by Al Stefanelli
As many spindoctors try to assess ‘what’s wrong’ with our country, I continue to insist that it is spiritual and moral at its core. And what do you know, the largest growing self-identifying ‘religious/spiritual’ category is the most prone to mental illness, anxiety, phobias and drug abuse. No, I’m not surprised. – Fr. John.
The British Journal of Psychiatry featured research by University College Professor Michael King and other scientists that suggest those who claim to be ‘spiritual,’ but not religious are more apt to have problems coping over those who adhere to mainstream religions and those who hold no religious beliefs, at all.
The report stated that the spiritual/not religious demographic is more prone to phobias, neuroses and anxiety/eating disorders, as well as problems with drugs. The report also reveals that this group is more likely to be on medication for mental health problems.
Professor King wrote,
“Our main finding is that people who had a spiritual understanding of life had worse mental health than those with an understanding that was neither religious nor spiritual.”
The study revealed that 35% said they were religious and attended a house of worship regularly. The percentage of those who stated they weren’t religious or spiritual came in at 46%. Nineteen percent identified as spiritual, but not religious.
Out of the group of spiritual/non-religious, more than three quarters of them were more apt to be on mental health medications, and slightly less were apt to have a phobia. Half were more likely to suffer from some sort of anxiety. Other figures include approximately forty percent using psychotropic drugs, and slightly less presenting an increased risk of neuroses.
The report concludes with:
“We conclude that there is increasing evidence that people who profess spiritual beliefs in the absence of a religious framework are more vulnerable to mental disorder.
“The nature of this association needs greater examination in qualitative and in prospective quantitative research.”
The study included 7,403 randomly selected people in the United Kingdom. These subjects were questioned about their religious beliefs and the condition of their mental health.
Source
About Fr. John Peck
Isn’t it likely that “psychiatry” would be pre-disposed to classify much of religious belief as a “mental disorder”? The research seems to support the notion that “those who don’t stand for something are more likely to fall for anything.”
Psychology, not psychiatry.
Please elaborate on that distinction, Fr John. In commenting on “psychiatry,” I took my cue from “The British Journal of Psychiatry” as the reference for the study. My pop-cultural understanding of the distinction is that one is praxis wheras the other is more theoria. Not so?
Psychiatry is the science of brain disorders and their symptoms, performed by board certified medical doctors.
Psychology is a ‘soft science’ by comparison, ascribing behavior to certain contrived theories, and deriving diagnoses according to specific schools of thought.
Psychiatrists can prescribe medications, for example, while psychologists cannot. I don’t disparage the works of most psychiatrists, but I don’t trust most psychologist either, and the growing hostility of professional psychological circles to Christians in their midst and Christianity in general is proof that they are not to be trusted with fragile and wounded souls.
I can’t speak for others, but I think the entire mental health field is wrought with quackery and over diagnosis of dangerous neuroleptic medication. Too many folks with their own issues are dabbling in ‘psychotherapy’ and that itself is a shifting definition of dangerous practices. The purpose of therapy is make one viable, not to cure.
Hi Father and Peter,
First, I believe one finds the “spiritual but not religious” group are usually active in psychology or psychiatry. Their definition of “spiritual” essentially means sensitive, empathetic, or feeling. The statistics reflect this alignment of “spiritual but not religious” with those professions.
At a conference called Psyche and Soul attended by a majority of mental health professionals and a lesser number of clergy and faithful I heard, over dinner, the comment, “I’m spiritual bur not religious.”
Being a wise guy, I immediately sounded off, “Oh, no. You cannot be spiritual.” Startled jaw-dropping ensued. I went on to explain, “You do not believe in the existence of the spirit, therefore, by definition, you cannot be spiritual.”
The comment did not spur the outrage I expected (they did not toss me) but rather led to considerable discussion and introspection. The mental health professionals had not previously considered the true meaning of what they were saying. They were left with the motivation to either 1) consider more carefully their views on spirit, or 2) not refer to themselves as spiritual.
In our Orwellian times, I believe it is the redefinition of “spiritual” we see reflected in these studies.
Father Bless: A friend just referred your article to me, so here are my (somewhat strong) thoughts on the topic lol. During my hiaitus from the Church and before becoming Orthodox, I used to call myself spiritual but not religious (SNBR), so I definitely believe there is something to this assertion. Even Scripture backs it up! Remember Matthew 12:43-25 where Christ talks of the man who was cleansed of a demon but then that demon came back with 7 more even worse, and the man’s state was worse than before? That seems to be an apt description of the idea of being SNBR and risks of mental illnesses! Of course, the ones who promote being SNBR don’t see it that way because they tend to reject the things they deem as negatively “religious” like the Scriptures, the teachings of the Church Fathers, or even having a discipline such as attending weekly service and adhering to a daily prayer rule. It’s not unlike a persons who insists on sitting around eating only candy, ice cream and rich desserts and ignores their meat and veggies and avoids exercise…and then wonders why they’re so out of shape, tired and feeling weak all the time. The SNBR tends to subscribe to on the airy-fairy non-committal notions of spirituality posited by people like Oprah, and a bunch of the New-Agey woo woo types who make it up as they go along. SNBRs for the most part allow emotionality and sentimentality to direct them, and because they are only interested in ‘feeling good’ and positive 24/7, they have this unrealistic notion that somehow being only “spiritual” means they can avoid all the not so pleasant (and yes, realistic) aspects, duties and committments of religion (particularly organized religions.) That tells me they don’t truly understand what actual religion is…and why it’s essential to our spirituality. Too many people nowadays allow the “R” word to scare them or put them off. One of the definition of Religion according to Webster: “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” Now, part of Webster’s definition of spiritual is quite interesting:”concerned with religious values.” So, see? One can’t truly be spiritual without having some sort of religious values. The question is which religious values? which spiritual values? One must make a choice and not sit on the fence of slothfulness! Consider the passage: “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”-Joshua 24:15
Sabrina, may the Lord bless you!
I don’t usually allow such lengthy comments, but yours merit posting! I think you are within the mark. Theology is the expression of the Church’s experience, and indeed, as the saying of St. Maximus goes “theology without action is the theology of demons” and that, better than anything else, describes the SBNR state – the slave of spiritual fancy, demonic provocation, and self-fulfilling prophecy – and therefore perpetual doubt and despair. It is precisely this misery that we want to save people from, and like many clergy, I have souls come to me for help, but disputing with me constantly on the very help they desire. What a world!