Just the facts, man : Catholics still marry Catholics.

For reasons that escape me, the conviction is widespread that younger Catholics are drifting away from the church. Thus an article about Catholics in their thirties in Commonweal [July 17, 1998] by a team of scholars associated with The Catholic University of America was headlined with the suggestion that their faith was "loosely held." More recently, Professor Scott Appleby of Notre Dame, in an address to a convocation of Chicago priests, opined that the church was faced with mass defection in his generation. Now Professor James D. Davidson of Purdue University has argued in the September 10, 1999 Commonweal that religious mixed marriages have increased because younger Catholics are "less attached to the church" than their predecessors.

I would have thought that the article by The Catholic University team really indicated that young people strongly identify with key elements of their heritage. Professor Appleby's apocalypse was not notably encumbered by data; in fact, available data indicate that the defection rate from Catholicism for non-Hispanics has not changed dramatically from the turn of the century (up only 11 percent). Professor Davidson's findings, however, do deserve more serious attention.

Davidson's essential finding-that more and more American Catholics are marrying outside the church-is a factoid. One ought to, therefore, search for an explanation. Professor Davidson hints at one in his discussion of mixed marriages: There is less pressure now on the partner who is not Catholic to convert to Catholicism-before, during, or after the marriage. Might the increase in exogamy (marrying outside one's faith) be nothing more than that? If, in other words, one allows for that change, might the exogamy rate across various generations or "birth cohorts" be constant? Might those Catholics who were raised Catholic be choosing Catholic- raised spouses at approximately the same rate as earlier in the century?

These questions can be answered by analyzing data from the National Opinion Research Center's General Social Survey. Annually, or more recently, biennially, since 1972, NORC has surveyed probability samples of the American population for the National Science Foundation (and other sponsors). Trained interviewers have talked face-to-face (not simply on the telephone, as Davidson seems to suggest) with more than 38,000 respondents of whom 9,408 identified themselves as Catholic. Of these, 7,450 married Catholics, and 5,472 were currently married to a Catholic when interviewed. With a sample of the duration and size of the GSS, it is possible to compare birth cohorts from the beginning of the twentieth century with all birth cohorts throughout the century, and to measure changing patterns of behavior and attitudes. The GSS data, for example, included 520 Catholics born before 1910, interviewed in great part in the early years of the project. How does their exogamy rate compare with that of those born in the 1960s?

The first column of the accompanying table indicates the correctness of Professor Davidson's analysis. More than eight out of ten Catholics born before 1940 were currently married to other Catholics. Moreover, the rates for each cohort (using a technique called dummy variable multiple regression analysis) are significantly different from that of the 1940s' cohort. Those born before the 1940s had higher endogamy rates-that is, they married other Catholics-whereas those born in the 1950s and '60s had lower rates (though there is not a significant difference between those born in the '50s and those born in the '60s, which suggests that the decline may have bottomed out).

The question remains, however, as to whether the absence of pressure for conversion on partners who are not Catholic may account for the decline in endogamy. To answer this question one must look at the propensity of Catholics who were raised Catholic to choose as spouses others who were raised Catholic, a "pure" endogamy rate, as it were, in which there was no pressure for conversion. Fortunately, the GSS also asked questions about the religion in which both the respondent and the spouse were raised.

The second column in the table shows this "pure" endogamy rate-the propensity of Catholics who were raised Catholic to choose as spouses those who were also raised Catholic. Here the results are very different. The endogamous rate of those born before 1910 is significantly higher than the rates of those born after 1910, but, it should be noted, none of the other birth cohorts is significantly different from the 1940s' benchmark. Beginning with the cohort of the 1920s, two out of three Catholic respondents who were raised Catholic have chosen as spouses those who were also raised Catholic. Under a different statistical technique in which the religion in which the spouse was raised and age are taken into account, the correlation between year of birth and endogamy is reduced to statistical insignificance.

It would appear, therefore, that the increase in what the older monsignori used to call "those damn mixed marriages" is almost entirely the result of the relaxing of pressures for marital conversions. I doubt that Davidson or anyone else would want to go back to those pressures, even if it were possible-which it certainly is not.

I am prepared for priests to argue that the data do not apply to the situation in their parishes, or for laity to argue that there have been far more mixed marriages in their families. I can only respond, with respect, that they should collect their own national sample data to prove that their experiences are typical and that our data are flawed.

