ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS
The Census which is taking place today across the country will provide the government with a snap-shot of life within the nation. It is an important analysis of what is happening to people. It is an important tool for assessing the likely needs of people and the future planning of services. It will also tell social analysts quite a lot about how people live their lives. This is the reason that the British Humanist Association (BHA) has worked so hard and campaigned so aggressively to get the question on religion changed.
The BHA has conducted its own survey to try to show that there is a key difference between asking people “what is your religion?” and asking people “are you religious?” They claim that many people will claim a religious affiliation without being actually religious. So many people will claim to be Christian but will never go to Church – something we all know very well. In the BHA sponsored survey 61% of respondents said they did have a religion but only 29% also said they were religious, while 65% said they were not. The survey also showed a widespread denial of cardinal truths by those who claimed to be “Christian”. There is nothing surprising in this.
The question on religion on the census form allows for comparisons to be made with past censuses. That is what is important to the Government – the ability to establish trends and changes. What is important to the BHA, however, is the ability to prove that people are far less religious than official statistics will show. They have a separate agenda – a religious one?
The point about identifying changes and giving them a statistical basis was emphasised this week. A report was published by the American Physical Society which claimed that census data from nine countries showed that over the last 100 years there has been a steady and significant increase in people claiming no religious affiliation and not being religious. They suggest that this shows that religion may well become extinct in these countries in the foreseeable future. This report was given surprising prominence on the BBC web page.
That is a disturbing conclusion on the face of it, but the research has flaws. The approach adopted depended on being able to define the social motives behind being religious. As the researchers put it, “there’s some kind of status or utility in being a member of a religion or not.” The team took census data from Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Switzerland. Britain could not be included because the question asked in this country only refers to affiliation and not ‘religiousness’ – the very reason the BHA wanted the question to be changed. The problem with the report is the way they define “status or utility”, because they are treating religion as a merely functional aspect of life – like where you live and what work you do. This is the problem with putting any question at all on a census form. To many people the idea of religious affiliation is about identifying themselves within society and distancing themselves from groups they would not wish to be associated with (e.g. not a Muslim or Hindu etc.). So while the census is useful in many areas of social analysis it can also be extremely misleading in terms of evaluating values, unless the questions are very specifically framed. So the doomsday predictions of a group of mathematicians in America are based on unsound ground, and the future of the Church is on better grounds than they can discover by their general questions.
A more specific survey of people is held in America. The National Survey of Families and Households has found that Americans who attend religious services several times a month were about 35 per cent less likely to divorce than those with no religious affiliation. Less active conservative Protestants, on the other hand, were 20 per cent more likely to divorce than the religiously unaffiliated. There are some other interesting features to this particular survey:
We may feel very happy at these statistics but let us be very cautious lest we read too much into such figures. Spiritual vitality is not easily quantifiable. It is the work of God.
A census or a survey may tell us useful things or may completely mislead, it all depends on the questions that are asked. On this census day we must surely consider a greater truth. Today reminds us that there are questions being asked of us that demand an answer now. One day soon after His resurrection our Lord Jesus Christ walked along the shore of an inland sea with the failed disciple Peter. He asked him the most serious question of all – “Do you love me?” That is a question we must all answer. There was another question that was asked by Pilate when Jesus was on trial – “What shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” Our own consciences will ask us that as we hear the Gospel or as we think of what lies ahead in life and in death. Have you answered it – “What will you do with Jesus who is called Christ?” Will you receive him as your Saviour? Will you serve Him as your Lord and King? These questions produce far more significant outcomes on our lives and eternal futures than any human census or survey, depending on how we answer them.
So today should also remind us of a day when a final set of questions will be asked of us all: Questions which have no ambiguity or uncertainty about them whatsoever. We will all stand before God and have to answer Him as to what response we have made to his great offer of salvation in Jesus Christ. Are we ready to answer that question? And for believers there is the question about the nature of our service and commitment to Christ. How are we answering that question now?
Roger Hitchings 27th March 2011