Being Spiritual but Not Religious: Past, Present, Future(s) ed. by William B. Parsons (review)

In a field wracked by concerns about defining religion, William B. Parsons has gathered an eclectic group of scholars to explore those who self-identify as spiritual but not religious (SBNR) or are identified that way by others. We are forewarned that SBNR is not wholly invented by academics, although any hope for clarity in what admittedly has so many variations is possible only with in-depth studies of particular cases. Several are provided in this text, mostly by scholars who have authored books from which their chapters are distilled.

Parsons has done a good job in arranging this text in three parts. While each has a primary focus, they are best viewed as overlapping Venn diagrams, with fifteen chapters evenly distributed. Parsons’ introduction is a helpful guide to the contemporary study of opposition to religion among those who nevertheless remain spiritual.

Part One—Roots, seeks to place the SBNR phenomena in a historical context beginning with the ancient Greeks and early Christians and culminating in the current, largely Western, focus on SBNR. We are reminded that spirituality has always been intertwined with mysticism but it took psychologists such William James to free spirituality (as experience) from religion (as interpretation). This theme echoes throughout the text and reminds us that, as Abraham Maslow warned, neither a narrow religion nor a narrow science can accommodate the other. Other chapters in Part One challenge well known texts and themes debunking claims that SBNR is necessarily narcissistic, or that the search for God cannot occur outside religion. Two chapters focus on how spirituality has been psychologized, as in forms of Buddhist mindfulness or in “Afro-Buddhism.”

In Part Two—Circumscriptions, two chapters seem destined to stimulate controversy. Melissa Wilcox explores neoliberal logic in queer communities and half playfully legitimizes her humorous self-identification as a “spiritual slut” (131), a phrase likely to go viral. Andrea Jain’s case study of Bikram Choudhury and his infamous effort to copyright yoga postures is done in the context of only briefly noting Bikram’s disappearance after being convicted of sexual harassment and ordered to pay a fine of $7 million. In the #MeToo age, this cannot stand alone simply as fact, but needs exploration.

The chapters in Part Three—Future(s), exemplify the thesis that there is no traceable historical linear progression by which to predict the future. Likely options for SBNR include concern with global warming rooted in the “rogue mystics” (Walt Whitman, R. M. Bucke and Edward Carpenter) and transpersonal explorations of participatory movements. Once more, two chapters are likely to stir controversy. Chad Pevateaux courageously claims that William James’ Varieties of Religious Experience was rooted in racism and sexism, and that the human nature James applauded (the subtitle of his classic is “a study in human nature”) looks a lot like James himself. Likewise, Jeffrey Kripal suggests that even the fascination of New Age spirituality with alien abductions can be rethought in light of what religion scholars have studied in versions of apophatic mysticism (which can be seen as a subtext throughout many of the essays). In today’s accounts of alien encounters, Ezekiel’s chariot may simply have morphed into a spaceship, but the interest in throne mysticism remains.

This book makes a substantial contribution to the complexities and particularities of the penumbras of religion that are only apparently new. SBNR is here to stay as long as some define themselves or others in opposition to “religion.” That this is a major phenomenon of western culture does not mean that it is universal nor that its significance is thereby diminished. We definitely need more nuanced studies of SBNR, for which this collection of essays is a provocative prolegomenon.