have a nice day

The words spirituality and religion are not interchangeable. I am not religious. I am spiritual. I define the two very differently. My own simple definition is thus: Religion refers to an individual or community who share a general set of beliefs, deity concepts, and doctrines with a larger group. Spirituality is simply the individual experience of the sacred, whatever that may be. Of course people can share a spiritual sensibility or experience, just like they can agree on a philosophical idea or ethical stance.

Religion and spirituality can be deep subjects that don’t always lend themselves easily to casual conversations. And I do strongly believe there are circumstances where it is inappropriate to discuss the topics or anything related to them. Although for those of us who are not religious, the subject all too frequently comes up in potentially awkward ways throughout the course of every day life. The example that immediately comes to mind is when someone wishes you merry Christmas. If a stranger does it casually my usual reply is, “happy holidays” or some such thing, and I move on. Certainly if I am a guest in someone’s home for a holiday festivity I don’t go into a discussion regarding religion and my lack there of. But during the course of a passing conversation, under appropriate circumstances, I might mention that I don’t officially celebrate Christmas. Surprisingly, folks seem very taken aback for a moment. It’s as if the thought hadn’t ever occurred to them; after all, doesn’t everyone observe Christmas? And then, if at first I offer no explanation, inevitably it’s quickly assumed I must therefore celebrate Hanukkah instead. Apparently here in suburbia there are only two choices in winter holidays – Christian or Jewish.

When I do elaborate and explain that I celebrate winter solstice, some people look puzzled but mutter a pleasantry and change the subject. It’s enough for them that I celebrate something so they’re satisfied and really don’t want to know anymore than that. However there are a few curious souls who venture to ask questions, the first of which is invariably: “well then, what are you?”

I admit the smart-ass in me often wants to quip, “a human being” but that would be utterly rude. And actually they are genuinely interested which is wonderful, so I sincerely appreciate that. But my dilemma comes from answering this question in a timely manner rather than going into a long descriptive dialogue about what I believe and what I don’t…um, kinda like I’m about to do right now. You see, there is no easy, snappy little label for what I am. No term comes readily to mind that doesn’t also require further qualifying or explanation. Many classifications could fit, but some of the terminology is unfamiliar to most, and not altogether practical over all.

Because of my recent viewing of the Jonathan Miller BBC series on disbelief, we’ll take the label atheism first for this discourse. Atheist is a nice, familiar, compact little word that is totally loaded with misinterpretations. It does fit me to some degree; I do not believe in a personal deity, I deny the existence of a Supreme Being, there is no god. There, so I am an atheist, right, problem solved? Well, yes strictly speaking I might be an atheist because the definition of atheism fits my views on deity , but that’s not the whole story.

I am not 100% sure of a few typical atheistic beliefs…or should I say, disbeliefs. The most troubling one is what happens to me, as in my self or consciousness, after I die. While I don’t accept a concept of heaven, nirvana, or any of the new age ideas of an afterlife, I do grapple with the notion that my consciousness completely disappears in every way upon my death. My reluctance to face facts may just be a function of egocentric denial. Admittedly, it makes perfect sense scientifically that when I die my awareness just totally ceases to be. But sense isn’t always perfect. When I imagine losing a child, or my child losing me, my mind reels. Enough said.

And besides all that, I am a deeply spiritual person that holds a great many things as sacred and I particularly love ritual, both designing and participating in ceremonies. Not exactly typical atheist attributes. Furthermore, I commemorate holidays in more than a secular way. My family and I celebrate holidays essentially rooted in our own naturalistic version of an earth-based wheel of the year.

Okay then, so I’m definitely not a full-fledged atheist. Could I be one of those Wiccans or perhaps some other new age type of thing? Nope, that doesn’t work either. Decades ago I briefly explored various forms of Wicca, sort of tried them on for a while, but that path just didn’t quite fit. I don’t revere a god & goddess, which is a fundamental part of the Wiccan religion. I also don’t believe in casting circles or invoking elemental entities; nor do I think magic works in any way other than what could be defined as the power of suggestion or positive thinking. Which, I might add, is still a pretty worthwhile psychological endeavor under certain circumstances. But I digress.

