Survey of Mary and Youth

A Faceless Madonna:
Young People Love the Blessed Mother But Do Not Know Her Very Well

REPORT ON SURVEYS OF THE
INTERNATIONAL MARIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Johann G. Roten, S.M.

Introduction to the Survey

Religious surveys among Catholic college students in the 1920s and 1930s explicitly referred to the "Blessed Mother," and the questions asked were direct. Has your devotion to Mary increased since you came to college? Have you developed a personal love of Our Lady? How often do you say the beads privately? How often do you visit the Grotto? The answers given to these questions by students at Notre Dame in the late 1930s were also direct and showed great devotion: 84% of the collegians reported that their devotion had increased; 91% had developed a personal relationship; the majority said their rosary privately at least once a month, and, as the years went by, the number of visits to the Grotto rose dramatically (information from an overview of fifteen religious surveys, 1921-1936).(1)

More recent surveys dealing with the relationship between youth and Mary are considerably less focused. The questions posed are fewer and less pointed; the devotional emphasis gives way to broad psychological considerations. Andrew Greeley (1981),(2) and Fee, Greeley, McGready and Sullivan (1981)(3) have studied attitudes toward Mary. Fee and associates found that "the overwhelming majority of young Catholics think of Mary as warm and comforting."(4) However, the more common tendency of religious surveys of youth is to omit the figure of Mary altogether. She may be part of sociological inquiries, where she is mentioned to explain why unchurched people do not join the Catholic Church. (One reason given for not joining listed "statues, rosary, incense, holy water, candles, medals..." [10%]; another, more explicit explanation indicated "devotion to Mary and the Saints" [6%].(5)) Mary has her special status among Hispanics. Asked about religious activities in the last thirty days, Catholic Hispanics mentioned "the rosary" (35%) and "visit to a shrine" (15-20%), after activities such as "talked about religion," "read Bible," "lit candle," and "went to Communion."(6)

Meanwhile, comparable youth surveys concentrate mainly on sex education, social values, political beliefs, and career selection (7). Where the beliefs of Catholic youth are singled out, God and prayer, sin, Church and religion, the parish community, and even vocations to religious life may be surveyed; however, questions about Mary are omitted. Should this be considered an oversight, or is Mary simply absent from the religious beliefs and practices of youths? The latter seems to be the opinion of some surveyors; one study concluded: "An interesting point is that nowhere in this study did any student mention a single saint. Admittedly, no questions specifically addressed this subject, but the fact that no one brought it up, even in the course of extensive comments and interviews, suggests that saints play little or no part in their lives. The role models that Mary and the saints offer would seem to be lost to them." (8)

How does this compare to statistical evidence that religion in the United States is well, even thriving? In a general characterization of "America's Faith in the 1990s," Gallup and Castelli assert:

One of the most remarkable aspects of America's faith is its durability. Despite all of the dramatic social changes of the past half century depression, war, the civil rights movement, social unrest and technological change, the religious beliefs and practices of Americans today look very much like the beliefs and practices of the 1930s and 1940s. Church membership and attendance figures today are identical to what they were in the thirties; belief in God has held steady; the same percentage of Americans today as in the late forties believe in an afterlife.(9)

This assessment is generic, but it is Church-related, and does not deal in generalities only: "In the 1930s . . . 10% of Americans read the Bible daily; in the 1980s, it was 15%. In the decade between 1978 and 1988, belief in the divinity of Christ and personal commitment to Christ increased."(10) Conscious of the differences between Christ and Mary, it might nonetheless be asked why students in the thirties valued Marian devotion, while in the eighties, Mary and the saints seem to be lost to them, even though "Americans are even more religious today than they have been in the past."(11)

We can think of a variety of reasons to explain the discrepancy between Mary's presence in the thirties and her absence in the late eighties. If it is at all true quod erit demonstrandum! we could suggest at least two explanations:

The first explanation deals with the Catholic religious worldview of the present. Surveys comparing the basic ways in which American Catholics and Protestants relate to God and the world came up with the following characterization: the Catholic worldview is "intellectual . . . more likely to reconcile reason and faith than the Protestant worldview"; it is "accepting . . . [taking] a more understanding attitude toward sinners and those who hold different religious views"; the Catholic worldview is "pragmatic and earthly . . . marked by an intense concern for this world and a much lower priority on the next." An additional factor is described as "communal . . . [placing] a greater emphasis on social justice as a dimension of faith and a correspondingly lower priority on personal piety." The Catholic worldview, finally, seems private; that is, it views religion "as an individual choice and does not actively seek the conversion of others."(12)
Assuming that these characteristics apply, the Catholic worldview presents a strong "this-worldly" component. It is marked by intense social concern, rather than personal devotion. Accepting human reality as a given, it consequently reconciles faith with life, rather than life with faith. Acknowledging religious freedom, it has abandoned proselytism. We might ask provided again that this perception or view reflects reality if there is a place for Mary in this worldview? Is there a correlation between an actively proselytizing Catholicism and a thriving Marian mentality? Does intense social concern develop only in inverse proportion to devotion to Mary? Does the image of Mary fade when personal piety dwindles? These questions merit attention. There are numerous historical parallels which clearly show how closely Mary and evangelization (an apologetic and/or proselytizing attitude) are linked. Intense concern for this world never previously hindered Catholics from relating positively to the religious figure of Mary, although the recent shift from "charity" to "liberation" may have had an impact on the way in which we view her role. Finally, the correlation between personal piety and Marian devotion cannot be denied, either spiritually or historically. Thus, several of these observations seem to suggest that the contemporary Catholic worldview is not overtly favorable to a high-visibility profile of Mary.
The second explanation deals with Church identification. Americans, in general, "remain highly independent in their religious beliefs; they are certainly independent of their religious institutions."(13) Core beliefs have not changed, but confidence in organized religion and ecclesial authority has waned. Opinions such as "one does not need to go to church to be a good Christian" or "people should arrive at their religious beliefs independent of any church," or "it doesn't make any difference which church a person attends" are pervasive and trans-denominational.
Conversely, sociological inquiries seem to indicate that Catholics project an overall positive image of their Church. The picture of American Catholics that emerges from those studies is that of "a group of people secure in their sense of identity as Catholics. In some ways, they are extremely upbeat; in other areas, they have some serious criticisms of the Church and some serious disagreements with Church teaching. But neither criticisms nor disagreements have changed their sense of belonging to the Church, indeed their sense of ownership of the Church."(14) Understanding themselves as a "People of God," American Catholics take things into their own hands. They seem to have more confidence in their Church than in any other institution. A high percentage (88%) indicate satisfaction with their priests, as well as a generally positive experience with the Church.
Should these positive indicators of Church affiliation not presage an equally positive and ever-loving attitude toward Mary? Since this does not seem to be the case, what are some of the more important reasons for Mary's absence, in the minds of both the surveyors and those surveyed? In the first place, "young people are typically less attached to the Church than those over thirty, and low ratings of the Church among this group are fairly typical, but they also suggest that the Catholic Church is not doing enough to reach out to young adults."(15) High identification with the Church, in part at least, suggests strong involvement of laity, a pragmatic and practical orientation, and a consciousness that the American Church is faithful to the spirit of Vatican II. The dissent from Church teaching in moral matters (e.g., divorce, abortion, birth control, women's ordination) suggests a potential withdrawal, not so much from the Church (considered as their own), but rather from the Vatican. Should we conclude that Mary is considered more Roman than Jewish, or that she embodies what some may consider a curial conservatism reflective of an anti-Vatican II mentality? Or could the American Catholic Church, busy as it is with more practical endeavors, be oblivious to Mary?
Is Mary absent from the hearts and minds of American Catholic youth? Several theological studies intimate this, and there is a series of conjectures to explain it. Satisfied neither with the way the problem is posed, nor with the generic assumption that American Catholic youth is alienated from Mary, the International Marian Research Institute decided to conduct its own survey.
The instrument used was a comprehensive questionnaire consisting of forty-six item clusters (see Appendix I: Questionnaire). While composed primarily of "multiple choice," selecting, and ranking items, certain questions on the survey also asked or allowed for "write in" answers. The survey attempted to cover the major aspects of potential relationship between young people and Mary. The questions focused on the religious identity of the respondents, their knowledge of Mary, their degree of identification with her, and their representations of Mary. The instrument was developed, tested, corrected, and retested, with the help of the Department of Sociology of the University of Dayton; the results were scored and interpreted by individuals versed in statistics.

Our purpose was to discover whether Mary has a place in the religious consciousness of Catholic young people. To measure and verify this, a certain number of working hypotheses were necessary. Here are the hypotheses which determined and structured our research.

