church, there is perhaps a more traditional political battleground that could re-emerge. Abortion is back in the headlines with Rep. Trent Franks proposing a ban on abortions after 20 weeks in the District of Columbia. Nearby in Georgetown, some of those who opposed the Georgetown Public Policy Institute’s commencement speaking invitation to HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius did so by noting her support, as Governor of Kansas, for late-term abortion and her record of raising tens of thousands of dollars in campaign donations from a medical practice that promoted and performed these procedures. 

It has now become standard operating procedure for those supporting or opposing a policy to bring out polling data to show a majority of Americans are on their side. If there is any bright side for the Obama administration in the contraceptive mandate debate, it is in how this has shifted the political discourse away from deeply unpopular positions (...the mandate is under a much greater threat in the courts). When questioned about the mandate, both President Obama and Sec. Sebelius can take the position, citing polling results, that they are “in-touch” defenders of women’s health and access to contraceptives (the specific issue of religious liberty is rarely the main topic covered by secular media). It is much easier for the Obama administration to play defense in terms of public opinion on this side of the field than on the side where something like late-term abortion resides (…for abortion generally this is becoming more difficult with a record low percentage of Americans now self-identifying as “pro-choice” as announced today by Gallup).

You are unlikely to see any supporters of late-term abortion use polling data if this re-emerges as an issue in 2012. Why? First, there are not a lot of recent topical questions out there. The most recent publicly-available poll I could analyze that included a question specific to late-term abortion was conducted in 2007 by the Pew Research Center (2011 topline data from Gallup are consistent to Pew). Second, there is not a single sub-group in America that I can identify in these data that is supportive, in a majority, of late-term abortion being legal—not even those who say they believe abortion should be legal in “all” cases (…only 42% of this group supports late-term abortion).

Just 17% of Americans overall said the believed late-term abortion should be legal in the survey. Both women and men responded similarly. There is absolutely no gender gap on this issue. Among self-identified Catholics, 51% said they thought abortion should be legal in “most” or “all” cases (Catholic responses to abortion questions vary across a variety of circumstances). However, just 15% said they believed late-term abortion should be legal. 

Many supporters of abortion argue that pro-life positions are based in religious beliefs that should not play a part in the political process. However, as shown in the figure below, even among “Nones”—those with no religious affiliation—late-term abortion is opposed in large numbers (…similarly only 36% of Americans who “never” attend religious services feel that late-term abortion should be legal).

Why would someone who is not religious at all oppose an abortion procedure if this is “all about religion”? Don’t look to ideology or partisanship. There is no majority support for late-term abortion among the “very liberal” or Democrats either. So what is going on?

To me late-term abortion is such a remarkable issue because it represents the scientific front lines of the abortion debate and these seem to be in motion. You’ll rarely see someone who supports late-term abortion use science to defend their position. President Obama said the whole question of when a baby gets human rights was “above my pay grade” (he got a raise... is anyone in the media going to ask him this again?) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi relied instead on her interpretation of Saint Augustine for the same question. In my opinion, one of the most scientifically ignorant elements of this discourse in the United States is the “out of sight out of mind” idea that fetuses magically become babies with basic human and constitutional rights at nine months—I guess as if some mythical stork swoops down and bestows the mark of humanity on lumps of cells that transforms them instantly into something that is constitutionally protected. In the words of President Obama while he served in the Illinois State Senate (...when his “pay grade” was even lower):

“Number one, whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that we would be provided to a - - a child, a nine-month-old - - child that was delivered to term [emphasis added]. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it - - it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.”

Throughout history human beings have done remarkably cruel things to each other by defining some segment of us as “less than human.” We have recovered from most of these delusions. But there are still many who appear to believe some version of this self-destructive narrative—including Sec. Sebelius and the President who appointed her.

