Nineteen Sixty-four is a research blog for the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) at Georgetown University edited by Mark M. Gray. CARA is a non-profit research center that conducts social scientific studies about the Catholic Church. Founded in 1964, CARA has three major dimensions to its mission: to increase the Catholic Church's self understanding; to serve the applied research needs of Church decision-makers; and to advance scholarly research on religion, particularly Catholicism. Follow CARA on Twitter at: caracatholic.


Vocations: The Importance of Family

This blog post was written by CARA summer research intern Hannah Hagan. She is a rising junior from Vanderbilt University, majoring in mathematics. She presents her analysis of the The Entrance Class of 2016 survey data, which was also used in a March post, “Who is Entering Religious Life?.”  The full report, which was written by Dr. Mary Gautier and Sr. Bibiana Ngundo, is available for download, free of charge, here: The Entrance Class of 2016.

Families, as Pope Francis said during his 2015 Apostolic Journey to the United States, are “true domestic churches… the right place for faith to become life, and life to grow in faith.”  With the Pope’s frequent statements about the importance of family in mind, I decided to look into family background while examining the survey data from the Entrance Class of 2016; that is those who formally entered a religious congregation, province, or monastery in the United States during 2016.  In addition to being a summer research intern at CARA, I am a twenty year old college student, and I am deeply aware of and grateful for the spiritual nurturing and guidance which my family has provided throughout my life.  Given that half of the respondents of the Entrance Class of 2016 are age 26 or younger and that the average age at which respondents report first considering a vocation to religious life is 18, I was curious to see if the majority of respondents would likely say that their families have played similar roles of support in their faith and in their decision to enter religious life.

At first glance, it appears that an overwhelming majority of the entrants grew up in Catholic families and the kind of the faith-centered environments which one would most commonly expect to encourage and produce religious vocations.  Nine in ten respondents say that they were raised Catholic, and eight in ten report that both of their parents were Catholic.  However, an examination of how important respondents indicate religion was to their parents while they were growing up suggests a hidden diversity to respondents’ family backgrounds.  Compared to four-fifths of respondents reporting that both of their parents were Catholic, only about two-fifths of respondents report that religion was “very important” to both of their parents.  Furthermore, three in ten respondents indicate that religion was less than “very important” to both their parents, while only one in twenty say that both of their parents were not Catholic.  Together, these comparisons help to highlight the fact that entrants who were raised Catholic do not always come from families in which religion was modeled as “very important.”

On the other hand, it cannot be said that the majority of entrants do not come from religious families.  Slightly more than seven in ten say that religion was “somewhat” or “very important” to both of their parents while they were growing up, and only two percent say that religion was “not at all” important to both of their parents while they were growing up.

When looking at the responses of entrants regarding how important religion was to their parents, an interesting pattern emerges: respondents are significantly more likely to say that religion was “very important” to their mother than to say the same about their father.  Just over six in ten entrants say that religion was “very important” to their mother while half that religion was “very important” to their father.  This pattern can also be found among the subgroup of respondents who report that they were raised Catholic, with two in three saying that religion was “very important” to their mother and slightly more than half saying the same about their father.  While interesting, it does not seem likely that this pattern is specific to families which produce entrants or to Catholic families in general, as Pew Research Center observed in a 2014 survey that American women are more likely to be religious than American men.

If it is more likely that religion was “very important” to entrants’ mothers than to their fathers, are entrants’ mothers also more likely to encourage openness to a religious vocation?  Not necessarily.  Slightly more than one-tenth of entrants who were raised Catholic say that their mother, but not their father, spoke to them about a vocation to religious life, and about three percent say that their father, but not their mother, spoke to them – a difference which is not statistically significant.  Perhaps even more interesting to note is that, despite the high numbers of respondents who reported that they were raised Catholic and that both of their parents were Catholic, two in three respondents say that neither of their parents spoke to them about a vocation.   

Still, speaking about religious vocation is not the only way in which parents may facilitate and support their child’s openness to entering religious life.  As a measure of how respondents expected their families to react to their discernment of a religious vocation, entrants were asked if starting a discussion about their vocation with their family was easy for them overall.  Around half of entrants answer “yes,” and a similar portion (slightly more than half) of those who were raised Catholic report the same.  One interesting and thought-provoking phenomenon is that slightly less than half of entrants who were born in the United States say that starting a discussion with their family about their vocation was easy, compared to just over six in ten of others.  Are families in the United States less likely to support their child answering the call of a religious vocation, or are entrants born in the United States simply more likely than others to anticipate difficulty?

