DEI of Spirituality

Spirituality and religion occupies and influences our society in a dizzyingly inconsistent way. No single creed or platform seems to fit all hearts, likely because there are so many hearts, and so many ways they may be shaped. Geography still plays a large role in determining what the available options even are. It makes sense to fit in with family and neighbors, especially at the beginning of a spiritual journey. There is certainly something to be learned from any of the the mainstream options. There may even come a day when the enormous plurality of competing religions, styles, expressions, and doctrines comes into clear focus. The sheer variety and superficial differences can be overwhelming to accept. How are we to know if we picked the right one? This is a dangerous and unstable time for some, a period where things are seriously questioned, things perhaps better left unasked, but it still must be worked through. There is a lot of unanswered questions about validity of other religions, conflict over sacred sites, jurisdiction over law, and political imperatives of the faithful. Religion has seemingly been around forever, why is all of this still being debated?

Out of all the reasons, and there are may, one is presenting a critical threat to some core truths about ideal doctrine and actual reality. The levels of acceptable diversity, scope of equity, and degree of inclusion is an ongoing battleground in many faith communities around the globe. Geography plays a role in filtering what religions are available in practical ways, but more often it is the seeker’s class, race, criminal history, or spoken language that presents the greatest obstacles for entry. In the greatest spiritual irony of all, some visitors will simply not be welcome due to unspoken or unofficial criteria.

All communities of faith must struggle with their collective concept of strangers just as much as any other civic community must. Members of other religions are viewed with suspicion, and an increasingly large number of them are seen as enemies or foreign pretenders. Religion, at it’s most superficial levels, offers a clear identity and a place to belong in community. As long as this fictional identity can be maintained, there is plenty of love and support to go around. Should any unfortunate circumstance, moral aspect, or physical appearance spoil that aura, all bets are off. Vague suspicions, spiteful gossip, or blatant distrust can be weaponized to turn the opinion of a tight knit community against any one them. There is one secret weapon that can potentially turn any vague and unsubstantiated suspicion into outright hostility- charismatic leadership wielding scripture like a scalpel instead of a suture.

If you want to know a faith community, observe what happens when a stranger enters their doors. Is the visitor treated as if they are lost? Is there suspicion and distrust right from the start? Are they stereotyped simply by the way they are dressed? How friendly and welcoming are the members to someone’s guest in comparison? Do leaders model normative behaviors when encountering strangers, or is there a committee for that? It can speak volumes to be one of the hundreds of congregations with their doors open while singing hymns of being saved just as they are, and yet decide that this person or that type will not be welcome here. The definition of “us” must be clearly defined in order to preserve it. Maintaining a strict code of enforced identity is just another case of classism gone awry. Only those who are just like us are worth welcoming.

Anyone who might be turned away, felt unwelcome, pushed out, or formally banished will easily find their own way. It is hardly the punishment the congregation might imagine. And frankly, the estranged person may be better for it. In a way, this type of gatekeeping creates their own competition in the haste to enforce a restricted sense of identity. Physical attributes like color, style, literacy, or spoken language may contribute in a secondary role, but the primary spiritual pseudo-identity they would rather maintain in it’s abstraction becomes just as discriminatory as any perceived nationality, age, or disability. This is not always a doctrine of the religion itself, but the leadership has failed to curb these unconscious prejudices and instill the offering of love without exception.

Just as people have done with increasingly toxic politics, more and more people have elected to simply flee the religious wasteland and seek out more peaceful surroundings. Unwilling to compromise their own identity for the sake of fitting in, they simply walk away. Potentially the most valuable encounter that kind of fearful community might have is lead out the door with smiles, handshakes, and pats on the back. A closed community can only survive by growing from within, yet they offer fewer and fewer reasons for their youth or visitors to stay. Something different is needed, and experimentation has already started changing the style and formality of mainstream services, and outreach to at-risk communities is steadily growing.

Ancient and mostly forgotten devotional frameworks have recently been reconstructed, refreshed, and resurrected into practical and accessible modern formats. Everything that mainstream religion pillaged and burned in it’s righteous annexation has turned up once again in a modern dress. Sprouting from the ashes and toppled walls of once powerful institutions, these fresh echoes of ancient sensibilities hold a much stronger appeal in a complicated world like ours. In historical context, they fit the complicated and mixed up world of their time. Empires, disasters, invaders, and diseases kept shifting the borders and challenging political control. Then came a tunnel when jealous monopolistic institutions tried to rule over all things spiritual. In the process of clear-cutting the spiritual landscape, anything that conflicted, or was simply there before, was burned down and decreed heresy. There will always be a prominent place for such institutions, as they will ensure it by any means necessary. In the ensuing years, the institution became staid, internally conflicted, and top-heavy. The message fell on tired ears, and power waned.

Roman, Greek, Wiccan, Sumerian, and many other polytheistic pantheons have become much more attractive with their devotional simplicity and aversion to rigid doctrines and dogma. This creates room for individual customization and personalized observances. As a result, these emerging communities tend to be very ecumenical and more interested in learning from each other. This does not imply an absence of power struggles and raging narcissists, they are just not as formalized and rigid. Cults of personality are present in many shapes and forms, but their influence is limited in it’s potential for wide-spread destruction and harm.

Even in these growing and expanding practice communities, older voices still try to serve as gatekeepers, asserting cultural appropriation, closed practices, and enforcing birthright privilege. Commercial appropriation and initiated traditions are real, so it is important to understand where the trespassing begins. However, gatekeeping on behalf of those communities is just as flawed. Make a referral and let those communities decide. Such ideas are increasingly viewed as old-fashioned, and they will likely fade as these old ways of worship mature and embrace more diverse followers. This is a process still in it’s infancy, and sharing ancient practices to new and open minded students will take some time. Alternative practices can suffer from the same fear of strangers, and that is an artifact of humans, not the practices themselves. It is important to respect ancient religious practices and customs, but more inclusive alternatives are emerging, doors are opening, and a larger contingent of open minded supporters have started making their voices heard. We can only hope that same thing continues with the mainstream religions as well.