After a period of decline during the 1970s, it is now customary to speak of a "new springtime" or rebirth of Marian devotion. Can this transition from decline to rebirth be verified? What does sociological research have to say about this?
Methods and content of catechetical instruction have undergone considerable change over the past thirty years. How have these changes affected knowledge of Mary?
Religious attitudes have several dimensions: affective, cognitive, practical. What are the components of youths' attitude toward Mary? Do these various dimensions influence each other? Does one predominate over others?
Usually the affective, cognitive, and practical dimensions of religious belief and behavior converge on some image or representation. What images or representations of Mary are preferred by youth? To which are they attracted?
Religious belief and behavior is based, in part, on psychology and culture. What are beyond age, sex and religious affiliation some of the more salient psycho-cultural features of the way respondents picture Mary?
If the religion of youth appears fundamentalist, eclectic, and amoral, how is this reflected in their opinions and beliefs about Mary and in their devotional conduct toward her?

The survey was administered to individuals between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five; all were students at the time the questionnaire was presented to them. Through the affiliation of the International Marian Research Institute with the Society of Mary (Marianists), the audiences surveyed were students of Marianist schools (i.e., schools presently or formerly administered by Marianists) in the U.S.A. and other countries (Austria, Canada, Ecuador, France, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Peru, Spain and Switzerland). To offset and counterbalance the uniformity of the population surveyed, a limited number of schools of non-Marianist affiliation were added (see Appendix II: U.S. Schools Participating in Youth Survey). Questionnaires were administered in a formal setting, usually during a religion class period of fifty minutes, and were normally presented and collected by the teacher in charge. Although this survey was administered and evaluated over a three-year period (1989-1992), in different countries and languages, the results presented here are mainly those of American youth. As a complement to this primary focus, some averages computed from the aggregate of all non-American sample groups are also included.

More recently, the International Marian Research Institute conducted a second survey, addressed to U.S. Catholic institutions of higher learning and designed to explore the situation of Marian studies in departments of religious studies, seminaries and theological faculties. While these two surveys were entirely separate, a comparison of their results presents a challenge to those who are or will be entrusted with the religious education regarding Mary for youth of various ages.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Beliefs, Behaviors and Representations

The Socio-religious Profile of the Respondents
The population we are dealing with has been described as actively receptive to religion. American teenagers' religious practices and beliefs remained fairly consistent between 1978 and 1988. Nearly all (96%) believe there is a God or universal spirit and are more likely than adults to acknowledge the divinity has a personal character (75%). They do not reject prayer (87% say they prayed in the past; 39% report praying frequently), divine messengers and angels (74%), or organized religion (52% attended church the previous week).

It is important to remember the religious traits of the overall population to which our respondents belonged. Since the survey was conducted in forty-six Catholic schools (forty-three high schools and three colleges), it comes as no surprise that the participants were predominantly Catholic. Of the 3,631 American students surveyed, 80.6% (2,926) identified themselves as Roman Catholic, 14.5% as Protestant, and 1.6% as non-Christians, while 3.3% stated that they had no religious affiliation. Similar observations can be made on samples taken from other countries (see Appendix III: Summary for Select Questions by Country). Respondents belonged to predominantly Catholic student populations, oscillating between 89.3% (France) and 100% (Ecuador) with Korea the exception (24.9%). To be specific, the average for the counterbalancing remnant (i.e., the 3,223 respondents from non-American schools) showed that 82.8% identified themselves as Roman Catholic, while 6.4% stated that they had no religious affiliation.

Although the survey was addressed to students in the age bracket of 15 to 25 years, the population surveyed in the U.S. were predominantly high school students (83.6%):

Student First Year H.S. Second Year H.S. Third Year H.S. Fourth Year H.S. College or university
Age 15 16 17 18 19-25

27.8% 22.7% 21.8% 11.3% 16.4%

Less numerous were the college and graduate students who responded to the survey. They represent a total of 16.4%, of whom 12.3% were twenty years or older. A similar imbalance can be seen in the male-female distribution. Of all the respondents, 61.7% were male students and 38.3% female students.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Family, Parents and Religious Affiliation

Religious sociology commonly accepts that "the image of God is seen to develop in early childhood from children's perceptions of their parents what they are and what they should ideally be . . . The child spontaneously attributes to his parents the perfections and abilities which he will later transfer to God if his religious education gives him the possibility." Deconchy (1968!) even concluded that "the development of the idea of God in boys was more marked by the notion of the Virgin Mary whereas the opposite happened in the case of girls."

It is usually thought that a strong correlation exists between parental religious affiliation and the child's past and present religious affiliation. It appeared important to know whether the indication of religious affiliation referred to the past, or if the respondents maintained some relation with their stated religion in the present. Asked to characterize their present association with the religion in which they had been raised, the following answers were given: 9.8% thought they had a very strong bond with the religion of their youth; 29.8% thought they had a strong bond, and 41% characterized their relation to their childhood religion as average.

Note that 80.6% of the respondents related positively and maintained a positive bond with the religion in which they were raised. For 39.6% of the respondents, this relation was even characterized as strong or very strong. On the other hand, 19.4% characterized this relation as negative, or were not able to describe it: 7.8% said that it was weak; 3.7% said it was very weak; 2.3% rejected the religion of their family, 5.5% did not know how to characterize their relation to the religion of their family.

Ties to Parents' Religion

very weak weak average strong very strong

3.7% 7.8% 41.0% 29.8% 9.8%

The percentage of American youth who related positively to their families' religion is high (80.6%). However, of these respondents, 41% characterized the relation as average. Obviously, the nature and intensity of this relationship is subject to closer scrutiny. We are not privy to the conscious or unconscious criteria motivating the respondents. We do not know whether the understanding of religion underlying these answers is related more to family than to Church, or whether it conveys a broad and nondescript concept of religion. We know, for example, from other studies "that teens are clearly searching for spiritual meaning in their lives with a new intensity," but despite this growing interest in matters religious, "many teenagers remain turned off' by churches and organized religion." At present, however, we are leaning toward a different assessment.

The positive relation to religion probably contains a cluster of positive variables from childhood memories, to affection for parents and teachers, and the personal assimilation of religion. Age differences reveal little: the positive relation to religion increases almost imperceptibly between age fifteen and twenty-one (from 9.2% to 16.1%, for strong association with religion). There is no appreciable difference between male and female respondents on this point: 82.1% of the men and 79.8% of the women relate positively to their families' religion. As a group, 69.3% of the non-American respondents stated positive perceptions of their families' religion, while 3.0% claimed to reject it. Positive association with religion is lower for respondents of other countries (e.g., 57.1% for France, 60.3% for Ireland, 52.8% for Switzerland).

Positive association with religion is even stronger when we are dealing with the mothers of the respondents. As expected, the father's association with religion is perceived as being weaker. The following observations can be made:

The mother's positive relation to religion is judged as being very strong by 26.3% of the respondents, whereas only 14.3% thought their father's relation was very strong, and 9.8% of the respondents judged their own relation as very strong.
33.3% of the respondents thought their mother's relation to religion was strong, while 22.7% judged their father's relation as strong, and 29.8% judged their own relation as strong.
24.5% thought their mother's relation to religion was average, while 25.1% judged their father's relation and 41% their own relation as average.
So we see that a positive relation (very strong, strong, or average) was perceived by 84.1% of the respondents for their mothers, 80.6% for the respondents themselves, and 62.1% for their fathers. These findings corresponds to those of McAuley and Mathieson, in which, of 775 students surveyed, 322 declared their father a practicing Catholic, 448 their mother as practicing, and 424 identified themselves as practicing.

Survey on Mary and Youth: The Catholic Identity of Respondents

To place opinions and beliefs about Mary within the context of the Catholic Church and its religious and moral rules of conduct, the respondents were asked about the following five items: papal infallibility, the Sunday Mass obligation, cohabitation before marriage, abortion, and commitment to justice and peace in the world.

Infallibility
Young people may sometimes have a strained relationship with the Church, feeling that they are misunderstood and neglected. Other surveys indicate that only 30% of the respondents believe that most Catholics practice what they are taught by the Church, and that individuals should be allowed to make their own decision about belonging to the Church (90%). However, the Catholic identity of the respondents should not be defined by rules of moral conduct only. It should not and cannot be limited purely to institutional adhesion and identity. Social and/or spiritual dimensions represent equally strong, if not stronger, factors of identification.

The papacy and its charism of infallibility are among the most distinguishing elements of the Catholic Church as institution. To what degree do youth recognize and accept for themselves this distinguishing characteristic? The responses were clearly divided on whether the Pope has the authority to speak with infallibility.

Papal Infallibility?

Affirmed Denied Don't Know

36.9% 36.9% 26.2%

(29.5% non-American)

To a slightly different question ("Catholics are required to accept and do everything the Pope says"), McAuley and Mathieson report 109 (out of 775) positive answers; 521 in disagreement.

