I didn’t know it at the time, but it was one of those moments when America changed.
Well, that isn’t true. America didn’t change on this particular night early in Jimmy Carter’s campaign for the Democratic Party nomination to seek the presidency. It was a moment when American journalism changed, when lots of reporters in East and West Coast media centers were forced to wrestle with the term “born-again Christian” for the first time.
The number of born-again Christians in American didn’t change, just because a major political figure applied the term to his own status as a believer. But this term — rooted in church history and doctrine — moved into a political context, which meant that it became a real thing for many journalists.
I’ve told this story before, but it’s relevant once again — because of a fascinating new think piece by political scientist Ryan Burge, a GetReligion contributor, about what happens (and what rarely happens) after a person claims to have been born again.
Hold that thought, while we head back to 1975.
… I'll never forget the night when an anchor at ABC News — faced with Democrat Jimmy Carter talking about his born-again Christian faith — solemnly looked into the camera and told viewers that ABC News was investigating this phenomenon (born-again Christians) and would have a report in a future newscast.
What percentage of the American population uses the term "born again" to describe their faith? Somewhere between 40 and 60 percent back then? I mean, Carter wasn't telling America that he was part of an obscure sect, even though many journalists were freaked out by this words — due to simple ignorance (or perhaps bias).
Actually, the percentage was almost certainly 40% in that era and I was wrong to assume that it had ever been higher.
Nevertheless, 40% is not a small chunk of the population and many of those believers are found among the 20% of Americans who consistently practice their religious faith in daily life. We know that because, for decades, the Gallup organization has been asking “born-again” and “evangelical” questions in its polling research. Here is some interesting commentary on that from Gallup veteran Frank Newport:
There has been little change in the percentage of Americans who identify as "born-again or evangelical" over the past 27 years.
From time to time each year, we at Gallup include this self-definitional question in surveys: "Would you describe yourself as 'born-again' or evangelical?" This provides us with the great advantage of being able to track a consistent wording over time.
The most interesting finding from our 27 years of tracking this question is the lack of meaningful variation. We have seen year-to-year fluctuations, to be sure, but nothing meaningful or sustained. The 42% of Americans who on average identified as born-again or evangelical in 1991-1995 is little different from the 41% over the past three years.
This brings us to that think piece by Burge, published at the Religion in Public blog.
Readers will want to note that Burge is also interested in what happens when someone STOPS identifying as a born-again Christian.
His key finding: While there will always be examples of people who’s lives radically change, after becoming born again, that does not appear to be the norm, according to hard data about church attendance and their beliefs on moral and social issues, and political beliefs.
… The data doesn’t really match the expectations. The number of people who radically shift their church attendance after a born-again experience is incredibly small. The share of people who shift their attendance more than two points up after becoming born-again is low (less than 10%). And, a good chunk of people actually attend *less* after becoming born-again (between 17 and 24%). Also, just over half attend the same amount after a conversion experience and this is consistent across multiple panels.
What about politics, since that is what matters to so many journalists (especially editors)?
In two of the three surveys, a respondent was just as likely to move toward the Democrats as they were the Republicans after becoming born-again. But, it’s fair to stay that stasis was the norm for this group of new converts. Somewhere between 50 and 75% of this group didn’t change their partisanship in any meaningful way. There’s not a lot of evidence that indicates that people who deidentify shift strongly toward the Democrats, either. However, there is some ceiling effect to consider: 22% of people who switched to a born-again identity in the Voter Study Group were already strong Republicans to begin with, thus they couldn’t move any further to the right.
Reporters: You are going to want to read the whole blog post to see how Burge reached these conclusions. Also, click here if you want to read his entire academic paper on this topic.
The bottom line, stated in theological terms: Repentance is hard. Change is hard.
Lots of people claim to have had significant religious experiences in their lives. Some of those experiences truly change lives and that fact should not be ignored. However, it appears that few choose to consistently “walk the narrow way.”