I find that the term religion is such a turn-off for many people, but I also find that for people who are used to going to church regularly, the term spirituality  is too new-age. I also find that new people who are drawn to the church are really there for spiritual purposes. They want to be nourished at a soul level, not a head level. The ways that this happens is different for each of us, so I think that we need to introduce multiple ways of being with the Spirit in our churches-intoduce practices of centering prayer, chanting, drumming, body prayer, dance.  I think that we get too head centered with some of our religious rituals- we don't allow for responses of the heart and body. I also believe that there are unwritten codes of conduct that are expected in our churches that encourage conformity at the expense of diversity and creativity. I believe that if we could free the spirituality in our religion we would embrace newcomers and meet them where they are as they come seeking to our houses of worship. Right now I see us clinging to the more formal, hierachal, paternal Religion when I believe that we need to embrace the more life -centered, community- building, circle- centered Spirituality.

Spirituality-

I don't think I see a need for us to be seeking spiritual experiences anywhere in the Bible. I think we need to always seek truth, and to live the HOLY lives we are called to live. I don't seek experience. I seek Truth, and I serve God. I pray and I fast and I teach my children. Just curius-why do you think we need more than that?

Hi Wunderer,

Religion is all that ritual stuff that leads to a bunch of monks batting each other around over an empty tomb.  And much worse.

The spiritual stuff you list above sound like a new bag of rituals.

Spirituality should be the relationship between you and God.  The most obvious ways of developing that are prayer and fasting and learning more about God through the word.

Anyway, a healthy spiritual life is simply God centered.

Hi Motorfix,

I seek spiritual experiences in the gifts of 1 Cor 12. According to Paul, we should eagerly desire (pray for) the greater gifts.

Hi wunderer, welcome to wondercafe!

You are a regular wunder, you took the words right out of my mouth!

A majority of Canadians say: "I'm spiritual, but not religious." I agree with you that organized religion needs to change to accomodate them. Otherwise, religion will die, not with a bang, but a whimper.

The problem with "spirituality" for me is that it had no structure or community.  I could say I believed in a God  (or a higher power) without religion, but it gradually felt empty and hollow.  It was really just a mish-mash of what I thought were interesting bits from other religions glued together.  I just couldn't "go it alone" any longer

For me religion is method to understand God and since its culturally based, and I live in a Christian culture, I am a Christian.  It is religion on my terms, however, free from dogma and any "isms" that get in the way. 

When you read about Jesus you understand that he was about breaking down religious dogmas that got in the way of going good in the world.  See the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke10 25-37)

Yes, pleroma, I couldn't agree more. I rejoined the religion of my culture for the very same reasons as you.

Are you new to wondercafe? Welcome!

It's great to have people respond to a thread. Thank you.

Hi Motorfix, I believe that we are here on Earth, having an embodied llife and that we are meant to experience it. The way that I become aware of my connection with the Spirit may be different than yours. It doesn't make me  wrong, or bad or that I am not making the connection. It makes me be true to who I am and how I  know I need to be with God.

Hi Saul_now_Paul, I agree with you that a healthy spirituality is God centered. And yes, some of the things that I suggested could become new rituals. But, if they help people connect with God- what is wrong with that? Sometimes the bible used in the name of religion has been used to harm, and people who come seeking need to experinece God in other ways first.

Hi Arminius and pleroma, I too, have had experiences similiar to yours. However, I find little discussion goes on in my current church about these issues. It seems if you grew up in this tradition then it is a ritual (going to church) that you get used to and just "do".  I'm sure that this is very helpful and beneficial to many people, but if you are like me and have a variety of traditions, and some times with no tradition, then learning more about Christianity and Christian spiritual practices are really important. I am fed by these practices and the more that I learn about them, the more I am changed by them and the more I think that many of us could really benefit from them. They seem to open the door to the Spirit.

Hello Wunderer -- welcome!  You are a breath of fresh air. 

I don't know where to begin, except to say I'm in total agreement with your opening statements and have found from experience with both conventional and more open spiritual communities that my personal preference is for the styles of celebrations you describe. 

I'm going to cut and paste another post of mine from Diana's  Centering Prayer thread.

My experiences of community in these spaces was extraordinary, and those deeper connections with people have persisted over time and informed my other relationships. 

Now I didn't grow up in a churchgoing family, and maybe that builds a stronger and more intimate sense of community -- I dont know.  But I certainly never felt the love in more conventional church settings.  I was a part of a "house church" community before I moved, which was a hybrid of both spiritual communities.  Those who had come from "organized" religion and those of us who hadn't. 

I think there's a lot to learn here.

Hi Wunderer

And also welcome.

