'Spiritual but not religious' becoming more common self-identification

[Ed Barrow]

Laura Rios grew up Catholic, dancing in honor of the Virgin of Guadalupe, patroness of the Americas and a symbol of Mexican identity. Now, at 32, dancing is still her main expression of the sacred in her life, though now she does it to honor her ancestors. Rios' Aztec dancing is part of her spiritual life, like the ritual tattoos she has on her arms and the poems she reads by the Sufi mystic Rumi. She's one of an estimated 30 percent of Americans who refer to themselves as "spiritual, not religious" according to a 2009 Newsweek poll — up from 24 percent in 2005. A Gallup Poll released in May showed that now 16 percent of Americans don't have a religious identity, which is up from about 2 percent in 1968.

As most mainline Protestant churches have continued to report membership declines because of what the Rev. Eileen W. Lindner, editor of the annual Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, has called "an increasing secularization of American postmodern society," there has been increasing attention on what it means to have a spiritual life outside of a church, mosque or synagogue. Recently released research focusing on millennials, people between the ages of 19 and 30, shows that they are increasingly likely to move away from the faiths they grew up in and blend multiple faiths and spiritual practices as they go through college.

Jason Steans, 37, says he grew up Protestant but as an adult found himself embracing a more general sense of spirituality based on the belief that "spirituality involves defining ourselves through the acts performed throughout our lifetime. We aren't just physical bodies — we are the total sum of the effect that we have on the world." For Steans, that effect can happen without the influence of church.

"Churches have been notoriously irrelevant for the last 30 years," said Will Davis Jr., 48, who leads the nondenominational church Austin Christian Fellowship, which has about 1,900 members. "As a leader of the church, I've got to own that, though it's starting to change."


http://www.statesman.com/news/local/spiritual-but-not-religious-becoming-more-common-self-719642.html

[DefenseLawyer]

1. Yeah well... The Dude abides. n/t

[donco6]

2. Yeah, I guess it's starting to change.

They're making themselves relevant by firing up the hate in everyone else.

[Walk away]

3. So they still believe in spooks, just not organized spooks!

One of my neighbors calls himself a catholic but he is a big believer in space aliens (let me see your space papers please).

He thinks creatures come from outer space to impregnate earth women. He also believes that he's eating the body of Jesus Christ every Sunday morning at church. I think that either one of those delusions is nutty so I guess dropping the "organized" one is a step in the right direction.

[DavidDvorkin]

4. So religious belief is becoming increasingly fuzzy and ill defined

Well, that's progress. Perhaps this means it's on the way to fading out completely. One can hope, anyway.

I have yet to see a definition of "spiritual" that says anything meaningful. It's always vague and fuzzy.

[Chulanowa]

5. "Deluded, but not deranged"

[phasma ex machina]

6. The GoM oil spill and Wall Street greed tell me that America ought to work on its collective soul.

See the dance of your inner light.

O8)

[K8-EEE]

7. Do people really think "prayer" is going to decide any world event?

I just have a hard time wrapping my head around that kind of superstition. I mean if it makes people feel better go ahead but to actually think "IF WE ALL PRAY THE OIL LEAK WILL STOP" or whatever, that seems to me so childish. Maybe I'm not the only one rolling their eyes LOL "HEAVENWARD" at things like that!

[Radical Activist]

8. First date cliches for a thousand, Alex.

[eridani]

9. Well, if I lived in a small town and wanted an outlet for my do-gooder impulses--

--church is where I'd head for. If I couldn't find Unitarians, I'd look for some other liberal denomination. Given all the options of life in a big city, I haven't done that.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

12. We don't have liberal denominations in little towns, alas. Then there is mislabeling.

The most liberal church is where the rich people go -- the Methodist church.
And these people are probably not as liberal as big city Methodists.

No thanks.

Boy do I miss the Unitarian churches/fellowships in the big city.

If you're in a conservative area, an institution may have a label that sounds like liberal Protestants, but they are conservative.

