Last week’s post about Ryan Burge’s categories of non-believers led me down a different rabbit hole, the category of “Spiritual but Not Religious” (SBNRs). For many people who attend churches, they conflate the categories of “religious” and “spiritual” in ways that are not warranted. When you separate the categories, it’s pretty easy to see that some people are great at performing in the religious structure (socially, following the norms and rules, and feeling good feelings about their compliance) but not necessarily spiritual. My first thought was “Is the difference between being religous and spiritual one’s empathy?” The people I know who are religious but not spiritual often do fit that description, but that’s not to say that everyone who identifies as spiritual but not religious is above-average in the empathy department.

So let’s dig in a little more. Those who identify as SBNRs usually have one or more of three deeper orientations:

Internal authority. “Truth comes from my experience, not an institution.” These are people who rely on their own wisdom and insights over the traditions or authority of an external source like a church. Here’s a Mormon example for you. If asked “What is the greatest gift you have as an LDS church member?” a person who prizes internal authority might answer “the gift of the Holy Ghost” or “direct access to God through prayer,” but a religious person might say “the counsel of prophets and apostles” or “the Book of Mormon.” If a man said “access to the Priesthood,” it could mean either depending on what he really means by that. If a woman said “access to the Priesthood,” it would not mean the same thing.

Meaning without structure. This refers to the feeling of awe in nature or in contemplating the universe or even science. It can also refer to personal intuition and wisdom. For some it includes personal rituals that are meaningful to the individual but didn’t originate in a structured environment (a tattoo, a special place, talking to a loved one who has died).

Identity and autonomy. “I’m not part of a group that tells me what to believe.” This is that libertarian streak that is prevalent among those who have left religion. Not being labelled in a social group that isn’t a perfect fit is something they reject because it infringes on their sense of self, their authenticity.

People who leave or reject religion take the SBNR path usually due to the following factors. See which ones are familiar:

Disillusionment with religion. They see the hypocrisy, harm, or control exerted by religion. They want a life of meaning, but don’t like what instiutions are offering because of all the accompanying baggage.

Need for flexibility. They may feel discomfort with rigid truth claims or dogmatic teachings. They would prefer a more exploratory approach that embraces ambiguity.

Trauma or negative experiences. Some who came from authority or shame-based systems ultimately reject that controlling atmospere, but still retain their own ability to find meaning.

Cultural shift. Sometimes the culture within a church changes over time, or the individual’s needs changes, and this results in a shift away from religion. We’ve talked a lot here about how some church members have become alienated as the church’s MAGA affiliation was revealed.

Back to my original question, empathy is a part of spirituality in that it’s how one relates to other people, but SBNRs choose that path because of how they relate to meaning, existence and the unknown. While there’s often overlap, they are not the same thing. Additionally, when someone says they are spiritual but not religious, it may be mostly about boundary setting–with religion on the outside of their spirituality. They believe in something, but they have found religion to be untrustworthy in defining the spiritual. It’s not so much an affirmation of what their spirituality is as it is a rejection of what their religion was.

Within SBNRs, there are several sub-categories to consider.

The Recovering Religious. These are most common among those raised in a high-demand religion. They usually left due to disillusionment, harm or a mismatch with their values. They still believe in a higher power and have a moral framework and sense of meaning. They can be very emotionally charged in their rejection of their religion of origin because they are focused on healing and reclaiming their identity.

The Intuitive Mystic. These folks focus on their own felt experience to define their spirituality. They are open-minded and exploratory. They seek energy, interconnectedness, elevated consciousness, and sometimes metaphysical ideas. They are likely to use meditation, mindfulness, and connecting to nature as well as personal rituals. They are less likely to care about a set of beliefs or logic or doctrine, instead enjoying experiences that resonate for them.

The Ethical Humanist. This is probably the group I was mostly thinking about when I posited my theory about empathy. They may not actually have any specific belief in a higher power, but instead are focused on how people can help other people. “What really matters is how we treat each other.” Their key focus is on ethical behavior, not metaphysics. They care about human dignity, compassion and connection.

The Agnostic Seeker. “I don’t know what’s true, but I’m open.” They aren’t sure about God or anything supernatural, remaining curious rather than committed. They are comfortable shrugging and saying “I don’t know” when asked religious questions. They can use religion as a Whitman’s Sampler, skipping what they don’t like, and trying new things when offered.

The Anti-Institutionalist. Their core belief is that institutions are corrupt and have a corrupting effect on the people in them. They may believe in God or spirituality, but they distrust organized systems, particularly religion but perhaps extending to other systems like government. They value their autonomy and independence and react poorly to any perceived control or manipulation. They are defined more by what they reject than by what they believe.

The Wellness Spiritualist. Tik-Tok and the current CDC are full of these guys, and they have got supplements to sell you! I kid, but there is overlap here. They are usually interested in yoga, breathwork, mindfulness and self-improvement. They may also have ideas about energy, healing and alignment. This group is very common in Western culture, and they are not always deeply philosophical.

The Cultural Adapter. “I inherited some beliefs, and I interpret them in my own way.” They are still culturally attached to a religious tradition but don’t fully accept its doctrines. Cafeteria Mormons (or Catholics, or whatever) fit nicely into this category. They are selective in their beliefs and practices, using what works for them and discarding what doesn’t. There is some acceptance of this approach even at the highest levels in the church–I’ve heard leaders encourage people to pay attention to the talks that resonate and ignore the ones that don’t. That’s basically what this group does.

The Detached Non-Believer. They have little or no belief in the supernatural, but are too non-confrontational to claim the label “atheist.” They prefer to call themselves SBNR to avoid stigma or conflict.

In short, people who claim to be “spiritual but not religious” may mean many different things, so you can’t paint them with a broad brush. Consider how they may feel across these dimensions:

Belief in the Supernatural

  • Strong – maybe an Intuitive Mystic
  • Weak or Uncertain – maybe an Agnostic Seeker
  • Minimal – Ethical Humanist or Detached Non-Believer

Relationship to Authority

  • Rejecting – Anti-Institutionalist or Recovering Religious
  • Neutral – Agnostic Seeker or Wellness Spiritualist

Motivation

  • Healing – Recovering Religious
  • Meaning – Mystic or Seeker
  • Ethics – Humanist
  • Well-being – Wellness
  • Identity/social positioning – Detached

When someone says they are SBNR they might mean “I believe in a universal consciousness that guides reality” or they might just mean “I try to be a good person, and I don’t like organized religion.”

  • Have you interacted with individuals in these groups?
  • Do any of these sound more appealing to you personally?
  • Do you think some who are in religion also exhibit these tendencies?

Discuss.