| Abstract
|
:
|
How we define “spirituality” and also distinguish and describe different traditions of spirituality is not a simple matter of objective observation. All definitions and descriptions are a matter of interpretation which, in turn, involves preferences, assumptions and choices. In that sense, our approaches to spirituality may often be effectively “political” in that they express values and commitments. Sometimes our historical narratives also reflect the interests of dominant groups – whether in a religious institutional, theological or socio-cultural sense. This process may sometimes be conscious but is more often unconscious and uncritical. This essay first of all explores some of the issues surrounding the question of definition in the study and presentation of Christian spirituality in particular. Second, the essay examines how the history of Christian spirituality has been shaped by certain underlying “narratives”. However, following the thought of Paul Ricoeur, narrative and story are not to be rejected in favour of a quest for history as a form of pure factual “truth”. Rather, what is needed is a more conscious understanding of the power of narrative, its importance and the potential released by identifying forgotten or repressed human stories. Third, the essay then asks whether our approaches to, and descriptions of, particular spiritual traditions have masked prior assumptions about their autonomy, purity and their radical discontinuity (or “rupture”) from what went before or what lies alongside them. Two examples are briefly outlined: the supposed Catholic-Protestant spiritual divide and the often unacknowledged impact of another faith (for example, Sufi Islam) on certain Christian spiritual or mystical traditions. Fourth, the regular geographical-cultural biases in the study of Christian spirituality are noted and one response to this among Spanish-speaking Christians of the Americas, known as “traditioning”, is outlined. Finally, the importance of critical self-awareness in how we employ interpretative frameworks is underlined. How we define “spirituality” and also distinguish and describe different traditions of spirituality is not a simple matter of objective observation. All definitions and descriptions are a matter of interpretation which, in turn, involves preferences, assumptions and choices. In that sense, our approaches to spirituality may often be effectively “political” in that they express values and commitments. Sometimes our historical narratives also reflect the interests of dominant groups – whether in a religious institutional, theological or socio-cultural sense. This process may sometimes be conscious but is more often unconscious and uncritical. This essay first of all explores some of the issues surrounding the question of definition in the study and presentation of Christian spirituality in particular. Second, the essay examines how the history of Christian spirituality has been shaped by certain underlying “narratives”. However, following the thought of Paul Ricoeur, narrative and story are not to be rejected in favour of a quest for history as a form of pure factual “truth”. Rather, what is needed is a more conscious understanding of the power of narrative, its importance and the potential released by identifying forgotten or repressed human stories. Third, the essay then asks whether our approaches to, and descriptions of, particular spiritual traditions have masked prior assumptions about their autonomy, purity and their radical discontinuity (or “rupture”) from what went before or what lies alongside them. Two examples are briefly outlined: the supposed Catholic-Protestant spiritual divide and the often unacknowledged impact of another faith (for example, Sufi Islam) on certain Christian spiritual or mystical traditions. Fourth, the regular geographical-cultural biases in the study of Christian spirituality are noted and one response to this among Spanish-speaking Christians of the Americas, known as “traditioning”, is outlined. Finally, the importance of critical self-awareness in how we employ interpretative frameworks is underlined.
|