I am one who also uses the words "Spiritual, not religious". To me it says I am free of the control of any organization and can make up my own mind. Having said that I go fairly regularly to the Presbyterian Church and my wife is a lay preacher there. She isn't as radical as I am but between us we think it better to help churches from the inside rather than sitting outside and poking fun at them. People have "voted with their feet". Most aren't going to church anymore but, of those who don't, many are now exploring their spirituality on their own.

I agree with your comments below.

I think Ninja's experience beautifully demonstrates how spiritual practices are inclusive where religious beliefs may divide.  In my centering prayer group, we have people with very different theologies coming together and being united in our common experience of resting in God.  But Neo could join us in the group and describe it as channeling spiritual energy.  A Buddhist could join us and describe it as experiencing ultimate reality.  A humanist could join us to seek inner peace.  The practice includes because it transcends language.  That sense of a sacred space and energy that Ninja describes exists for each of us;  we won't get into "trouble" until we try to interpet it for each other!  (which is exactly what religion does).

I do appreciate religion as providing a framework to grow spiritually, but I totally agree, wunder, that we would so benefit from more experience of the Holy as it touches each of us.

Religion is the path; Spirituality is the journey.

I so need to drink more coffee this morning.

The dances were realy moving meditations.  Symbolicaly, they represented community since they weren't individual performances.  Always in a circle, always together -- one person could be carried by the others.  The only "rule" was if you make a "mistake", laugh.  The choreography was simple and usually easy to learn (think tai chi) and the music and dance was drawn from a large range of traditions.  It ranged from energetic and humourous to measured and somber -- always sacred.  Sometimes we sang in addtion to dancing.  Here's an example of a song:

Spirit, I love you.

Oh, how I adore you.

Lay my life before you.

This was repeated for the duration of the dance and I remember no one wanted to stop!!!  Some worked out harmonies on their own and threaded them into the whole.

Wish I could describe it better.

And it was always an option to dance or not -- some just came to be in the centre.  Your level of participation was up to you, as long as you came with  sincerity. 

Hello wunderer.........God bless you.....

I believe the difference is do we fellowship with Christ....do we love God with all  our heart, all our soul, all our mind and all our strength...and love others the way we want to be loved....following Jesus is just not a trip to the church once a week...it takes a personal approach to the scriptures...seeking , learning and growing from Gods words.....but mostly I find it takes faith...real serious faith....we cannot doubt in the existance of God ...when these thoughts sneak into my head I just ask God .....Jesus take these thoughts and make them obedient to You and have faith that He has done just that.......

Churches can only get so much in on a Sunday...in order to grow in the church I believe we should attend the bible studies and other opportunities they offer to get to know the Love of Christ...when we do this we find the fellowship and faith of others to guide us in the right direction....having fellowship with other strong believers helps us to grow spiritual...I guess we get back what we put into it...we reap what we sow...if we are willing to take the time...are willing to learn and grow...it is up to us to what degree.....spiritual teachings do go on in the churches but I believe we have to get behind the scenes to reap the rewards...it is a shame that so many people only see the church on Sunday or special occassions....we need to be part of the church to grow ....so religion and spirituality do work if you are in the right church with a strong  seeking attitude....

IJL:bg

As a Christian, I would like to propose another angle; religion versus gospel.

This is what makes the Christian message, at it's core, uniquely set apart from all other world religions. Where all other systems put the onus on the follower to 'be good enough', the gospel message takes that away. It is understood in all other systems that the way one lives in this life will have direct implications in the next life...be it eternity in one of two places or as being reincarnated. That humans miss the mark of God's perfect standard, prompting him to literally intervene in the world and make a way for humans to be saved, is taken to be offensive by the proud, and profoundly 'good news' to the humble. Religion is to gospel as DO is to DONE. Religion tends to set up a 'slippery slope' in one's heart, leading them to feel superior to others, which leads to oppression. Religion perpetuates the focus on self, where as in gospel it is away from the self. I understand selfishness to be the root of all evil, and selflessness to be the root of all good. For me, this is one of the reasons I am a Christian, because the gospel message does not bear the earmarks of being 'man-made' - as having an exaltation of 'self' performance - but that the onus is taken off of man's ability to morally outdo others. It is God's light of truth that shines in the darkness of man.

The founders of all other religions claimed to show the way to salvation. Only in the gospel does it's founder claim to be the way of salvation.

Let's look at Islam as an example of religion. It must be a tremendous burden to bear for Muslims who are wondering whether or not 'the scales' are tipping in their favour, because there is no way to know until the day you die - no guarantee of 'salvation'. You'd better hope that on judgment day that you have been at least 50.1% good...This is in fact a reason why many Muslims are embracing Christianity in Asia with great gratitude - because of the eradication of 'the scales'. This is one of the reasons why the story of the criminal on the cross next to Christ touches so many hearts.

