Common Threads: Incorporating Concepts of Christian Spirituality into a Secular Humanist Context

As part of a course in Christian Spirituality, I wrote an integrative paper which was intended to indicate how I had integrated the concepts of the course into my life, while still being an academic paper. I approached the topic authentically as an atheist humanist. This is a lengthy academic paper, but it addresses some pertinent topics in a way that I am happy to share with anyone willing to take the time to read it.
 
Specific nomenclature and personalities characterize Christian spirituality, as is the case with most faith traditions. Although many Christians may perceive their beliefs and practices as unique to their religion, beneath the surface of theological language, the practical application of idealized Christian spirituality is quite similar to what one may find in a multitude of human spiritual and cultural contexts. As with any religion, Christianity becomes dangerous to society when its adherents insist that all people must believe as they do, and the violent and oppressive ramifications of this characteristic of religion are apparent in every period of recorded human history. If one could strip away insistence upon specific linguistic labels and bypass the separation of “Believer” and “Nonbeliever” inherent in most expressions of evangelical Christianity, however, one would find a collection of practices that support meaningful human relationships and personal integrity. Christianity’s greatest weakness is that these potentially valuable practices are used to support assertions that overshadow the gospel message of love, namely that human beings are essentially depraved, incapable of love and integrity by their own effort, and that an afterlife of reward or punishment awaits every individual, based on one’s acceptance of the mythology regarding an implausible divine being’s blood sacrifice. Should any person choose to develop the spiritual values found in Christianity apart from their basis on the supernatural, that person might gain a clearer understanding of the teachings of Jesus in the gospel narratives than many who identify themselves as “Christian.”

Foundations of (Christian) Spirituality 

Spirituality, as a comprehensive term, is a way of describing the actions people take to incorporate deeply held beliefs into their practical lives. While some definitions of Christian spirituality skirt the issue, accurately defining Christian spirituality necessitates a comprehensive definition of Christianity. Unfortunately, this has become less and less possible as individuals self-identify as “Christian” based on flawed or incomplete understanding of Christian mythology, not to mention divisions of various Protestant denominations over doctrinal conflict. This is a boon to all people who have an interest in exploring a more integrated life, since there is now a greater diversity of beliefs that spirituality may support. One Christian may support through spiritual practices a belief in guardian angels, while another may support the belief that God wants worshippers to be wealthy, and another still may look to the actual teachings of Jesus as depicted in the gospels to determine what beliefs spiritual practices should support. With this incredible diversity within the Christian community, it is understandable that some writers are satisfied with a definition of spirituality apart from a specifically Christian context.

The key to spirituality is that it reflects intentional integration of beliefs into the practical reality of one’s life. Spirituality is not limited to a specific set of doctrines or principles. Spirituality is about purposeful action based on deeply held beliefs. People automatically act on their beliefs every day, although this action is not necessarily conscious or purposeful. Some people may even experience a certain amount of anxiety in their lives because they think they believe in a certain set of principles, while their actions reflect a different set of deeply held beliefs, of which an individual may not even be completely aware. One’s actual beliefs may even be radically different from what one wants to believe, and this can only be recognized with intentional exploration of the self. Thus, human behavior is always the result of beliefs being integrated into practical action; spirituality is the practice of making that integration intentional. When one’s life becomes a purposeful reflection of deeply held guiding principles, then life can be more fulfilling because it results in a more fully authentic expression of one’s self.

There is danger in purposefully engaging in spiritual practices without truly examining one’s beliefs. As can be seen in the fear and hatred expressed by many twenty-first century “Christians,” spiritual practices can reinforce false beliefs if one remains oblivious to the difference between irrational fear and guiding principles. Fear can seem very important and powerful, and yet it cannot have the sustainable strength of emotionally mature guiding principles. While spirituality defines the purposeful actions one takes to integrate deeply held beliefs into the practical reality of one’s life, one must also critically examine one’s beliefs to determine which beliefs are desirable and which are based on falsehoods and fears. Without a set of guiding principles that supports personal responsibility and integrity, and love and respect for other human beings, spirituality can become a very purposeful way of reinforcing irrational beliefs. In other words, if spirituality is focused passion, one should be aware and intentional about one’s passions.

Thus, while it is impossible to say exactly what is “Christian” about Christian spirituality, it can be said that spirituality is how an individual chooses to be in the world. Since spirituality is the intentional practical application of guiding principles, a secular humanist can potentially incorporate insights from any religious tradition without kowtowing to supernaturalism or the political leanings of twenty-first century religious power structures. Belief in the inherent worth and dignity of every person, for instance, is a statement of faith, since it is impossible to empirically prove such a claim. A variety of intentional practices can support such a guiding principle, and these intentional practices might look indistinguishable from what an emotionally mature religious person would choose to do in support of a set of religious beliefs. While there are potentially other descriptive labels for the connecting of guiding principles with practical actions, the term spirituality need not be confined to religious contexts.

Six Great Traditions of the Faith 

[Some Christians consider the six great traditions of the Christian faith to be the Holiness, Contemplative, Social Justice, Charismatic, Evangelism, and Incarnational traditions.]

While some Christians identify six traditional means of the outward expression of faith, the definitions of these means of expression require a bit of adaptation if they are to be meaningfully applied in a non-Christian context. Whereas the Holiness tradition might be defined as “purity in thoughts, words, and actions, and overcoming temptation,” the challenging words purity and temptation reflect a mental model that may not be shared by a secular humanist. However, one might re-frame Holiness as “having self-differentiated thoughts and actions, and dismantling irrational fear.” While there is most likely a more appropriate label to attach to this outward expression of emotional maturity, it undoubtedly captures the spirit of the Holiness tradition in a way that can have broader usefulness apart from a religious context.

