CORRESPONDENCE.

Thanks to Abigail

I will miss the thoughtful columns authored by Abigail McCarthy ["One Last Word," December 17, 1999], as will countless others. For twenty- five years I have looked to her as the original advocate of feminism in its full Catholic dimensions. Abigail enlightened and charmed us all. I hope you will urge her to write often. Her voice is needed. She has made a unique contribution, and all of us are deeply grateful.

(rev.) robert f. drinan, s.j.

Washington, D.C.

Angels we will hear on high

Thank you for your gift of another of Anne Porter's poems, "Music" [December 17, 1999]:

"...And when the music comes to us

With its heavenly beauty

It brings us desolation

For when we hear it

We half remember

That lost native country...."

In return I offer remarks from the National Gallery of Art's brochure on "The Golden Age of Chinese Archeology." A tenth-century marble relief from the tomb of Wang Chuzhi depicts a small orchestra of female musicians performing a courtly concerto. "Ever since the Shang dynasty," the brochure comments, "the Chinese had considered the afterlife unthinkable without music."

anne morris

Pittsboro, N.C.

'Rex Christus'

As I was beginning the great "O Antiphons"-our prelude to the most unlikely happening in the history of our universe-I came upon Thomas Landy's article "Christ the King?" [December 17, 1999].

The century winds down and Landy remains moved by the image of Christ the King. The image connotes power, totally at odds with either Bethlehem or Calvary. But with images failing to speak much to us, Landy rescues our alienation by invoking an infant soothed by a lullaby. That touched us, and God is again revealed.

william f. lucey

Norwood, Mass.

The facts, man

I am not surprised that Father Andrew Greeley ["Just the Facts, Man," December 17, 1999] disagrees with my conclusion that more and more Catholics are in interfaith marriages, including ones that take place outside the church (see my "Outside the Church," September 10, 1999). In fact, I expected him to disagree, for at least three reasons.

First, in my work, I stress the importance of generational differences among pre-Vatican II, Vatican II, and post-Vatican II Catholics, arguing that the different experiences these groups had during their formative years have lasting consequences on their approaches to faith and morals. In his writings, Greeley stresses the importance of age differences, suggesting that religiosity dips during our teen-age and young-adult years, but rebounds as we get older.

Second, I argue that generations differ most on their attachment to the institutional church. Pre-Vatican II Catholics are the most loyal, Vatican II Catholics less so, and post-Vatican II Catholics are the least attached to the church. Greeley argues that today's young adults are just as attached to the church as young adults were back in the 1940s and '50s, but "in their own way."

Third, I contend that symptoms of the declining attachment to the church include Catholics' increasing tendency to marry people who are not Catholic, and their growing willingness to by-pass the church when they do marry. In The Catholic Myth and elsewhere, Greeley contends that the interfaith marriage rate has remained stable over the years, with 20-25 percent of Catholics in religiously mixed marriages. He does not speak to the issue of marriages taking place outside the church, except to say that existing data do not permit any conclusions about the frequency with which Catholic/Catholic marriages are witnessed by priests.

The bottom-line question is this: Which scenario is more consistent with existing research and the experiences of church leaders? Is it mine, which stresses the importance of generational differences in today's church, declining attachment to the institution, and an increase in interfaith marriages, including ones that are not sanctioned by the church? Or, is it Greeley's, which stresses age differences, the continuing loyalty of young adult Catholics, and the persistence of religious endogamy (marrying someone of the same faith)? I believe there is far more support for my scenario than there is for Greeley's.

