Cohort, spirituality, and religiosity: a cross-sectional comparison

The social scientific conversation on the relationship between birth cohort, spirituality, and religiosity has been going on for some time. The Millennial cohort has now “come of age” and cross-sectional comparisons of the Millennial cohort, Generation X, and the Baby Boomers are possible. The 2010 and 2012 General Social Surveys are used to analyze the relationship between cohort, subjective religiosity, subjective spirituality, and various sociodemographic variables. Results indicate that members of Generation X are the most likely to be “spiritual but not religious” (SBNR) with the Silent Generation the least likely. Millennials are consistently less religious than Baby Boomers but are similar to Generation X in prayer and attendance at religious services. Future research is needed as the Millennials age to examine life course spirituality and religiosity. Introduction The social scientific conversation of the relationship between spirituality and religiosity (however defined) has been going on for a long time and is still relevant today (e.g., Wuthow; Zhai, Ellison, Stokes and Norval 2008). Wuthnow contends there is a growing separation between those who make ideological distinctions between whatever it means to be spiritual and the more traditional measurements of religiousness or religious identification. In particular, he points to a higher percentage of young adults in our society who consider themselves “spiritual but not religious” (SBNR). Social scientific scholars have devoted considerable attention to spirituality since the 1960s (Ammerman). Much of this research initially addressed the baby boom cohort. A significant proportion of Baby Cohort, Spirituality, and Religiosity Journal of Religion & Society 2 15 (2013) Boomers questioned the relevance and legitimacy of a number of social institutions in society. Many members of this cohort began to question institutionalized religion and embraced subjective, voluntaristic approaches to religious beliefs and ideologies (Roof and McKinney). Recent research suggests that it is now the younger cohorts or age groups of today (e.g., the Millennials) that hold the spiritual but not religious positions (Zhai et al.; Pew Research Center 2010a, 2010b). It is possible that cohort members, such as Baby Boomers, “age out” of individualistic ideological positions and return to the religious institution later in life. In order to examine cohort comparisons, we address the degree to which birth cohorts are more likely to report being “spiritual but not religious” or less religious in general. Religiousness involves a number of elements or facets of one’s life. Social scientists use the term “religiosity” to indicate the intensity and commitment of an individual’s practice or participation in her or his religion. Clearly, there are several components as to what the term conveys (see Ellison, Gay, and Glass). For this study, we focus on belief in God, belief in the Bible as the actual word of God, frequency of prayer, and attendance at religious services as indicators of religiosity. These components of religiosity are frequently used in the social scientific literature (see Roof and McKinney). Spirituality is a more difficult concept to measure than religiosity. It is more idiosyncratic and is influenced by a variety of personal and societal factors (Ammerman; Barringer, Gay, and Lynxwiler). Religiousness is often tied to the social institution of religion whereas spirituality is perceived as more individual, subjective, and personal in definition (Roof 1993, 1997). What people mean when they say they are spiritual is less clear than when they say they are religious. Even though research demonstrates a consistent relationship between religiosity and spirituality, many interpret spirituality as something different than religiousness. It is beyond the scope of this paper to examine what spirituality means to people (i.e., people were not asked to provide a definition of spirituality). Instead, we examine the correlates of subjective spirituality. Cohort differences in subjective spirituality and religiosity may be related to other factors. Recent research demonstrates the importance of a variety of sociodemographic variables (e.g., Roof and McKinney; Wuthnow; Baker). This research demonstrates that religiosity varies by marital status, parental status, gender, socioeconomic status, geographic residence, and race and ethnicity to mention a few. As a result, this study incorporates control variables in the analysis. The purpose of this study is to examine cohort comparisons of subjective spirituality and religiosity in two ways. First, we address cohort variations in spirituality and religiosity using four birth cohorts in the analysis: (1) the Millennials, (2) Generation X, (3) the Baby Boomers, and (4) the Silent Generation. Second, we include sociodemographic variables to see whether they affect the relationship between cohort and spirituality