Spiritual but not religious

  • Thread starter Thread starter junebug
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

junebug

Guest
This is a term I hear many people use. Father Winslow in the Catholic Scripture Study (CSS) did a short lesson on the use of this phrase. Then I heard at Mass this Sunday our priest make one short comment in his homily with this phrase. We’ve all heard it before… what do you think about it?
 
It’s a lame cop out.

They are trying to bypass the responsibility but still claim the benefits.
 
I translate that into English from mirrorese as follows:

I want to have a relationship with God, but not with those inconvenient rules, and without acknowledging His authority, and none of that life-changing stuff for me! I’ll just do what the mirror tells me.
 
I always take it to mean that the “spiritual” ones think they are superior to the “religious” ones. They seem to think that having structure (i.e. obligation to go to church on Sunday) and following rules is somehow mindless. They sit in their isolated glass houses never getting their fingernails dirty and with no callouses on their hands judging the religious as hypocrits while the religious are the “worker bees” of the church involved in it’s structure and daily life.
 
“Spiritual but not religious” in my country means superstitious, believing in various pagen/forklore religions that has no structure.
 
“Spiritual, but not religious” is roughly the equivalent to “eating, but not digesting”. Food (or something) is being taken into the body, but the body isn’t using it, and what the body eventually does with it is not specified.
 
For me, to be spiritual, but not religious, is to acknowledge God, but not giving any time to know Him through any religion at all. I used to be one of these types of people, noting the many existant religions and since many of them claimed truth, it was hard for me to discern, so I took an agnostic stance towards it.
 
It’s the classic false dilemma. Basically every alternative to the one True Faith–be it health and wealth, syncreticism, indifferentism, or Westernized distillations of the spurious glitter of Eastern mysticism–are flimsy attempts to appropriate the sanctifying and actual graces of Christ without picking up the cross.

Scott
 
“Lectio divina” is Latin for “divine reading.”

“A VERY ANCIENT art, practiced at one time by all Christians, is the technique known as lectio divina - a slow, contemplative praying of the Scriptures which enables the Bible, the Word of God, to become a means of union with God.”

The above quotation is from this Introduction:

valyermo.com/ld-art.html
 
There are some very very “nice” people who claim to be “spiritual” but not religious. Sometimes they are “inclusive” souls who find beauty in ALL religious traditions and feel more comfortable focusing on just the beauties, and not on the “uglies” or ALL the rules. Sometimes they are indifferentists who figure that since “all roads lead to God/conscious/whatever”, that they really can’t make a decision to choose ONE particular path. Sometimes they had a “bad experience” with a particular faith, so while they will continue to call themselves “Christian”, perhaps, they will be quite vehement that Christianity “means” not a particular denomination or church or teaching, but simply a “love of Christ” that can be accomplished just by the person claiming to “love Christ”. . .nothing else necessary.

Sometimes they get upset at their churches “abuses”, past, present, or future (egad! what if the Catholics NEVER ordain women?), and claim to be above all that “hierarchical stuff”.

Sometimes they focus, not on the beauty, but on the “discomfort”, and actively strive to paint any sort of “organized” religion as a cancer which has grown on the “pure religion” which is some sort of amorphous “god within us love your neighbor but don’t bother putting things in a collection plate or celebrating in a building” REALITY. . .all organized religion just being some sort of RIPOFF scheme to make people into sheep, while only these spiritual people have “seen through” the conspiracy and are truly worshipping God the way He WANTS to be worshipped. . .

And there are probably lots and lots more “reasons”, depending on a given individual. Pride and disobedience have been with humanity since the Fall, after all. . .and been the cause of loss of salvation for many, at some epochs more than others. I think that our current times will at the Judgment be shown to have been particularly infected. . .
 
Sorry for that post about “lectio divina.” I thought I was responding to a completely different thread! :o
 
I have a question. What should one say to a person who says they are “spiritual but not religious”?

I have a friend who used the phrase, and frankly, I was at a loss as to how to respond. She’s a very nice girl and a good friend, and I want to gently say something to her that both lets her know I disagree and doesn’t turn her further away from organized religion.
 
I’ve heard my priest say that there are religious people in our parish but not very many spiritual people. I honestly have no idea what this means. How do most people differentiate between the two? He made it sound as if being ‘religious’ was not the preferable thing to be.
 
40.png
Elzee:
I’ve heard my priest say that there are religious people in our parish but not very many spiritual people. I honestly have no idea what this means. How do most people differentiate between the two? He made it sound as if being ‘religious’ was not the preferable thing to be.
Click to expand...
I think that he meant some people show up to Mass, but lack a life of prayer. I’m finding it harder to put into words than I thought. The only true way to find out would be to ask your priest.

This is another stab in the dark but I don’t think he meant to sound as if being religious or spiritual were preferable but that being religious and spiritual were preferable.

I hope this helps some, though I don’t think it did.
 
