I think I've mentioned before that I don't like commenting on things like poetry or artwork because they can have so many interpretations. So I'm skipping another post. Is there stuff that I could say? Yeah, I'm sure. But if I really feel that it needs saying, I can always come back to it later.
So instead, I'm going to comment on the post about the label "spiritual, but not religious." The term, as I would define it, means a personal religion. What is religion in the simplest sense? It is the means by which you worship something. And EVERYONE worships something. Therefore, to "be spiritual" but not identify with any major religion is to simply have your own religion that's personalized to you. It is to come up with your own set of "how to"s and "do"s and "don't"s.
I think the biggest danger about this is the lack of accountability. Almost every major religion has some kind of discipline for those who claim to be a part of it but don't follow it's rules. Whether it's excommunication or something more mild, the fact remains that there is a standard that you must adhere to or you will feel consequences.
If you, however, are making up your own rules as you go along, not only is it unlikely that anyone else will be able to understand your rules, they will never be able to hold you to them. Honestly, I would imagine that the phrase came into being because of the multiplying of irresponsible young people in America who don't understand what they believe and don't really care to define it. They don't want to be held accountable for anything. (I DON'T think this is why it appeals to Lalaith in particular.) The younger generation always wants to be independent of the older. What better why to go about that than to throw off the constraints of organized religion, while at the same time, staying in the good graces of as many of the older generation as possible by claiming to retain a level of spirituality?
Last of all, I must point out that there is no active spirituality outside of Christ. Outside of Christ, everyone is spiritually dead. So if you want to be actively spiritual, you must be religious; but don't worry - you're religious anyway because you're already worshiping something.
I understand the accountability bit, but does it really mean that they are setting up their own religion? What if they are simply deciding what to do day-to-day with no specific code in mind? Religions have their traditions and such, but it sounds like lalaith is free to do what she will without being bound to set traditions. And people have set their own do's and don't's apart from religion. They are called laws. So for one to have freedom to do what he/she will while following a government's code, does this mean there really is no accountability or that they are making their own religion? Sounds like a stretch to me.
ReplyDeleteExcept that you have to decide what to do day-to-day off of something. You can't make arbitrary decisions, no matter how much you might want to. You will always decide based on SOMETHING. So that something becomes your guide, your code, your religion.
ReplyDeleteLalaith IS free to do what she wants without traditions - because her stance has no traditions. lol She's making it up as she goes along. Every religion started without traditions. Even Christianity. Traditions come AFTER the religion has been around.
Also, laws are not personal "do's and don'ts" - laws are Society's "do's and don'ts." That's why there are murderers who are held accountable to the laws, but in their minds they did nothing wrong. There is a distinct difference between the two.
I don't understand your last question; it's phrased oddly. If what I said didn't address it, maybe you could say it differently and I'll try to answer.