Sunday Mass Obligation
Opinions were less divided when they dealt with the power of the Church to determine personal conduct. The following are the responses to the statement "It is a serious sin to miss Mass on Sunday, except for serious reasons (such as ill health, etc.)":

Sunday Obligation
Agreed Disagreed No opinion

24.4% 62.8% 12.8%

(23.9% non-Americans)

Living Together before Marriage
In matters related to personal conduct and sexual morality, the opinions were similar. The Church teaching that living together before marriage is wrong evoked the following response:

Cohabitation?

OK Wrong No opinion

25.8% 59.8% 14.5%

(21.6% non-Americans)

Abortion
In a country where the abortion question is vehemently argued by representatives from both sides, opinions on the Church's staement that abortion should be illegal reveal strong division.

Abortion?

Wrong OK No Opinion

49.7% 31.3% 19.2%

(49.0% non-Americans)

Social Commitment
Opinions on the statement that Christians are obliged to get involved in social-political issues (e.g., social justice) were similarly divided.

Social Commitment?

Agreed Disagreed No Opinion

47.1% 25.2% 27.6%

(41.7% non-Americans)

A comparison with other countries on behalf of the "Catholic identity" of respondents shows similar patterns of rejection or resistance to institution (esp., infallibility and moral conduct). The following table shows the percentage of respondents (by country) who strongly agree or agree with the following Church teachings:

Austria Ecuador France Italy Japan Peru United States
The Pope has the authority to speak with infallibility. 24.0% 33.7% 7.4% 29.2% 27.2% 31.7% 36.8%

It is a serious sin to miss Mass on Sunday, except for serious reasons (such as ill health, etc.). 8.3% 33.3% 18.9% 36.1% 37.6% 29.3% 24.4%

Living together before marriage is wrong. 6.3% 45.5% 15.1% 17.8% 19.8% 24.4% 25.8%

Abortions should be illegal. 43.8% 77.0% 40.6% 46.1% 34.1% 69.5% 49.7%

Christians are obliged to get involved in social-political issues (e.g., social justice). 49.0% 56.3% 42.9% 67.4% 44.0% 38.5% 47.2%

Survey on Mary and Youth: Learning about Mary

The religious influence of schools has repeatedly been questioned, studied, and reaffirmed. Recent studies concur that parental influence has the greatest effect on children's religious outlook. Schools also have an independent effect, but one less effectual than the parental influence and related to social environment rather than religious education. The same studies confirmed that girls are more religious than boys (though the gap is narrower among Catholics); that religious observance tends to decrease with age (except in the area of vocation interest among Catholics). Catholics, especially those having attended Catholic schools, scored highest on religious belief, practice and knowledge. However, in general, levels of religious knowledge were poor in all samples, whereas belief and practice were better but still low.

Given this broad information about learning and the interaction of family and school, we wanted to know how respondents were first presented with the figure of Mary and if the school played a role in their knowledge about her.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Initial Information

Of the respondents, 80.6% indicated that they were raised Roman Catholic, and 99.2% of the respondents said they had heard of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ. A significant number of respondents (43.2% of those who answered this question) did not remember who first spoke to them of Mary. A majority 56.8% remembered the person from whom they first learned about Mary: 26.7% from their mother; 1.9% from their father; 10.9% from their priest or religious education instructor; 13.6% from their teacher; 3.7% from another person (e.g., a grandparent).

Initial Teacher on Mary Mother

Father Priest or Catechist Teacher Other Don't Recall

26.7% 1.9% 10.9% 13.6% 3.7 43.2%

Of the write-in answers to this question, a plurality indicated "grandma." Perhaps this indicates that older Catholics are more knowledgeable about traditional teaching on Mary and more willing to pass on this knowledge. If true, this fact could have significant pastoral implications.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Religious Instruction on Mary

After obtaining this primary information, the survey proceeded to measure the role the school had in imparting knowledge about Mary. To the very general question as to whether "something" had been taught about Mary "at your school" within the past three years, 84% responded "yes," 10.5% replied "no," and 5.6% could not remember. (In comparison, the non-Americans answered in the affirmative 77.8% of the time.)

Further inquiry about the form or setting for this teaching about Mary (in the last three years) revealed the following:

Only 5.4% of the students said they had heard about Mary in a course that was specifically about Mary;
The great majority (77%) said they had heard about Mary in a religion course in which one or several classes discussed Mary (which we designate as an occasional instruction on Mary;
A significant number (28.5%) said that they had heard or were taught about Mary at a particular event or occasion at school (e.g., a conference, film, or special religious program).

Among high school students, age differences were of little importance for the responses given. 86.3% of the fifteen-year-olds, 85.1% of the sixteen-year-olds, 85.3% of the seventeen-year-olds, and 82.2% of the eighteen-year-olds all said they had heard something about Mary. However, there was a slight drop among college students who said they had heard about Mary in school: 72.3% of college students responded in the affirmative.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Marian Devotional Practices

A significant part of our survey dealt with the devotional practices of the respondents. Was the respondent aware of and did he/she have contact with some Marian devotion in the parish, at school, within the family? Was the respondent open to the practice? Did he/she participate? What did the respondent think of Marian prayer? Did this prayer have some part in his/her life? How did the respondent react to apparitions or the Rosary? Was the respondent involved with some apostolic Marian work or some Marian prayer group? The respondents were not only questioned about their opinions on the various expressions of Marian devotion found in the family, school and parish, but were also asked to indicate their personal involvement with these practices of the spiritual life concentrating on Mary.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Negative Reactions

A cursory reading of the results indicates that between 30% and 45% of respondents answered negatively to various questions dealing with personal participation in Marian devotion: 44.4% said they never participated in any Marian devotional practice in their parish (51.2% of non-Americans never participated); 31.3% said they never participated in any Marian devotions offered at school (n.b., 15.7% of the American schools and 9.6% of the others had no such devotions); 68.8% of Americans (and 69.7% of the others) indicated some participation.

30.4% said that neither Marian prayer (23.1%) nor any prayer at all (7.3%) had a place in their lives. Conversely, 69.7% of the American sample (and 63.3% of the others) ackowledged a place for Marian prayer in their own lives. Among non-Americans the figure for "no prayer" (14.4%) was nearly double that for the same American response (7.3%). 34.4% said they had learned but never recited the Rosary (compared to 29.0% of the non-Americans); 45.3% in the American sample said their families had no Marian devotions (close to the 45.4% for the remaining group).

96.9% said that they were not part of any Marian group, apostolic or otherwise (the figure for the non-Americans was 90.1%).

Survey on Mary and Youth: Presence of Marian Devotion in Parish, School and Family

It did appear though, that the majority of respondents thought that Marian devotion was present and alive in their parishes, schools, and families. 55.6% said that they participated often or occasionally in the Marian devotions offered by their parishes. However, only 9.4% said that they participated frequently. On the other hand, it was difficult to measure the degree of occasional participation which totaled 46.2% of the responses given. 68.8% of the respondents said that they participated in the various forms of Marian devotion which were conducted at school. Here, the rate of frequent participation was greater than that in the parish (22.6% at school, 9.4% in the parish). 54.7% referred to some Marian devotion in the family, without indicating whether they had participated in it or not.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Varioius Expressions of Marian Devotion

What were the Marian devotions to which the respondents referred? Questions 13-16 asked which Marian devotions students participated in at home, in church, or at school (usually Marianist). Since the range of Marian devotions in the parish was more or less limited and known, we tried to ascertain the response of youth to Marian devotions in the school and the family. First, the school:

Marian Devotions at School Participation

Feast Day Masses 52.8%

Rosary 30.9%

Celebrations 29.8%

Non-specified Marian Prayers 28.6%

Pilgrimages 4.8%

Other 7.2%

The Marian devotions which take place within the family are necessarily limited. The survey revealed the following for Marian devotion within the family: 33.8% recite the Hail Mary; 25.5% pray the Rosary; 10.6% have some other Marian prayer; 5.5% recite the Angelus.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Preference among Marian Devotions

We find a similar pattern in answer to the question (no. 19) concerning the preference among Marian prayers. For 69.6% of the respondents (the remaining 30.4% said that Marian prayer did not have any place in their life), the following were listed as the preferred prayer: 78.4% indicated the Hail Mary; 51.8% the Rosary; 29.2% the Angelus; 25.7% the Magnificat; 12.0% another Marian prayer (not specified). (The Hail Mary was also most frequently mentioned by the non-Americans at 69.3%.)

The survey on the different forms of Marian prayer revealed that young people preferred the simplest and most traditional forms probably because they were the best-known and the easiest to learn and use. Although 20.1% responded that they were never instructed about the Rosary, there were 45.5% who said they recited the Rosary often or sometimes. The most common write-in answers regarding personal Marian devotions were the "Hail Holy Queen" and the "Memorare"; however, the "Our Father" was listed as often as any of the specifically Marian write-in replies.