Lastly, parents can impact the possibility of their child entering a religious institute by providing, or failing to provide, encouragement while their child is considering entrance.  Slightly less than half of respondents say that they received “very much” encouragement from their parents when they were first considering entering a religious institute, and only one in three says that they received “only a little” encouragement or none.  The responses of those who were raised Catholic are similar to the responses of the entrance class as a whole, with just under half reporting “very much” encouragement from their parents and three-tenths reporting “only a little” encouragement or none.  Entrants’ evaluations of their families’ response to their vocation (represented through their indication of whether starting a discussion about their vocation was easy) are fairly accurate, with two-thirds of respondents who said the discussion was easy reporting that they received “very much” encouragement from their parents, compared to one-fifth of other respondents saying that they received “very much” encouragement.  Intriguingly, respondents who were born in the United States and elsewhere do not differ significantly in their reports that they received “very much” encouragement from their parents, despite the significance difference in their responses on whether discussing their vocation with their family was easy. 

Analysis of the family backgrounds of the Entrance Class of 2016 provides observations which may be interpreted as examples of the important and lasting impact which Catholic families can have on the faith lives of their children.  However, analysis also reveals a surprising amount of variation in the ways in which parents, particularly within Catholic families, do or do not encourage their child to consider entrance to religious life.  There is no overarching, secret formula which characterizes all of the families that produce a child who is moved to enter religious life, but examining the characteristics of such families remains an interesting and illuminating endeavor.

About the Survey
To obtain the names and contact information for entrants, CARA contacted the major superiors of all religious institutes that belong to either the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) or the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious (CMSWR), the two leadership conferences of apostolic women religious in the United States.  CARA also contacted the major superiors of all religious institutes who belong to the Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM).  Finally, CARA contacted the major superiors of 138 contemplative communities of women in the United States that were identified by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations.  Each major superior was asked to provide contact information for every person who entered the institute (for the first time, as a postulant or novice) in the United States since January 1, 2016.  CARA then mailed a survey to each new entrant and asked them to return their completed survey to CARA.

After repeated follow-ups, CARA received a response from 610 of 759 major superiors, for an overall response rate of 80 percent among religious institutes.  In all, 93 percent of LCWR superiors, 84 percent of CMSWR superiors, 76 percent of CMSM superiors, and 59 percent of superiors of contemplative communities provided contact information for 502 novices or postulants that entered religious life for the first time in the United States in 2016.  The Entrance Class of 2016 consists of 272 men (reported by CMSM superiors), 144 women reported by CMSWR, 66 women reported by LCWR, and 20 new entrants into contemplative communities of women.  Of these 502 identified women and men, a total of 278 responded to the survey by February 2, 2017.  This represents a response rate of 55 percent among the new entrants to religious life that were reported to CARA by major superiors.

Photo courtesy of Flickr creative commons user Saint Joseph.


Compensation of U.S. Diocesan Priests in the Catholic Church

This post is authored by CARA Research Associate Michal Kramarek, Ph.D. and provides a brief preview of a much larger new study about salaries and benefits for priests and lay personnel in U.S. parishes. This post shows some top-level and trend information about earnings of diocesan priests. The full study can be purchased now from National Association of Church Personnel Administrators (NACPA) through their online store as a pdf download and printed report.  This research was commissioned and funded by NACPA and the National Federation of Priests' Councils (NFPC).

CARA has finished crunching the numbers for the National Diocesan Survey: Salary and Benefits for Priests and Lay Personnel, 2017. One of the many questions explored in the 203-page report is how much the Catholic Church in the United States pays its priests. The median annual salary of a diocesan priest in 2017 is $29,619 (see the chart below). The median annual salary received by a newly ordained priest is $26,760 and the median annual salary for highest paid priests is $32,478.

The salary is the first, and often most substantial component of diocesan priest’s taxable income. The second component, other taxable cash income, constitutes about 20 cents of every dollar of priests’ income and includes, for example, an allowance for housing and food as well as Mass stipends, retained stole fees, and bonuses. Altogether, a diocesan priest makes $8,924 in other taxable cash income.

The least substantial component of diocesan priests’ income is other taxable non-cash income, accounting for 15 cents for every dollar of total income. Non-cash income includes, for example, diocesan housing, meals prepared for priests as well as priest retreats facilitated by the arch/diocese.

The three components add up to a median overall taxable income of $45,593 for a diocesan priest. How much is it in comparison to other U.S. males who share a similar level of education? Not very much. Between 1996 and 2017 (in the six years for which the data are available), diocesan priests’ taxable income accounted, on average, for less than half (48 percent) of the median income of men ages 25 and over, with a Master’s degree, in the United States. See the chart below (Note: The dotted line indicates missing data. The underlying data for the general population was derived from: U.S. Census Bureau. 2016. “Table P-16.  Educational Attainment--People 25 Years Old and Over by Median Income and Sex: 1991 to 2015." Historical Income Tables).  While diocesan priests’ income is relatively low, it is increasing. In the examined time period, diocesan priests’ median annual taxable income grew by 9 percent, after adjusting for inflation.

How does diocesan priests’ compensation compare across different job assignments and experience levels? How do lay employees compare to diocesan priests in terms of salary and benefits? How do all those groups compare across arch/dioceses of different sizes or different regions? Those are some of the questions CARA explored in the National Diocesan Survey: Salary and Benefits for Priests and Lay Personnel, 2017. You can see more about what the report covers in the Table of Contents.


