Spiritual and Religious
Although religion will always have our attention, some people still say, “I’m spiritual but not religious.” It’s an old expression, but it remains very much in vogue. For those unfamiliar, it describes someone whose spiritual life is divorced from organized religion, with the implication that the two are mutually exclusive, or at least should be. And people who say it usually assume God is just fine with that.
Not long ago, the spiritual and the religious were understood to go hand in hand. To be religious meant you were living a spiritual life, and vice versa. But the breakdown of formal institutions - the family, the school, the State - has bred a general distrust of organized religion simply because it is organized. Formal societies are out.
The trouble with this thinking is that it alienates us from our own humanity, because man is by nature not only spiritual but also religious. We are not angels. Angels, being purely spirit, see God face to face. We, however, come to know God through the physical world - through our senses, through signs. By the use of our intelligence (the spiritual life), we can come to recognize God, love Him, and even worship Him (the religious life) here and now, before ever seeing Him face to face.
Not content merely to like music, for example, we buy concert tickets. Nor do we merely enjoy baseball, but follow teams and wear jerseys. Instead of only feeling love, we move in with one another. And this is why we not only believe in God, but go to church. The feeling of love, the appreciation of music, the joy of sport: these are spiritual realities. The concert, the jersey, the shared life: these are religious expressions.
To say “I’m spiritual but not religious” will never satisfy us, because it really means, “I believe in God, but I don’t go to His concerts, follow His team, or live with Him.” There may be painful experiences that would lead a person to this kind of separation from religion - all of which can be forgiven - but it is a rupture nonetheless that shouldn’t be celebrated, much less presumed to be pleasing to God.
It is especially strange to hear Catholics say it. Doesn’t the fact that God became man mean that He Himself chose not to remain only spiritual, but also religious by becoming man? And don’t we profess that the Church is the historical continuation of that Incarnation of word-becoming-flesh? Consider the Resurrection: can there be any greater sign that God is now both spiritual and religious? Why, then, would a God who raised His Son from the dead be content with our being one without the other?
The Risen Christ comes precisely to heal this false dichotomy in man, saying: “Touch me and see; I am not a ghost. A spirit does not have flesh and blood.” In other words: “I have not returned to being only spiritual; I am still a man, like you.” This alone is worthy of our humanity. +