I have participated in non-denominational Neopagan oriented celebrations. That type of group can sometimes approximate much of my beliefs and provide an atmosphere conducive to expressions of reverence for nature and the human condition. They also do so without subscribing to the typical Judeo-Christian-Islamic constructs of a patriarchal god. My preference more often than not would be goddess-oriented rituals to honor the symbolic sacred feminine. Women’s spirituality would be a good umbrella term to describe what I tend to be drawn to. So, that could make me an atheistic feminist pagan…or maybe a Dianic atheist? How’s that for an unlikely pair of words, lol. I can feel the collective cringe from here. No, while these group rituals can offer me something, they don’t provide me with everything. Until I perhaps find others of a more like mind, they merely give me an opportunity to share in some semblance of community and are a pleasant way to engage in spiritual creativity.

It’s been suggested to me that I embrace the labels of eco-feminism or deep ecology. These are both interesting philosophies that are to my mind a little bit more political in character, but which do include spiritual facets nonetheless. While I subscribe to many of the ideals contained in both those worldviews, there are elements that don’t fit me and in the end don’t accurately express how I feel or what I do, spiritually speaking.

I could adopt a combination of names, blending together my own brand of spirituality with some mixture of terms like naturalist, humanist, ethical culturalist, Gaianist – even more “ists” that I’m not thinking of at the moment. Many of these philosophies are encompassed in my belief system wholeheartedly, but not one of them singularly describes my spirituality aptly enough, tho naturalism comes pretty close. And besides, there is no way to fit all those “ists” together without starting to sound silly.

But wait a minute, speaking of “ists” – the core of my spirituality is that the cosmos, nature, the earth is sacred, right?. So okay, I’m a pantheist, obviously. Well yes, and this is a word I now use when I want a quick and simple reply to the question, “what are you?” Pantheism involves an elegant set of beliefs related to the sanctity of the earth that I find beautiful and deeply moving. Pantheism does not discount science but instead revels in it, also another positive aspect. I especially love the ideas and concepts advocated by pantheism as expressed by the World Pantheist Movement or even the Universal Pantheist Society. There are many Gaia references within pantheist writings that are very compatible with what I feel spiritually. However, some definitions of pantheism include brief statements like “god is all” or “god is nature”…basically that the entire cosmos IS god. Now, a definition of the word “god” itself is open to wide interpretation, just ask Einstein. But in any case I don’t think in terms of god as nature, I think nature is nature and “she” is sacred. Because let’s not forget that whole feminist thing -- when I do personify nature or the earth or the cosmos metaphorically, I don’t use god, I use a goddess construct like Gaia or Mother Earth. This is a choice I make deliberately with intention as a feminist.

Ok – so, bottom line: nature is sacred and I need a feminist sensibility. Gotcha. Maybe I’m a feminist pantheist? That’s down to two “ists” but it’s not easy to explain to the cashier at the supermarket checkout line or my kid’s art teacher. Plus it’s assuming that anyone has heard of pantheism and/or doesn’t presuppose that feminism is just relegated to radical politics. Not to mention the many, many, oh too many times I’ve been looked at askew and asked, “but how can your husband be a feminist?”. Hey, he is folks – and even has the T-shirt to prove it.

In the end I’m left with saying firstly what I am not. I am not Christian or Jewish. I am not a member of any religion. I am not a believer in any gods. What am I? I am spiritual. My family and I practice reverence for the earth and a myriad of natural wonders as our spirituality; maybe qualified further by adding that we celebrate the changing seasons as holidays. I might mention Mother Earth, veganism, poetry, art, pantheism and crunchy granola, for that matter. People usually think it’s all very quaint and perhaps a bit quirky, but harmless enough. Which is fine once in a while, but what if I want to be taken seriously? And how do I get my 6-year-old daughter to memorize all that stuff anyway?

As the harried mom of two kids I admit, there are some days when I don’t want to deal with belief or disbelief in anything greater than imaginary friends and teddy bears. So when someone passing by wishes me merry happy something or other, I just politely say “have a nice day” and am done with it. That should pretty much be something anyone can believe in, right?



(I decided to use Wikipedia as a reference link for several of the religions or philosophies mentioned purely for ease and consistency. Wikipedia is not always a credible source of information and should be used prudently)