2 examples from Tulsa: DH got his master's at the University of Tulsa which is allegedly Presbyterian. Yet he said the physics department was run by FUNDIES!! I think the dept. head had a nervous breakdown over it and left. :wtf:

Also his ex wife was a Bible thumpin' fundie who went to a "Methodist" church.

That's Tulsa for you.

I went to a different Presbyterian university, and was shocked when he told me that. The school I went to had a religion dept. full of profs who who went to Harvard and Princeton & taught some very interesting courses. Courses that a fundy preacher could not pass.

[Better Today]

10. Which is just a way of saying atheist without starting a hassle with religous folks, imo.

[OnionPatch]

11. Not for people I know.

I know a lot of people who describe their beliefs this way, myself being one. We believe there is more to our existence than meets the eye but don't ascribe to or follow a particular set of religious beliefs. I also know plenty of atheists. They would never describe themselves as "spiritual."

[Silent3]

14. I know plenty of atheists who believe there is more to our existence...

...than meets the eye, myself being one. We just admit that we don't know what it is. Where we run into trouble is that we don't believe the religious and "spiritual" people know what it is either, and, oddly enough, that lack of faith in the claims by others of "special" knowledge gets us a reputation for supposedly claiming that we know it all.

[OnionPatch]

15. I would consider you agnostic, then.

It was my understanding that an atheist flat out doesn't believe there is life after death or that people have any sort of soul or anything. What you see is all there is, if it can't be proven by science, it doesn't exist or isn't real. An agnostic, on the other hand, is more like you describe.

I can only say that the "spiritual" (not religious) people *I* know would never claim to have "special" knowledge, let alone try to push it on anyone. They have lots of theories and hunches and do seek answers, but the moment someone tells me they "know" what's going on, I know they're full of it.

[Goblinmonger]

16. You would be wrong

and a little rude. The person you are replying to has identified themself as atheist and explained why. Who are you to then come along and tell them they are wrong about their self-identification? Especially when you are so far from the mark.

Atheist = no belief in gods (a + theist)
agnostic = no knowledge of the truth (a + gnostic)

One can be an agnostic atheist (or an agnostic theist, or a gnostic atheist, or a gnostic theist). The twuo are not mutually exclusive.

Agnostic has become a nice word to mean "whatever" but it isn't what the word means.

[OnionPatch]

18. Well, I didn't mean to be rude.

Guess I shouldn't get my information from my self-proclaimed atheist friends. I assumed they knew what they were but I guess they are as misinformed as I am.

[Goblinmonger]

19. Maybe you just need smarter friends

:evilgrin:

[Silent3]

17. In addition to what Goblinmonger said...

...I'd add this: The positive assertion of a belief in God is, all by itself, a claim to special knowledge, knowledge that somehow doesn't have to meet the same standards of evidence that we'd expect for something apparently so important.

Even if you doesn't stomp your foot and get adamant about there being a God, if you base a lot of your life around there being a God, pray like there is a God who's out there listening, follow certain rituals and practices and rules as if this God cares, you're acting with a certainty that well exceeds the strength of the evidence.

Some people try to avoid conflicts with other belief systems by getting vague and wishy-washy about what they say about their own religious and/or spiritual beliefs, talking about what "works" for them, what is "true" for them, etc. That might be good for diplomacy, plus good for avoiding uncomfortable cognitive dissonance for yourself, but, like the often-trotted-out fable of the blind men and the elephant, it's the kind of casual and sloppy reasoning that doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

13. Churches have become irrelevant.

People do not want to follow the stupid rules that the churches teach them, nor do they want to follow morality that doesn't work because we live in a completely different society from the ancient Hebrews. The Bible is a pretty useless guide to morality, as a whole.


Hindu, Buddhist and humanist teachings on how to be a good person don't have the cultural baggage in them like blood sacrifice, endorsement of violence and the whole death to infidels thing you get in the Abrahamic religions.


I think that's why a lot of people find spirituality in nature, or some other place than church.

[Deep13]

20. Not surprising.

Here's to the increasing irrelevancy of institutional religion. :toast: