I have lunch once a month with a group called Women in Religious Leadership (WIRL). We are from many different faith traditions and political backgrounds, but we share a commitment to meaningful conversations and civil discourse. A theme that arose out of our discussion this month was the importance of individual freedom versus the value of the "greater good."
As a simple example, a question was raised about whether there is a national standard about when to lower the American flag to half-staff, or whether individuals or communities can decide their own standards. Two of us seemed to vaguely remember something from civics class about national standards, but none of us really knew. In a small town south of Fayetteville, the community lowered the American flag to half-staff when a local and beloved official died. We had mixed views of whether that was OK.
Later, I went online and found, that on June 22, 1942, Congress passed a joint resolution that encompassed what has come to be known as the U.S. Flag Code. The code provides details for when the flag is supposed to be lowered to half-staff, along with the number of days it should be flown that way. For example, for a president or a former president, it is 30 days from the date of death. Only national-level officials were listed.
So in this case, emphasis on the collective -- the United States -- was deemed more important than the individual. If, on the other hand, we were to talk about something like entrepreneurship, the focus on individualism might be more prevalent. Different faiths, cultures and communities differ on whether they emphasize the collective over the individual or vice-versa. Asian cultures, for instance, are well-known for having a more collective culture, and the United States is probably the world's poster child for an individualistic culture.
However, this is not an either/or situation. Cindy Wigglesworth has done extensive research on spiritual intelligence, and one of the 21 spiritual intelligence skills she identified is "complexity of inner thought." She writes, "As we progress to the highest levels of development in this skill, we develop the ability to recognize elements of truth in conflicting points of view, embracing and even enjoying paradox and mystery."
At our WIRL lunch, we talked about the pros and cons of individualism and the pros and cons of collectivism. One of the things I admire about this group is the ability to find truth in conflicting points of view.
There is a method called "polarity management," developed by Barry Johnson, that teaches the skill of complexity of inner thought. He says we tend to see most challenging situations as problems to be solved, when they actually are polarities to be managed. To follow our example, individualism will never become the only way we live, and neither will collectivism. Both are inherent in human society. Rather than being a problem to be solved, they are polarities to be managed.
I'd like to offer another polarity, one that has been central to my experience of moving from New England to Northwest Arkansas. That polarity is faith and spirituality. In New England, the word "spirituality" was an accepted and comfortable word, and the word "faith" was one that evoked fear of proselytizing and judgment. The word "faith" was confused with fundamentalism. In Northwest Arkansas, the word "faith" is a more accepted and comfortable word, and the word "spirituality" can sometimes evoke fear of New Age woo-woo or even of the work of the devil. The word "spirituality" is confused with being secular and even anti-religion. In the workshops I have conducted, people frequently associate faith with collectivism, and spirituality with individualism -- although that is not true across the board.
Using the polarity theory, we ask ourselves, "What are our positive associations with faith? What are the benefits of faith?" Not everyone defines faith the same way, so the dialogue allows for a greater complexity of thinking about the many nuances of faith. Some of the things I have heard are: "I value the tradition." "I belong to a community that supports my walk of faith, it provides me a sense of inner peace." "It helps me to 'Let go and let God.'"
Next, we ask ourselves, "What are the positive associations with spirituality? What are the benefits of spirituality?" Some examples I have heard are: "It gives me freedom to discover my own unique path." "It provides me with contemplative practices that make me a better person." "I don't need to belong to a specific religion to be spiritual." "It helps me to experience a sense of oneness and mystical connection."
The next step in polarity management is to ask, "What are the negative outcomes or downsides to faith, and to spirituality?" Possible negative outcomes or downsides of faith might be the suspension of critical thinking, trusting too heavily in authority figures instead of one's inner judgment or even abuse of power. Possible negative outcomes or downsides of spirituality also can be the suspension of critical thinking, losing the capacity to function effectively in the day-to-day material world, isolation or not being able to go as deeply as you could if you were in a particular faith tradition.
In a shared dialogue about these kinds of polarities (Liberal versus conservative might be another polarity to explore.), a more holistic and mature picture develops. Ken Wilber talks about the process of growth and evolution as one of transcending and including the polarities of what has gone before.
What transcends and yet includes the polarity of individualism versus collectivism, faith versus spirituality, liberal versus conservative? How can we find the best and the positive in each of these polarities, knowing that each has a shadow side and a downside? It takes a great deal of spiritual maturity to hold these polarities at the same time, and it is my hope that we learn to transcend and include.
NAN Religion on 05/27/2017