and religiosity. Spirituality and Religiosity The literature shows a consistent relationship between these two constructs through the analysis of survey data. For example, a simple cross tabular look at the 2010 and 2012 General Social Surveys (Smith et al.) shows that a little over one half of the respondents Cohort, Spirituality, and Religiosity Journal of Religion & Society 3 15 (2013) report being moderately or very religious and moderately or very spiritual. Earlier studies (e.g., Xenakis) also show a significant relationship between the two constructs. This is not surprising since spirituality is an important component of Christian ideology, and Christianity is the dominant religious ideology in our society. As result, a large proportion of American adults consider religiousness and spirituality to be overlapping concepts that are embedded within one belief system. Nevertheless, there is an increasing interest in understanding the subset of the population that self-identifies as “spiritual but not religious” (Chaves). Religiosity, Spirituality, Cohort and Age Time and again, age has demonstrated a positive relationship with religiosity. As people age and move through various life course transition periods or stages, religious participation and involvement has a tendency to change. The general pattern is that people increase religious participation as they get older but in a non-linear fashion (Argue, Johnson, and White). What is unclear is whether the relationship between age and religiosity is contingent on historical epoch (the time of measurement) or cohort membership. Studies indicate that memberships in religious collectivities and attendance rates were at a peak shortly after World War II for all ages. That is, rates steadily climbed from the 1940s through most of the 1960s (Salisbury). These rates began to fall during the 1970s (Roof and McKinney). Much of this decline was attributed to the baby boom cohort. This cohort was socialized in a much different political, social, and economic climate than the cohort that preceded them. The Baby Boomers witnessed and were often a part of social and political issues of the time, such as war protests, the feminist movement, and the civil rights movement. Numerous studies (e.g., Bass; Alwin; Williamson, Coupland, Folwell, and Sparks; Hill; Miller) document the differences in the social and political attitudes and behaviors between the baby boom cohort and their predecessors. It follows that since Baby Boomers questioned major social institutions, they also tended to reject the traditional religious institution and norms as well. Greer and Roof conclude that many adopted a more privatized religion that was not related to institutional religious identification. Bellah’s widely recognized description of the development of religious individualism supports a more subjective, voluntaristic ideological position of this cohort. Bellah did not use the phrase “spiritual but not religious,” but it describes much of the individualism expressed at the time (Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, and Tipton). Wuthnow does use the phrase and suggests that the SBNRs are involved in “spiritual tinkering” and are also more likely to be involved in “church shopping” and “church hopping. ” In addition, he contends that those in their twenties and thirties (during the middle years of the 2000s) are more likely to consider spirituality and religiosity as distinct entities. “Twenty and thirty-somethings” in Wuthnow’s analysis are either young members of Generation X or older Millennials. Hence, we are interested in examining whether younger birth cohorts differ in subjective spirituality and religiosity from older cohorts. Cohort, Spirituality, and Religiosity Journal of Religion & Society 4 15 (2013) Birth Cohort In general, most of the literature focusing on cohort differences in religiosity focuses on variations between the Silent Generation or Depression Era cohort, people born in the 1930’s, and the Baby Boom cohort, people born in the 1950’s (see Craig and Bennett). In the 1990s, more began to address the Generation X cohort born in the 1970’s or so and their attitudes and experiences in general (e.g., Roof and Landres; Trenton; Ortner; Arnett 2000b). Recently, attention has turned toward the Millennial generation and their spiritual and religious patterns (Arnett 2000a; Arnett and Jensen; Smith and Snell). Some of the difficulty in cohort/generation studies is the operationalization of each cohort/generation. In many cases, there is widespread disagreement or at least differences in opinions concerning categorical strategies for cohort designations. This section describes the uniqueness of each cohort and the operational strategy used in this analysis. The Millennials. Today’s Millennial generation is often compared to the Baby Boom cohort. They have been called “Generation Y,” “Generation Next,” and “echo boomers. ” Howe and Strauss coined the term Millennials, and it is the name that has garnered