SUBJECT RELIGION, RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCES AND SPIRITUALITY
LEARNING OBJECTIVES PERIOD
Student shall be able to: SEMI-FINAL 9-13 WEEKS
1.
EXPECTED OUTPUT
After reading this module the student must be able to Measurement Evaluation
1
Quiz/Exam and Projects
TOPICS MODULE 5: SPIRITUALITY-RELIGION
MODULE 6: SPIRITUAL EXPRESSION AND EXPERIENCE
MODULE 7: RELIGION VS. SPIRITUALITY
SPIRITUALITY – RELIGION
What do these terms mean?
Some people might characterize the difference between “religion” and “spirituality” in a way that
resembles the video you just watched.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ-DM4q3oq8
They might say that religion is external behavior that is rule based, and that spirituality is more
of an internalized behavior.
Those definitions are too simplistic
and do not reflect the great deal of
variability in both personal and
academic definition of both terms.
People have different definitions
based on their own experiences.
Some define spirituality as a smaller
part of the larger construct of
SPIRITUALITY
religion. RELIGION
In other words, they see spirituality
as just one aspect of religion.
Others see it right the opposite.
SPIRITUALITY
They see religion as just on aspect
of spirituality
RELIGION
The broader reality is that when you combine all of the various definitions, you get the following picture
of spirituality and religion.
RELIGION SPIRITUALITY
There are certain human behaviors and experiences that could be classified as both “spirituality” and
“religion”.
SPIRITUALITY RELIGION
There are other human behaviors and experiences that are most commonly classified as “spirituality”.
SPIRITUALITY
RELIGION
There are other human behaviors and experiences that are most
commonly classified as “religion”.
SPIRITUALITY RELIGION
Again, people will define both terms differently based on their own experiences.
SPIRITUALITY RELIGION
Religion
is commonly defined in terms of an organized set of beliefs and practices – directed toward spiritual
concerns - that are shared by a community”.
“Spirituality is typically conceptualized in more subjective, individualistic terms”.
“There are two common themes...”
1. The existence of a transcendent reality that is transpersonal in nature.
2. That this reality is “personal, existential, and subjective” and involves a “union with the
nontemporal”.
Like any definition, that doesn’t really tell you anything. So let’s take those words one at a time, so we
can gain a better understanding of how spirituality is most commonly defined by academics.
TRANSCENDENT
Beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.
(of God) existing aove from, nd not subject to the limitations of the material universe.
TRANSPERSONAL
Denoting, or dealing with states or areas of consciousness beyond the limits of personal identity:
State of Consciousness
Philosophy concerns of existence, especially human existence as viewed in theories of
existentialism.
Logic affirming or implying the existence of a thing
TEMPORAL
1. Relating to the worldly as supposed to spiritual affairs, secular
2. Of or relating time
NONTEMPORAL would be not related to worldly affairs or time
SPIRITUALITY
So if we put that all together we can understand spirituality to be behavior or experiences that are very
personal but yet take us out of ourselves and connect us to a higher consciousness that is not bound
by our world or our time.
That is just my (Dr. Stanfield) paraphrase.
You may have one that makes more sense to you.
Let’s turn now to how Social Work has defined spirituality and religion .
LEARNING ACTIVITY 1
WHAT ABOUT YOU?
• How do you define religion?
• How do you define spirituality?
• Do you see yourself as more spiritual or
religious?
SPIRITUAL EXPRESSION AND EXPERIENCE MODULE 6
To begin, then, I must show that all experiences are expressive of a spirit. Drawing heavily on the
phenomenological investigations of Husserl and Merleau-Ponty, I will first elucidate the act of ‘expression’ so that we can
properly understand what I mean when I say that our experiences are expressive of a spirit. Then I will move to define the
nature of the spirit that is so expressed.
EXPRESSION
There is a certain ambiguity in the phenomenological use of the term ‘expression’: ‘expression’ can refer either
to the act of forming a ‘phenomenal unity’ (e.g., between sense and perceptual object) or to the meaningful
thing that is produced as the result of that unity. This ambiguity is captured in the distinction between the noun and
verb forms of ‘express’ in the phrase: “the phrase ‘that is a cat’ is an expression that expresses a particular sense or
meaning.” Phenomenologically speaking, the tie that binds these together lies in the phenomenal unity of the
expressed (normally an epistemological element such as a sense or meaning) and that in which it is expressed
(normally an ontological element such as a perceptual object or social institution). This unity necessarily results in the
existence of something that has sense or meaning as part of its very being and so can be considered inherently meaning-
full.
But this meaningful ‘expression’ is expressive if and only if it constitutes a phenomenal unity with what is
expressed.
Spirit
This notion of ‘expression’—if not always the explicit terminology—remains central to Husserl’s entire
phenomenological project.8 It reaches its zenith in his invocation of ‘spirit,’ where it is used to refer to the life,
accomplishments and products of human living.9 Such spirit is therefore personal (insofar as it pertains to persons)
and communal. For Husserl, “Personal life means living communalized as ‘I’ and ‘we’ within a community-horizon”10 that
is part of a “surrounding world” in which we, as humans, always live. Such a surrounding world “is the locus of all our cares
and endeavors,” and as such “is a spiritual structure in us and in our historical life.