Meaningfully translating some of the recognized traditions into a non-religious context requires little adaptation, however. People from nearly all faith traditions and cultures practice Social Justice to some extent, and while Contemplation in a Christian context implies communion with an external divine being, people have incorporated the practice of meditation and introspection in many contexts, religious and otherwise. Other traditions suffer, as the tradition of Holiness does, from alienating terminology, both in the name given to the expression itself and in the words used to describe and define it. The Charismatic tradition involves “engaging the Holy Spirit while developing and exercising one’s spiritual gifts.” While this may seem immediately dismissible to one who eschews supernaturalism, beneath the linguistic religiosity, this tradition is about recognizing and legitimizing one’s authentic self—perhaps even one’s deepest guiding principles—and nurturing and exercising one’s innate capability. Again, a less alienating label can perhaps be applied, but the ideal of the Charismatic tradition can be made useful in a non-Christian context. The same could be said of the Incarnational tradition, which also may seem immediately worthy of rejection within the context of secular humanism, given that what is presumably being made “incarnate” is overtly supernatural. Any person who strives toward emotional maturity, however, is in a sense attempting to “incarnate” deeply held intentions—to unify the intended and the actual areas of life. Put another way, emotional maturity involves learning to show forth one’s authentic self more clearly. This is, at its core, Incarnational.

While it is somewhat artificial and gratuitous to translate these traditional means of expressing faith into a non-Christian context, the value of finding common conceptual threads that connect radically different perspectives is that people learn to see one another as similar rather than Other. Specialized and alienating language is less of a barrier to harmonious relationships when the actual intentions beneath the linguistic challenges become clear. This illustrates the importance of appropriately applying the Evangelical tradition, which has been made more challenging by the appropriation of the term “evangelical” by a particularly fundamentalist, politically conservative, and socially bullying sector of American Christendom. While the term originates from the concept of sharing “good news,” many who outwardly proclaim themselves to be “evangelical” express more fear, hatred, and arrogance than anything that might be considered good news to anyone. Thus, it is perhaps even more important that those outside the Christian context become adept at framing the message of human value in a way that is filled with hope and inspiration rather than contributing to the environment of fear and anxiety. The inherent worth and dignity of every person is indeed a message of good news, and in the face of fear-mongering and claims of superiority, it is a message that is vitally important to the postmodern world.

Balance is the ideal approach to these traditional expressions of faith, according to many Christian writers on the subject. This involves being aware of how one spends time and energy and where one lacks confidence or practice. In a certain sense, by extrapolating how the biblical example of the character of Jesus embodies this aspects of faith, one could say that being “Christ-like” involves practicing all of these outward expressions of faith in equal measure. Taken from a less religious perspective, however, one sees another aspect to these traditions, as they have been provisionally reframed. Placed next to one another, the goals of these outward expressions from a more humanist perspective might be seen as: having self-differentiated thoughts and actions and overcoming irrational fear, recognizing one’s authentic self while nurturing and exercising one’s innate capabilities, spending time in introspection and meditation, honoring and caring for others, unifying the intended and actual areas of one’s life, and sharing the hopeful and inspiring news of human potential and capability while continuing to grow in knowledge and insight. This is the epitome of emotional maturity (or self-differentiation) based on the guiding principle of the inherent worth and dignity of all people. Balance is inherent in the process of recognizing one’s own worth, examining one’s guiding principles and dismantling the fear and lies that threaten to provoke anxious reactivity, and reaching out beyond oneself to acknowledge the value of other people. If one commits to living authentically, without acting based on fear or obligation, but rather out of a deep faith that human beings are capable of building a better world, personal balance in these various expressions is potentially a byproduct rather than a goal. Where there is imbalance, there is fear; dismantling fear opens the way for balance. At the same time, balance is an illusion, for each of these components will be in a constant state of fluctuation in the life of a person who is growing and becoming more emotionally mature. Any attempt to assess balance based on a static snapshot is misguided. Maintaining focus on the process of inward and outward work toward emotional maturity and authentic expression of guiding principles yields a full expression of all of the traditional Christian expressions of faith, without the limitations of Christian mythology and supernaturalism.

The Experience of Silence 

Like the process of breathing, the process of growing into greater emotional maturity based on meaningful guiding principles requires taking in and releasing. When one develops the practice of reaching inward to maintain connection with one’s deepest self, then one is better able to reach outward to connect with others. For some, this may look self-indulgent, but one must indulge one’s deepest intentions in order to live them out in practical reality. Indulgence is harmful when based on fear, as is often the case when people develop psychological addictions, but indulging in introspection—time to still the mind and reconnect with an inner sense of what is most important—is vital to bring forward an authentic expression of oneself into the world. Amid the busyness of life, stillness and silence may require discipline, but without time of inward connection, irrational fears and old lies may more easily govern behavior.

Intentional growth toward emotional maturity is a process, regardless of whether one embraces any specific religious tradition. Christians and humanists alike must trust the process rather than allow it to be a further source of anxiety. Like following the path of a labyrinth toward its eventual and inevitable center, if one foot is placed in front of the other along the path, the destination is certain. Human beings cannot always be certain of the destination of their lives in terms of external circumstances, but individuals can choose to take slow and methodical steps toward greater emotional maturity. In its assertion of an afterlife, Christian thinking sometimes fails to offer practical hope. If one can do nothing to control one’s life except trust in an inscrutable, omnipotent divine being and wait for a better experience after death, then one cannot be empowered toward any meaningful growth. Likewise, if one cannot do any good except by the inner working of a divine entity beyond one’s own control, then one cannot be personally responsible for one’s contribution to the world. Humanism offers greater potential for practical hope in that it asserts the capability and responsibility of human beings for their own growth and contributions. The practice of inward stillness and silence is especially important when one’s own personally-determined guiding principles are the linchpin of a meaningful life. Where some Christians strive to trust a process of listening to and being guided by something outside of themselves (for which stillness and silence are necessary), a humanist approach can use the same practice of stillness and silence to look inward and foster deeply rooted guiding principles that allow for greater fearlessness and authenticity. One might even suggest that Christians who pray or seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit are looking to the same place for truth—deep within themselves—using a different set of terminology that reflects a lack of confidence in their own ability to answer the important questions of purpose and authenticity.

