Reflections

Navigating our diverse religious landscape

By J. Brent Walker

March 2008

The recent Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life’s survey on the U.S. religious landscape gives empirical support for what we have long known or at least suspected: religion in America is both diverse and dynamic, and many of our fellow citizens claim no religious affiliation at all.

The survey results invite the Baptist Joint Committee to re-examine its mission and its strategy for accomplishing it. For example, should we embrace our “Baptistness,” as our mission statement requires, or should we distance ourselves from our denominational moorings? How best can we articulate the importance of religious liberty in a culture suspicious of denominational labels and a population that moves easily from one religious expression to another, or none?

The survey, first, confirms widespread religious pluralism. To be sure, Christianity still comprises the majority — some 78.4 percent claim to be Christians. But that number devolves into a variety of expressions: evangelicals, mainline Protestant, historically African-American, Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Orthodox and others. Only 4.7 percent claim “other religions,” but that still reflects millions of Americans. All told, the religious landscape reflects more than 200 faith traditions.

The survey also shows an unprecedented fluidity. Some 44 percent of the surveyed participants report they no longer embrace the religion or denomination of their childhood. Some have switched religions or denominational preferences, and many reflect a “post-denominational” attitude that abjures entirely sectarian labels. Many point to the 2006 election of Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., a Muslim who took his oath of office on the Quran instead of the Bible as evidence of our embrace of pluralism. But not many know that Rep. Ellison is a former Catholic who converted to Islam in college.

Further, some 16.1 percent are categorized as “unaffiliated.” These account for atheists (1.6 percent), agnostics (2.4 percent), and so-called “nones” (12.1 percent) who embrace “nothing in particular.” These nones reflect varying degrees of religiosity: about half lean toward secularism (6.3 percent) and the rest (5.8 percent) toward some ill-defined, generic faith commitment.

These findings present the Baptist Joint Committee with both challenges and opportunities in how we craft our message about religious freedom and the importance of church-state separation to ensure it. First of all, ever increasing pluralism demands even greater attention to the rights of minorities. In the infamous case of Employment Division vs. Smith (1990), Justice Scalia opined that accommodating this kind of pluralism would be to court “anarchy.” That is, with so many religious traditions in contemporary America it is impossible to assiduously protect the rights of all. I think Justice Scalia is flat wrong; just the opposite is true. The very fact that we are not all of one mind demands a redoubling of efforts to make sure all Americans are protected in their religious belief. It may be messy, inconvenient and, at times, difficult. But, as James Dunn often says, if anyone’s religious liberty is denied, everyone’s is threatened.

Second, the constantly shifting sands of our religious landscape may indicate that people simply do not care about religion or that their religious commitment is superficial. It may also mean, however, that they are sincere seekers looking for a more meaningful expression of faith. Is this, then, a teachable moment? I think it might be. Now is precisely the time to hold up Baptist distinctives such as soul freedom, the vitality of voluntary religion, and the inviolability of the rights of conscience. Now is not the time — post-denominational age or not — to run from our Baptistness, but the time to affirm it.

The Baptist label is not sacrosanct, in and of itself. But what we stand for as Baptists — particularly our commitment to religious liberty for all — may well encounter receptive ears among our countrymen. Indeed, many of these seekers are landing in Baptist churches for reasons having nothing to do with our heritage of freedom. They need to be taught about the rich tradition of their new family of faith.

Third, the fact that so many claim to be “unaffiliated” or are not religious at all is a stark reminder that freedom of religion also entails freedom from religion — at least state-sponsored religion. Yes, the United States is one of the most religious and religiously diverse nations on the planet. But, we should always keep in mind that a sizeable percentage of Americans must be extended the right to reject any religion at all without compromising their standing as good citizens.

This is a time to reaffirm the best of our Baptist tradition.

We must tell and retell the stories about Thomas Helwys, Roger Williams, John Leland and George W. Truett. It is a time to proclaim a message about religious liberty that is not self-serving, but protects the rights of others. It is a time to proclaim a belief that, while we may disagree with others’ religious choices, we still respect their soul freedom enough to allow them to make those decisions. Finally, the only way to accommodate pluralism, to ensure one’s right to change one’s mind, and to acknowledge the full rights of citizenship of nonbelievers is to insist that government stay out of religion. Stated differently, the separation of church and state is essential to ensuring religious liberty for all and the full rights of citizenship for nonbelievers.

What could be more Baptist — and more right —than that?