In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more
volatile than usual.
Earlier this month, the Cultural Research Center of Arizona
Christian University released its 11th and latest detailed analysis of the
results of its January American
Worldview Inventory 2020 survey. In a long list of bullet points, CRC
Director of Research George Barna noted that, among other disturbing trends, 44%
of respondents who self-identify as Christian said they believe the Bible’s teaching about abortion is
“ambiguous”, and that 34% said abortion is morally acceptable
if it spares the mother from financial or emotional discomfort or hardship.
Tom: The
Christian news website Not The Bee (“your source for headlines that should be satire,
but aren’t”) took the survey at face value and pushed
back hard with a salvo of scripture, and good for them.
A Problem with Method
We’ve commented on some of Barna’s surveys before in this
space. IC, I’m wondering how you react to the results of this one.
Immanuel Can: The first and most obvious
problem with such a survey is the definition of “Christian”.
Tom: You’ve complained about that before.
IC: Yes. The article takes for granted that all one needs in order to be counted as a
Christian is to say, “I’m a Christian.” So that’s clearly wrong, and we’re
going to get mixed results including both real believers with merely-nominal
adherents … a serious problem for the data, to be sure.
Tom: There’s not a lot of detail
in the 11th AWVI 2020 release about Barna’s survey methodology, other
than the statement that their polling included a “nationally representative
sample” of 2,000 “church attenders” from four groups of churches: evangelicals,
Pentecostals and charismatics, mainline Protestants, and Catholics. I’m not
sure all the respondents even met that very low bar of saying, “I’m a
Christian”, IC.
So I agree with you; that does pose a serious problem for
the data.
Mental Gymnastics
IC: The second problem with the
survey is that baby murder is pretty obviously wrong … and the Not The Bee article agrees, listing a
multitude of Bible passages to demonstrate that. And I don’t think even
hardcore abortionists actually believe otherwise, despite all their elaborate
protestations to the contrary. They know they’re committing murder. They
just want to do it anyway. That’s obvious. And now they’ve graduated into
full-on infanticide, as indicated by opposition to the federal Born-Alive
Abortion Survivors Protection Act. As Christians, we should certainly all know
that’s evil, no question at all. If we don’t, then we have no real knowledge of
scripture, and what kind of so-called “Christian” is like that?
So it’s not the particular issue of abortion, or even of infanticide, that
intrigues me here. Rather, it’s the process of mental gymnastics one has to go
through to imagine that such a clear issue in scripture is still somehow
“unclear” for Christians. If it can be done for that issue, it’s surely being
done for others.
Making Murk
So I’m wondering two things: one, how are these alleged “Christians” managing to
do this, and secondly, what else is getting that treatment? Any thoughts?
Tom: Well, assuming the surveys
were distributed roughly equally among evangelicals, charismatics, Catholics
and mainline Protestants, I think we have good reason to suspect that at
least half the respondents were grossly ignorant of basic Christian orthodoxy.
Roman Catholicism dogmatizes about its theological positions, but doesn’t hold
to the sufficiency and finality of the Bible, so its congregants are not
necessarily familiar with the multitude of anti-abortion verses quoted in the Not The Bee article. And the “mainline Protestants”
surveyed included folks from the Episcopal Church, United Churches of
Christ and United Methodists, whose scriptural illiteracy is evident in their rampant
ordination of women and even the occasional atheist minister.
So I would say you don’t have to go through mental
gymnastics to rationalize abortion if your church never cracks a Bible, and most
of your views about right and wrong trickle in by osmosis from popular culture.
IC: Fair enough. But here’s
what’s interesting: the respondents claim the Bible is “ambiguous”. That is,
they don’t say, “I really don’t know what the Bible says,” or “My own
views are ambiguous.” They answer as if they think they know what the
Bible says, and it is ambiguous on abortion.
Knowledge and Ignorance
In other words, this is no claim of ignorance. This is the assumption of
knowledge, isn’t it?
Tom: Well, I think we’d have to
see the exact question they were asked to know that with certainty. I’ve looked
for it online, and can’t find precisely how each of the abortion questions was
framed in the survey. Analysis of the survey results is everywhere, but copies
of the survey itself are nowhere to be found, including at the CRC’s website.
All the same, I can make a pretty good guess what it might have looked
like from this earlier release about the same survey in
another subject area. It looks to me as if the respondents were asked to characterize
their own opinions about what the Bible says about abortion from a menu of pre-written
options, one of which included the word “ambiguous”. That’s less of a “claim”
than it is a “best guess” about what the Bible teaches. It’s actually the CRC
people who refer to these survey answers as “claims”, as if the respondents are
dogmatizing, when most of them, in my humble estimation, were probably just
blundering through one of many questions in a 51-question survey.
IC: Okay, so there’s a real
chance that the questionnaire itself accidentally produced the result that
people were recorded as thinking the word of God “ambiguous”. It’s a design
flaw in the study. Possibly so. Then perhaps not all the respondents actually
meant to say the scriptures weren’t clear, only that their own heads weren’t
clear. Understandable, if they didn’t actually read the scriptures in the first
place. And it would also explain why the author of the Not The Bee article was so easily able to provide abundant
quotations to show the Bible does handle the abortion issue with admirable
clarity.