”Husserl summarizes this account of spirit by referring to it as a “vital presentiment.” This highlights two key elements of
the account of spirit:
1. first, spirit is essentially living, that is, tied to life:
- spirit is a dynamic force and not merely a concept, position, or goal. Spirit is affective, not merely
effected: people “themselves also change as persons” as a result of the effect of spirit on the life-
world, “taking on new habitual properties” and new ways of intuiting (and therefore interacting with)
the world.
2. Secondly, in calling spirit a “presentiment,” Husserl means to say that it provides the horizon of
expectations that we necessarily draw on to ‘clarify’ or pre-figure the intended object.
By doing so, it provides the object-like formations that are the necessary precursor to ‘objective’ engagements
with the world, insofar as it enables the intended object to coincide with a confirming-fulfilling intuition in a
synthesis. Via this clarifying mode of bringing to intuition, spirit shapes the way an object presents itself to the
intuition of the perceiver (which, as you may recall, is central to the act of expression): by shaping what is clarified, spirit
shapes what is expected, and so shapes how and by what that expectation could be fulfilled. So, to speak of ‘spirit’ in
this phenomenological sense is to claim that there is a dynamic, vital force (that is not necessarily a distinct
living entity) that shapes our pre-theoretical horizons in a way that is necessary for experience itself but of which
we may not be consciously aware, even as we are being guided by it.
Experience and/as spiritual expression
Because this notion of spirit is at work in the pre-theoretical horizons of expectation we use to ‘make sense’ of our
world every day, ultimately all of our experiences are shaped by, and expressive of, (some type of) spirit: insofar as
drawing on these horizons is necessary for acts as basic as perception itself, everything we do is not only drawing on, but
also enacting or expressing, this spirit. And as expressive, this relation to spirit—this spirituality—is not merely an act of
the people who are thinking or drawing on those horizons, but is embedded within things themselves: we encounter
things always already as meaningful things. So Husserl will claim that a “spiritual meaning” is “embodied” in the very
environment of the lifeworld, especially in cultural objects such as “houses, bridges, tools, works of art, and so on” that he
sometimes calls simply “spiritual products.” The world we encounter is not made spiritual by the intervention of a human
perceiver; rather “the material-spiritual is already preconstituted, prethematic, pregiven.”
Describing this as “material-spiritual” is essential to understanding the type of spirituality at work here. As an active and
dynamic expressive force, spirituality is experienced, not as distinct from material things, but rather in phenomenal unity
with them. In general, we ‘live in’ the spirit that is expressed in material things, without (normally) being aware that we
have passed from a material/perceptual to a spiritual mode of engagement. In this regard, spirit is deeply formative
of the material conditions we find ourselves in, and is, in fact, experientially one with those conditions. To live is
to be engaged in this type of spiritual expression.
Merleau-Ponty will go so far as to say that this kind of expression is perhaps the fundamental element “of all culture,”
since human living is simply taking up the sense that is already present in the world around us and reworking it in and as
our very bodies. In this sense, the lived body of the human person is both expressive and an expression. This is based
on “a movement which itself creates its own course and returns to itself, and thus a movement which has no other
guide but its own initiative.” This movement is the living, dynamic force that Husserl calls ‘spirit,’ and we could refer to it
as a transcendental condition of our material, everyday living that is not transcendent to that material living.
MODULE 7: Religion vs. Spirituality
There are several different religions around the world, many with their own profound spiritual
texts. As a student of various world religions, one might be able to find things of great value in each
of the religions.
The purpose of religion, in general, is to unite a group of people under the same values
and principles and to facilitate their collective and individual communication with a
Higher Power and/or philosophy. In other words, religion was meant to enhance
spirituality.
On the other hand, true spirituality unites a person with his or her authentic Self.
That is not said to separate the two, for it is also entirely possible to be both religious
and spiritual. On the other hand, it is also possible to be so caught up in religion that
one does not make room for the spirit (or Spirit) to express or become known at all.
Only if one is fully open to the spiritual element of religion will religion enhance one’s
mental health. If one is religious but not spiritual, mental health is not enhanced—in
fact it might be very disturbed.
Religion that teaches or encourages judgment of self and other is often very disturbing to the
psyche.
Spirituality, on the other hand, would encourage compassion for self and other.
In fact, in some religious communities, the suffering that naturally occurs in the lives of the
members is worsened by the fear of judgment of others.
For example 1, a church member might not ever tell others in her church that she is thinking of
divorcing her husband because he is emotionally abusive to her, because she fears that they will
judge her—say that she is sinful—for thinking of divorce. Therefore, her suffering is prolonged and
she lacks vital support during one of the most difficult times in her life.