This finding offered evidence for the recognized lack of knowledge about Mary, especially in matters related to doctrine. It was further supported by the replies to write-in question 27: "Besides the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception, can you think of other Roman Catholic Marian dogmas." A few samples from the responses: "May crowning," "Mary was born without sin" (shows lack of understanding of Mary's Immaculate Conception, frequently confused with the Virgin Birth), "Good Friday," "The infalability [sic] of the Pope" (dogma, but not Marian), "Jesus born without original sin," and "Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived."

The most common replies for group devotions included: "May crowning" (quite frequent) and "Mass," especially Marian masses (e.g., Immaculate Conception was mentioned several times, perhaps since it occurred during the school year).

Survey on Mary and Youth: Importance of Marian Prayer

Another aspect of our sociological research dealt with what young people think about Marian prayer? The following table summarizes the responses to the questions on the importance and practice of Marian prayer in their lives.

Note that the percentage who thought that Marian prayer was important (64.7%) was close to that for those who thought that Marian prayer had a place in their lives (69.7.%). (The figures for the non-American group were, respectively, 70.2% and 63.3%.) The difference between theory (those who thought it important) and practice (those who actually prayed) seems slight. In this matter, a slight difference between boys and girls may be noted: 74.4% of the girls and 66.9% of the boys said that Marian prayer had a place in their lives. Similarly, 65.6% of the girls and 63.6% of the boys said that Marian prayer was important for them.

Here age seems linked to noteworthy differences. Of the total, 69.6% practiced some form of Marian prayer: 72.4% of fifteen-year-olds, 71% of sixteen-year-olds, 65.2% of seventeen-year-olds, and 68% of eighteen-year- olds. The percentage decreases at 19 years old (64.2%) and 20 years old (62.5%) and increases for those 20 years old and over (71.9%).

The importance given to Marian prayer declines with the age of the respondent. The following gives the number within the age groups of those who think Marian prayer is important: fifteen-year-olds 69.0%; sixteen-year-olds 66.5%; seventeen-year-olds 60.2%; eighteen-year-olds 61.5%; nineteen-year-olds 56.5%; twenty-year-olds 48.9%. For those twenty-one and older, the percentage rises to 65.8%. Age differences must be considered in interpreting the average (64.3%).

Generally, young people do not consider Marian prayer to be an obstacle to prayer addressed to God. Only 11% of the respondents thought that prayer to Mary is an aberration or a distraction from prayer addressed to God, and only 11.7% held that prayers should be directed to God alone. (The responses from non-Americans were similar: 10.2% and 12.1%, respectively.) The reservations about Marian prayer are slightly higher among boys than girls.

As to the meaning of Marian prayer, two major interpretations were offered by the respondents. Marian prayer is important a) because Mary is a model for those who pray and believe; b) because Mary intercedes efficaciously and assists those who pray. Young people appear to prefer the image of Mary as model of prayer and faith (74.8%) over her image as one who intercedes and assists (57.4%). (The same pattern appeared in the non-American group: 66.1% vs. 52.7%.)

Survey on Mary and Youth: Knowledge about Mary

How much do young people know about the image and person of Mary as found in Scripture (the New Testament) and in the Church tradition (the doctrines concerning Mary)?

Survey on Mary and Youth: The Biblical Mary

The respondents were presented with nine statements (such as "The Bible tells us that Mary was a Jew"), and were invited to express their agreement or their disagreement. The nine statements consisted of two groups. The first group was concerned with facts (e.g., "The Bible tells us that Mary was the spouse of Joseph") which closely followed the information supplied by the Bible. In the second group, we find deductive or interpretive statements, that is, statements which, while based on the Bible, are not available as ready-made formulas but must be deduced. We distinguished the two groups as facts (formulas or expressions found in Scripture) and interpretations (formulas or expressions not directly found in Scripture). Obviously, the second group of statements require interpretive skills.

a) Group I (Facts)
Mary is the handmaid (servant) of the Lord;
Mary is the wife of Joseph;
Mary was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit;
Mary became the mother of the beloved disciple at the foot of the cross.

b) Group II (Interpretation)
Mary was always a virgin;
Mary was free from sin;
Mary is the Mother of God;
Mary is concerned with human problems (Cana);
Mary is a Jewish woman.

The expectation was that there would be agreement concerning the facts, whereas there would be less agreement on the interpretations. Actually, the distribution of responses was the following:

89.1% agree that the Bible presents Mary as the wife of Joseph (fact);
87.8% agree that Mary conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit (fact);
78.6% agree that the Bible tells us that Mary remained a virgin (interpretation);
78.1% agree that the Bible affirms that Mary is the Mother of God (interpretation);
65.8% agree that the Bible affirms Mary's freedom from sin, whereas 19.8% doubt a biblical foundation for Mary's sinlessness, and 14.4% have no position on the question (interpretation);
52.6% agree that there is biblical ground for saying that Mary is concerned with our struggles and problems, whereas 48% have no opinion, don't know or are opposed (interpretation);
52.1% agree that the Bible speaks of Mary as "the servant of the Lord" (17.4% disagree and 30.1% have no position on the question) (fact);
44.2% believe that Scripture presents Mary as a Jewish woman (whereas 9.4% are opposed to this title, 46.5% have no opinion on the matter) (interpretation);
42.0% agree that at the foot of the cross, Mary became the Mother of John the Evangelist (18.4% were opposed, and 39.5% had no opinion on the matter) (fact).

We notice that the four highest ranked statements , independent of whether they were fact or interpretation, were directly linked to the event of the Incarnation: wife of Joseph, the conception of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, the virginity of Mary, and her role as Mother of God. Although the formulation of two of the four highest ranking statements may appear more doctrinal than biblical, they are all grounded in Scripture. The salient feature or common denominator for all of them is the Nativity of Christ. We are here dealing with well-known truths explaining the mystery of the birth of Jesus, found in a general way in the infancy narratives. The same can be said for Mary's freedom from sin. The responses to the first four statements can hardly be interpreted as biblical knowledge. The "Nativity-cluster," as we may call it, seems to be indicative of some generic knowledge about Christmas rather than of precise information about the place of Mary in the Bible.

The more specific statements (Mary as "servant of the Lord," 52.1%) and those not directly related to the Christmas story (e.g., the event at Calvary 42.0%) were more difficult to interpret. The statement about Mary's preoccupation with human problems (24.h.) was applicable to various biblical events (Magnificat, Cana, Pentecost) and may have created some confusion (52.6%). One must also have some powers of deduction to know that Mary was a Jewish woman (44.2%).

By way of summary, what is known about Mary from the Bible is limited and concerns chiefly the nativity of Christ. The dogmatic and scriptural affirmations derive from this event. This conclusion is verified by the finding that only 41.5% (and 43.4% of the non-Americans) say that they sometimes read the Bible outside of Church or school (58.5% said they do not read the bible at all). In this case, there were no significant differences related to age or sex.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary of Tradition

May we assume that knowledge of Mary among young people is more rooted in doctrine than in Scripture? The answer to this question must be nuanced.

Divine Maternity: To the question whether Mary was the mother of God, that is, the mother of Jesus Christ, true God and man, 81.3% replied affirmatively (72.3% of the non-Americans); 7.0% replied negatively; and 11.8% admitted they did not know what to reply.

Mary's Freedom: Similarly, a significant majority (i.e., 76.3% of the Americans and 70.5% of the others) believed that Mary freely accepted God's invitation to give birth to his Son, whereas 9.3% denied the liberty of Mary and 14.7% did not know what to think.

Mary's Virginity: Once again, the responses on Mary's perpetual virginity (before, during, and after Jesus' birth) did not give evidence of the difficulties which one might have expected. A majority (between 60 and 70%) apparently recognized the importance of this doctrine. Other findings concerning this issue included the following: 61.3% think that the virginal birth is important because it safeguards the divinity of Jesus (n.b., non-Americans: 50.7%), whereas, 70.2% see the importance of this doctrine in the fact that the virgin birth underlines the particular grace which Mary received from God in order to give birth to Christ.

As to the biological reality or the symbolic value of the virginal birth, opinions are divided: 37.1% think that the virgin birth has a symbolic value. They believe this doctrine is a way of saying that Mary was totally consecrated to God. On the other hand, 63.0% do not accept this interpretation: 35.3% reject it, and 27.7% have no opinion on the topic.

Opinions are similarly divided concerning the biological reality of the virgin birth: 35.4% (and 22.1% of the non-American group) think that it is important for a Catholic to hold that the virginal birth is a physical and biological reality; 28.7% reject the notion, and 35.8% suspend their judgment or have no opinion.