Let us not suppose that the gospel message has not also been 'religionized' however. It has, and has often been touted 'Pharisaism'.

There are two ways in which a person can 'sin' by being the 'Lord' of their own lives. One is by living life the way they want, blatantly breaking all the rules. The other is by avoiding sin and living a morally upright life so that God will have to save them; in effect, the person may look to Jesus as a teacher, but not a Saviour. Ironically, they are trying to 'save' themselves by following Jesus. This too is a rejection of the gospel.

There is a profoundly beautiful difference in grace. I like the way Tim Keller puts it:

"His grace both humbles me more deeply than religion can (since I am too flawed to ever save myself through my own effort), yet it also affirms me more powerfully than religion can (since I can be absolutely certain of God's unconditional acceptance)."

I agree in a way.

I see Spirituality as each person's personal relationship with God.

There are two aspects of the path to God, which I see as ritual (religion)  and emotional (mysticism).  Some people only take one, and suffer because of it.  I believe a healthy dose of both is needed.

As-Salaam Alaiykum

-Omni

For me it's about the relationship with God, not the religion

I really appreciate your thoughtful comments in this thread. It is interesting to see what other people have to say about this issue. It helps me to clarify my own thinking about it.

I have been unconsciously putting a negative charge on the word religion. I will let that go now and see what the Universe reflects back to me now that I am more open to the word. The discussion has also helped me realize that mostly I want there to be opportunity for forms of spirituality that nurture me ( and I suspect many others) at my local church. I'll have to think about how that may come about.

I find it interesting that amongst all the new-age doctrine and abiblical practices of "centering prayer" etc. there is a whole lot of everybody coming to receive and few wanting to do the significant work of giving. That is the maturity that God looks for according to the bible. I have noticed in my own life that my sinful self (sometimes called the "old man" in the bible) tries to make everything all about me. I am learning that it is not about me but about Jesus. He is the one who is the center of all things in God. It is time to volunteer to do the heavy spiritual lifting of loving, serving, dying for the Kingdom of God's sake. Jesus' example shows us nothing less.

One of the things Jesus did was to step aside from the organized religion of his time because it had become corrupt and bogged down with rules. Rules became more important than feeding the hungry.
— Corita Kent (1918-1986), American former nun, graphic artist; quoted in The Los Angeles Times, 11 July 1974

another thing that i don't like about religion is it focuses on everybody's differences, jew/muslim/christian/athiest.  heterosexual/homosexual.  male/female. human/animal. nothing but labels.  spirituality is universal.  being a good person and respecting this planet and all its inhabitants is what can all strive for, no matter which figure or book tells us to. 

john lennon sums it up beautifully in imagine, bob marley in one love,  u2 in one.

momsfruitcake

There was another posting on "sameness" and I sense that there really was little that was similar between the different "flavours" of Christianity.  So I have to agree strongly with your take on religion.

pleroma

Community, yes, I too am afraid that I am not a Moses on the mountain by myelf kind of person.  I may not agree with what is being preached about or read in church, but the people give meaning to my new-age take on God.  Without that, it is just plain lonely.

IT

Russ

russ p:  i'm off to read the sameness thread :)

People seem to want to dress up or dress down the word "religion" to suit themselves. In particular, there is a tendancy amongst Christians to try to change the meaning of the word "religion" from "a belief in God" into "what everyone else has" in order to use fancy slogans and sound bites like "it's not a religion, it's a relaaaaaaaaaaationship", as if  God needed to be sold like used cars.

In it's purest and most correct definition (go ahead, look it up), religion is a belief in a god or higher power, regarded as Creator and/or Sovereign of the universe.

In short, if you believe in God, you have a religion.

Don't like the word? Too bad. The word means what the word means.

Spirituality is our relationship with the Divine; Religion is an organisation that foster this relationship.

We don't have to be organized into religions to be spiritual. In the beginnings of human culture, spirtuality was a given. Nobody doubted the existence of a spirtual dimension. Human culture was so thoroughly spiritual that there was no need for spiritual organizations. The indigenous culture of this country was such a thoroughly spiritual culture, but we, the European conquerers, were deluded enough to impose our "superior" spiritual organizations on them.

Jesus actually started a movement toward a spiritual culture. He was non-sectarian; he was not out to denominationalize but to spiritualize culture. Perhaps we, the modern day Christian Churches, would do well to put less emphasis on perpetuating denominationalism and become a dynamic movement toward the spirtualization of human culture, similar to the movement started by Jesus.

