This blog was inspired by a friend who posted a link to the following CNN article. Here is the link (checking it out first may be helpful in understanding my thoughts on the subject):
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/personal/06/03/spiritual.but.not.religious/index.html
I absolutely agree with some of the article. It does a good job of taking a snapshot of the "cultural pulse," so to speak. It also left me thinking about a lot of spiritual things regarding community and accountability, and that was meditational time well spent, I think.
That said, I find the article fairly problematic too. In showing us a glimpse of the religious-cultural climate, it reminds me a lot of the American-cultural climate in general: Extreme opinions without a satisfying and sensitive middle ground. Being who I am and coming from the Evangelical history I stem from, I was particularly annoyed with those representing the "religious" perspective here. This "side" of the debate takes the opportunity of this article to idealize "religion" while painting "spirituality" in a non-ideal light by semantic default. The thing is, that's not a fair estimation of what we know and experience daily within humanity. It lacks the intricacy and nuance found in real human hearts and real human actions, which cannot be neatly contained by what anyone claims. When it comes to religion, peoples' lives tell the truth about them, regardless of what they might claim with words. And that goes both ways. Affiliating (or not affiliating) with a position, or subscribing (or not subscribing) to a label doesn't make you a genuine anything... And really, how can it? It's just a label. And where do labels apply? ...On the surface.
Here's my problem with the "religious" position taken up by those featured in the article: "Accountability to a community" is not something that's made easier or more likely for simply by being "religious." Why? Because there are just as many isolated and ultimately selfish people with their butts in seats at church, week in and week out. In fact, the church institution of our time is more geared toward and focused on the INDIVIDUAL than ever before. And the aim of most church organizations would clearly be understood to be "growing bigger" (size being equated with success), to the point where relationship isn't even necessary to "fellowship" there. Attendance grows, and eventually, no one can tell if anyone knows anyone else. Then comes the place we find ourselves now, where a huge percentage of religious people attend their big and shiny churches anonymously, because it's part of THEIR week and THEIR routine... The same way THEIR time at the gym is... THEIRS.
But if "church" is something you merely attend as a consumer recipient of religious goods and services, that doesn't necessarily make you "accountable to a community" at all. The simple reality of things is that much of "church" in our time has been specifically and intentionally redesigned to appeal to the selfish. So to suggest that people without "religion" have a hard time being accountable to a community strikes me as incredibly unfair. EVERYONE has a hard time with that. And no label can save you from contending with it yourself.
The article says, "Being spiritual but not religious can lead to complacency and self-centeredness," ...But the reverse is just as easily true. In fact, complacency and corrupt focus is what has caused such a great migration AWAY from churches. People began to leave as a matter of conscience, by and large. Like the Pool of Bethesda in John 5, they found themselves in a place with a pretense of healing which ultimately proved to foster very little of it. They had to look for Jesus on the perimeter - outside of the system - specifically because they wanted to be made whole. Many of those people learned to define church correctly - as "people" - while those still dependent on the four-walled, Sunday attendance model typically do not.
Sure, there are a lot of cases of shallow people who claim "spirituality" as a copout so they can be left alone... but no more than there are people who cling to "religion" as a copout. As a pastor, my big issue with Evangelical culture in general increasingly became a huge lack of care for those Jesus might call "the least of these." I found the following quote in the article frustrating along those lines (and other lines), personally:
"Hymn-singing, forms of prayer and worship, teachings about social justice and forgiveness -- all these things are valuable elements of religious wisdom," Walters says. "Piecing it together by yourself can be done, but with great difficulty."
I agree with Walters' statement, but what she's missing is that the church as a SYSTEM is making all those things incredibly difficult anyway. True religious wisdom is hard to come by whether you attend church services or not. The road is narrow and it seems there are few who find it. Life is full of delusions and distractions, and they're just as easy to find within a church system much of the time. I'd argue that it's often easier to find them there, actually.
Hymn-singing? Forms of prayer and worship? Teachings about social justice? Teachings about forgiveness?
Is there neglect in those areas? Yes, of course. Is there automatically less of it within "religion?" Of course not. Let's look at those pieces, one-by-one:
- The church system is neglecting to sing real and impassioned songs of depth, instead opting for 'top 40 worship' and jumping the bandwagon of worship leader rock stars in our image-obsessed culture (the same inside the church as it is outside). Worship lyrics are full of trite and selfish sentiment that goes unchallenged and depends on tired cliches. Joining up with "religion" is not guaranteeing that any of us can walk into a religious gathering and be involved with music that is beautiful and true. The Arts are incredibly stunted within the church, in fact.
- The church system is neglecting to embrace past forms of prayer and worship, and is neglecting to be open to future ones at the same time. Most churches I visit seem more interested in making a parody of things they like that are currently going on elsewhere. It's a circular cycle of insecurity, and it lacks real and honest vulnerability in approach. Church leadership typically seems more interested with placating expectations and utilizing templates than it does fostering an environment of devotional communion with God. We're full of programs and formulas and other phony things that are fundamentally NON-genuine, and yet we expect genuine results from them. There's a huge disconnect between our chosen means and our desired ends.