Reference to ecclesiastical authority does not necessarily conclude the matter, as the following responses show. To the statement "I do not understand the doctrine of the virginal birth, but I accept it because the Church teaches it," 26.7% gave their agreement, but 49.0% rejected the statement, and 24.3% were without an opinion. (29.7% of the non-American respondents assented to the statement.)

Immaculate Conception and Assumption: Hesitation was even more noticeable when dealing with these two Marian dogmas. 92.7% (and 92.0% of the non-Americans) believed that there were only two Marian dogmas the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. Familiarity with essential features of these two dogmas was minimal, especially in the case of the Immaculate Conception: 47.9% did not know what the meaning of this dogma is (37.0% for the non-Americans); 40.0% gave an incorrect definition; and, only 12.0% gave a correct definition of the Immaculate Conception.

Several definitions were suggested in a multiple choice-type question. The 23% ratio of correct answers was very close to the 25% to be expected from random chance. In this matter, there were no differences between men and women, but the older respondents tended to have more knowledge than the younger ones. With regard to the Assumption, 57.5% did not know the meaning of the doctrine; 3.3% gave an incorrect definition; and, only 39.1% gave a correct response (again, multiple-choice definitions were offered).

The difference between the correct answers for the Immaculate Conception and Assumption is readily explainable. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception has frequently been confused with the conception of Jesus, whereas it was relatively easy to give a correct response for the dogma of the Assumption. Nevertheless, little was known about the whole area of Marian dogmas terminology and content. In this regard, there was little difference between all respondents male or female, old or young.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary of Apparitions

We also inquired whether or not the respondents were interested in apparitions. About 40% of the respondents showed no interest or concern in Marian apparitions, while 60% manifested some interest. (The figure for the non-Americans was higher: 65.2%.)

Independently of whether they actually pray and how often they pray, the respondents thought the following about the importance of Marian prayer: 19.8% thought that it was very important; 44.9% thought it was important; 21.9% thought that it was not important; and 13.7% had no opinion.
Note that the percentage who thought that Marian prayer was important (64.7%) was close to that for those who thought that Marian prayer had a place in their lives (69.7.%). (The figures for the non-American group were, respectively, 70.2% and 63.3%.) The difference between theory (those who thought it important) and practice (those who actually prayed) seems slight. In this matter, a slight difference between boys and girls may be noted: 74.4% of the girls and 66.9% of the boys said that Marian prayer had a place in their lives. Similarly, 65.6% of the girls and 63.6% of the boys said that Marian prayer was important for them.
Here age seems linked to noteworthy differences. Of the total, 69.6% practiced some form of Marian prayer: 72.4% of 15-year-olds, 71% of 16-year-olds, 65.2% of 17-year-olds, and 68% of 18-year- olds. The percentage decreases at 19 years old (64.2%) and 20 years old (62.5%) and increases for those 20 years old and over (71.9%).
The importance given to Marian prayer declines with the age of the respondent. The following gives the number within the age groups of those who think Marian prayer is important: 15-year-olds 69.0%; 16-year-olds 66.5%; 17-year-olds 60.2%; 18-year-olds 61.5%; 19-year-olds 56.5%; 20-year-olds 48.9%. For those 21 and older, the percentage rises to 65.8%. Age differences must be considered in interpreting the average (64.3%).
Generally, young people do not consider Marian prayer to be an obstacle to prayer addressed to God. Only 11% of the respondents thought that prayer to Mary is an aberration or a distraction from prayer addressed to God, and only 11.7% held that prayers should be directed to God alone. (The responses from non-Americans were similar: 10.2% and 12.1%, respectively.) The reservations about Marian prayer are slightly higher among boys than girls.
As to the meaning of Marian prayer, two major interpretations were offered by the respondents. Marian prayer is important a) because Mary is a model for those who pray and believe; b) because Mary intercedes efficaciously and assists those who pray. Young people appear to prefer the image of Mary as model of prayer and faith (74.8%) over her image as one who intercedes and assists (57.4%). (The same pattern appeared in the non-American group: 66.1% vs. 52.7%.)

Survey on Mary and Youth: Knowledge about Mary

How much do young people know about the image and person of Mary as found in Scripture (the New Testament) and in the Church tradition (the doctrines concerning Mary)?

Survey on Mary and Youth: The Biblical Mary
The respondents were presented with nine statements (such as "The Bible tells us that Mary was a Jew"), and were invited to express their agreement or their disagreement. The nine statements consisted of two groups. The first group was concerned with facts (e.g., "The Bible tells us that Mary was the spouse of Joseph") which closely followed the information supplied by the Bible. In the second group, we find deductive or interpretive statements, that is, statements which, while based on the Bible, are not available as ready-made formulas but must be deduced. We distinguished the two groups as facts (formulas or expressions found in Scripture) and interpretations (formulas or expressions not directly found in Scripture). Obviously, the second group of statements require interpretive skills.

a) Group I (Facts)
Mary is the handmaid (servant) of the Lord;
Mary is the wife of Joseph;
Mary was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit;
Mary became the mother of the beloved disciple at the foot of the cross.

b) Group II (Interpretation)
Mary was always a virgin;
Mary was free from sin;
Mary is the Mother of God;
Mary is concerned with human problems (Cana);
Mary is a Jewish woman.

The expectation was that there would be agreement concerning the facts, whereas there would be less agreement on the interpretations. Actually, the distribution of responses was the following:

89.1% agree that the Bible presents Mary as the wife of Joseph (fact);
87.8% agree that Mary conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit (fact);
78.6% agree that the Bible tells us that Mary remained a virgin (interpretation);
78.1% agree that the Bible affirms that Mary is the Mother of God (interpretation);
65.8% agree that the Bible affirms Mary's freedom from sin, whereas 19.8% doubt a biblical foundation for Mary's sinlessness, and 14.4% have no position on the question (interpretation);
52.6% agree that there is biblical ground for saying that Mary is concerned with our struggles and problems, whereas 48% have no opinion, don't know or are opposed (interpretation);
52.1% agree that the Bible speaks of Mary as "the servant of the Lord" (17.4% disagree and 30.1% have no position on the question) (fact);
44.2% believe that Scripture presents Mary as a Jewish woman (whereas 9.4% are opposed to this title, 46.5% have no opinion on the matter) (interpretation);
42.0% agree that at the foot of the cross, Mary became the Mother of John the Evangelist (18.4% were opposed, and 39.5% had no opinion on the matter) (fact).