The Journey of the Intentional Life 

In considering how other core beliefs and practices inherent to Christian spiritual identity might inform a less religious, more rational, human-focused life of integrated guiding principles, it is important to recognize that there are limitations to the foundational claims of Christianity upon which otherwise useful practices rest. While any human being can find value in introspection, social justice, and striving for emotional maturity, there is less use outside of a Christian context for concepts like the transcendence of God beyond time and space and the immanence of God’s relationship with the natural world, which were contrived to explain and justify a belief system that has no basis in concrete reality. Equally unhelpful is the concept of an absolute moral authority that cannot be equally accessed and interpreted by every person; it is impossible to verify or refute anything that an individual claims about what God wants. Perhaps it is comforting to claim that all things are under the control of an almighty deity, but in a certain sense, this is a dismissive assertion that delegitimizes personal responsibility. Such ideas require the very reinterpretation of the divine if they are to be useful in constructing a humanist spirituality.

Some stepping-stones in the Christian understanding of spiritual identity can be useful, if one is interested in incorporating them in a non-Christian context and willing to perform some radically transformative interpretation. As one example, soteriology, or the doctrine of salvation, becomes useless in a mental model that dismisses the idea of sinfulness and human depravity, but if what the Christian context calls “sin” is addressed honestly as behavior prompted by irrational fear, then salvation becomes a matter of personal responsibility. Salvation becomes emotional maturity or self-differentiation. Even the concept of a trinity of personalities within one unified deity reflects a deeper truth about human interconnectivity within a larger system. Discarding the concept of a deity does not necessitate discarding the deeper truths of human relationships.

Perhaps it is worth exploring the idea that divinity is within the individual—that references to the divine are essentially references to the deepest, most noble self within a person. Platitudes can potentially take on a much deeper meaning if this is the case. For instance, some Christians speak of presenting themselves to God (preferably in a state of holiness and blamelessness), or of belonging to God, or of being devoted to God. One might consider what it would be like to present oneself to one’s Self—to look closely at one’s real, practical, intentional identity from the perspective of one’s idealistic, value-based, deepest, most noble and creative Self. As a replacement for the question of whether one “belongs” to God, the simple question, “Am I my own?” evokes an honest examination of one’s motivations and authenticity. Perhaps one is living out of a sense of fear or obligation toward others, denying one’s own deepest guiding principles in favor of superficial acceptance or keeping the peace. If one can strive to be devoted to one’s best self, this is in many ways more compelling than being devoted to a deity about which nothing can be known with certainty and about which many people disagree.

Ultimately, even if one is devoted to God, it is only one’s own concept of God to which one can be devoted. Being devoted to one’s deepest, most noble self is a powerful concept that would be difficult in many iterations of Christian spirituality due to a belief that people are wicked, broken, or damaged. If people are, at their core, incapable and unworthy, then anything good in a person must be considered to come from something outside of the person, and thus there is nothing within a person worthy of devotion. However, if people are recognized as innately capable of love, joy, peace, goodness, compassion, gentleness, and self-control, then these qualities can be seen as the fruits of their true nature, not some alien influence on their lives. Thus, where some Christian spiritual ideas make things immensely more complicated than necessary and abdicate personal worth and responsibility, the same concepts can be put to meaningful use in a non-Christian context which values people—or, as some might concede, a context which sees people as the character of Jesus in the gospel narratives does.

One challenge to the statement of faith that all people have inherent value is that it ultimately leads to a disintegration of tribalism, and human beings seem incredibly adept at distinguishing between “Us” and “Them.” Christianity has not managed to overcome tribalism; in fact, Protestantism has exacerbated tribalism within Christianity, finding reasons to build walls and corral people at every turn. The challenge of biblical love is no different from the challenge of humanism, however. While many would look at the commandment to “love one another,” as an insular order regarding how people within a faith community were to treat other people within that same faith community, this limitation is not reflected in the biblical depiction of Jesus. While it is true that the rain falls on the righteous and the unrighteous, the delineation inherent in the statement is unnecessary. Rain falls on people; the sun shines on people. The biblical call to love “one another” is, in essence, the very core of how a humanist vision of transformation must be founded. While the Christian church has not lived up to its own guiding principle very well in this regard, the implication of biblical love is that there is no “Them;” there is only one big “Us.” There is no human system in the world that cannot benefit from a more intentional application of this ideal.

Fear is the enemy of “Us.” Irrational fear of people who are in some way distinguishable from how individuals see themselves leads to behaviors that damage society. In the same way, irrational fears lead individuals to do things that are harmful to themselves. What Christian spirituality considers to be “deadly thoughts” are prime examples of this irrational fear, as well as the falsehoods that people develop throughout their lives. Gluttony and greed are expressions of the fear of scarcity. Misplaced anger is reactivity out of emotional immaturity. Envy, pride, lust, and indifference are all expressions of disconnection from, or devaluing of, one’s true self. Similarly, the virtues that are said to serve as counterparts to these “deadly thoughts” are various expressions of recognizing one’s value as a human being, striving for emotional maturity, and engaging with one’s guiding principles. Temperance, mildness, generosity, happiness, humility, chastity, diligence, and wisdom are all results that stem naturally from emotional maturity and honest self-evaluation. While it is valuable to consider where irrational fears and false beliefs originated, it is more important to continually return within to confirm one’s deep guiding principles and strive to unite these principles with the practical reality of daily life. One need not itemize virtues and “deadly thoughts,” but if it is helpful to an individual in recognizing areas in which fears and lies are prevalent, then even the distinctions of Christian tradition can serve as a starting point for honest self-evaluation.

In order to move closer to God, to express biblical love more effectively, and to shift from “deadly thoughts” toward their respective virtues, Christian spirituality considers a selection of behaviors—or disciplines—useful. Similar sets of meaningful habits may be useful for individuals seeking to break away from behaviors that do not reflect innermost values, or to commit oneself to developing behaviors that are more in alignment with deeply held guiding principles. While praying to something outside of oneself makes no sense in a humanist context, the practice of meditation and introspection has already been lifted up as a necessary piece of developing emotional maturity and engaging in honest self-assessment. Study is an equally important component of growth, especially considering the Christian inclusion in this discipline of studying the natural world and the careful observation of systems. While fasting may be helpful in terms of developing self-discipline, a more worthwhile exercise might be to consider why one is particularly drawn toward something that does not match with one’s guiding principles. Self-denial without self-examination is empty.