40.png
junebug:
This is a term I hear many people use. Father Winslow in the Catholic Scripture Study (CSS) did a short lesson on the use of this phrase. Then I heard at Mass this Sunday our priest make one short comment in his homily with this phrase. We’ve all heard it before… what do you think about it?
Click to expand...
When a smart, highly educated, ex-Catholic college professor said that to me, I looked her square in the eye and responded: “That’s bull**** – and you KNOW it.”

I considered it a “teaching moment.” :rolleyes:
 
Well mercygate - don’t sugarcoat it! Tell us how you really feel! :eek:
An excellent point too.

I love it when we discuss phrases like this. It’s great to get so many different perspectives.

When I hear spiritual but not religious, I imagine… me - several months ago! What it meant to me, and still does to my husband - please pray for him - is that all organized religion is symantics and everyone believes the same thing, they just call it different stuff. We don’t need a bunch of rules to tell us HOW to worship God, we just need to acknowledge that He’s there, He created everything here, Jesus came, saved us from sin, we should live a good life and we’ll all go to heaven in the end.

To be religious means being hypocritical, basically. To go around talking about God all the time, trying to convert everyone, drastically changing your life, no desire for material things, etc. Yet - your actions speak the opposite - you still aim to make more money, buy the next best thing, go to church to be seen, not to worship, etc.

Now that I see all of that in print, it really boils down to one’s pride. Too much human pride to acknowledge the awesomeness of God and allow Him to change you.

To be spiritual but not religious is a means of self-justification and denial of God’s greatness.

Wow… thanks for asking… I have a whole new perspective now.

=)
Kat
 
40.png
Fizendell:
Well mercygate - don’t sugarcoat it! Tell us how you really feel! :eek:
An excellent point too.
Click to expand...
I took a chance. This was somebody who needed to get real with herself. A very high level person on all fronts, damaged by a bad marriage (oh-oh, here’s where the “spiritual but not religious” fits in). But she was at a place where she was hurting herself with this sophomoric dishonesty
 
40.png
junebug:
This is a term I hear many people use. Father Winslow in the Catholic Scripture Study (CSS) did a short lesson on the use of this phrase. Then I heard at Mass this Sunday our priest make one short comment in his homily with this phrase. We’ve all heard it before… what do you think about it?
Click to expand...
You can’t seperate religion and spirituality. I have to agree with Trelow, it is a cop-out and they are trying to claim the benefits without the responsibility.
 
I have a sister who claims this. She thinks Jesus was “a really good guy" but, has issues with the Catholic Church because of what she believes is hypocrisy, like pedophilia.

People who say they are “spiritual but not religious” seem to mean they have faith that God exists. They try to live a good life, devoted to what is Good, which is God. They may see the hypocrisy that exists in people who claim to be religious, and feel it’s better to act separate then in community with other sinners, who claim to know truth and then act as if they have no truth at all?

I don’t think these people live in glass houses. They seem to be idealist and very serious about seeking to please God. Maybe it would help to uncover the issues that keep them separate from God’s universal (catholic) Church? Of course, they would need to be willing to look at the issues with an open mind and heart turned toward God, before they might see religion is a vital form of worship in learning to know and love God. It may take listening to how and why their minds are closed to religion, in the first place.

Peace,
Elizabeth
 
Fundamentally faith is a gift of grace from God. I don’t think people who are spiritual but not religious are “copping out” at all.

I use to define myself that way, when I had a lot of problems with the Catholic Church, (these were helped by learning more about the apologetics, and by being able to seaparate the nasty people from what the Church should be…I love that Catholicposters.com t-shirt that says “Don’t leave Peter becuase of Judas”).

I felt spiritual, because I definitely believed there was God, but would not have defined myself as religious because I was not quite sure that Catholicism or if any religion was pleasing to God, and I tried a few religions, which I thought might be more direct routes to God, until I eventually ended back with the Catholic Church. The concept fo the Trinity was one of my sticking poitns, and a misunderstanding of the communion of saints, as well as terrible priests and meeting one too many hypocrites in Church.

I was no worse a person when I was questioning my religon. My values did not change. I still prayed fervently. I was not trying to renege on some sort of responsability and get benefits; I had doubts and really had to wrok to discern the truth. I think I worked harded for my beliefs than many “religious” who never had any questions. The only thing different between me now and then, is that now, I feel more driven to evangelize.

To me, being spiritual, means identifying with something greater than yourself and seeking the welfare of some greater good. This is an obiligation under Christianity; to work in concert with the Holy Spirit to promote God’s kingdom on earth.

I have met many people who were religious, but incredibly self-centered and lacked spirtuality, despite being supposeldy Christian. And I have met many people who claim to be spiritual but who do not classify themselves as a religion, because they don’t have the faith (yet or maybe they might not ever…who knows), and who are very kind to others and seem to promote and embody many gifts of the Spirit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top