June 8, 2024

To Chip,

The conversation we had—and the insightful questions you asked—on that terribly late night has suck in my mind these past couple weeks. I simply cannot get the question, “why spiritualism over religion” out of my mind. For we did leave it unanswered after getting sidetracked with a question of parenting. I do suppose this was to be expected conversing in such late hours. To ease my mind, and avoid writing my essays, I would like to share my perspective. And while I don’t expect to offer a fully satisfactory response here, I hope you might find it entertaining.

First, we must take hold of our definitions, and in so doing some truth to the question is revealed. We use religious to describe a person that claims a specific, broadly organized, religion and lives by its principals. Though the latter half can take many forms, I think this definition serves our purposes. Spiritual then describes a person who has belief in some higher power, or causal force outside the universe, or perhaps even a divine being formed in the space between people; this is to say a person who does not claim affiliation with a set group. There are many Christians that attend church infrequently and do not study scripture. In this way they may be closer to some agnostic theists that reside in the spirituality camp.

When a person “decides” to claim a religion, I think it primarily to do comfort based on circumstance. If a person grows un in a religious household, in the church, they are more likely to consider themselves religious. This is an obvious assertion—we know beliefs are often inherited—but what’s interesting is that two people may have similar views on God but one is “religious” whereas the other is not. This reality becomes more and more true as Orthodox, and Catholic churches that prioritize scripture scarcements are losing out to non-denominational groups for the younger generation. The relevance is if you take two people, one who grows up with ritual and the other without, set them on similar metaphysical journeys (religious or spiritual), more often than not the outcome is (as we began) religious and spiritual. This is the case even if the religious person cares little for the Bible or service, but the icon of God has been pre-established, so whatever flavor of Christian they become, the icon remains the same.

So if we take a person’s religion to be a matter mostly of environment, but also profess that the line between Christianity and spiritualism may be quite thin at times, why do our edge cases (who I do believe to be in great number) then not adopt religion? What is keeping them from religion, (and I think this note is to your question) what doth spirituality offer that region does not? Many do not adopt the religious label out of hurt or pain, many others especially in our coastal liberal universities don’t for fear of association with conservative or extreme values. A quite harmful notion to all parties involved. But I think more than this even, it can be hard to accept only one thing as true. Determining the truth value of the religion may be unknowable. Spirituality offers not more than religion but less. I think if people had the faith and will to accept and practice great benefits would be received. Yet overcoming skepticism is hard and leaving the door open to everything, by not claiming a specific religion, is more comfortable. We have begun to move away from atheism as we combat a loss of meaning but the religious bargain may be less appealing than the faith one creates in with their spiritual journey. What that means and looks like varies greatly, but it saves them from the anxiety of a purely random universe. Many I think would become religious, especially Christian, if they might overcome the first fear. If they put themselves in religious circles and practice the rituals. If they become the child who grows up in the Church and with an open heart accept and work on Pascal's Wager.

Baden Holliday Rosales