Carl Jung gave us the terms extroversion and introversion, and people have been misusing the terms ever since. Being aware of the world and of people outside of oneself and at the same time being in touch with our inner lives of ideas and emotions are dual components of living a life of wholeness. If one were a total extrovert one could not stand to be alone, one could not think outside of a conversation, one would have no inner resources to handle the difficulties that humans are prone to encounter. Similarly a total introvert would have no relations with other people, and would be oblivious to their environment. Most of us balance introversion and extraversion, living both in the outer world of people and things and inner world of ideas and feelings.
When we use the term "spirituality" we are usually refering to our inner, and personal religious lives. Some of us have a spiritual practice, for example prayer, or mediation. Unitarians and Universalists had their own particular spiritual practices, such as journaling, and walking in nature.
When we use the term "religious" we are usually referring to our practices in the world, or to the practices of a particular faith community.
When people tell me that they are spiritual but not religious it reminds me of the misuse of the terms introversion and extraversion. Can one really be spiritual (seeking the inner and personal) and have no practice in the world? Can one find "inner meaning" and wholeness with no regard for the wisdom of the world's spiritual traditions (a.k.a. the world's religions.)
I think what these "spiritual but not religious" people are actually saying goes something like this: "I am aware of my need for a spiritual life, and I am oriented toward enduring values, but the organized religions that I have experienced are too dogmatic, authoritarian and/or hypocritical.
And they want to confess that to a Unitarian Universalist.
Leave a comment