What makes this difficult, however, are the entrenched dogmas and doctrines of religion.

But Jesus was not dogmatic. His "kingdom of God" or "kingdom within" was an experience of the Divine. Awakening us to that experience--which, after all, slumbers innately in us--and prompting us to act from the unitive spirit of  the experience, was Jesus' vision and mission. His movement was mystical and experiential rather than dogmatic.

Witch gets us to the problem of language - historically religion and spiritual were one and the same - every spiritual practice has a history, a context, a community - having experienced Buddhist spirituality I know there was a different experience for me than for the Buddhist - those who are buddhist, as a religious container, experience the practice in a different way from me.  To reduce the spiritual to  mere spiritual without form is a disservice to the traditions. 

You cannot break the spiritual practice from its context of a religious trajectory.  This  is not to say other forms are wrong - only different and have a history.

It is true some spiritual practices get rigid and rote and I think that is when we use the word religion but that is not correct use of the word - it is to be institutionalized in a fixed way - a closed system.

To say you are spiritual and not religious means that we have misunderstood and  can make the mistake of making spirituality nothing but my trip -  Notice even the dance group has a history, just as centering prayer - it has a discipline and when you have a discipline you have a religious tradition.

It is also true we can have surface experience - the form abstracted from the spirit and the form then becomes empty.  All good religious traditions combine feeling, action, and thinking and there is a feed back loop ot plump the depths - spiritual is based on some external effecting the outcome of who we are individually and collectively and the collective experience reinforces the individual - since we are relational there can be no private experience for all experience needs testing in the community and the community develops different tests to see if the experience is just self referencing or more than that- the core of spirituality is both self and community.

Now this has implication for multi-faith context - some would have us be the same and others would see multi-faith as transformation because each gives us a part of the divine that is not assessable through our trajectory - different routes give different information.

Religion is what you have. Spiritual is what you are.

Hi Pan: Even indigenous and universally spiritual human culture had its spiritual trajectories, but the indigenous cultures of our planet understood and accepted that the same spiritual reality was experienced and expressed unqiuely and differently by different indivduals and groups.

Their spiritual trajectories lacked the formal organization and the absoluteness and literalenss of the later, "religionized" or "formalized" trajectories.

The main difference between spirtuality and religion probably is that religions are organized trajectories of spirituality.

Even indigenous cultures had what we call formal organization - anthropologically we can see within the 'rediscovery' of indigenous religions the influence of encounter so we do not have non encounter forms or the 'original' spirituality.

I stlll claim that it is a false dualism to split spirituality and religion but that each is a part of the other.  You could use either to describe the reality of a transcendent reality.  From a language use they are the same. Yet we do use religion to speak of an organized structure - like buddhism or christianity etc and then we righfully resist the stasis form of religion.

Did you know that your definition of religion is not biblical? Do you care if it is not biblical?

Not particularly, since religion is an English word, and the Bible was not written in English.

Besides which, one person's interpretation of the passage, where the Bible defines the word that was subsequently translated as "religion", is not necessarily the same as the next person's.

Yes, Pan, the North American indigenous tradition of the Vision Quest, the Summer Solstice, the Medicine Wheel, the Sweat Lodge, the Pipe Ceremony, Give-Away Ceremony, Sunrise Ceremony, plus other ceremonies and the various mythologies and teachings were formal religious structures, except that they weren't written down, and therefore didn't lend themselves as easily to being taken literally and dogmatically. Moreover, being oral traditions, they weren't rigid, and tended to evolve with advances in knowledge and wisdom.

I agree, you said it better than I did.

As-Salaamu Alaiykum

-Omni

I am one of those who use the term 'in a relationship, not a religion' and I say it because, I was not raised in the church and veiwed 'church' people as religious...that they must do this and act like that. Once I received Jesus as my Saviour, I realized it wasn't about rules...I could just be me and be loved and accepted by Him.

I know that may not be the dictionary description, but it's what I know.

