Friday, October 05, 2007

Spiritual but Not Religious?

You hear this from a lot of people these days. Many of them, I suspect, mean they have an appreciation, even a reverence, for the things of the spirit, but they find themselves repelled by the trappings of institutional faith. (Given the history of institutional faith, who can blame them?)

In many cases, as our parish’s interim rector said in his sermon this past Sunday, this hunger for spirit expresses itself in a most eclectic way. The small shrine at our dog’s favorite kennel includes all manner of spiritual objects, including statues of Buddha and the Virgin Mary nearly side by side. “Spiritual but not religious” people might place Emerson in with Krishna in with St. Francis of Assisi and Zoroaster in one religious stew.

Is this necessarily a bad thing? I don’t think so. Truth is hardly restricted to one faith tradition. On the whole, at least from what I’ve read and seen, I think Eastern religions have gone far deeper than Christianity in matters of meditation and mysticism. On the other hand, there’s a depth of meaning in the Incarnation—God “lived and died as one of us,” so surely he knows our failings—that I believe is unique among faith traditions.

Here’s the one thing that worries me about “spiritual but not religious”: I suspect that, without a single established core to one’s spirituality, it becomes tempting to adopt those elements of faith that offer comfort but not challenge. In that guise, non-religious spirituality fails to do what spirituality at its highest level does: make us grow toward the Divine—and toward one another.

An example from the tradition I know best: Christianity, like the other Abrahamic faith traditions, calls its followers to live out their faith in flesh-and-blood communities, in this case the church. When you participate in a church with other people, however, some of them are bound to rub you the wrong way. The solution, according to modern society, is to leave. The solution, according to the Christian faith, is to stay—and even learn to love (though not necessarily like) those people. Why? Because it forces us outside ourselves, leavens our perspective with those of others, and fosters our growth in love.

In the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer, we ask God to “deliver us from the presumption of coming to this Table [the Eucharist] for solace only, and not for strength; for pardon only, and not for renewal.” This, I suspect, is what happens when we commit ourselves to a spiritual tradition: we enjoy the comforts even as we take up the challenges to which God calls us. Following that path is an adventure like no other.

1 comment:

Brother Billy said...

It's surprising, but even religious people tend to think that living out one's faith in flesh and blood communities is not important. In my own blog, I wrote about this, citing a study done by an evangelical polling outfit, The Barna Group, on individual spirituality vs. community/institutional participation.

Even evangelicals, by a 2-1 margin, don't think a community of faith is important in their personal faith development.

Here's part of what I wrote: A religious polling outfit, the Barna Group, reported in April that most Christians don't think that church is all that important. The figure is rather startling: although 72% of Americans claim that they have made a "personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is important in their life today", only 17% of US adults say yes to the statement that "a person's faith is meant to be developed mainly by involvement in a local church".

Only 18% agree that "spiritual maturity requires involvement in a community of faith". Even evangelicals and fundamentalists score only about 33% and 25% on those two questions.

So what's wrong with that? Faith is an individual thing, right? Well, yes -- in the USA -- but not in the Christian scriptures. There, the emphasis on community is basic, just as it is in Judaism and traditional Islam. - end of quote.

Keeping the idea of the "Body of Christ" always in mind is a necessary corrective to the culture's hyperindividualism. The mythos of individualism is so pervasive that even those who cling to scripture are overcome by it.