I’m becoming more and more aware how valuable blogging (especially theology discourse blogging) is. Maybe it’s sad that in my little life, although quite open-minded and well-read, I have had such limited contact with people with different philosophical and theological points of view… and I think I’m not the only one.
Case in point:
I read a fantastic blog called “Sarcastic Lutheran” (link under “Udderbloggers”). Although she’s quite “emergent” in her thinking, she also comes across as very liturgical. Very different to me. In her latest entry, she made a mind-blowing statement:
“We need to break through the isolation of sin and remorse to stand as Christ for one another. I think this is actually why we at ‘House for All Sinners and Saints’ say that we are religious but not spiritual. Spiritual feels individual and escapist. But to be religious is to do this thing of being human, not in isolation but in the midst of other sinners as equally messed up and obnoxious and forgiven as ourselves”.
Wow. What do “being religious” and “being spiritual” mean to you? Of course, this is not a debate, but simply an investigation into how our denominational heritage has coloured our understanding of these words. It may come down to nothing more than semantics. But hey! I’ll start. Up until now:
“Being religious” meant being in bondage to a system in which we make promises to God to prove our devotion (sometimes formally and sometimes informally – like through the songs we sing), and in which we believe that when we fail we invoke God’s wrath, and when we overcome, we invoke his blessings / favour.
“Being spiritual” meant being “in step with the Spirit”. Or being constantly aware of the fellowship of Christ through His Spirit in our day to day lives.”
Interesting that James (1:27) talks about “pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God”. So maybe I’ve given “religion” an unfair negative connotation. Me and many others…
“The revelation of God is the abolition of religion” – Karl Barth
“Religion is the archrival of intimate spirituality… Religion, a tiresome system of manmade dos and don’ts, woulds and shoulds – impotent to change human lives but tragically capable of devestating them – is what is left after a true love for God has drained away. Religion is the shell that is left after the real thing has disappeared” – Doug Banister.
There are lots more… but I wonder what YOU think?
Tongue In Cheek Stew 
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 8, 2009 at 9:23 am
natasha
Hm, religious always seems to have negative connotations with me as well. It’s interesting though to think that the word ‘religious’ conjures up images of a bunch of conservative legalistic christians in a church singing ‘Thou Sacred Head Now Wounded’ and gay bashing. It hurts my heart and makes me cringe when i am asked if I am ‘religious’. I suppose that’s super unfair, I tend to think of spirituality as being more of a private thing though so where do the two mix in a healthy way?
I don’t know how clear that was ha, they are thoughts though.
November 4, 2009 at 12:38 am
Hugo
Bonhoeffer also comes to mind…
And then there’s the metaphysical naturalists’ definition of religion: “involving the supernatural”. Maybe an example of that would be Spong’s “Jesus for the non-religious”?
But what really urged me to comment on this now (which I rediscovered in one of my many browsers as one of the tabs I never closed) was the Sarcastic Lutheran. My old pastor mentioned this blog to me again just two weeks ago. He said she demonstrates knowledge of rock-solid theology. (Not the only theology obviously as there’s great diversity, but he says the Sarcastic Lutheran demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of the theology of her own tradition/demonimation at least.)
And my pastor also ordered the “radical protestants; nailing sh*t to the church door since 1517” t-shirt for himself. I’d be sad to miss seeing him wear it to church! 😉
November 5, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Michael
I think your pastor is right. She has fantastic knowledge and often posts really insightful sermons (she did one recently about a the gay-pastors debate which shows a massive sensitivity to all players). So she’s not just an educated trouble-maker (although sometimes she comes accross that way).