Unfortunatly, when you choose to ignore what a word means, you make language meaningless. That is why so much of what Christianity has to say these days ends up sounding like a used car sales pitch. It's also probably why so few people listen anymore. Even if they don't understand exactly what the message is, most people can recognise a sales slogan, and know how to ignore it.

witch, the journalism student in me wants to agree with you, but i can't entirely.  but i really can't help but feel that words can also be interpreted differently or readapted over time.  we are also adding words to the dictionary.  the words that are now included are based on popular culture.  there was a time not so long ago bad meant bad, now it "means" good.  cool pertained to temperature, it now also pertains to a status/attitude/image.  deaf meant unable to hear, now it means, well, i'm not quite sure what deaf means these days, to be honest with you *lol*  it doesn't make language meaningless.  it is also why the world doesn't speak one universal language that was adopted thousands of years ago.

i remember accidentally swearing in a conversation with one of my friends in english class when i was in highschool --- holy shit.  my teacher overheard it and i remember her calling me on it.  being the smartass i was i asked why it would have been any different if i had said holy pooh?  it was the context i was using it in, not the word itself.  shit/crap/poop.... they all mean the same thing.  why is shit the worst of them?  luckily for me she was a great teacher and we actually all sat down to a class discussion.

one of the kids that works with us always says "mother father".  it catches me off guard every time.  the words are innocent, the meaning is obvious, but so is the context.  crap, where is that english teacher when you need her *lol*

j

I looked this word up Witch and found several references to its latin origin, i.e. The root of the word "religion" is usually traced to the Latin religare (re: back, and ligare: to bind), so that the term is associated with "being bound."

It's origins may not be so much simply believing in God as it is being bound to God.

I do, however, like how you compare the differences between religion and spiritual: "Religion is what you have. Spiritual is what you are"

Hi Neo: I always liked that definition of religion as being bound to God.

The quote above continues in its discription of the word religion and says "The idea may reflect a concept prominent in biblical literature. Israel was said to be in a "covenant" (berith) relationship with its God (Yahweh). In a sense, the nation was "covenanted" or "bonded" to the deity. "

You know, jensamember's post got me thinking...since i'm the only muslim in my town and for hundreds of miles...and I'm basically self-taught ( I need no teacher but the Lord!).  I'd say, that while I subscribe to the religion of Islam, I'm also on a greatly spiritual journey consisting of me, the Qur'an, wondercafe, and God. :)

As-Salaamu Alaiykum,

-Omni

P.S.  Hannukah is soon ^.^

I am going to agree with you in this sense...we as Christians aren't suppose to be 'selling' the idea of Christianity like a used car slogan, it's by our actions that should be the biggest influence...

Omni

If only my wife didn't dislike latkes so much.

Yumm.

IT

Russ

If religion is God ... a guideline ... is spirituality the tendancy to wobble (wonder) like Ba'alems as's when bunped off the road by primal desire?

There is an old Sufi comment that might help; nothing, absolutely nothing can be taken as truth without our considering the time, space and situation of the application of the rule (roue). Perhaps such is the image of the dance ... light about the darkness, darkness about the light!

"First there was a dark formless void and then there was light." A mystery and then a means to explore that mystery; and what does fear do to the journey? Does religion of all sorts tend to use such hard tools? Is there good in all badness, and badness in all good?

Who said it was a perfect creation and God didn't go off to rest somewhere to dream up a solution. God help us when Hur'im gets back from that Seventh Day and sees what a mess the wee daemons have made in the courtyard!

There is a word in Latin that describes this duality ... patrice, or in error paires ... with Isis stares! Puts a chill on the malle' (friable)end of the hammer (dark sea) of the Blacksmith of the universe.

Time for a holiday? Look that one up in the ironworker's vernacular. Yah have to put the whole thing together again folks! Dump it into a dimple is space, void, rapture ... a break from the main chore? Oh, what we don't know!

In my opinion, spirituality and religion do have a big connection. Whether your relgion is catholic, buddist, pagan..whatever, spirituality is how we interact or connect to the divine/God/whatever you wish to call it. It is our bond with the higher power and our choice to allow it into our lives. No matter what faith.

Spirituality is almost attempting to gain access to ones soul, to find the connection/union between soul and divine/God.

You will find that "spiritual people" are often quite religious. Have their own forms of worship or ritual that works hand in hand with thier spirituality.

Welcome  MotherAnne

I think religion can be taught but I think spirituality must be experienced. I know lots of folk who are spiritual but not religious.

I think religion can be limiting and spirituality limitless. (eternal)

It is a false dichotomy to split religion and spirituality - a misuse of language-  both are experienced and taught.

Pan"It is a false dichotomy to split religion and spirituality - a misuse of language-  both are experienced and taught."

So which came first? Love or the experience/teaching of it?

Sorry, I don't think you can teach spirituality - you either have it or you don't.

Hi crazyheart:

Do you mean to say that every one of us is born spiritual, with which I fully agree. But then the social process either drums this innate spirtuality out of us, or re-inforces it, depending on our upbringing.

If our innate spirtuality gets "untaught" in some of us, then it can also be "re-taught," or re-awakened. Then spirtuality can be taught.

I agree with you Arminius but that answers the question "can spirituality be re-taught or reawakened?", not "is spirituality taught".