We notice that the four highest ranked statements , independent of whether they were fact or interpretation, were directly linked to the event of the Incarnation: wife of Joseph, the conception of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, the virginity of Mary, and her role as Mother of God. Although the formulation of two of the four highest ranking statements may appear more doctrinal than biblical, they are all grounded in Scripture. The salient feature or common denominator for all of them is the Nativity of Christ. We are here dealing with well-known truths explaining the mystery of the birth of Jesus, found in a general way in the infancy narratives. The same can be said for Mary's freedom from sin. The responses to the first four statements can hardly be interpreted as biblical knowledge. The "Nativity-cluster," as we may call it, seems to be indicative of some generic knowledge about Christmas rather than of precise information about the place of Mary in the Bible.
The more specific statements (Mary as "servant of the Lord," 52.1%) and those not directly related to the Christmas story (e.g., the event at Calvary 42.0%) were more difficult to interpret. The statement about Mary's preoccupation with human problems (24.h.) was applicable to various biblical events (Magnificat, Cana, Pentecost) and may have created some confusion (52.6%). One must also have some powers of deduction to know that Mary was a Jewish woman (44.2%).
By way of summary, what is known about Mary from the Bible is limited and concerns chiefly the nativity of Christ. The dogmatic and scriptural affirmations derive from this event. This conclusion is verified by the finding that only 41.5% (and 43.4% of the non-Americans) say that they sometimes read the Bible outside of Church or school (58.5% said they do not read the bible at all). In this case, there were no significant differences related to age or sex.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary of Tradition
May we assume that knowledge of Mary among young people is more rooted in doctrine than in Scripture? The answer to this question must be nuanced.
Divine Maternity: To the question whether Mary was the mother of God, that is, the mother of Jesus Christ, true God and man, 81.3% replied affirmatively (72.3% of the non-Americans); 7.0% replied negatively; and 11.8% admitted they did not know what to reply.
Mary's Freedom: Similarly, a significant majority (i.e., 76.3% of the Americans and 70.5% of the others) believed that Mary freely accepted God's invitation to give birth to his Son, whereas 9.3% denied the liberty of Mary and 14.7% did not know what to think.
Mary's Virginity: Once again, the responses on Mary's perpetual virginity (before, during, and after Jesus' birth) did not give evidence of the difficulties which one might have expected. A majority (between 60 and 70%) apparently recognized the importance of this doctrine. Other findings concerning this issue included the following: 61.3% think that the virginal birth is important because it safeguards the divinity of Jesus (n.b., non-Americans: 50.7%), whereas, 70.2% see the importance of this doctrine in the fact that the virgin birth underlines the particular grace which Mary received from God in order to give birth to Christ.
As to the biological reality or the symbolic value of the virginal birth, opinions are divided: 37.1% think that the virgin birth has a symbolic value. They believe this doctrine is a way of saying that Mary was totally consecrated to God. On the other hand, 63.0% do not accept this interpretation: 35.3% reject it, and 27.7% have no opinion on the topic.
Opinions are similarly divided concerning the biological reality of the virgin birth: 35.4% (and 22.1% of the non-American group) think that it is important for a Catholic to hold that the virginal birth is a physical and biological reality; 28.7% reject the notion, and 35.8% suspend their judgment or have no opinion.
Reference to ecclesiastical authority does not necessarily conclude the matter, as the following responses show. To the statement "I do not understand the doctrine of the virginal birth, but I accept it because the Church teaches it," 26.7% gave their agreement, but 49.0% rejected the statement, and 24.3% were without an opinion. (29.7% of the non-American respondents assented to the statement.)
Immaculate Conception and Assumption: Hesitation was even more noticeable when dealing with these two Marian dogmas. 92.7% (and 92.0% of the non-Americans) believed that there were only two Marian dogmas the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. Familiarity with essential features of these two dogmas was minimal, especially in the case of the Immaculate Conception: 47.9% did not know what the meaning of this dogma is (37.0% for the non-Americans); 40.0% gave an incorrect definition; and, only 12.0% gave a correct definition of the Immaculate Conception.
Several definitions were suggested in a multiple choice-type question. The 23% ratio of correct answers was very close to the 25% to be expected from random chance. In this matter, there were no differences between men and women, but the older respondents tended to have more knowledge than the younger ones. With regard to the Assumption, 57.5% did not know the meaning of the doctrine; 3.3% gave an incorrect definition; and, only 39.1% gave a correct response (again, multiple-choice definitions were offered).
The difference between the correct answers for the Immaculate Conception and Assumption is readily explainable. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception has frequently been confused with the conception of Jesus, whereas it was relatively easy to give a correct response for the dogma of the Assumption. Nevertheless, little was known about the whole area of Marian dogmas terminology and content. In this regard, there was little difference between all respondents male or female, old or young.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary of Apparitions
We also inquired whether or not the respondents were interested in apparitions. About 40% of the respondents showed no interest or concern in Marian apparitions, while 60% manifested some interest. (The figure for the non-Americans was higher: 65.2%.)

Marian Prayer Yes No Don't pray at all

Practiced? 69.7% 23.1% 7.3%

(62.5% non-Americans) (14.4% non-Americans)

Important? 64.7% 21.9%

Marian Apparitions are: American Responses Non-American Responses

interesting to me 60.0% 65.2%

a sign of God's grace 66.2% 8.8%

a means of conversion 51.7% 58.1%

sign of God's freedom 51.0% 47.4%

overemphasized 28.2% 23.8%

to be believed 28.0% 46.1%

psychological 16.4% 23.3%

To the question whether apparitions are a primarily psychological phenomenon, only 16.3% agreed, 43.2% disagreed, and 40.5% did not know. A significant percentage 25% were "without opinion" on the subject of apparitions, and here again there was no significant difference in replies based on age or sex.

Return to the Apparitions Information Index

Survey on Mary and Youth: Beliefs and Opinions on Mary

There are many statements about Mary which are situated in a gray zone between established doctrine and stereotyped opinion and belief. Some are the consequence of polemic generalizations, others can be attributed to pious exaggerations. The question is often asked: How human really was Mary? For some it is a foregone conclusion that Mary is the rallying point of Roman conservatism and a major obstacle to ecumenism. In this section we would like to examine the beliefs and opinions of our respondents on some of these questions. And so, concerning the place and importance of Mary, we note the following.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary-Human or Divine?

46% of the respondents viewed Mary as a woman and a creature, a human person; 27.1% said that she "was more like us than God," and 18.9% thought that she was truly a "person like ourselves." 37.1% (and 25.5% of the non-Americans) showed the tendency to make Mary similar to God ("she is like God" . . . "she is more like God than us"); 17.0% had no opinion on the topic.

This somewhat astonishing tendency to make Mary divine was confirmed in another part of this survey. 33.8% of the respondents were in agreement with the following statement: "Mary is the goddess for Catholics and should be venerated by believers."

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary and the Church

The great majority of respondents recognized the importance of Mary for the Catholic Church: 76.9 agreed, 2.3% disagreed, and 20.8% abstained (70.3% in the non-American group also agreed).

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary-Symbol of Conservatism

At the same time, a large number 48.2% considered Mary as the symbol of traditional and conservative Catholicism; 13.8% disagreed, and 38% a large proportion had no opinion on the topic. Is Mary the woman who is to triumph over Satan and communism, or is she the one who shields us from the anger of Jesus, the Son of God? 21.8% connected Mary with the downfall of communism, while 38.3% did not make this connection. 28.6% saw Mary as the one who defeats Satan, while 34% did not agree with this opinion. 21.2% considered her as humanity s protectress against the anger of Jesus, whereas 45.8% were opposed to this view. In all three cases, the percentage of abstentions was high (39.9%, 37.5%, 33.0%).

Survey on Mary and Youth: Mary and Ecumenism

The respondents displayed some hesitation on the subject of ecumenism. When asked whether Mary was an obstacle to Christian unity, 57.1% had no opinion on the subject, while 32.1% did not think that there was a problem, and only 10.8% thought that Mary could be an obstacle to Christian unity. Conversely, 49.1% of the respondents thought that it was important to know and venerate Mary in order to believe in Christ. A high percentage (42.1%) had no opinion on this topic, while only 8.8% thought that it was not important to know and love Mary.

To questions dealing with the intercession and mediation of Mary, respondents replied in the following way: 48% agreed (61.6% for non-Americans) that Mary was the mediatrix between God and humanity (18.4% disagreed, while 33.4% had no opinion). There was less agreement on the subject of coredemption: 37.3% of the Americans (and 47.0% of the remainder) said that Mary is "the coredemptrix of humanity, with Jesus Christ" (22.7% were opposed to this view, and 40.1% abstained from taking a position). There was greater agreement with the statement that Mary leads the believer to Jesus Christ (57.7% agreed, 14.6% disagreed, and 27.6% were without opinion).

Finally, it is worth noting that only a small percentage of the replies viewed Mary negatively. This was true even in replies to question 40: "Is Roman Catholic teaching about Mary an obstacle to Christian unity?" The vast majority rejected this view (perhaps since so few knew much about the Roman Catholic teaching beyond that Mary was Jesus' mother and that she was good and loving to him). But, 10.8% of the American group and 11.7% of the others affirmed the statement (no. 40). Some of the negative write-in replies were phrased in stereotypical polemic phrases: "Jesus is the one we worship. She was only an instrument like Moses," "she was just an instrument of God," "the main difference between Catholicism and other Christian religions is their view of Mary," "it cuts out the fact that since Jesus died for our sins . . . we can have a direct relationship with God," "Jesus saved the world not Mary." This may indicate that most negative reaction against Mary is reflexive and unexamined.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Representations of Mary

What images or representations do young people use when thinking of Mary? To answer this question, we used two complimentary approaches: 1) a series of descriptions of Mary drawn from theological and spiritual literature (popular piety); 2) an open question asking the respondent to list personal qualities of Mary, in addition to and in a way different from those listed in question 34.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Affective Relation and Closeness

The results showed that the images of Mary rated most highly (in the list of 12 possibilities) were expressed in statements and titles which suggest an affective relation and closeness to us. The preferred descriptions were the following:

Affirmation of Image of Affective Relation American Repsonses Non-American Responses
A concerned mother of the Church and all people 83.3% 72.6%
Mother of God 79.8% 70.0%
A lover of the poor 76.7% 61.7%
Sister in faith 70.2% 62.7%

83.3% of the American respondents (72.6% of the others) saw Mary as a mother who is concerned (warmth and caring) for the Church and for humanity (against 15.3% who do not have this view of Mary); 79.7% saw Mary as the Mother of God (9.6% could not identify with her in this way; 10.7% had no opinion). Despite the prominent theological note of this description, the maternal relation was present and indicated, at least indirectly, an affective relation. (70.0% of the non-Americans affirmed the title.)

The third preference was the following: 76.8% (but only 61.7% of the non-Americans) saw Mary as the one who loves the poor (8% rejected this image while 15.2% had no opinion). A note of maternal warmth and the possibility of identification with the poor make this an image not only of affective warmth and closeness to us but also one which in a certain way speaks of a maternal bond and of social concern. 70.2% saw Mary as our sister in the faith (10.5% rejected this image, while 19.3% had no opinion). Again, the note of "closeness" is present: Mary shares our lot and with us lives our faith. (62.7% of the non-Americans also accepted the image.)

