One of the questions we ask a patient upon admission to the hospital is whether they have a religious preference or affiliation. Like blood type and countless other pieces of information, this knowledge helps inform our care and enables us to provide the most effective treatment (physical and spiritual) possible. Interestingly, on both the national and local levels, the fastest-growing category of religious affiliation is, “Spiritual but not religious.” Now, the precise meaning of that phrase leaves a lot of room for interpretation, so it’s important for us to get to know a patient well enough to understand just what he/she means by it.
Some fall into the category researcher and author George Barna labels, “Love Jesus, but not the church.” This group would include those who have some sort of religious affiliation (presumably Christian, in this case) but don’t enjoy participating in a local congregation. For others, though, the phrase “Spiritual but not religious” (SBNR) conveys a loosely defined tendency toward “spiritual” things without any formal religious affiliation. Even some atheists and agnostics identify with this description.
Whatever their particular circumstance, the number of people identifying as SBNR continues to increase significantly. In fact, according to a 2017 study conducted by the Pew Research Center, nearly one in five Americans now identifies as SBNR. While that percentage might not be quite so high here in the Bible Belt, it has, no doubt, increased significantly over the last decade or two. The growth of this group has been so dramatic that pastor/blogger Craig Leukens wryly describes it as a “once-hip-but-now-it’s-too-popular-to-be-truly-hip” trend.
Outside the Bible Belt, a lack of religious or spiritual inclination carries no negative connotation whatsoever. However, the cultural faith that still predominates here (i.e. religious engagement driven by cultural expectation rather than genuine faith) apportions a pointed measure of guilt and shame to those who claim no religious, or even spiritual, alignment. In fact, I believe the implied condemnation is so strong it has driven many to take a stance I would describe as, “Religious but not spiritual.”
the cultural faith that still predominates here
apportions a pointed measure of guilt and shame
Like the SBNR, the “Religious but not spiritual” category can be divided into more than one group. Author Elizbeth Scalia (no relation to the late Supreme Court Justice, by the way) contends that many engage in religion-shaped behaviors “as they observe their special rites and rituals, identify new sins, and assign penances,” all without any affiliation with an organized religious group. She suggests they “know nothing of mercy and too much of rage.” John Stonestreet suggests we consider the so-called “’social justice warriors’ who patrol the internet seeking heretics and sinners to punish . . . They know little about wonder, mystery, and gratitude—which is at the heart of true spirituality.”
In the Bible Belt, anyway, I more often see a different side of the “Religious but not spiritual” bloc. This segment claims a strong affiliation with an established religious group and generally has a somewhat consistent record of attendance and participation. Significantly, though, those in this group, like others in the “Religious but not spiritual” category, seem to display little of the “wonder, mystery, and gratitude” referenced by Stonestreet. Frequently, this group also matches Scalia’s description, seeming to “know nothing of mercy and too much of rage.” Sadly, if I’m totally honest, I too often find myself in this category.
I was raised in church from childhood. In fact, I can’t remember ever not being a regular church-goer. I’m an ordained minister and chaplain, and I’m also a flawed human being. I find it easier to be religious than to be truly spiritual. Much easier. Allowing God’s Spirit to direct my thoughts and actions doesn’t come naturally, and it doesn’t come easily. And that’s one of the paradoxes of genuine spirituality – It’s not until I honestly confess I’m not capable that I can fully rely on God’s Spirit in me.
I find it easier to be religious than to be truly spiritual. Much easier.
My desire is to be both spiritual and religious. I’m convinced genuine religion strengthens my spirituality. Sadly, too much of what passes for religion in our culture isn’t genuine or spiritual, not by biblical standards, anyway. James 1:27 tells us, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” My prayer is that I would be found faithful in practicing religion that “God our Father accepts as pure and faultless,” religion stemming from a profoundly spiritual relationship with God.
What about you? Are you “Spiritual but not religious?” “Religious but not spiritual?” Maybe something else altogether? It’s an important question for each of us to consider.