In fact, many of the spiritual disciplines regarded as beneficial in terms of Christian spirituality can be expressed in terms that have already been outlined: regarding all people (including oneself) as valuable necessarily leads toward certain types of behavior, and it is necessary for an individual to engage in consistent self-examination to verify that personal actions reflect guiding principles. This self-examination is a profoundly important discipline that many people neglect. If one does not truly understand one’s own beliefs, then one can never honestly explain one’s own actions. The entire process of looking within and maintaining one’s connection to self, then looking without and acting intentionally in the world is a disciplined way of being as well. In many ways, this process is counter-cultural and requires recognition of the vulnerability inherent in human existence. If approached from a humanist perspective, the process of building emotional maturity requires wrestling with difficult questions about oneself, other people, and life itself, with the added challenge that supernatural or doctrinally based answers are not satisfactory. A disciplined approach to such wrestling is necessary to continue seeking and applying meaningful answers in everyday life.

Conclusion 

All people have beliefs. At a certain level, some deeply held beliefs cannot be proven. There is rarely anything to be gained from debating such beliefs with the expectation that another person’s viewpoint might be swayed into agreement. There is value, however, in recognizing one’s own deeply held beliefs, dismantling those beliefs which are actually irrational fears and falsehoods, and choosing a set of guiding principles by which life can be intentionally made meaningful. Although Christianity has many features that encourage supernaturalism, tribalism, and the devaluation of personal value and responsibility, some of the practices by which Christians claim to connect faith with practical reality are equally useful to individuals in a non-Christian context. If one approaches the spiritual practices of any religion with an eye toward finding personal value rather than an intention to criticize and judge, one is likely to find elements that can be used in support of the guiding principles by which one wishes to connect with oneself and other people. This can mean some amount of re-contextualization of ideas from other belief systems, but this need not translate into insistence that one’s interpretation of a practice is right while all others are wrong. The important task is finding practices that support the implementation of guiding principles in everyday life. While spirituality might be loosely used to refer to putting into effect the practices linking deeply held beliefs with purposeful action, there are many other meaningful labels that might be applied.

Just as Christianity requires dedicated work within oneself if it is to be effectively manifested in the world, other beliefs require intentional effort if they are to meaningfully inform practical reality. Whatever one’s culture or religion, there is a core identity beneath traditional nomenclature, cultivated irrational fears, and falsehoods about oneself and other people that have developed over time. Allowing this core identity to be expressed authentically in the world is challenging enough that some supportive practices are most likely necessary. Connecting with that core identity understandably requires some intentional effort. Especially in the context of a culture that views human beings as broken or depraved, crippling fears may even develop about the nature of that core identity. Some people may never look deeply into themselves out of fear that, deep inside, they are inherently worthless. However, one might just as easily assume that, at that deepest point of every human being, there stirs a similar desire to be free of fear, meaningfully connected with others, and contributing to a better world. There is no reason not to assume that all people are, at their very core, beings of love and hope and creativity. Individuals who believe such things about themselves and others still require a means of putting that belief into practice just as much as those who believe in human depravity and powerlessness. Perhaps it is too audacious a question to ask which perspective more clearly emulates the Jesus of the gospel narratives, but there is no question that people with divergent spiritual views can still learn something from one another, if they are willing.

Philosophy of Spirituality and Personal Rule of Life

As an assignment for a seminary course, I was to create a succinct philosophy of spirituality and a personal Rule of Life. Most participants in the course are coming from a Christian perspective. Rather than redefining any specifically Christian concepts, however, I looked back to pre-Christian shamanism for an organizing principle around which to express my post-Christian, atheist, humanist beliefs.

For those who are unfamiliar with the term "Rule of Life," this is a purposeful structure of disciplines that serve to direct spiritual identity and growth. Members of a monastic community hold in common a particular Rule of Life, based upon a specific spiritual philosophy. An individual can also create a Rule of Life as a baseline of personal accountability. Some aspects of my personal Rule are specific, while others are more general. Should you be inspired to throw down your own Rule of Life, keep in mind that it only really needs to make sense to you, and it should include those things about which you realistically can hold yourself accountable.

So why share a personal Rule of Life publicly? First, I have encountered several misconceptions about atheism recently, and I think sharing this sort of information serves as a plank in the bridge of understanding. Second, I am comfortable with stating publicly those things for which I want to hold myself accountable. I do not think I will perfectly uphold the standard I have set here, but I believe it is a realistic standard to journey toward. Third, perhaps a couple of people in reading this will consider deepening their own personal philosophies of spirituality and Rules of Life, which I believe will only contribute toward a more spiritually mature world.

 

  

Philosophy of Spirituality and Personal Rule of Life

Spirituality is a journey along a four-fold path as a mystic, warrior, healer, and sage, continually moving toward personal responsibility; embracing confidence in the inherent worth and dignity of all people; exchanging irrational fears, beliefs, and vows for bold honesty; and recognizing those truths that must be taken on faith and those that may be evaluated through empirical verification.

A mystic recognizes deep truths and acts out of faith in human value and the interconnectedness of all things.

A warrior stands calm in the face of challenges, confronting irrational fear and injustice in self and in the world.

A healer demonstrates compassion, acts as peace-maker, creates beauty, and speaks difficult truths gently.

A sage constantly learns with an open mind and continually refines beliefs in the face of additional knowledge.

Personal Rule of Life

Recognizing that I can choose in every moment to be intentional in my thoughts and actions—that each moment has the potential to be sacred if I make it so—I journey toward fully inhabiting my capability, creativity, and compassion, inspiring others around me to do the same. Through embracing a four-fold path as mystic, warrior, healer, and sage, I sharpen myself and those around me, and I create a better reality in partnership with the world.

