Beyond the None Zone

Fully a quarter of Americans, in recent surveys, identified with no formal religious affiliation at all. Instead, given the choice, they selected the option “none”. This led to interpretation of the data for its political implications, famously in the book “Religion and Public Life in the Pacific Northwest: The None Zone”, Patricia O'Connell Killen and Mark Silk, editors (AltaMira Press, 2004). Nowadays we may not say that religion does not matter in public life or politics. Indeed, people are religious, it’s human nature; what changes is how and whether they express their beliefs in eternal verities. We may no longer or may never have expressed our deepest values and most profound convictions in conventional denominational or communal terms. We do however find ways to show, to reveal, and to act upon what truths we hold most sacred, in our public life and private expressions. The challenge is how to match them up, and to expose them to scrutiny. Lent is a good time to do this. So is the daily practice of examining how our lives show our values. We might ask: Where does God show up in my life today? Where is God in this moment, this interaction, this experience? What have I done to provoke myself into holiness? Holiness, I take it, is the goal beyond which we dare not go, even dare to aspire to: but in small moments of daily life, it can come upon us unawares. Perhaps not in ourselves, perhaps not in others, but in the shape of the clouds lofting across the face of the mountains, the sun on the peaks, the dew on the grass, the coo of the doves. The kindness of neighbors, and strangers. Maybe this is where we need to look, for God, for the spiritual, to show presence in our lives.

Believing, Behaving, Belonging

We cannot be again the church (or the society) we were or thought we were, but we can become the church (and the society) that we are called to become.

Recently I listened to a series of presentations by church historian and sociologist of religion Diana Butler Bass, who described three B’s that are often used in “Religion 101” courses (she taught at UC Santa Barbara) to categorize religions, and religious people. They are: Belonging, Behaving, and Believing. 

Traditionally – back in the good old days (when she and I were young) – these categories were formal and institutional in the lives of many Americans. Belonging traditionally included membership, even card-carrying membership, in various organizations and institutions. Examples include voluntary associations like the Lions Club or the bowling league, as well as political parties, and — denominations. Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Congregationalist, Roman Catholic, etc., as well as Jewish organizations. Dr Bass mentioned “the letters” that pastors received back then, as individual parishioners requested formal transfer of their membership from one congregation to another. These are seldom seen any more. 

Behaving, for someone involved in the traditional religious circumstances of the recent past, could require adherence to specific, overt or implicit, rules of behavior, often connected to their church tradition. Do bees and don’t bees, Goofus and Gallant, et al., taught us how to behave and not to behave. There were rules.

Believing, again, was explicit and systematized, institutionalized and organized. The Ten Commandments and the Apostles’ Creed occupied large plaques at the front of many Episcopal churches. The Bible and the Book of Common Prayer were the documents referred to as formally containing the doctrine of the Anglican Communion (of which the Episcopal Church in the United States is a part). Other churches had other specific doctrines or authorities: the priesthood of all believers, the primacy of the Pope, justification through faith, etc. 

More recently Americans have become aware of another way of looking at faith, at believing, behaving, and belonging. In some ways we discover - and uncover - what we believe by what we do, how we behave, and with whom we belong. It is said, for example, that many among younger generations and age cohorts are more inclined to see themselves as belonging to groups of friends, and to family, which maintains its importance. Religious affiliations are more informal and relational as well. “Denominations are kaput” is a dire way to put it, but the institutional structures of the past mean less than they used to. 

What do we believe? What we experience is mediated by our tradition, our relationships, our memories, and our situations in life, and how we understand that experience helps us express what we believe, in what we say and in what we do.

How do we behave? Much as humans always have, and this is something to be celebrated. We show up for each other. The rules and expectations may not be as explicit or institutional but more relational. We care. The challenge is to care about others, and know our tribe, our clan, our family, is larger than the people we know or from whom we derive direct economic benefit. Being part of a denomination means that we can celebrate with total strangers who know the same hymns. Being part of a worldwide denomination means responding to human needs around the world and across the street. But that is part of being neighbors and co-religionists. And that is part of being human, too.

So how do we belong, and to whom? What does it mean to belong? Often through relationships with friends, family, work colleagues; some indeed online or by telephone or correspondence, but still also among the people we see regularly, in our home town or on the road. We show up for each other, as humans have for ever. Just don’t expect the singing to be as good on zoom. 

The Rev. Dr. John Leech is a priest associate at the Episcopal Church of Saint Matthew in Tucson, and a frequent guest preacher at other churches throughout Southern Arizona.

An edited version of this meditation appears on page E3 of the Arizona Daily Star, Sunday February 11th 2024, on the Keeping the Faith page of the Home + Life section.