Do religious people give more money to organizations that help the poor than non-religious individuals? The answer is a resounding "yes" according to a recent article in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion by three sociologists from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This should be no surprise given religion's history of helping the poor.

Unfortunately, the new research provides little help in explaining what accounts for religions' heightened responsibility, the differences between religious traditions, and why this question is important in the first place.

The three authors, Mark D. Regnerus, Christian Smith, and David Sikkink, analyze data from the 1996 Religious Identity and Influence Survey. One of the questions asked of approximately 2,600 Americans was if they gave a lot, some or no money to an organization that helps the poor. The authors rely on the usual demographic and religious variables to discover who gives more money. Women, those who are married, the elderly, and the wealthy are more likely to report that they give "a lot."

Individuals who belong to religious organizations, who are active (i.e., who attend at least three times per month), and who report that religion is very important were more likely to report that they give "a lot" than the non-religious.

The researchers' unanticipated finding is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, Christian conservatives give as much if not more than Roman Catholics and liberal Protestants, and that they don't hold a strong anti-poor bias. An interesting finding that the authors don't try to explain is that individuals from "other faiths" (Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness) have the highest self-reported rates of giving to poverty-relief organizations.

At first glance this research appears important because it debunks the popular conception that the Christian Right is hostile to the poor. However, a closer look reveals that the analysis doesn't really tell us much; it fails to reveal why Christian conservatives give at such high rates.

Individual versus Corporate
This failure leaves many unanswered, and more important, questions: Is there something about the beliefs or practices of conservative Christianity that encourages its members to give at a high rate? What does it mean to give "a lot"? How do different religious groups understand the poor, and what are the reasons for giving (e.g., a duty to provide charity vs a duty to do social justice).

These questions are important because they go to the heart of religious rationales for helping the poor and needy. Knowledge of who gives is important only insofar as we understand why they give. For instance, one venerable tradition holds that helping the poor is properly done by individual and private means, and conservative Christians explicitly advance this view.

On the other hand, mainline and liberal Protestantism and Roman Catholicism have championed a more structural or systemic approach in which believers are morally obliged to act collectively in order to remove the enduring, institutional causes of poverty such as the lack of jobs, inadequate education, or limited access to healthcare services. Thus one possible explanation for the findings stems from theological and ideological differences between different religious groups—mainline Protestants may be less likely to give charitably on an individual basis because they are committed to an alternative, corporate solution. Such a solution might emphasize lobbying or protests to influence legislation rather than directly giving money.

Another possible explanation lies in the organizational differences between conservative Protestants and other Christian groups. Roman Catholics and liberal Protestants usually have church offices that attend to the poor, and local congregations often give part of their moneys to these national offices. Many conservative congregations are independent or only loosely affiliated with a national denomination and therefore are less likely to have the opportunity to donate money through the Church.

The relationship between religion and poverty is complex. While the new University of North Carolina study provides some worthwhile analysis, it doesn't go nearly far enough. We need scholarship that inquires into the theological, ethical, and social factors that shape the religious response to the poor.