My previous post provided a definition of spiritual independence, presented some of its challenges, and discussed the fact that people find themselves independent for a variety of reasons.
This time, we’ll focus on additional information, generated by Dr. Linda Mercadante, that will add to our understanding of who this group is. Dr. Mercadante is currently a Distinguished Research Professor, Emerita, at Methodist Theological School in Ohio.
In her book, Beliefs Without Borders: Inside the Minds of the Spiritual but not Religious (SBNR), Mercadante shared qualitative results from scores of in-depth interviews conducted with “spiritual-but-not-religious” individuals across the United States. The interviewees represented both those within and outside a formal religious tradition.
Although the study offers data from over a decade ago (I am not aware of any newer qualitative findings like these), the results help paint a picture of the various ways spiritual independence can manifest. Through her research, Mercadante identified four distinct groups, each with their own characteristics and generational demographics.
Dissenters
First are the Dissenters, people who largely stay away from institutional religion. There are mainly two types: “Protesting” and “Drifted”.
Protesting Dissenters are those who have been hurt, offended, or angered by an experience or some aspect of organized religion. Theology is often at the root of the dissent. These are frequently people from the Silent or Baby Boom Generations. They are often individuals who were raised in a certain religion but now have specific issues with it.
The Drifted Dissenters are just what the name suggests. These are people who find themselves drifting away from organized religion and then not going back. No particular issue typically triggers this lack of engagement. Instead, the drifters simply get out of the habit or find no compelling reason to attend anymore. At times, an expressed rejection of a theological position is offered as justification.
There are also a few in this category who Mercandante described as “Conscientious Objector Dissenters”. They tend to be people who hold a suspicion of religious institutions in general. They may acknowledge that religion is useful for some but that it is not necessary for a person’s spiritual life.
Casuals
Then there are those Mercadante dubbed as Casuals. These are people for whom religious or spiritual practices are mainly functional in nature. She found that interviewees from the youngest cohorts often fit this category. A finding that stood out was the low level of interest expressed by nearly half of the Millennials as compared to older age groups for both religious and spiritual alternatives.
Spirituality for casuals does not serve as a central aspect in their lives. It is ancillary. Casuals may occasionally read related books, seek out a teacher, attend a service, engage in a ritual, etc. but only as need or interest dictates.
Some she termed Pragmatic Casuals because they did not seem troubled by the theological inconsistencies among the many alternatives with which they engaged. Theirs was mostly “a loose, open kind of thing, used for psychological health and happiness, serving its purpose and then receding into the background.”
Many who fall into this group have an interface with spirituality that comes from complementary and alternative health practices. The litmus test is usually whether something helps them feel better in some way.
Explorers
A third group, Explorers, is often confused with the last one (Seekers). They are, however, distinct categories. People in both groups seem to search for transcendent experiences, but Explorers are more “like tourists who enjoy the journey but do not plan to settle anywhere.”
Mercadante found that a large portion of her Baby Boomer interviewees fit this category. In fact, the Baby Boomer cohort had a higher percentage of Explorers than any other age group. Second to Boomers were Gen Xers. Relatively few were Millennials.
Explorers are willing to mix and match beliefs, techniques, and spiritual practices that are often quite incongruent. We might consider many of them “hybrid” (or “spiritually fluid”, a term I mentioned in my previous post), as they tend to have a foot in two or more spiritual traditions.
Of her interviewees, Mercadante found few who took a fully hybrid route – that is, remaining committed to both their native and new spiritual traditions. She stated that while it might be possible to embrace this approach to a certain degree, it could present serious theological dilemmas to those who think about and attempt to participate in their faiths at deep levels.
Seekers
Last, we have the Seekers. These are people who are actually looking for a spiritual home. Mercadante found fewer in this category than religious leaders might hope for -- but more than some researchers might predict.
Seekers were more common among those who had either: 1) had a positive religious experience in their past or 2) desired to finally belong somewhere. There was a fairly high percentage of Seekers within both the Baby Boom and Gen X interview cohorts (25% and 20% respectively).
People who fit the Seeker category are often looking for credible beliefs. They want a trustworthy group that is a good personal fit. Members of this group often experience, early in their lives, a longing to connect with something transcendent, starting in childhood and continuing thereafter.
The standards of Seekers tend to be high. As a result, few of Mercadante’s interviewees who fit this category had actually settled anywhere permanently. Using the terminology of certain researchers, she found that many were “seekers” but not “dwellers”.
This specifically meant that few had either returned to their original traditions or become what Mercadante calls religious “immigrants”. The latter term refers to those who move to a new spiritual tradition and attempt to adjust to a new identity and community. Mercadante found very few “immigrants” among any of the generational groups.
For Seekers who had become “immigrants”, their new tradition was often very different from their original affiliation, if they had one. They frequently found themselves as newcomers attempting to adapt to the new environment but who did not feel completely at home in it.
Many still saw themselves primarily as spiritual-but-not-religious, even when they were regarded as full members in their new settings. Due to the long-standing tendency toward non-affiliation, they seemed quite hesitant to fully commit.
The source of their discomfort was often theological. Certain belief assumptions were often made by the new spiritual or religious group that these “immigrants” found challenging to fully embrace. Mercadante concluded that there may be something inherent within the SBNR designation that makes full integration especially difficult.
She stated that adopting a new religion requires commitment, constancy, and group loyalty. These often conflict with the values common to the spiritual but not religious -- independence, freedom, non-dogmatism, and an open and questing attitude.
Why Does Any of This Matter?
It matters because what I’ve presented here shows that there is no single way to be spiritually independent.
It matters because, for those sincerely interested in crafting an authentic spiritual life, independence can often be both freeing – and a lonely road.
It matters because appropriate supports will depend on how independence plays out for any given person (i.e., what “type” they seem to be).
As we continue this exploration, my intention for An Uncharted Path is to serve as a kind of companion, offering encouragement and guidance as you independently (or perhaps interdependently) search to construct meaning in your lives and connect to “something larger”.
That is our birthright as human beings.
Post Author: Anna Cuyler, Certified Spiritual Director