We cannot tell from the data how many of these Catholic/ Catholic marriages were contracted in the presence of a priest. Moreover, I am skeptical about trying to manipulate The Official Catholic Directory data to answer this question. Bad data tend to drive out good data, especially when it is relatively easy to ask a question about the subject in a survey.

Many young couples report that rectories these days greet them with hostility instead of enthusiasm when they come to apply for marriage, that registration in the parish has replaced baptism as a criterion of a right to the sacrament, that preparation for marriage has become an obstacle course instead of a celebration, and that priests or parish staffs frequently simply deny them the sacraments (for example, if they are living together), usually in direct violation of canon law. I know of some couples who simply go down the street to the local Lutheran church to contract marriage and then continue to attend Mass and receive Communion in the Catholic church. However, in the absence of data, I doubt that this strategy has become common. Most Catholic/ Catholic marriages will occur in the Catholic church, despite what bitter taste in their mouths the bride and the groom might have after encountering parish staff. I agree with Davidson that more attention should be paid to young adults by the church (many parishes have no programs at all for them). I also believe that parishes should emphasize celebratory instead of rule- dominated preparation for marriage (many of which rules violate canon law).

Nonetheless, two-thirds of those Catholics who were raised Catholic and were born since 1940 (and, for the most part, came of marriage age after the Second Vatican Council) have chosen marriage partners who were also raised Catholic. Moreover, despite all the social, economic, demographic, cultural, and religious changes in this century, the "pure" endogamy rate has not changed significantly since the 1910-19 cohort. I would suggest that these data lend support for a conclusion opposite from that of Davidson. Young people are still strongly attached to Catholicism, if in their own way. Despite all that we (pope, bishops, priests, lay staff, lay intellectuals) have done to them, we have not been able to drive them away from Catholicism.

I realize that I am virtually the only one in the public arena of the church who holds this position. Nonetheless, the phenomenon which must be explained is not why they leave but why they stay, not why they marry those who were not raised Catholic, but why most of them marry those who, like themselves, were also raised Catholic. It is folly to try to make ecclesiastical policy without asking and attempting to answer these questions. There are several reasons which we might consider.

Religion in our society is still an important element in a person's social identity (even though the media and the academy often try to pretend that it is not or perhaps should not be). To choose a Catholic spouse protects and reinforces one's Catholic identity.

Religious affiliation is a form of what George Stigler and Gary Becker have called consumption capital: a collection of habits, customs, attitudes, and behaviors in which one has invested considerable time and energy and hence a capital that one is loath to lose or to compromise in an exogamous marriage.

Catholics like being Catholic. The Catholic stories which reflect the sacramentality and the community and are the core of the Catholic heritage are too good to give up; on the contrary, it is good to have a spouse who shares them.

Faith-which may well subsume the first three reasons.

To those who think these explanations are absurd, I can only say, again with infinite respect, derive your own explanations for the consistency of the "pure" exogamy rate.

In conclusion, I have always been astonished at the propensity of the clergy (from the pope on down) and the serious thinkers in Catholicism to believe the worst about the Catholic young people and indeed about all the Catholic laity. Granted, the young are Catholic on their own terms now. So, for weal or woe, is everyone else.

Priests seem to exult when they tell me that the latest "October count" (bad data drive out good data, just as bad money drives out good money) shows a decline in church attendance. See how bad the laity are, they seem to be saying. Not one has ever wondered what he might have done to cause the problem. Similarly, the European bishops assembled in synod in Rome this fall were busy blaming everyone and everything in sight (especially vague cultural forces) for the "crisis" in the European church without asking what mistakes they might have made.

No one seems interested in the enormous residual power which might be latent in the Catholic heritage, much less in the solid empirical evidence that this power is still strong, perhaps even indestructible.

The Reverend Andrew M. Greeley teaches sociology at the University of Chicago and the University of Arizona.

Catholic Endogamy Rate by Birth Cohorts
           Raised Catholic
      Catholic with   with Spouse
   Birth Cohorts   Catholic Spouse   Raised Catholic
   Before 1910   88 percent*   82 percent*
   1910-19   84 percent*   73 percent
   1920-29   85 percent*   68 percent
   1930-39   81 percent*   70 percent
   1940-49   76 percent   68 percent
   1950-59   71 percent*   65 percent
   1960-69   69 percent*   64 percent
*Difference from 1940-49 is statistically significant.