Survey on Mary and Youth: Source of Inspiration and Ideal Figure

A second set of images statistically less often preferred can be interpreted within what might be called "the distant ideal" category. Here we are dealing with images of Mary which speak of her greatness and excellence, and, as a consequence, of her distance and separation from us. These images may suggest an ideal figure and be a source of inspiration.

60.4% of the respondents see Mary as the Queen of Heaven (against 19.5% who could not identify with this image, and 20.1% who had no opinion). (Only 38.7% of the non-American respondents agreed with the title).

58.6% (compared to 51.4% in the non-American sample) saw her as the chaste virgin, an image which suggests both an ideal and Mary's distance from us pilgrims and sinners (12.3% rejected the image, and 29.1% abstained from answering the question).

52.0% identified Mary as the ideal woman (20% disagreed, and 28% had no opinion), a title which may somehow secularize the essentially religious significance of Mary, but which contains the notion of her being a distant ideal (49.9% of the non-Americans also affirmed this image).

50.1% saw Mary as the powerful mediatrix who presents our prayers to God. (This figure was identical to that for the non-Americans: 50.1%.) Although in this image, the idea of closeness to humanity is evidently expressed, it appears subordinate to the idea of power, grandeur, and mediation (22.3% could not identify with the description, and 27.7% were without opinion).

The other descriptions (four in all) fell below the 50% level and cannot be classified in any well-defined categories. However, the following observations can be made:

a) Traditional titles, which to our contemporaries denote little affective relation, such as servant of the Lord and coredemptrix ("co-redeemer of humanity with Jesus Christ"), are less well liked:

Affirmation of Traditional Titles: American Sample Non-American Sample
servant of the Lord 50.0% 51.3%
coredemptrix 39.4% 50.5%

50.0% chose servant of the Lord (20.8% were opposed, while 29.3% had no opinion). (Non-Americans chose it 51.3% of the time.) 39.4% chose Mary as coredemptrix (22.5% disagreed, and 38.1% a significantly high proportion had no opinion). (The non-American group selected it in higher numbers: 50.5%.)

b) A second observation deals with reactions to more recent, less familiar titles of Mary, such as, the feminine dimension of God and the highest expression of human beauty. These titles, although of relatively recent origin and familiar to intellectual circles, seem to have an attraction for youth. 47.2% (37.8% of non-Americans) chose Mary as the highest expression of human beauty (20.5% disagreed with this description, while 32.2% had no opinion). 41.5% agreed to call Mary the feminine dimension of God (against 29.1% who rejected the title and 29.4% who had no opinion). (28.5% of non-Americans also agreed with the image.)

Survey on Mary and Youth: A Typology of Marian Representations

As to the approach involving an open-ended question inviting the respondents to describe their own image or description of Mary, a minority of those surveyed (28.9%, or 1,013 individuals) responded, whereas 71.1% (2,489 individuals) chose not to respond to this question.

The evaluation of the responses to this question allows us to develop further and more broadly the two categories previously established. Based on the study of about nine-hundred responses to this open-ended question, we can distinguish seven types or categories of representations of Mary favored by the respondents.

(1) The first type, and that which was most preferred (255 responses), dealt with the affective relation of the respondent to Mary: Mary is present as a mother; she is caring and concerned with our needs; she is a special friend, lovable and loving; she listens, has patience, and pardons. Mary is a second mother, someone who makes one think of one's own mother.

(2) A second type of response proportionately less important than the first type (215 responses) referred to the role and function of Mary. We are dealing here with a response which is more a statement of fact or an impersonal idea, rather than an expression of a loving relation or a challenge. Here, the responses underline the role and mission of Mary in the history of salvation. In these more theological descriptions of Mary, the personal relation of the respondent to Mary is not accented, at least not explicitly. Thus Mary is described as the person who gave us Jesus, as the Virgin-Mother of Jesus or the mediatrix; Mary is the one who spreads peace, the one who has an impact on the faith of the world, the model and epitome of all who say yes to the Lord.

(3) A third type (seen in 137 of the responses) dealt with expressions of admiration for Mary's person. Rather than an affective and dependent relation, this type expresses a respect and admiration for Mary. Here the accent is placed on the human person of Mary, rather than on her function and role. For these respondents, Mary is a great woman "super," "cool," sensational, courageous, beautiful. She is "very special."

(4) A fourth type which is more of an antitype (104 responses) included all those who suggest that Mary is not perfect. These responses indicate a direct or indirect correspondence between Mary and ourselves. Generally, these responses have a democratic or leveling tone about them, a desire to bring Mary close to us and our world, without however expressing a personal relation with her. This type, which wishes to reclaim the image of Mary as a person, questions the Mariology of privileges. For these respondents, Mary is a normal woman, a woman like others, a woman not in need of special treatment. She is human but not perfect, full of "human goodness." She is not the "ever-virgin" or the "mother of God." She is human, but someone special.

(5) The fifth type is the opposite of the fourth type. The qualities used to describe Mary come together as perfection (ninety-four responses). Here are found the ideal and the absolute, the language of superlatives. As a result, Mary's image recedes and becomes idealized. Here, Mary is described as the "divine dimension" who is in some way part of God, the woman of all women who now enjoys complete and absolute happiness; she is the most perfect woman, the most perfect expression of the faith. Her perfection puts her beyond the human.

(6) The sixth type less frequent numerically (sixty-six responses) presents Mary as the model in the grand scheme and, more particularly, as a model of faith (twenty responses). She is the person we ought to be: the model for Christian women, a model mother, an example of goodness, a leader in the faith, someone whom we should imitate.

(7) In the last category are grouped all descriptions which indicate rejection, aggressiveness or antipathy. Often, reactions of this kind towards Mary serve as an indication or signal of a religious crisis -- a strained relation with or a rejection of the Church. The language used in these responses was explicit and sometimes coarse. The descriptions ran the gamut from those indicating that Mary had no importance to some saying that Mary was only a fictional character.

We can draw two sets of conclusions from these seven types:

There are three types which indicate a relation between the respondent and Mary. The relationship with Mary can have three dimensions:

a) First, there is the affective relation which is centered on maternal characteristics (acceptance, protection, dependence, warmth, gentleness, love).

b) There is a relation of admiration based on the qualities of Mary s excellence and superiority over us. This relation is based on knowledge of some aspects of the person of Mary which inspire respect and admiration the qualities typical of an interpersonal cognitive relationship.

c) There is a relationship of an imitative type, one based on perceiving a person as a model, either for all phases of life or for certain attitudes and qualities. This relation is of a connative, interpersonal type, based on the need and determination for self-realization.

Statistically, the preference for the three types is highest for the affective relation; it decreases with the relation of admiration, and is lowest for the imitative relation. These are complementary types and constitute the total profile of a relation with Mary. Religious education should lead from one to the other, beginning with, if possible, a relation to Mary based on love.
The four other types, which appear in comparable numbers to the preceding three types (413 for the first three, 458 for the last four), do not emphasize the relation to Mary but rather dissociation in various degrees of expression. Dissociation does not necessarily indicate rejection or opposition to Mary. It may be the result of an exclusively intellectual approach to Mary, an indication of distance or indifference, or the result of religious positivism. The perception of Mary may be influenced by any one or all three of these factors. Use of certain expressions of perfection may indicate, as has been said by certain authors, an attitude of annoyance or discouragement. It may indicate that the individual is overwhelmed by an excess of perfection or by a perfection which is far removed. Or, the denial of the perfection of Mary may indicate a desire to close the gap or fill the distance between Mary and ourselves. In a way, the three types suggest an underlying need to overcome the dichotomy or dissociation.

Mary and Youth: The Existential Relation:
Is there a place for Mary in my life?

To further develop and explain the personal relation with Mary, that is, to measure its vitality or existential bond, the respondents were asked the following direct question: Does Mary have a place in your life?

1) Importance of Existential Relationship

Place for Mary in my own life? Yes No No Opinion
59.4% 14.5% 26.1%

59.4% (compared with 48.6% of the non-Americans) replied affirmatively, while 14.5% replied negatively, and 26.1% did not have an opinion (or did not know whether Mary was in their lives).

2) Profile of Experiential Relationship

As to the nature or significance of this relation, another open-ended question was presented to the respondents. From the 1,843 responses received (which represent about half of the respondents), we established the following categories:

620 young people said that Mary has a place in their lives because she assists them in their prayer; 349 spoke of the maternal qualities (warmth, security) of Mary; and 300 considered her in a generic fashion as a model, guide, or "idol" (i.e., someone admired). 238 saw Mary as a model of faith for themselves; 170 said that she has a place in their lives because of her role in the history of salvation, whereas 71 said that she merited this place because she is "like me" (has a resemblance). 54 simply stated the fact: she has a place in my life.