MYSTIC

• I see the inherent worth and dignity of all people, including myself, engaging in times of introspection to remain connected to my deepest, most noble self.
• I bear witness to the interconnectedness of all things, trusting that my bold and authentic actions will have a meaningful impact beyond what I can see.
• I bring forward my natural impishness and humor as a vessel for truth and enlightenment.

WARRIOR

• I dismantle irrational fears and supernaturalism in myself, and I confront irrational fears and supernaturalism as hear-ably as possible when they are expressed by others.
• I stand for justice and equality for all people in my words and actions, including contributing my time and energy to (a) support the efforts of others who are working to better themselves and break systemic cycles of poverty, and (b) create a more accepting and equitable environment for those of minority sexual orientations.
• I am a calm, deeply grounded presence, secure in my own sense of self and comfortable with my vulnerability.

HEALER

• I am available to others, to listen and validate primarily, and to advise when requested.
• I create beauty through music to contribute to a more harmonious world.
• I allow people to fully express their beliefs and feelings without making them wrong, separating dangerous and irrational fears from the beautiful and worthy person who holds them.

SAGE

• I allow myself to be challenged by other perspectives, without assuming that only one must be right and all others wrong, thus allowing for a multiplicity of paths toward peace and equity.
• I read credible authors and researchers to continually deepen and broaden my understanding of people and the world.
• I proclaim without attachment what is so for me and what is true by virtue of empirical evidence.

1 Kings 19: The Still, Small Voice of Your Self

Obvious folklore qualities aside, 1 Kings 19 expresses a captivating spiritual idea: that truth and guidance appear in stillness more easily than in bombastic activity. The surrounding material also has a few other worthwhile points to consider.

Elijah is on the run (after he committed, or at least oversaw, the mass murder of 850 people), and long-term survival seems unlikely to him. He wants to give up. He wants to just die, but he's not really out of options. Even when things seem desperate in the moment, Elijah has choices. We will rarely be on the run after killing hundreds of people for believing something different from us, and yet there are times when we want to give up. We aren't likely to have angels come to us and provide food and encouragement, though. If we are fortunate, we may have friends stand in for Elijah's angel, but the decision to keep going is always ours to make. Elijah accomplishes quite a bit after this episode of despair. In this sense, our lives are no different. On the other side of despair, more satisfying options always await us. Even amid our desperation, our presence can still do some good in the world, even if we aren't in a position to see it.

The portion of this chapter just after Elijah senses the gentle whisper obviously "foretells" historical events in a way that affirms for the Jewish audience Yahweh's control over all things, including leadership of other peoples. Elijah's detached attitude during the calling of his successor Elisha is also notable; his confidence that he doesn't need to exert control over Elisha reflects an admirable quality of leadership. Before expounding on the still, small voice, it also bears pointing out the similarities between the angel coming to feed Elijah and the temptation stories of Jesus. Likewise, Elisha's call is reflected in a brief gospel story of would-be disciples who want to return home before joining Jesus. Unlike Elijah's calm detachment, Jesus proclaims, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God." Perhaps Elijah was able to tell that Elisha just needed to take care of a couple of things so he wouldn't be tempted to "look back." Or maybe it's just a story.

Regarding this business about stillness, though, there have been volumes written from an abundance of different perspectives. It is a very necessary and important topic that stands in stark contrast to the way many of us go about our lives. There are those who want to see God at work in every mudslide, hurricane, and tsunami, punishing humanity for one thing or another. There are also those who, even in the twenty-first century, expect divine guidance to come in some blatant, over-the-top, undeniable package like a lightning bolt or an earthquake. Some people alive today, misinterpreting Carl Jung, encourage looking for synchronicity at work around us -- "coincidences" that are linked meaningfully to reveal some deeper truth to us if we are willing to see it. This could presumably be somewhat quieter than an earthquake or a fire, but it still amounts to looking for signs outside of ourselves for guidance. 

While we might receive guidance from other people, and while some situations might offer opportunities for us to do something meaningful, there is nothing outside of ourselves guiding us into anything -- not God, not the Universe, not "Life," not our ancestors, not fairies, not aliens. The meaning that we find in circumstances comes from within ourselves. We read the meanings into the "synchronicities" of our lives. That isn't a bad thing at all; it helps us take notice of what's important to us in lives that are increasingly busy with surface-level activity. But it comes from within ourselves, not someone trying to send us secret messages. If it seems like our ideas are coming from outside of our own brains, it is  possibly because we spend so little time actually listening to ourselves -- considering what makes sense to us, what we really value, who we most want to be, what we yearn for in life. This is why stillness is so important.

There are many earthquake-sized voices in our society. Everywhere we turn, we can find someone screaming about what we must do in order to protect ourselves against all sorts of things. Everywhere we turn, it seems that someone is trying to convince us of something. It's a wonder we can ever think for ourselves with all the racket we have grown to tolerate. As loud and passionate as those voices may be, however, there is often very little meaning or value in all of the noise. It is very difficult to find truth in the throes of anxiety, and our culture does not inherently promote thoughtful response that comes from an inner stillness. Instead, we are told to act quickly, to fear being left out or left behind, to be impulsive, to defend our rights (which are always somehow under direct attack by something). If we are to be thoughtful individuals who know themselves and live with integrity, we must be responsible for our own stillness.

In stillness, we can find which threads to pull to unravel our anxieties -- the lies and assumptions that hold together our irrational fears about ourselves, other people, and the world around us. In stillness, we can dig beneath our surface level activities and recognize what matters most to us. In stillness, we can acknowledge what we are doing that we absolutely hate, just because we have convinced ourselves that we must. When we realize that there has been some perceived synchronicity or message from Life or God, we can look into ourselves and discern what our subconscious is trying to bring into focus. The meaning we place on coincidences has value -- profound value, since that meaning is coming from within our own psyches. If we are perceiving something as divine guidance, some part of ourselves is trying to make that "message" important. In stillness, we can ask ourselves why.