Am I editorializing for once?... Well this does get a bit personal for me. I was born seven months into my mother’s pregnancy in 1970. I weighed only two pounds and nine ounces. I heard throughout my childhood how I was a “miracle baby” that you could have held in one hand when I was born. At the time I was given poor odds of survival—my condition put me at the very cusp of what is technically called “viability” (i.e., the ability to survive outside of the uterus). I spent weeks in an incubator in intensive care. These days my case would be routine as doctors have now pushed back the window of viability into the sixth or even the fifth month with amazing developments in science, technology, and medicine. But back then I was more likely to be considered a woman’s health issue as I was essentially killing my mother. The pregnancy had its complications and my mom was experiencing life-threatening hemorrhaging. But we were very lucky. My mom and I had doctors and nurses looking after us who must have taken their occupational oaths very literally. They fought hard to save us both. Not a day goes by that I don’t think of them and understand that my mom and I are here today because of their choices and actions.

There are other doctors out there who have a very different idea of medicine—then and now. These are the doctors who perform late-term abortions extinguishing the lives of those who may be at the very cusp of viability where I was in 1970 (take for example the doctor who signed the birth certificate of Gianna Jessen... If GPPI is looking to schedule speakers for 2013, Jessen has my recommendation. In her own words, “I didn't survive so I could make everyone comfortable. I survived so I could stir things up a bit.”). It is the case that those often seeking these procedures are doing so because of a medical complication in their pregnancy. However, at this stage, it is unlikely that this would necessitate that the baby must die to save the mother. Others often seek out these procedures following tests that indicate the baby has a disability or even a terminal condition. I would encourage anyone making an argument for late-term abortion on the basis of these cases to do so in front of an audience of Americans with disabilities—adults with voices and votes. Tell them how having a disability makes it acceptable to take a human life (...this is one sub-group of the population, currently including more than 55.5 million people, that we are all likely to be a part of some point in our life).

I taught a class this spring at Georgetown called “History of the Future.” A section of the course looked at predictions of the future being made now. One of our texts, Physics of the Future was written by one of my favorite scientists Michio Kaku. Read it if you ever get the chance. You’ll be amazed and thrilled by what is likely ahead of us. I believe the advances in medicine that are expected in the next 50 years will transform so many of the debates we are having now about life. Medicine will continue to push back the window of viability. At some point, I am hopeful that our society and culture will be more obviously confronted by the reality that pregnancy involves more than one human being. I am also hopeful that in the future Georgetown will never again honor someone who does not honor human rights (or science). As I have said elsewhere, I have no objections to Sec. Sebelius or someone like Rep. Paul Ryan being on campus in a forum that allows for discourse and criticism. But neither of these individuals deserves to be honored by Georgetown given their current policies.

All of this has little to do with my religion. I don’t need to be a Catholic or Christian to believe any of this (and if you’ve read this blog you already know I’m no Republican... nor a Democrat). Science, basic human rights, and my own experience are all I have ever needed (arguably I thought more about these issues than your average kid given my experience—even before I had a good understanding of my religious faith).

We’re out there and you’ll run into us from time to time—the non-humans as the myth goes—the people from that shifting, murky realm of viability who missed our date with that magical stork. 

[Note: The survey data presented above are from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. These are based on 3,002 telephone interviews conducted August 1 to August 18, 2007. Question wording: "Now I would like to ask your opinion about a specific abortion procedure known as 'late-term' abortion or 'partial birth' abortion, which is sometimes performed on women during the last few months of pregnancy. Do you think this procedure should be legal or illegal?" Although the survey references "late-term abortion" and "during the last few months of pregnancy," the question also refers to the procedure for "partial birth abortion" which was addressed in The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Carhart in 2007). This legislation did not make "late term-abortion" illegal. Removal of the baby after death is not "partial-birth abortion," thus late-term abortions involving methods that extinguish life in the womb (typically by injecting drugs to stop the heart) are still used. It is possible that responses to this question in 2012 without the term "partial birth abortion" included would show a different result. However, I would not expect these results to be substantially different nor would I expect to find majority support among any sub-group. Evidence for this is available from a 2011 Gallup poll which finds few Americans believe abortion should be legal in the second (24%) or third trimester (10%)]

Above photo courtesy of cliff1066 at Flickr Creative Commons. 