EXAMPLE 2
Or, a man who has lost his wife to cancer might not show his grief to others for fear that will judge
him for not accepting God’s will for his wife. Or, a person who is unhappy in his job might not share
his concerns with those in his meditation group for fear that they might tell him that he’s just being
negative and he is drawing negative experiences into his life through the law of attraction by
thinking these negative thoughts.
Religion that teaches us that we must rely completely on external advice or external books—as
opposed to listening to the urging of one’s own soul—is a religion that is destructive to mental
health.
When an external authority, be it a book, a person, or a religion, has final control over everything
we do, say, and think, it is impossible for us to find and begin to live out of our own truest, deepest
souls. We live oppressed by the external authority—this is definitely not good for mental health. It
is the same as if a government came in and told us how to think, feel, believe, and act. The external
authority has final and absolute control. Where, then, are our original thoughts, beliefs, feelings,
and actions? Rather we must learn to find our own internal authority and come to trust its guidance
—that is true spirituality.
eligion that teaches us how we are to think and feel about the world does not allow us room to
grow into our own understanding of life and the world.
For example, many religious authorities are currently teaching members of their community how
they should view politics and how to vote. Rather than trusting and even encouraging the
membership to educate themselves on the world and to search their own souls, they are telling
them how to think and feel.
Spirituality is a very personal and individual journey into the inner terrain of one’s own soul. The
person on such a spiritual journey may use all manner of external tools to facilitate that journey—
including attendance to a church, temple, or mosque, and/or reading of certain sacred texts, and/or
joining and engaging with others in various spiritual practices, and/or spending time in one-on-one
conversation or counseling by and with certain spiritual leaders.
Spirituality allows a person to come to terms with life on life’s terms. It allows one to process
through difficult experiences and become stronger and wiser because one stayed conscious as one
walked through the experience. Spirituality allows one to develop healthy self-esteem and to
respect and appreciate the journey of others. Spirituality encourages one to walk through the deep
recesses of the heart, mind, and soul and come to know one’s Self in deep communion with a
Higher Power or philosophy of one’s choice.
RELIGIOUS VS. SPIRITUAL: STUDY SAYS THE TRULY 'SPIRITUAL BUT NOT
RELIGIOUS' ARE HARD TO FIND
The term "spiritual but not religious" has, over the last decade, evolved from an academic
definition to a widely used label for people who have abandoned traditional congregations in
favor of a more solitary form of belief and worship.
But new research by a Boston University sociologist has found that the ideas of "spirituality"
and "religiosity" are rarely at odds but intersect often in the daily lives of people as they
describe their spirituality.
"People who occupy this spiritual-but-not-religious category are really few and far between if
you look at what people believe and practice," said Nancy Ammerman, author of the study
published in a recent issue of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. "You have to
ask people what are they trying to tell us when they talk about themselves that way."
“ ‘Spiritual but not religious' is a polling category, and people aren't polls," said Ed Stetzer, a
pastor who also heads LifeWay Research, a Christian polling group affiliated with the
Southern Baptist Convention. "As someone in the ministry, it is necessary to recognize that
every person has a story to tell that defines (the spiritual and religious) differently. … Each
person is made in the image of God and it's worth understanding their thoughts so you can
communicate to them an understanding of the gospel."
Spiritual packages
Ammerman, a scholar on American congregations who has recently examined personal beliefs and
practices, gathered hundreds of those personal stories as part of a larger project recently published
in the book "Sacred Stories, Spiritual Tribes: Finding Religion in Everyday Life."
To find out what people mean when they called themselves "spiritual but not religious,"
Ammerman's research team recruited a group of people reflecting America's religious landscape to
be interviewed about their beliefs and practices. The volunteers were also given disposable
cameras to snap photos of places important to them and asked to periodically record an oral diary
about memorable experiences during the day.
WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPIRITUALITY AND RELIGION?
In the 21st century America context, spirituality and religion should not be strangers but partners. It is a
relationship like spirit is to body. It is based on the recognition that spirituality that lacks the structural and
functional resources of an institutionalized religious tradition is rootless for both the individual and society. At
the same time, a religion that is uninformed by a personal and corporate spirituality is lifeless. While
institutionalized religious traditions have many weaknesses in leadership, religion as a tradition is most
appropriate context for the development of a mature spirituality personally and societally. It also fosters inter-
religious dialogue which unites the human family. As Dr. Schneider puts it so succinctly,
“What we may be learning from the struggles of our time in this area of the religion and spirituality context, is
how to sip lightly to institution even as we drink deeply of our tradition.” Adapted from Sandra Schneiders’
“Religion and Spirituality: Strangers, Rivals, or Partners?”
REFERENCES https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/opth-2018-0022/html
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/96773618.pdf
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/traversing-the-inner-
terrain/201912/religion-vs-spirituality
https://www.deseret.com/2013/8/16/20524007/religious-vs-spiritual-study-says-the-truly-
spiritual-but-not-religious-are-hard-to-find
SUBJECT TEACHER CRISTITA T. RAMBOYONG
ADMINISTRATOR DANIEL DOMINIC DE LEON