Without stillness, we ignore the things that matter most to us in order to do the things that seem most urgent. Without stillness, we act in ways that are incongruous with the people we claim to be, and we may not even notice it. Without stillness, we react impulsively to people and situations that challenge us, with no regard for the long-term consequences. In thoughtful stillness, we can tap into ourselves and discover who we are and what we believe apart from the anxiety around us. Through making time for a bit of stillness in our lives, we can be our own best representatives in the world. We can come closer to living like our authentic selves. Stillness brings us closer to integrity, if we allow it.

So, this snippet of Jewish folklore is revealing. If we want to search for something to call divine, we won't find it in the flashy, loud, anxiety-producing racket of the world; we will find it in stillness. It's not always easy to see in other people (or in ourselves) the beauty and creativity and value and dignity that defines us as human beings. It's not always easy to see that there are things in our lives more valuable than money, more important than convincing people to think like us, more compelling and awe-inspiring than our fears. Stillness helps us see ourselves more clearly, so that we can see other people and the world around us more clearly.

Judges 13-16: Samson, Bruce Banner, and Finding Where the Spiritual Rubber Hits the Road

It's one thing to speak in the abstract about spirituality and divinity -- to have an academic or philosophical conversation about God and belief and the biblical narrative.  It is sometimes more challenging to recognize where belief impacts how we live.  While we may not always realize it, our actual beliefs are more clearly expressed in our actions than we ever consciously state in an abstract conversation.  Whether a person claims to believe in a loving god who saves people from harm, a vengeful god who punishes the wicked, or something else altogether, those claims don't really have a lot of meaning until they impact daily life.

One can draw all sorts of clever lessons from the story of Samson.  The bottom line is that Samson is a man who gets very violent when he gets angry.  In today's terms, he has an anger management problem.  Of course, because he's an Israelite from the tribe of Dan and the people he kills are Philistines, Samson is a hero.  Today, when someone from one culture commits suicide while killing thousands of people from another culture, we have a different name for that.  Whatever we call him, Samson was obviously a powerful man who was reviled by people because he demonstrated his power in uncontrolled fits of violence.  Conveniently, the writers of Judges attribute Samson's strength to God.  I would submit that the divine character is not the source of rage, vengeance, and hatred.

Several years ago, a close friend of mine in a large church endured horrific treatment by a coworker for a series of months.  Instead of handling the problem professionally, senior staff treated my friend as if he were culpable for the abuse he endured.  Eventually, things came to a head and my friend was essentially asked to resign.  Although it was a traumatic experience for months, it was the best thing that could have happened to him.  The environment wasn't going to change.  The only thing that could change was his role in the system.  In the end, he won by getting out of the abusive situation.

No doubt, people at the church thought they had won as well: The abuser got to keep his position, the pastor didn't have to handle the messy issue, and other people could go about their business without getting caught up in the drama of the conflict.  It's easy to think of ourselves as winners when we get what we want.  But what we think will make us happy in the short term is not always what will satisfy us in the long term.  The things we want in the moment are not always the things that connect us more deeply with ourselves and other people.  Sometimes we want it easy, but we don't grow much through easy situations.  We grow when we recognize the decisions that are in greatest alignment with the core of who we are, and choose to do those things even when they are challenging.

From the outside, it was very easy for me to side with my friend.  I know him better than I knew anyone else in the situation, and I care about his well being.  It was easy for me to value him over the anonymous people that had "made his life miserable."  And yet, I have this belief (at least I claim to) that every human being has value, that every person holds within them a divine self -- a deep core of truth, beauty, and creativity.  How do I reconcile that belief with a person or a group of people who seem to have a very different character?  This is where the rubber hits the road in terms of spiritual belief.  What do we do with situations that challenge the way we want to see the world?

In the midst of an abusive situation, a person might feel justified in feeling hatred, seeking vengeance, and looking for ways to bring the building down around his enemies, even if he gets hurt in the process.  When we start thinking and acting based on what we fear, we lose our sense of who we are.  Feeling threatened can lead us to sever our connection to our values.  We even have the Samson story telling us that God approves of rage and vengeance if it's directed toward the right people.  But does that ring true with what you honestly believe?  It doesn't ring true for me.  I know that rage and vengeance and hatred are the exact opposite of what I want to express to other people, and those uncontrolled and unquestioned emotions separate me from who I most want to be in the world.

Rage, vengeance, and hatred all stem from fear.  In Samson's situation, it might be seen as fear that the Israelites would always be subjected to Philistine authority.  In my friend's situation, there were plenty of things for him to fear, too: that more people might get hurt if he didn't do something, that he might not find another job, that he might be embarrassed, that his relationships would suffer... a lot of understandable fears.  The other people in the system may have had some fears as well: The abuser in the situation may have had some legitimate anger issues that he feared would never be controllable.  The pastor may have feared the ramifications of some difficult and unpleasant decisions.  Other people in the system may have feared for their jobs if they don't cooperate.  Everyone may have feared instability in relationships that mattered to them.  And fear leads us to do some pretty inhuman things sometimes.

We don't have to take that path, though.  When we see fear for what it is and recognize how easily it escalates into irrationality, we can stop our legitimate anger from building into uncontrolled rage or hatred.  Anger is useful.  It helps us to see what we want to change in our lives.  When we use it to determine how we want to control or manipulate other people, we've missed the gift in the anger.  Samson hurt a lot of Philistines, but did his actions really accomplish anything for his family or his people?  Our fear separates us from our truest, most noble selves and we can easily slip into hostile reactivity when we don't manage that fear.

Seeing our fear for what it is and disarming it can also help us see how other people's actions are based on fear and not their truest, most noble selves.  We can have compassion for people who are caught up in hostile reactivity, because we know what it's like.  We know how easy it is to let fear rule our thoughts and actions.  We can't change those people, but we can be willing to see them more fully -- their humanity and their divinity, even in times when they don't see it in themselves.  Everyone has value, even people whose behavior we find deplorable.  The behavior is not the person.  The fear that fuels the behavior is not the person.  The person we are tempted to hate is honestly just like us: a beautiful and creative being who sometimes lets fear get in the way of deep connection to themselves and other people.  