- The church system is neglecting social justice - actually, the church system has even gotten to the point of MOCKING and DOWNPLAYING social justice. Benevolence and charity play second fiddle to large church staffs and bloated salaries, and people vote with their dollars for favorite religious CEO at whatever megachurch is the current big deal. Many of us have learned AT CHURCH that things like caring for the poor or the environment is some silly, "liberal" thing to do (and we all know Jesus is a Republican, since we learned that at church too.) We learned all of it at church. Not so much outside of it.
Outside of church, all we had was conscience, and conscience was pretty simple in revealing to us what God expects... But it was religion which came in and stole that away, and for many, even seared it - so they can no longer be moved by any spiritual thing which isn't dispensed by the institution. They can't engage God or God's mission apart from what they're told to do or be by someone who has become a mediator between them and Jesus. They are not God-inspired, God-moved or God-taught, so much as they have become subscribers of a particular institution. They aren't revolutionary in faith, because, for them, faith is a means of safety and fitting in. "Pastor" has become the stand-in for old covenant "priests," with people dependent upon them - to do the communing with God, the sacrificing, the interpreting, the relationship-having... Religious people refuse accountability all the time, and live their lives of faith more vicariously than they'll admit. So many of them are pleased enough to simply affiliate somewhere they feel "represented" by.
Let's not kid ourselves: This "church" isn't about real, vulnerable transparency and accountability to a community... It's about routinely showing up somewhere that other people routinely show up to as well, perhaps singing together and listening to someone speak together, and then walking away with that whole experience cleanly compartmentalized... And this whole practice of religion does not by default mean that communal accountability exists, or is even encouraged, in such a place. I mean, obviously... right?
- The church system is neglecting forgiveness. In establishing social classes for sinners and hierarchies amongst the people, the 'Body of Christ' takes a shape more and more akin to that of a pyramid scheme. And while forgiveness is often talked about in regards to private lives where no one is accountable outside of their innermost attitudes, it's never brought up in regard to collective and corporate wrongs (even though the prophets consistently called Israel out for its collective brokenness in this regard). For instance, "forgiveness" isn't something that's really even grappled with by the church when our nation has warring to do... It isn't brought up as a possible path to reconciliation. We're quicker to violence and preemptive strike than we are to peace, love and forgiveness, and we're quick to follow our national interests as though they were automatically the interests of God's kingdom. I'm not saying we couldn't conceivably make a legitimate decision that destructive response is our only option in some circumstance... But the fact that it's so seldom discussed? The fact that to even bring it up or challenge the church's automatic embrace of that kind of policy? I think that's unfortunate, to say the least. Shameful, to say a bit more.
As I mentioned above regarding the forms of worship... We seem very slow to appreciate the disconnect between means and ends where the things we seek to accomplish are concerned. If you're trying to make a SWEET cake but use only SOUR ingredients, you should expect a sour cake, right? James said, "The fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace." The means bring about the ends. Forgiveness requires a measure of love, but if we cannot love people without agenda, and when we think certain types of sinners or certain cultures are somehow BEYOND the response of love, and when we maintain such rampant hate for pet moral issues we hear blasted from the pulpit each week... It's very difficult to walk in forgiveness - the way we would if all we had to consider was God's heart, and not the incessant, thumping drum of our own religious culture.
To many, it just seems like everything carries an agenda. "Religion" has lost its way. To a lot of people, "going to church" has become like pulling a curtain in front of God's light and love. It's as though Jesus tore the veil of the temple down... and church went on to sew it right back up there again. The "spiritual but not religious" designation did not arise as a copout - it arose as a means of distancing oneself from the religiosity infecting institutional churches - a religiosity which so obscures the person of Jesus.
There are many, many legitimate concerns, complaints and issues people have with "religion." And simply pointing them back to "religion" does not even begin to address their problems. This is why "I'm spiritual but not religious" took hold as a way to articulate something that, for many, is very much a conscientious choice. And conscientious choices like that should be embraced and applauded (not minimized and made light of).
Of course, there are others just looking to sound deep (or whatever else) when they claim, "I'm spiritual but not religious." For some people, sure, that's just a way to be left alone. A way to not open up any vulnerable discussion, which might reveal that they're really just selfish and shallow (or completely apathetic) when it comes to spiritual/religious matters.
But that's not at all particular or specific to this crowd of people. By now, we should all be well aware of the fact that phony people are all over the place - both inside and outside of our tidy classifications, and inside and outside of "religion" too. Then again, the same is true of genuine beauty - it's all around us as well, refusing to be bound by the very same barriers we create.
Huge issue. Huge implications. Lots to consider.
To anyone who read this... Thanks. I'm thankful to Kaley especially, since she took the time to give me a nudge in actually posting something here. I setup this blog in November of last year and this is my first real post in it.
I'd love to read any comments or further discussion you might add.