Catholicism: The Next Generation?

This post is co-authored by Hannah Hagan, our 2017 summer research intern. She comes to CARA from Vanderbilt University and is a math major (Class of 2019).

When I came to CARA in 2002, the research center was already studying the youngest Catholic generation, the Millennials (born 1982-2004). The oldest in this cohort were just 20 years old at the time. Now they are 36. It’s 2017… time to start thinking about the next generation of Catholics who are younger than the Millennials.

CARA typically gives the secular generation a Catholic name representative of things happening in the Church as the cohort comes of age. We do so because generational differences are often among the largest and most significant sub-group findings from our national surveys. We’ve typically included the following in our reports to describe generations:

For purpose of analysis, CARA categorizes Catholic survey respondents into four generations based on life experiences especially relevant to Catholics:    
  • The “Pre-Vatican II Generation,” was born in 1942 or earlier. Its members came of age before the Second Vatican Council. 
  • The “Vatican II Generation,” are the “baby boomers” who were born between 1943 and 1960, a time of great demographic and economic growth. They came of age during the time of the Second Vatican Council and their formative years likely spanned that time of profound changes in the Church. 
  • The “Post-Vatican II Generation,” sometimes called “Generation X” or “baby busters” by demographers, has no lived experience of the pre-Vatican II Church.
  • The “Millennial Generation,” born in 1982 or later (up to 1994 among adults), have come of age primarily under the papacies of John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis. Some still live with their parents and their religious practice can closely follow that of their families of origin.

CARA has already conducted a few studies of Catholic youth and teens that have collected data on the youngest, yet unnamed, generation. They will begin to enter adulthood in 2023 and appear in our national polls at that time. Of course, they are already an important cohort in our research as they are part of the Catholic school children of today and we see them in our sacramental practice data for baptisms (13.7 million infant baptisms already from 2005-2015) and First Communions. The oldest of this generation are age 12 today and some will live to see the Church enter the 22nd century.

So what should we call Catholics of this generation? In the secular research world they have been referred to as… Homelanders, Generation Z, Boomlets, Digital Natives, and iGen. The simplest choice is just to follow Gen X with Gen Y and go with Gen Z (…and worry about what letter comes next with the generation that follows). Naming generations alphabetically seems to be an odd choice (...bit lazy as well) and limits the relevance of the name to any substantive aspect of the generation.

Should the name embrace the digital revolution? Of course this generation will have no lived experiences without iPhones, tablets, social media/networks, Fitbits, etc. They will never learn cursive handwriting and struggle to develop a signature. “And also with your spirit” will always just roll off their tongues in a natural way.

Should the name be related to international events? This is the generation with no lived experience or memory of 9/11 and the immediate aftermath. Yet, their whole life has existed in the new realities of global terrorism and reactions to this. I’m not a big fan of “recycling” the Boomers and calling them the Boomlets because their early birth years exceed the numbers of the Baby Boom. There are no similarities here as the un-named generation was and will continue to be born during record low fertility rates. 

CARA has discussed whether “Generation Francis” would be an appropriate name. The oldest members of the cohort were eight years old when his papacy began. Pope Francis is 80 now. The unnamed generation is likely to include births as late as 2025. Pope Francis would be 89 at that point and those born in that year wouldn’t likely have personal memories of the pontiff.

Is Generation Francis a bit presumptuous? Maybe not. Name the last (or next) pope that is going to be Time’s Person of the Year, appear on the cover of Rolling Stone, and be named by Fortune as one of the world’s greatest leaders? Or how about name the last pope from the Americas? The last Jesuit pope? He’s created more than 60 cardinals and this will likely have a lasting impact for some time beyond his papacy.

Perhaps the only other defining religious narrative for this generation, so far, is that they will likely come of age in an era of growing secularization. Yet, pinning this on them as a Catholic generation would seem odd as this would include only those who self-identify as Catholic. It is the case that we see a decline in sacramental practice and a slow shift from weekly to monthly Mass attendance norms among younger adult Catholics. This unnamed generation may be much less attached to a parish and its community life than members of the other existing U.S. Catholic generations.

This disconnect, is in part, a reflection of the growing digital nature of their lives. They won’t recall a time when it wasn’t possible to order groceries from home, watch movies on demand (on their phones…), shop for clothes online, or keep in touch with friends and family on an hourly basis on their social networks. They may be the first generation to think of the Bible as an app rather than a thick book. Yet, Catholicism takes place in sacred (real) spaces—in the brick and mortar of parishes. You can’t email your confession or have Communion delivered by a drone. In this regard the “digital” names for this generation in the secular world may not fit in the Catholic world.

What do you think? We need your help. Researchers will be writing about this generation in CARA reports in 2100 so you could leave a lasting impression. Join us on Twitter (@caracatholic) to let us know your ideas.

Photo courtesy of Balazs Koren

Search This Blog

Blog Archive

© 2009-2017 CARA, Mark M. Gray. Background image courtesy of muohace_dc.