Within us all is the character of the divine, even in the times when we lose sight of it.  We can always reclaim it and reconnect to it when we are willing.  If there is anything of value in the Samson story, it is that possibility of reconnection to the divine.  It is through that connection that we have a chance of seeing our way past irrational fear and into honest hope.  It is through that connection that we have a chance of personal responsibility and meaningful awareness of ourselves and other people and the world we share.  It is through that connection that our deepest truths can be made manifest in the way we live moment to moment, where the rubber hits the road. 

Evaluating the Power of Prayer: Is It Magic, Meaningless, or Personally Transformative?

A couple of times in the story of Isaac and Rebekah, the practice of prayer comes up. It will continue to come up frequently in scripture, obviously, so a basic understanding of prayer seems appropriate at this point. Even among religious people, there are different beliefs about the value of prayer. Some people claim that prayer can heal disease, mend broken relationships, provide guidance or comfort. However, there are also medical studies which suggest that people have more post-surgery complications if they know that strangers are praying for them. Whatever the case, any understanding of prayer has to take into consideration the belief system in which it originates.

Most Christians would agree that the God they believe in is omniscient, omnipotent, and loving and compassionate beyond human capability. In light of this view of an external divine being, prayer can have only a few possible interpretations. Sincere prayer can only be magic, meaningless, or solely valuable to the person doing the praying. Public prayer can also be used by people who want to convey the appearance of righteousness and holiness for political reasons, and prayers can be used by people who want an excuse for certain actions or decisions. These distortions are less than sincere, however, and this is an important distinction to make. It goes without saying that the practice of using prayer to manipulate other people’s opinions or perceptions is despicable and abusive.

But why would sincere, effective prayer be equated with magic? Any time people believe that they can have a supernatural effect on the world around them, this is the practice of magic, witchcraft, or alchemy. If God can be convinced to take action by a person’s persistence or faith, this actually places power in the hands of the believer rather than a deity. It is really no different from deciding that if the right color candles are lit and the right incantation spoken, you can make another person fall in love with you, or recover from an illness. Of course, one may believe that God is a loving and all-powerful being who simply waits for the actions of believers in order to have an impact in the world. There’s nothing to prevent a person from believing that the prayers of the faithful can move God to action. But a person who believes in that particular flavor of witchcraft or magic should at least recognize it for what it is.

If there is an all-knowing, loving deity who cares for people, then it follows that such a being would do what it was willing to do, whether people asked for it or not. If God intended to heal someone, it would seem that the person would get healed whether anyone prayed for it or not. So, if prayers are not magic, and if God is completely powerful and loving, then there’s actually no real value to prayer. God will do what God will do, whether believers request it or not. Otherwise, people are constantly at the mercy of those who choose to pray rather than a divine power.

None of this changes when one considers the idea of prayers for guidance. In witchcraft terms, this would be called divination. People have also used astrological charts, tea leaves, Tarot cards, bones, gut instinct, self-help books, and any number of other resources for guidance. It’s natural to want to know what the right answer is before making a decision. But if one can coax an answer from God by fervent prayer, this is really no different from sorcery. Likewise, if God wishes to put a believer’s feet on a particular path, wouldn’t he do so with or without a specific request for guidance? There is nothing loving or compassionate about playing games with people’s fates based on whether they ask the right questions.

There is another option, however. Whether any sort of divine being exists or acts in the world, prayer can alter the perspective and the attitude of the person doing the praying. When people take the time to quiet their minds and sincerely align their attitudes with their values, there can be a profound personal impact. One may not be able to cure cancer with an attitude adjustment, but a person can certainly find peace and guidance from a still moment of contemplation or prayer. There is also the matter of gratitude to be considered. Recognizing and expressing one’s gratitude can be an extraordinary way to align one’s actions and intentions with deeply held values.

The objection may be voiced that prayer must be directed outward, by definition. How can one seek guidance if there is no higher power to do the guiding? How can one express free-floating gratitude without someone to be grateful to? I honestly don’t see the problem with turning inward for guidance, or in acknowledging gratitude without a deity to address. Just as happiness and anger and sadness are emotions that don’t always have discretely defined objects, gratitude is an emotion. One can be thankful without addressing the thankfulness to anyone in particular. And I believe that many people already know the answers to their important decisions, although we don’t always trust ourselves. We want some sort of reassurance, especially when our ideas seem out of sync with mainstream thought. Realizing one’s capability to guide oneself can empower a person to take action even when there are no blatant signs from above to rely on.

In fact, taking action is perhaps the most effective way to ensure that a prayer will be fulfilled. There is perhaps a temptation to wait for an external deity to do something. This temptation is fueled by a perception of an external divine that is wiser than any person and capable of producing miracles with the same ease that human beings breathe. Without an illusory deity to grant wishes, it falls to the individual to act in accord with a sincere prayer. Hopefully, such action will not only be in accord with an ephemeral wish, but also in alignment with deeply held values. So often, people can be their own answer to prayer, if they are only willing to act in accord with what they want and bring forth the power of creation that dwells within every person.

September 11, Ten Years Later: The Hypocrisy of Demonizing Islam Is Still Alive and Well in America

It has been a decade since terrorists crashed planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The events of that day transformed life, not just for Americans, but for the entire world. This weekend, many people are honoring those who lost their lives, either as innocent victims or as courageous first responders. I deeply respect that heartfelt mourning, and I am profoundly grateful that no one in my closest circle of friends and family was at either scene of violence on that day.

Even beyond those sincere statements, I find it prudent to preface what I am about to write with the assertion that I do not condone the actions of terrorists, regardless of their religious or national affiliation. I’m not a Christian, and I’m not a Muslim. However, I do sympathize with Muslims who unnecessarily bear the brunt of persecution because of their faith, and I am both angered and saddened at the willful misrepresentation by which some American Christian spokespeople have attempted to villainize nearly a third of the world’s population.

I earnestly believed Americans had moved past the wholesale demonizing of Islam, but just this week I have heard Americans who claim to be devout Christians asserting that Islam is a violent faith which encourages the destruction of innocent (Christian) lives. I have heard people fostering the perspective that Americans/Christians are hated for their beliefs by Muslims in general. Perhaps it is not the willful propagation of misinformation. Perhaps these people (who have some measure of influence, by the way) are truly ignorant. My skeptical side would suggest that they know exactly what they are saying.