3) Intensity of Existential Relationship

How is the intensity of this relation perceived? Is this a living relation, something close and personal? To what degree? 64.5% (65.8% for the non-Americans) said that their relation with Mary is very or somewhat close; 21.7% said that it is not close at all.

Among the different models proposed for religious identification, Mary occupies the third place after God and Jesus. 87.0% of the young people said that their relation with God is very or moderately close (the figure for the non-American sample was 75.9%). 83.7% (vs. 75.9% for non-Americans) affirmed the same relation with Jesus.

Moreover, the bond which unites youth to Mary is stronger than their relation with the saints, their parish, or with church groups. 57.9% said they maintain a very or moderately strong bond with their parish (against 49.6% of the non-Americans); 39.6% (close to the 39.3% figure for non-Americans) said they maintain a very or moderately strong bond with the saints, whereas 35.4% said they are strongly or moderately united to a group within their Church (the figure is almost identical for the non-American respondents: 40.3%).

Mary and Youth: Mary and the Feminine Archetype

Is there any relation between the respondents' image of the ideal woman, their own mother, and Mary? For young people, is there some representation of the feminine which serves as the basis for their image of the ideal woman, their own mother, and for Mary? In other words, can we discern some archetype of the feminine? Without entering a discussion on the psychology of archetypes, we can indicate some traits or characteristics of the feminine which are found in the various responses given by youth. Generally speaking, there is a great deal of correspondence among the three representations the ideal woman, one's own mother, and Mary.

The image of the ideal woman can be characterized by four traits or characteristics (expressed in each case by a series of adjectives):
a)The dominant qualities of the ideal woman include human warmth, assurance, gentleness, lovableness all traits which establish an affective relationship;
b)Secondly, and less important, is a group of traits which speak of the strength and durability (permanent qualities) of the affective relation: the ideal woman should be sincere, strong, and patient;
c)The third group of traits highlights, not some aspect of the relationship, but the personality of the ideal woman: she should be forceful, proud, with a firm character which can inspire others;
d)In this last group, we find the qualities of agreeableness and contentment: the ideal women is conciliating, reserved, gentle, serene, and mindful of others' needs;
For the characteristics of a mother, the young persons were able to refer to an actual woman, not simply to an ideal or abstract woman; however, their answers corresponded to those given for the ideal woman, with some significant differences. The respondents hoped that their mothers would be less insistent and demanding, not so righteous. Mothers, it was expressed, should be more open and flexible.
We note a high degree of correlation between the representation of the ideal woman and that of Mary. Young people attribute to Mary qualities which speak of an affective relation, of the durability of this relation; she combines the qualities of a strong and determined woman with a certain individualism and indulgence.

Survey on Mary and Youth: Major Conclusions

To end this sociological study, we wish to state once again that the respondents in our survey were young persons, mostly (two-thirds) students from Marianist Catholic schools. Does the atmosphere of the Marianist school in some way determine their image of Mary? We think so, while admitting that this affirmative reply is intended to encourage rather than to be a source of complacency.

The answers given to our questions on Mary suggest a steady but shallow transmission of religious sentiments and doctrines, rather than the audacious construction of a new and different Madonna. When speaking of Mary as young people (especially American youth) perceive her, we do not refer to a post-modern Madonna, rather we speak of the traditional image of the Mother of God. If, as de Tocqueville suggested, the principal religious rule in American religion is that of "private judgment," then religious tradition freely chosen, adhered to, and transmitted to the next generation would indicate that the traditional image of Mary has been accepted by the respondents without too many complications or difficulties.

The principal findings of our survey are reassuring to those devoted to Mary. American youth are not wandering in some vast "Marian desert," because there is no desert. We have found that about 60% of the respondents relate to Mary in a positive way, and that young people have a place for Mary in their lives and maintain a personal relation with her.

The overall results from the non-American group were, in general, roughly comparable to those from the American sample. Replies which required affirmation of elements relating to "Catholic identity" (e.g., factual understanding about the Mary of Scripture and Church tradition, the Church's normative teaching involving personal and social responsibility) were consistently, though not dramatically, lower than in the American group.

However, the basic trends remained the same: an intellectual acquaintance about the person of Mary was lacking, and a negative relation to the Church as institution was high. Similarities appear to outweigh the differences.

(1) The difference between male and female, which usually plays a large role in sociological surveys, is virtually nonexistent in regards to attitudes towards Mary. The same can be said about differences related to the age of the respondents.

(2) Youth have not separated themselves from religion or rejected their families' religion. About 85% identify with it, in varying degrees.

(3) The parish, school, and family have not abdicated their traditional responsibility for the transmission of Marian devotion to youth. Young people participate to a significant degree in what the parish (56%), the school (69%), and the family (55%) have to offer concerning Mary.

(4) There is no truth in saying that Mary is absent from the school. 84% of those surveyed said there was at least some occasional teaching about Mary.

(5) Marian prayer seems to have an important place in young people's lives (70%).

(6) The different expressions of devotion to Mary are rather traditional, simple, elementary.

(7) In young people's attitudes toward Mary, one cannot find evidence of systematic and consistent rejection (rationnalisme de rejet). Witness, for example, the positive attitude toward apparitions and virginity.

(8) There is a certain hesitancy to identify Mary's nature clearly: the percentage of those who see her as "created" and "human" (46%) ranks only a little higher than of those who see her as "superhuman" and/or "divine" (37%). Survey conclusions to be continued.

(9) The representations or images by which youth identify with Mary are complementary, even while being on different levels. First, there are images which express an affective and close relation with Mary; next, and less strong, are those images which suggest the notion of a distant ideal.

(10) Generally, spontaneously formulated representations of Mary are not highly individualized or unique. Usually, they reflect attitudes of affection, admiration, and imitation. Among these images and representations, the traditional image (e.g., "mother") and the recent image (e.g., "sister") hold the attention of youth. Specific traditional images (e.g., "servant") or specific recent images (e.g., "the feminine face of God") are less appreciated and accepted.

(11) The representation which youths project of the ideal woman corresponds, in large measure, to the images which they have of their mothers and of Mary, and vice versa.

(12) Young people expressed hesitation when asked about Mary and the problem of Christian unity. While only a few of them think that Mary presents an obstacle, a large percentage have no clear opinion on the subject.

(13) Youth are virtually unaware of the existence of Marian apostolic works or Marian prayer groups.

(14) Is there a rift between morality and spirituality? We have noted an indifference, a tension, or a break between the moral teaching of the Church and the spiritual values, including Marian values, it presents. In other words, there is a rather strong Marian tradition among youth, but, to an important degree, it seems independent of the Church.

(15) Finally, everyone (99%) knows at least something about Mary; the great majority have received some teaching about her, and many love her and make a place for her in their lives.

But do young people really know her? For a great number of them, is she not someone unknown someone who is loved, but who remains unknown? Can one really love someone about whom so little is known? It is true that love of Mary does not necessarily require exegetical and doctrinal depth and precision, but when an adolescent loves someone who is unknown, could it not be a projection of his/her own self?

The image of Mary, even when beloved and cherished, is subject to a threefold deformation: psychological projection, based on personal needs; religious sentimentality, based exclusively on some romantic Madonna from an idyllic nativity scene; and, finally, a radicalization of the mythic image of Mary, separated from its sources in Scripture and tradition. When faced with these potential shortcomings of a "Madonna well-loved but unknown," we feel compelled to present a more complete biblical image of Mary (Annunciation, Nativity, Cana, Calvary, Pentecost), a more specific image (model for the disciple and for the believer), and a more generic image (one based on the Church's doctrinal teaching on Mary). We must also rediscover Marian dogma as an expression of the Church's continual reflection on Mary.

Personal relationship and ideal representation, together with affection and admiration for Mary all converge toward a more wholesome image of Mary. When head and heart touch faith and cause it to grow, the image of Mary cannot help but be one which is both known and loved. [Charts to follow next week.]

* Fr. Roten is currently Director of Art & Special Projects at the Marian Library/International Marian Research Institute at the University of Dayton. He conducted the survey during his tenure as director of the Institute.

Return to Top

View the Results

View the Survey Questionaire

Return to Research and Publications

Return to The Mary Page

This page, maintained by The Marian Library/International Marian Research Institute, Dayton, Ohio 45469-1390, and created by Jim Danis , was last modified Thursday, 10/21/2010 11:45:09 EDT by Ramya Jairam . Please send any comments to jroten1@udayton.edu.

URL for this page is http://campus.udayton.edu

A Faceless Madonna: Young People Love the Blessed Mother But Do Not Know Her Very Well

A Faceless Madonna:
Young People Love the Blessed Mother But Do Not Know Her Very Well