1. Religion in America: Putnam & Campbell More and more Americans choosing their religion independently of both their family of origin and their current family.

2. Stability & Fluidity Compared to other aspects of our selvesour attitudes, values, identities, habitsour religious outlooks are, in fact, highly stable. – Between 2006 & 2007, 58% gave an identical reply re: frequency of church attendance, 86% virtually the same reply – By contrast, only 33% gave the identical response re: how often friends over to home But highly stable is not perfectly stable: – Only 70% of 2006 nones claimed same status in 2007 – Meanwhile, 30% of 2006 affiliated individuals claimed none in 2007 – Very few of these experienced any other changes in religious beliefs or practice Prayed as often, same level of belief or non-belief Liminal members of religions (134-135) 2

3. Stability & Fluidity ¾ of Americans practice the faith in which they were raised, but: – Parents religion is ambiguous for children or religiously-mixed marriages – Almost 20% of Americans were raised in a different religion from their parents – 10% who now share their parents religion had left it for a time – Many Protestants have switched denominations Less than 2/3 of all Americans simply inherited parents religion Fidelity to parents religion almost twice as high among black and Latino as for white and Asian Americans – Religion & ethnic identity Many more have lapsed, ceasing to attend services – Non-attendance has risen sharply in recent generations (136-137) 3

4. Fig. 5.1 4

5. The rate of switching rose slowly over the century from about 19 percent among those Americans born at the beginning of the twentieth century to about 27 percent among those born at the end of the century, for an increase of almost 50 percent in the rate of switching over this century. (138) – What explains who remains faithful to the religion of their parents and who leaves? (142) 5

6. What explains switching? Other than ethnicity, other demographic factors (gender, income, education) make minimal impact Religious socialization appears to have the strongest impact: is the family of origin homogenous & observant? – If not, children more likely to becomes nones – But obviously, religiously engaged parents are likely to care more whether child follows the same faith (142- 143) 6

7. What explains switching? Marrying someone of another faith increases likelihood of switching – 60% of switching unrelated to marriage – 25% probably directly related to marriage (switch to spouses faith) – 15% switching when both spouses switch to same, third status Marital switching down and more and more Americans choosing their religion independently of both their family of origin and their current family. (143) – More interfaith marriages 7

8. What explains switching? While 50 years ago religiosity and political beliefs were uncorrelated, but strongly correlated today Those who retain their parents faith only weakly correlated, but misfits (unchurched conservatives or churchgoing liberals) are more likely to switch religious affiliation that politics (145) 8

9. Previously, nones were likely to have religious children, keeping their overall numbers small, but in the latter half of the 20 th century, but retention, esp. since 1990, has become strong As of today, most nones had religious parents, and thus most secular Americans are much more intimately familiar with religious beliefs and practices than their secular counterparts in Europe. – Secular Americans thus in many ways do not tend to regard religion as alien – However, if current trends continue, the personal basis for that comity will be weaker a generation from now (147-148) 9

10. Deceasing Barriers to Interfaith Marriage Fig. 5.5 10

11. Who Intermarries? Fig. 5.8 11

12. Who Intermarries? Opportunity matters: the more of a given category of person, the easier to marry someone in that category – Increased religious diversity would seem likely to increase number of interfaith marriages More intense religiosity increased likelihood of same-faith marriage – Normative commitment or social opportunity? Ethnic minorities tend strongly to religiously homogenous marriages because religion seen as part of ethnic identity (158-159) 12

13. Switching Produces Competition When it comes to religious switching, the action is in the congregationsthe primary point of contact most Americans have with their religion. – If necessity is the mother of invention, religious fluidity is the mother of innovation. Or, perhaps, innovation is the mother of fluidity. Either way, Americans have a wide array of religious choices, as religious entrepreneurs [...] constantly refine and reinvent both the substance and the presentation in the United States. – The authors speculate that religious entrepreneurs will increasingly seek to reach this untapped pool [of nones] and offer examples of innovators who appear to be trying to do so already. (163) Market model 13

14. Focusing only on switching between religions undercounts the extent of fluidity in American religion, as Americans move between congregations more frequently than religions – Church shopping common, but infrequent for individuals, more like buying a house than picking a restaurant (169) 14

15. Fig. 6.2 15

16. But isnt it views on sexual morality that have reshaped Americas religious landscape? – Recall: Nones have commonly left organized religion over political questions – Choosing church b/c of teachings on sexuality consistent with theology or religious beliefs – But while people choose a church due to beliefs, they stay in the church due to friendship & community (171-174) 16

17. Types of Religious Innovation Presenting an old message via a new medium (163-165) – LifeChurch internet church service, Billy Graham & televangelism New forms of religious organization – Circuit-riding Methodists in the West, the megachurch A new message, possibly a new faith – Mormons, Seventh-day Adventists, Christian Scientists, Scientologists New practices in existing faith – Vatican II, Episcopal ordination of homosexuals, mixed gender seating in Reform Judaism, Emerging church Even preserving the old in the face of change – Orthodox synagogues, Latin Mass, High Church Protestants 17