The strange thing is that some of these people are happy to use a single verse from the Quran to justify their judgment of Islam. If it says in one place that it is a religious obligation to kill infidels, then that closes the book on the subject so to speak. They never seem to remember that the Judeo-Christian Bible says pretty much the same thing. In fact, several times in the book of Deuteronomy, God is quoted as commanding that people be put to death if they don’t agree with the strictures of Israelite culture. After leaving Egypt and wandering around in the desert for a couple of generations, God commanded the Israelites to burn cities of people of other cultures and kill innocent women and children.

I’m not suggesting that this is in any way right, or that people should judge 21st-century Christians based on what people did thousands of years ago. I’m simply saying that there are some pretty violent actions condoned in the holy text of Jews and Christians, and we do not typically think of Judaism and Christianity as intentionally violent faiths. I suppose if the Christians who believe that Islam is a violent faith also acknowledged that Christianity is a violent faith (when the same standards are applied), it wouldn’t seem so deceitful. As it is, their accusations come across as manipulative and underhanded.

It makes sense, though. For hundreds of years, Christians have read and been told that they would be persecuted for their beliefs. When someone treats them poorly, it’s natural for some of them to think: That’s just religious persecution. It not only strengthens their resolve, but it also exonerates them from examining their own actions. To claim that an entire group of people hates you because of your beliefs may seem fantastical, but I’m sure it makes a certain sense in the minds of some Christians. It also makes sense that people unwilling to examine how their actions impact how they are treated as individuals would also be unwilling to consider how an entire group’s actions impact how they are treated by other groups.

I don’t believe that the terrorists were in any way justified in their actions. I also don’t believe that the whole of Islam hates America because of a belief system that not even everyone in this country espouses. It makes more sense that a small group of people were reacting to the actions of the American government and military, actions that had a direct impact on their lives. I don’t even want to get into whether the actions of the American government and military were right or wrong. I just want to be a voice of clarity about what actually happened ten years ago and what continues to happen today.

Innocent people lost their lives at the hands of violent men committing atrocious acts. The men were affiliated with an extremist group who identify with a particular religious tradition. These people and people like them are no more representative of Islam than the Ku Klux Klan is representative of mainstream Christianity. It’s easy to get people riled up when it comes to hating an entire group of people. I don’t know why we’re wired like that, but we’re very practiced at generalizing and stereotyping. It isn’t honest, though. It isn’t the truth that sets anyone free. It is a deception which keeps people in chains of anger and resentment. And it isn’t appropriate behavior for people who claim to follow a new command to love one another.

Liars Deceive Themselves First: A Life Lesson from Genesis 12

Some of what I've been suggesting as a re-interpretation of the Bible may be difficult to accept without question, especially with the number of competing beliefs and assumptions we already have running around in our minds.  We have certain ideas about other people and about what we have to do to survive in this world.  Not all of them are accurate, but they all seem absolutely true.  One of the most common conclusions we draw is that it would be easier to deceive others than to tell the truth.  Or if not easier, then at least safer or wiser.  As many of us know from experience, lies often wind up being much more costly than the truth in the long run, even when our motivation seems on target.

Reasons for lying or bending the truth often seem quite logical, but it almost always amounts to a matter of safety.  We think that we will be somehow safer if we keep the complete truth hidden.  Through maintaining falsehoods, however, we put ourselves in a position of constant threat.  At any moment, someone may find us out, our deception will be revealed, and we will suffer the consequences of that deception, regardless of the truth we initially sought to hide.

At their core, people are not frightening or untrustworthy.  It’s true that there are some people who do frightening things, and there are some individuals who betray confidences.  That doesn’t change the value of the adage that "honesty is the best policy."  Fewer people get hurt by honesty than by deception, and after all, most deceptions spring from fear that could be entirely irrational.  When we are willing to wrestle with the possibility that people may actually embody a deep truth, beauty, and inspiration, and that our fears may be nothing more than the creations of our own imaginations, deception seems quite unnecessary.

I have largely steered clear of story-telling because of how subject to interpretation stories can be.  For now, though, recall the story in Genesis 12 of a man journeying to a foreign land with his wife.  A famine had struck their own homeland, so they were traveling to a place of greater abundance.  This man didn’t trust the people of the foreign land, however, believing that the men of the land would kill him and take his wife.  So he told them that the woman with him was his sister and not his wife, thinking that this would keep them safe.  Since she was an attractive woman, the ruler of the land desired her.  After claiming that the woman was his sister, what could our traveler say to the ruler’s proposal of marriage?

The traveler was given many gifts as a result of his deception, and he lived a life of luxury since the ruler welcomed him as a brother-in-law.  But the ruler and his court soon experienced a plague of curses which could only be traced back to the marriage born out of deception.  Calling the traveler into his presence, the ruler rebuked him for his persistent lie, and he returned the man’s wife and sent them both packing.  They had to leave behind all of the gifts and luxury, and they were no longer welcome in a place that could have provided for them while their own land was in the throes of famine.  Although it may have held some benefit in the short term, deception wound up costing the man the very security he had lied to obtain.

There are those who will conclude, "Ah, but if the traveler hadn't lied, things would have been much worse."  Such arguments have very little merit.  No one can tell the future, and no one knows what would have happened if...  For every un-manifested bad consequence a person can imagine, a more desirable outcome could likewise be conceived.  The fact is that when we deal in deception, we rob ourselves of our innate value and we create a reality for ourselves defined by suspicion and fear.

Of course, the way we choose to express the truth also makes a difference.  Angry or belligerent truth-telling can be difficult to hear.  Such tones stem from some potentially false assumptions about the willingness of other people to hear truth and the ability of ourselves to speak it clearly.  Connection and trust often requires a bit of vulnerability, and when we are willing to see the intrinsic value, beauty, and inspiration in others and ourselves, that vulnerability and truth-telling becomes easier.