An UPdate on Religion

Recent conversations, some on networking sites populated by my children and their friends, have drawn me into discussions about the place of religion and church and spirituality in the lives of the regular Joes of the world. (I know I posted a longer rumination on religion in an earlier post, so this will be something of a tune-up.)

The discussion thread in question started with a posting of a quote attributed to Buddha, the gist of which was that the individual human must find his own answers: the minute the individual's perspective is dependent upon any authority, literary, philosphical, canonical, or otherwise, the individual has ceded himself, and thereby diminished himself. That is, at least, what I took from the quote. Responses ensued. The respondents are intelligent people, so the thoughts were generally well-crafted and comprehensible, despite an apparent disregard for the conventional mechanics of written communication and the occasional typo. What struck me, however, upon re-reading the thread, was just how much of the dialogue and the observations are dependent upon the limits of the experience of the speakers.

Lest the conclusion of the last paragraph sound dismissive of the posted views, let me clarify. Most of the people contributing are in their twenties. Consequently, though their respective voices are intelligent and thoughtful, they are to a large extent encumbered by their lack of years. The oldest of the respondents took the broadest approach, and so on down the line. So, while I have respect, comprehension, and appreciation for their thoughts, I am incapable of seeing things as they do. My point is not that I am older, wiser, and therefore more 'right.' Rather, my point is merely that I can't agree and accept the viewpoint each espouses, since living more than twice as long as all of them, I have been shoved into my way of seeing by the cumulative experiences that I have had.

Examples might help here. One of the participants is closely aligned with an orthodox religious approach. Another has been influenced by an orthodox religious perspective, but has rejected such viewpoint entirely. A third has been less indoctrinated into any formal theology, and so has adopted a somewhat carefully crafted hybrid of those with which he is familiar: he is a contemporary L. Ron Hubbard who is blazing a trail that is malleable and organic. Finally, the oldest contributor - except for me - has apparently concluded that there is no one way, and that if there is, it will always elude him just as he gets close enough to nab it.

Again, all of these people are interacting with and responding to life as they know and are living it. All of them are right, and none of them is, including me. People, if they are so inclined to make spiritual or religious discoveries, are constantly taking in new information on the basis of the things they observe. Only the most severely indoctrinated believes that the answers to life's questions have all been generated, and that the individual needs only to locate the template and then adhere to it.

My observation is simply this: the individual finds and tries to adhere to an approach that makes the most sense to him at the time. The indoctrinated individual believes he has found the pertinent answers in a formal code that will serve him for the rest of his life. Yet I feel confident that the details of the personal application of the philiosophy or theology will go through myriad developments as life throws its curves his way. The same is true for the rest of the group; the only difference is that their epiphanies may come to them not as a shock, or as a necessary adjustment, as they have already determined that the answers are elusive or ever-changing.

I don't know that any of this is clear enough, but for those who were part of the discussion thread, I think it best clarifies the broad range of the discourse.