Spiritual But Not Religious

How irreligion in America led me into a deeper inquiry

Lord, I know that people’s lives are not their own; it is not for them to direct their steps. Jeremiah 10:23

Among the new many things I discovered coming to America, the popular phrase “Spiritual But Not Religious” is one that stands out. It is so conspicuous and overt in my mind’s eye that I couldn’t think about religion without spending minutes mulling over it. I lost count of the number of people who are quick to admit “I am not religious. I believe in God and all that, but I am not religious.” It operates easily under the acronym SBNR. I’d say that considering my background, it was a very disturbing phenomenon for me. Maybe that is because it challenges the truth I hold dear about religion and spirituality. Outside the limitations of that, it contradicts what the Bible teaches on the subject.

Weeks ago, I met a 17-year old who identifies as an “I-don’t-carist,” but would love to associate with “spiritual” rather than “religious.” From an observational standpoint, many who crave the identity, namely “spiritual” usually have no idea what they are affiliating themselves to. The realization of that troubled me all the more. Sometimes I feel itchy so much that I wish there could be a world stage to actively spread the information I have on the subject, listen to what others think so there would be resolve. Technically, I find myself screaming into the void.

While I sought seminal meditations on the subject, I found George J. Ziogas’ compelling composition as he, in brief, handles the topic with such ease. I must confess that the article is a classic, but it didn’t directly address, neither did it satisfy my inquisition. To whatever extent, in his topic sentence, he confessed that being spiritual

“has nothing to do with your beliefs, it’s to do with what you feel”

But here is the thing: if we divorce spirituality from religiosity, we do spirituality a great disservice; we erase it. This dissolution, critically investigated in light of the Bible leaves a lot of unanswered existential questions:

Does SBNR person worship a specific divine being, since their foundational tenet frowns on organized religion? If they worship a divine being at all, which might that be? Are they in reality worshipping, if only they do, a plurality of deities? Wouldn’t that result in a conflict of worship, which in reality is confusion, against the backdrop of what is known about at least the three major faith confessions regarding their veneration of different divine beings?

In the words of John Bartunek,

“….spirituality without religion is an aberration.”

Religious vs. Spiritual

“Religious” and “spiritual” have been used variously to describe adherence to religion. The tectonic shift in recent times in how we approach these terms rob millennials of the possibility to know the differences and similarities, ascertain what they believe so they can make informed choices.

Gradually, the platitude SBNR has become a getaway excuse for people who see devotion to a deity as compulsive, or perhaps for those whose knowledge about religion is so conflicted that they hardly know to defend what they believe. As a consequence, being spiritual in the postmodern context means nothing more than being free, freedom from commitment to a deity.

If the use of “spiritual” relates to the human spirit as opposed to material or physical things, then it is needless to contrast it with “religious.” For that would mean talking about the term “spiritual” in isolation. Historically, it seems likely that spirituality, as seen in the way humans relate to a divine being has nothing to do with the way they feel, but has everything to do with how they internalize the teachings of that divine being, whatever that being may be.

Biblical View of Spirituality

James, the brother of Christ Jesus, says:

Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you. James 1:27, NLT

He acknowledges being religious as a spiritual virtue worthy of God’s approval. Follow closely: votaries of SBNR adore the characteristics mentioned by James as what makes them “spiritual” while at the same time they shy away from being identified as “religious.” While we may interpret James’ use of “genuine religion” as synonymous to “spiritual,” it even goes deeper than that.

Christ Himself speaks of similar qualities in discourse with his followers. In Matthew 25:31–46, He distinctively classified two classes of people that would be present at the eschaton — the sheep and the goats. One group, the spiritual, herein referred to as the righteous (or the sheep) would be saved. Their salvation would be made possible not because they help the needy, but since they would have met Christ’s moral imperative. They understand that Jesus demands it from them.

For the “religious” not only does spirituality represent a state of development, but also it speaks of the cause of that development which results from a person’s relationship with their object of worship. It is a cause and effect ordeal. In his metaphorical address to the Corinthian Church, Apostle Paul unburdened his heart concerning the members’ exhibition of stunted spiritual growth — or lack thereof:

But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:1 ESV

In the ensuing verses, he points to the church, when functioning properly, as the place of growth for God’s people. So you see, spirituality is hardly earned or developed when we operate from outside the confines of the Church. The extrinsic actions may be present, but if the driving force is other than an injunction by an object of worship, it is implausible to qualify the act as spiritual. According to Paul, spiritual people are those continuously seeking a deeper life of dedication and commitment to Christ, distinguished from those who seek to live otherwise.

The Heart of the Matter

The Early Church began with the ministry of Jesus; Christ established the Church in a well-organized and structured state. The organization of the church is a legacy handed down to the Church from the Founder. No matter how we look at it, judging from what the church has become over the years, with all its defects and failures, Christ remains the builder of the Church. He said to Peter:

Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means ‘rock’), and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.

Christ has not abandoned His Church. He did not leave it untended. For Apostle Paul, the Church is God’s building. He says,

Together, we are his house, built on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets. And the cornerstone is Christ Jesus himself. Ephesians 2:20, NLT

So, if the argument for not being religious (used synonymously with spiritual) is because one does not subscribe to an organized religious set up, that being so the premise of that view is on the blink.

A Matter of Fact

C.S. Lewis posits that,

There would be no sense in saying you trusted a person if you would not take his advice. Thus, if you have really handed yourself over to Him (Jesus), it must follow that you are trying to obey Him. — Mere Christianity

Being spiritual is a call to devotion and fellowship. It is a call to obedience. Here are a few principles undergirding this assertion:

Come, let us worship and bow down, Let us kneel before the Lord our Maker. Psalm 95:6, NIV

Let’s see how inventive we can be in encouraging love and helping out, not avoiding worshiping together as some do but spurring each other on, especially as we see the big Day approaching. Hebrews 10:25, MSG

All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper), and to prayer. Acts 2:42 NLT One cannot live a spiritual life and decry Church as an organized establishment. Spirituality without religion is a departure from what is expected. On the whole, if the term “spiritual” would be maintained as against “religious” in our everyday use, then there is a need for vocabulary reform and should be done deftly without complexities.