The Value of Trust

Trust is an important value.  Without trust society can't function well, and over the past forty to fifty years the trust that people put in their institutions has continued to diminish.  First it was the Vietnam War and then Watergate.  More recently we saw the US enter a war in Iraq based either on faulty or falsified evidence.  Catholic priests and bishops were exposed as either participating in or covering up sexual abuse of minors.  So, perhaps it's not surprising that opponents of a property tax assessment (called a millage here in Michigan) to protect the local library had to deal with, unfortunately unsuccessfully, a campaign that was based almost entirely in falsehoods, and yet it won.  Of course there are the reports that nearly half of Republicans believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim and increasing numbers reject the idea of global warming, because  . . . And on and on.  This is a serious problem that we're facing in our country.   

Martin Marty has written an essential book on this topic, one of my Top 10 books of 2010 -- Building Cultures of Trust.  Marty writes this of a culture of trust:

We may speak of a culture of trust when there is evidence that through internal or external means the religious, political, economic, artistic, scientific, technological, educational, and linguistic expressions of a group lead participants to count on each other and keep commitments.  (Marty, p. 15). 

Since I've been working through American Grace, I should probably not that trust is one of the issues dealt with in the book.  From their studies, they have discerned that trust is a central issue of faith.  What is interesting is that it would appear that while religious people are more trusting than seculars, the more conservative your theology the less trusting you become.   But, when comparing two fundamentalists, the more you attend church, the more trusting you become.  Again, social networks have influence.  But, so does your view of God -- the more you see God as judge, the less trusting.  The more you see God as a loving parent, the more trusting. 

But, the authors don't want to go too far outside their expertise and make theological judgments, but it is interesting data!  And so, they conclude:

We seem to have found consistent expectations about other people's behavior and God's behavior.  If God loves us, then we love and trust others, but if God sternly judges us, then we sternly judge and distrust others.  Social relations in America may be eased by the fact that most Americans find God more likely to comfort than afflict . . . Such a comforting, avuncular God encourages social comity and confidence (American Grace, pp. 468-471).

It could be that the authors of American Grace are overly optimistic about the American people.  Perhaps the angry groups of people that have propelled the Tea Party represent the majority.  I don't think so, but we do have a problem and that problem is a serious decline in trust.  And as Martin Marty reminds us -- that can be dangerous.  Further, that means that religious liberals/progressives have something important to bring to the table. 

Good Neighborliness: Religiosity and Generosity

As I mosey my way back and forth through American Grace, my book of the year, I want to go back to an important chapter entitled "Religion and Good Neighborliness."  In this chapter the authors, using data from several sources, demonstrates that in terms of volunteering time and giving of money, religious people stand far above seculars in their generosity.  Now, you might say, well, they do give to their churches, but that's not all.  A majority of regular church goers also make up the bulk of volunteers at schools and service organizations, and more.  Consider this:

Of all people who volunteered for a religious group, 91 percent also volunteered for at least one secular group, whereas of those who did not volunteer for a religious group, 69 percent did not volunteer for any secular group either.  Those of us who volunteer for religious groups are two or three times as likely to volunteer for secular groups as well, compared to those of us who don't volunteer for religious groups.  Americans, it seems, mostly choose between volunteering and not volunteering, not between religious and secular volunteering.  (American Grace, p. 445).

And the same goes for giving of money -- if you give to religious groups you're more likely to give to "secular" ones as well. 

The authors note that in essence "religious Americans are more civically active."  They're more likely to join community organizations, engage in community problem solving, participate in civic and political life, and press for social and political reform.

Oh, and if you think that it's just the Religious Right that's active in the public arena, the surveys say quite the opposite.  The authors write:

Indeed, for many measures of civic engagement, such as club membership, organizational leadership, and (as we have seen) local reform activity, religiosity matters more for the self-described liberals than for self-described conservatives.  That is, the difference in activism between a religious liberal and a secular liberal is even greater than the comparable difference between a religious conservative and a secular conservative." (American Grace, pp. 456-457). 

In this regard, the authors are able to put to rest the claim that conservative Americans are more generous than liberals (Arthur Brooks).  While it is true that religious folks tend to be more generous and conservatives are more religious than liberals, the key is not conservatism but religiosity.  That is, its the faith and not the politics/economic theory that leads to generosity.  Again, just to be clear on this, the authors write that with all things being kept constant (size/numbers, etc), "liberals are never less generous than conservatives, and are, by some measures, better neighbors than conservatives" (p. 458).  Yes, read closely:

Liberals, for example, work more often on community projects, cooperate more to solve community problems, and volunteer more often to help the sick, the needy, and neighborhood and civic groups, whereas on none of our measures of generosity and civic engagement are conservatives more active.  Holding religiosity constant, ideology has little significant effect on total giving or total volunteering, nor on any of the fifteen good deeds discussed earlier, but liberals assuredly give and volunteer more for nonreligious causes than conservatives do.  According to the best available evidence, the "civic good guys" are more often religious liberals, not religious conservatives. (American Grace, p. 458).

 So, who do you want for a neighbor?