Posted by Jason on: 11.24.2008 /
I read an editorial on Friday from the UK’s National Secular Society that put forward the idea that religion is losing out to individuals own private spirituality. A survey in the US of 12 to 25 year olds revealed a significant proportion (one third) distrusted organised religion and that they preferred being spiritual to being religious.
93% of the young people interviewed expressed a belief in a spiritual aspect of living. However, like me, they seem to view spirituality as a connection with nature, community and other people rather than a supernatural spirituality. It seems the word is gradually losing it’s religious meaning.
Why do you think that is? Terry Sanderson seems to think that the homophobia and sexism expressed by some faith leaders is significant. Similarly the authoritarian nature of attending a worship and being led in some way may be the cause of rebellion in freedom loving Americans. People naturally desire their independence and are extending this to their religious beliefs.
It is ironic that many people immigrated to North America in order to practice their religion without state restrictions and now they are expressing their own spirituality apart from perceived religious restrictions. Or perhaps it isn’t that at all. Perhaps religion is undergoing a transformation once again. Perhaps the next generation are rejecting the faith of their parents in order to redefine it in their own terms.
“Spirituality” is a way of getting back to the root of a belief after rejecting all the perceived baggage. A way of starting over. If that is the case then some people will inevitably manage perfectly well without religion, some will return to the established path of organised religion and others will define religion in new terms meaningful to them. If they really are then I wonder what it’ll look like.
Comment by: Donna
1Wow, I was just thinking about the same thing the other day. I think that’s great. Here’s what I wrote (I’m not a believer, FYI):
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
2Jason, this is why Off The Map tends to use the word ’spirituality’. It seems like it has more positive connotations for many people than ‘religion’.
I think Jim’s goal is to free the teachings of Jesus and the practice of following him from unnecessary baggage.
I think some people already are redefining ‘religion’ so it is meaningful for them. The emerging church, for example.
I like the focus on friendly dialog and on making the world a better place.
Comment by: Spiritual but not religious | All Reason
3 11/24/08 5:05 PM | Comment Link |[...] ..Real Full Article [...]
Comment by: Mike O
4The differentiation between religion and spirituality is hard to maintain.
To me, at a really general level, spirituality is what God wants from us, and religion is how we go about trying to do it. The problem is, we end up putting more rules on it than God ever intended.
I just read Acts 15 today, and it was about how the Gentiles were starting to be converted, some of the Jews wanted to make them be circumcised to become Christians. After some debate it was decided that Christians were saved by grace, and Peter made this statement:
Compare that to what Jesus says:
That’s one difference between relition and spirituality - the yoke of religion is heavy and the yoke of spirituality (Jesus) is light.
Comment by: Donna
5Actually, Jesus is not the key to spirituality. He may be your key, but people can be spiritual if they don’t believe in or have never heard of Jesus. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and even many atheists are engaged in spiritual journeys that have nothing to do with Jesus.
I think the key difference between spirituality and religion is that spirituality is a personal, individual journey that does not depend on any group, formal teachings, or holy book to direct it. Religion on the other hand, depends on all of these things.
When I used to be a Christian, I would often say, “I’m not religious,” but I was wrong. Evangelical Christians often think they are not religious because they attend non-denominational churches. They consider the denominations to be religions. But these non-denominational churches only differ from the others in the types of rituals they practice. They sing different songs and say different prayers and have different kinds of sermons. But the difference is marginal when viewed from outside of Christianity. It’s all the same religion.
Comment by: Mike O
6I was speaking from the Christian perpsective. Spirituality for spirituality’s sake is not the same as being a Christ-follower. At some level, though, being a Christ follower should be more spiritual than religious.
One thing I’ve noticed about people that leave the faith is that they seem to find a sense of relief - as if a burden has been lifted. That, to me, is a huge red flag that Christianity has got off track. Jesus’ intent was not to burden people with rules and regs, but what have we done? Burdened people with rules and regs. Christianity isn’t supposed to be a burden - it’s supposed to be a relief. But people find that relief upon leaving. What’s wrong with that picture?
If we Christians were really living and propagating Jesus Christ, we would be bringing relief, not burden - a Christ-focused spirituality, not religion. (I’m just talking to/about Christians here)
Comment by: Donna
7Yeah, I definitely felt that way.
I still get put off when Christians say they have something that no-one else can possibly have without Christ. Sorry, but you lose me there.
Comment by: Seren
8Hi Mike, yes this was true for me. But to be honest the relief was associated with not having to pretend any more, with facing the threat of rejection by Christian friends/family and owning up to my own truth.
Comment by: joe
9A few months back, my company was contacted by a new customer. She was an ex-convict who was attempting to rebuild her life through her new fashion enterprise.
She never paid for the goods we supplied and made an accusation that we actually owed her the equivalent of several hundred dollars. Looking her up the other day, I discovered that she is a fairly famous con-artist and is now back in prison waiting trial for further offences including fraud.
I was telling this story (which by the way only left us out of pocket by a relatively small amount) to a church friend. He told me about someone he used to know. Apparently, this guy came to the church from a difficult background and got very involved, gaining their trust. One day his shop burned down, and he claimed a large amount of insurance on the property. After a long while, he was prosecuted with fraud relating to the fire. Being in good standing with the church, the elders spoke up for him and gave a powerful character reference, which meant his sentence was significantly reduced. Some time later he was arrested and jailed for abuse of his family - he had been running a prostitute ring and forcing his wife to work on the street.
I can think of several other similar stories I have heard from other Christians.
We are often ingrained to want the best for people, despite what the perceptions of Christians often suggest. We want to give people a second chance if they show a bit of willing.
I’m wondering if this means that we too often are scammed. Or is this something that happens to everyone?
Comment by: Mike O
10I think so. At least for smaller churches like I used to go to, they tend to be so in need of help and participants that they don’t properly screen new people. If you need help, and someone you “know” (from church … how well doyou really know someone you only spend a couple hours a week with in a specific setting) acts like they are on the same page as you are, it’s difficult to properly be skeptical of their motives - especially when you “need” them. So yeah, I think Christians are too often scammed because of our bent to trust, forgive and include people.
It has been said that church is the only organization whose existance is more for the outsider than the insider - that’s good, but does open yourself up to being scammed.
At smaller churches where my wife pastored, when people couldn’t help in the nursery until they had a criminal background check, it was hard for people to understand that it was really necessary. They were very naive.
Comment by: Pseudonym
11I’m not entirely sure that “spirituality” vs “religion” is entirely correct, linguistically speaking. But I certainly appreciate this.
It seems to me that the real beef isn’t with beliefs or even practices, but rather institutions. It’s related to a modern phenomenon where society is undergoing a decentralisation.
Humans, for example, still want to live in tribes and villages, as we have evolved to do. But our “tribe” is no longer geographical. Rather, it’s the people in our address book (whether that’s paper, phone or computer). Our communities are now the people that we want to hang out with regardless of time zone, not the people who happen to turn up to the local place of worship.
I don’t go to church. There’s really no point. I have almost nothing in common with the people there. What they need is not what I need. I don’t call myself “spiritual but not religious”, I say “non-institutional” instead.
Comment by: Mike O
12Something about this doesn’t make sense … are you saying you *are* somewhat religious? Because you call yourself non-institutional rather than non-religious.
Not that that’s a bad thing … I’m just not sure what is your point.
Maybe you’re equating (or differentiating) religiosity with institutions.
Comment by: Pseudonym
13I think that most people who call themselves “spiritual but not religious” are not rejecting religion in a broad sense, but are rather rejecting religious institutions.
Maybe. Religiosity is yet another concept that means different things to different people.