Tom: That’s my thought. Now, don’t
get me wrong: I’m not saying the spiritual perception of the average pew-sitter
in the average American church is not something speedily approaching
dire — it definitely is — but I really don’t think we are
reading the survey responses of trained liberal theologians here.
I suspect what the vast majority of these survey results are revealing is
an appalling ignorance of what’s actually written in the Bible, rather than any
calculated effort to whitewash away what the scriptures teach.
Conspiracy Theories
I don’t mean to be a conspiracy theorist here, but do you suppose it’s even faintly
possible that both the Cultural Research Center and the Christian media get more mileage and more publicity
from delivering shocking survey results than they do from telling us things we
already know?
IC: I thought of that. For
certain. I think that is why they also liked to use the “self-definition”
criterion in their study, accepting anybody who self-identified as a
“Christian” as if he/she were a real one. But I can tell you for sure, the
self-identification criterion is one of the least reliable ways to know what a
person actually believes. Almost any other criterion is more precise, and using
it inflates the number of people included in your sample to truly bloated
proportions. And that makes for very exciting results, because it makes it look
like all your numbers are the maximum possible, so it makes the claims based on
the study much more sensational and impressive ... and more wildly
inaccurate or dishonest.
Tom: Funny you would bring that
up. As you know, I love numbers, and you got me interested in how
all this collected data is being presented, so I went to the CRC website
and downloaded four of the other ten press releases about this survey. It seems
their 51 questions got fairly granular, but the headlines coming from the
media (which, to be fair, pull direct quotes from the CRC press releases) are
much more sensational than the actual data.
Analyzing Responses to the Abortion Question
Release #6,
for example, is the one having to do with morality, and it touches on the abortion
question. So the survey asked respondents how they would counsel a pregnant
woman considering an abortion because her partner has bailed on her and she
cannot take care of the child alone. There are five possible responses: “Yes”,
“No”, “Not a moral issue”, “Would offer no advice” and “Don’t know”.
Below the chart with the survey data is this note:
“This behavior was indisputably the most polarizing of the five behaviors tested. Nine out of ten adults with a biblical worldview (92%) and eight out of ten SAGE Cons (83%) defined it as an immoral action. [Bold text mine] At the other end of the continuum — indicating that having an abortion is not immoral — were spiritual skeptics (17%), political liberals (22%), and adults connected to a non-Christian faith (29%).”
So then, the survey data was sufficiently granular for the
CRC to break out the category of “adults with a biblical worldview”
separately from other so-called “Christians” (elsewhere they distinguish
between “born-again Christians” and “other self-identified Christians”). And
what does the data show? It leads me, at least, to the conclusion that the vast
majority (92%) of serious Christians (those pesky “born-again” folks, I’ll
wager) remain quite conservative — yea, biblical — in their beliefs about
the immorality of abortion.
Have Disinformation Will Travel
IC: Well, look at that. That’s
just how wildly deceptive a study of this kind can be. I’ll bet most people
just read the headline, and assume that the writers are going to do their
thinking for them, honestly, and tell them what the data actually suggests. But
not in this case.
Tom: Exactly. Where
is the headline that says, “Nine out of ten serious Christians claim abortion is
immoral even under extenuating circumstances”? It ain’t there, is where it is. That’s
not a newsworthy story. That’s the boring old status quo since about 1970.
So instead, we get headline numbers generated by labeling as “Christian” a
group made up of political liberals, spiritual skeptics and “adults connected
to a non-Christian faith” (whatever that means), lumping them into the
pro-abortion “Christian” category just because that’s the name they use, and
then telling us “Christians” are going soft on the abortion question. Blame the
CRC for that part of it. But then The Christian Post takes those numbers and runs with the headline “Over
4 in 10 American Christians ...”, which turns it into a shock piece, after
which Not The Bee picks it up and inadvertently
perpetuates the original mischaracterization.
But even a moment’s serious thought tells us these numbers
cannot be so: if so many Christians are now apathetic about overturning Roe v. Wade, why are the Democrats in
such an all-fired tizzy over another conservative Supreme Court Justice being
confirmed? It doesn’t make any sense at all.
Burying the Lede
I’m not saying the CRC is being deliberately dishonest here,
but let’s just say I don’t find their methods as transparent as they
could be. The lede is seriously buried.
IC: The TRUTH is buried. And I’m
suspicious it’s not accidental. If people come to believe that a significant
percentage of Christians is going soft on this issue, it has at least two very
unsavory consequences: first, that it makes Christians look like ignorant
hypocrites to the world, and second, that since people tend to stay with the
herd, it implies to Christians that being “average” can now involve being
pro-abortion; after all, your peers have dropped their objections, so why
haven’t you?
Perhaps the creators of the study and the writers of the article were only really
interested in creating sensation and generating revenue. Maybe. But it also
seems to me that this kind of article, at this time, serves the particular
interests of some very devious and wicked people. Maybe that’s by chance …
maybe it’s not … either way, that’s what it does.
No comments :
Post a Comment