Social researchers from Robert Bellah to Robert Putnam and Wade Clark Roof-to mention just a few-have shown that Americans generally, and especially today's young adults, are less attached than ever to all sorts of institutions, including churches. In three national surveys (1987, 1993, 1999) with William D'Antonio, Dean Hoge, Katherine Meyer, and Ruth Wallace, I also find that commitment to the Catholic church is declining (National Catholic Reporter, October 29, 1999). While observing that Catholics still embrace pre-Vatican II doctrines embedded in the Nicene Creed and social teachings, I also show that fewer and fewer Catholics say that the church is an important part of their lives. Fewer say they would never leave the church. Fewer attend Mass on a weekly basis. More say that one can be a good Catholic without abiding by church norms (such as marrying in the church). These trends are most apparent among (but not limited to) post-Vatican II Catholics, even as they age. I don't deny that age makes some difference in Catholics' attachment to the church; indeed, in the NCR supplement, I present evidence suggesting that some post-Vatican II Catholics will become more closely attached to the church as they age. However, I also show evidence suggesting that post-Vatican II Catholics are not as likely to rebound as earlier generations did. My colleagues and I are closer to the truth on this issue than Greeley. So are Scott Appleby and The Catholic University researchers.

My conclusions about interfaith marriage are also more consistent with other studies than Greeley's. When researchers examine spouses' current religious affiliations (thus, not controlling for conversions after marriage), studies consistently show an increase in the percentage of Catholics involved in interfaith marriages. Now, Greeley's own data (column 1 in his table) challenge his long-standing claim that the rate of exogamy (marrying outside of one's faith) has been stable over the last forty to fifty years. Also, even when the trend toward more couples in interfaith marriages reflects a trend toward fewer conversions, it is more important than Greeley suggests, because other research clearly shows that children in mixed marriages are less likely to grow up Catholic.

Even when researchers examine religious affiliation prior to marriage (thus, eliminating the effects of conversions after marriage, as in column 2 of Greeley's table), Greeley's interpretation of the data is out of sync with the rest of the field. Robert Johnson (Religious Associative Marriage, 1980), Allan McCutcheon (Review of Religious Research, 1988), Matthijs Kalmijn (American Sociological Review, 1991), and William Sander (Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1993) have conducted the most sophisticated analyses of intermarriage trends, using General Social Survey data (and other national data as well). All four researchers conclude that, while a majority of American Catholics continue to marry Catholics, the interfaith marriage rate is increasing. Other studies also show that the intermarriage rate is increasing among Catholics in Canada and England (and among Protestants and Jews in the United States, for that matter).

Greeley is the only sociologist I know who concludes that what he calls a "pure" interfaith marriage rate is not increasing. Given the discrepancy between Greeley's interpretation and the conclusion most other researchers have reached, I will abide by the consensus in the field until Greeley makes a more convincing case as to why his idiosyncratic interpretation should prevail.

I reported Michael Hornsby-Smith's finding that in England, more and more marriages involving at least one Catholic are taking place outside the church. Preliminary analysis of our 1999 survey indicates the same pattern in the United States (see NCR, October 29, 1999). Six percent of pre-Vatican II Catholics in same-faith marriages say their marriages were not approved by the church, versus 31 percent of post-Vatican II Catholics. Thirty-five percent of pre-Vatican II Catholics in interfaith marriages say their marriages were not sanctioned by the church, versus 55 percent of post-Vatican II Catholics. Our on-going analyses of these data (including comparisons of cradle Catholics who married cradle Catholics with those who married non-Catholics) will be reported in our new book, which will be out by the end of the year.

Finally, I said that my findings are consistent with the pastoral experiences of most of the priests, sisters, and lay leaders I know. Now we learn that they also compare favorably with the experiences of Father David K. O'Rourke, a Dominican priest, former pastor, and currently a member of the Oakland marriage tribunal, who says my views "are on target" (see "Vows, Not Laws" December 17, 1999), and Brother Jeffrey Gros (see Correspondence, October 8, 1999), who says they are consistent with the experiences of people working in related pastoral ministries and at Creighton University's Center for Marriage and Family. In his article, and in The Catholic Myth, Greeley rather cavalierly dismisses the pastoral experiences of most other priests who believe that the rate of interfaith marriage has been increasing. Even Greeley says he is "virtually the only one in the public arena of the church" who still believes that young people "are still strongly attached to Catholicism, if in their own way." The experiences of most church leaders suggest, and most research confirms, that "in their own way" means less frequent Mass attendance, more disagreement with church teachings about what it means to be a good Catholic, an increasing inclination to marry non-Catholics, and a growing willingness to marry outside the church.

james d. davidson

West Lafayette, Ind.