A Micro-scoping View of U.S. Catholic Populations

With the recent release of ASARB data on the size of U.S. religious group memberships and our previous post on this topic I began to think about the multiple ways in which one could think about the "number of Catholics." I am preparing for a presentation next week for an Ave Maria Press webinar (you can sign up here) on the Emerging Models of Pastoral Leadership project. We are looking at a very specific sub-group of Catholics—parish leaders. We define this in the project as all of those on staff, volunteers, council members, and highly active parishioners. The presentation will include results from a national survey of parish leaders regarding their evaluations of their parish and their ministries, as well as their descriptions of how they were called to ministry.

Among parish leaders is a specific group of interest who are defined as Lay Ecclesial Ministers (LEMs). A LEM within a parish is someone with professional training working or volunteering in a ministry at least part-time. How can we understand the size of this group relative to the total Catholic population? How about some charts...

First, let me note these estimates are generated for 2010 and are derived from multiple data sources including CARA (1, 2, 3) and Pew (1, 2). The bars are like a Russian doll with each lower bar generally being a subset of those above it (don't add the bars together!). The largest bar on the chart is the total number of people in the U.S. baptized and raised Catholic. This includes nearly 97 million people in the country today (...and remember, because of immigration some of these individuals were baptized in other countries). Of course some of these individuals no longer self-identify as Catholic and either have no religion or are affiliated with some other faith (although technically they remain baptized Catholic and could return to the Church). Of these 97 million people, nearly 75 million continue to self-identify as Catholic (approximately 24% of the U.S. population).

The next group of bars covers those who are parish-connected. The number for individuals registered with a parish is based on a CARA survey of pastors in U.S. parishes for the Emerging Models project. At 58.3 million this is nearly identical to the ASARB estimate of 58.9 million Catholics adherents, which is "roughly equivalent to those who are known in some way to each parish or mission" (the difference between these counts and what dioceses report in The Official Catholic Directory, 65.4 million, is the adjustment some are making for active Catholics who are not registered. More than 6,500 U.S. parishes indicate they serve a significant number of non-registered parishioners. Most pastors indicate these parishioners are recent immigrants, Hispanics, and young adults). Some 50.6 million Catholics attended Mass at Christmas or Easter in 2010 (...some are not registered with a parish and many in this group overall attended Mass regularly as you will see below).

For those readers interested in New Evangelization you now know the approximate size of three important populations. First, there are the 22.5 million people who were baptized and raised Catholic who no longer self-identify as Catholic. Second, there are the 16.2 million people who self-identify as Catholic but who are not in a household that is registered with a parish (although technically there is no requirement to register with a parish... But it is helpful!). Finally some 23.8 million self-identified Catholics (many not registered with a parish) who do not attend Mass even at Christmas or Easter.

From here on Catholics who are parish-connected and who attend Mass with some regularity come into full view. Some 36.5 million Catholics attend Mass at least once a month (i.e., this total includes those who attend more frequently) and 32.8 million are in a household that gives regularly to a parish offertory collection. We must drill down further to specifically focus only on the 17.9 million Catholic weekly Mass attenders (i.e., those attending every week. This is different from the number of Catholics attending in any given week. This total is not shown on the graph and includes approximately 23.1 million individuals on a typical weekend).

Now down to the question of parish leadership—the number of Catholics who say they are "very involved" with parish life other than attending Mass. This totals just under 3 million or about 168 people per parish in the U.S. (there were 17,782 U.S. parishes in 2010). To give you a better idea of all the populations discussed above per parish see the graph below.

And finally to the group I am currently focusing on in my research, the 50,000 lay Catholics involved in parish ministry (either paid or volunteer... there are an additional 50,0000 in non-ministry parish staff positions) and of these nearly 38,000 are LEMs. Part of the goal of the Emerging Models project is to understand what the pathway is from some 97 million Catholic baptisms to the 38,000 LEMs (there is one LEM in the U.S. for every 2,556 people who were baptized and raised Catholic). Time for me to get back to answering this question... 

Above photo courtesy of _Libby_ at Flickr Creative Commons.