Acton Institute Powerblog

Are Young Millennials Less Religious or Simply Young?

Share this article:
Join the Discussion:

Joe Carter recently posted a summary of a new study conducted jointly by Public Religion Research Institute and Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs that shows that college-aged Millennials (18-24 year olds) “report significant levels of movement from the religious affiliation of their childhood, mostly toward identifying as religiously unaffiliated.” He also noted the tendency of college-aged Millennials to be more politically liberal.

Just yesterday, the same study was highlighted by Robert Jones of the Washington Post, who wrote,

According to a newly released survey, even before they move out of their childhood homes, many younger Millennials have already moved away from the religion in which they were raised, mostly joining the growing ranks of the religiously unaffiliated.

Jones goes on to say, “These findings have profound implications for the future of religious denominations that have, in the past, dominated American religious life.”

But is this true? I am not entirely convinced.

Aren’t college-aged people in all generations less orthodox, less religious, and more politically liberal and idealistic than any other age group? Take, for example, the following comments from a 1973 article by Robert Wuthnow and Charles Glock in the Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion:

An accumulating mass of data suggests that organized religion is currently a significant object of commitment for only a minority of young people. Gallup polls conducted in 1970 and 1971, for example, reveal that only 28 percent of those age 21 to 29 have attended church during the previous week and that a striking 80 percent in this age category perceive religion as losing its influence in American life (Gallup Opinion Index, January 1970; February 1971). Among college students one national survey of seniors done in 1969 reported only 8 percent describing themselves as “very religious,” another survey in the same year found only one-third of students in “forerunner” colleges and one-half in “practical” colleges valuing “Living the good Christian life” or identifying with people of their religion, and a Harris poll of college students in 1965 showed only 34 percent expressing a “great deal” of confidence in “organized religion” in comparison with 75 percent who placed such confidence in the “scientific community” (Hadden, 1969; Fortune, 1969; Newsweek, 1965). And results from an unpublished study of Berkeley students conducted in 1971 found only 18 percent accepting a traditional image of God, 14 percent a traditional image of Christ, and only 9 percent a traditional view of life after death (Berkeley Beliefs Study, conducted by David Nasatir).

If not for the dates, one might easily mistake this description of college-aged religious defection for the assessment that is all too common of Millennials today. So far as I’m concerned, the data simply represents Winston Churchill’s famous dictum: “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

Certainly, this is not to say that the study itself is inaccurate or that Joe Carter or Robert Jones have misrepresented the facts. The point is simply that the facts may not be as significant as they appear. Indeed, Jones even notes,

In some ways, this is not a new problem; it’s not uncommon for younger American adults to be less religiously affiliated than older Americans. However, the Millennial generation’s rate of disaffiliation is higher than previous generations at comparable points in their life cycle.

The study examines 18-24 year olds’ Facebook usage rates by gender, their feelings regarding President Obama by race, their approval of the “Buffett Rule” by political party, their views on abortion, same-sex marriage, pornography, contraceptives, etc., but the one thing that it does not do is the one thing that would have been the most insightful: it does not actually take the time to compare these statistics with similar statistics of older generations when they were the same age.

This does not, of course, render the study entirely useless. The data could still be compared to other generations in this way. But until it is I can only remain skeptical of the significance of stories claiming that my generation is any less religious or more politically liberal than any other, and I recommend that others do the same.

Dylan Pahman Dylan Pahman is a research fellow at the Acton Institute, where he serves as managing editor of the Journal of Markets & Morality. He earned his MTS in Historical Theology from Calvin Theological Seminary. In addition to his work as an editor, Dylan has authored several peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, essays, and one book: Foundations of a Free & Virtuous Society (Acton Institute, 2017). He has also lectured on a wide variety of topics, including Orthodox Christian social thought, the history of Christian monastic enterprise, the Reformed statesman and theologian Abraham Kuyper, and academic publishing, among others.


  • Recent work by Campbell and Putnam did compare today’s youth to the youth of previous generations and found a significant dropoff in religiosity. You can see my interview with Campbell here: 

    • Ah, for the good old days when the young weren’t so irreligious!

    • Thanks!

    • I am curious, how much of the difference between 2006 and 2012 do you think could be attributed to residual effects of the general rise in religiousity post-9/11, assuming that idealistic youth–some of whom joined the military as a result and most of whom at least knew people their age who did–might be more likely to embrace religion at such a time (due to a heightened awareness of their own mortality, for example)? Perhaps we have simply come back down to the typical percentages today.

      Campbell and Putnam’s research is an improvement over the present study, but I still think more thorough comparative work could be done.

  • Pingback: Cardinal Ouellet St. Catherine of Siena NFP Millennials | The Pulpit()

  • Daniel

    At the conference, this exact question was brought up. Tom Banchoff of the Berkley Center and Robert Jones of the Public Religion Institute countered (I have yet to see the data) but that these new trends are quite different from earlier generations. Interacting with many of the student leaders there and at home in general, I see that this trend is experentially true for me. The Catholic Church and mainline Protestant churches are hemorrhaging among my generation. The call must be find ways to better contextualize the gospel to younger people and see how Christ is relevant to them.

    • I would love to see that data as well. I am not necessarily rejecting the idea, only critiquing those who base their conclusion merely on lower numbers of young people as compared to older people without looking at the older generations when they were the same age. Furthermore, the data from Wuthnow and Glock would seem to contradict the claim pretty strongly.

      Whatever the case, as it turns out (I wish I had remembered this when I wrote this post), I actually made the same hasty conclusion myself a few months ago:

      As for your last point, it depends on what you mean by relevant. If indeed there is a real generational religious decline—more than what is typical of any other generation at the same age—I still stand by my conviction in that post that past attempts to be relevant have only contributed to Millennials leaving churches. That, at least, was my own experience.

  • Pingback: The Perils of Pedocracy | @ActonInstitute PowerBlog()

  • That may be, but I still think we are too quick to jump to conclusions either way. Every generation does have its unique character and challenges, but thinking that something is unique that is not opens us to the danger of missing what precisely is the challenge (and solution) that we are faced with today.

  • Kris Fetterman

    As confirmed by the Churchill Museum, the Former Prime Minister did not say that line. It’s certainly clever, but not Churchillian.

  • Pingback: Mass Marketing to Millennials: A Marxist Paradigm? | Acton PowerBlog()