Journaling and spiritual practice

I have recently started being more attentive to keeping a journal each night. While the benefits of keeping a journal have been espoused by many sources of wisdom, my particular practice is inspired by the Stoics, and takes on a certain form for a certain purpose.

In the past I have written about how we should have a sense of 'making progress' in our spiritual walk. In this effort, Epictetus prescribes careful self observation, saying that the Stoic philosopher "keeps watch over himself as over an enemy lying in ambush". Seneca likewise recommended self observation in the form of making a daily review of ourselves. Each night as we retire for the evening we should put these questions to ourselves: What bad habit have you cured today?, What fault have you resisted?, In what respect are you better? Seneca suggests that our sleep will be more tranquil, having 'sifted' through the whole day and admonished or praised ourselves appropriately. The practice of having to answer for that day's behavior will help us stay mindful and hold up in our continuous effort to make progress[1].

I've found this kind of review is best made in writing (or even typing/tapping). Putting this review into words makes them more real, and we can refer back to them easily if we need to. The famous Meditations of Stoic Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius were, in fact, a journal he wrote to himself; never intended for publication.

By practicing thus, I've noticed a few additional things that are helpful. For one, I make sure not only to review what I've improved, but where I've failed. Noting the good and the bad is important. I then sum up with what I plan to do tomorrow to improve.

Finally, there is one other benefit to this review in journal form that has been quite striking. Make a practice of reading again your previous night's entry the next morning, perhaps just after meditation. This is surprisingly powerful. I think it must be because our frame of mind changes so vastly over a night's sleep that we need to be reminded of that person who existed the night before and what their concerns were. If needed, the previous night's entry can be read yet again later in the day if we need to stay on course.

If you would like to try this ancient Stoic practice, here is a checklist you might entertain as you proceed:

1) Put thought into what form your journal will take. I originally had a small notebook, but later moved to the notebook app on my smartphone because the convenience of it made it easier to always have nearby, and since I always have my phone, I could easily review it each day. Think about what will work best for you in the long run.

2) Ask: What were my most significant failures today in my spiritual practice?

3) Ask: Did I perform all the regular practices I planned to?

4) Ask: Did the traits I am trying to cultivate hold up under the day's events? (think specifically through the events of the day and if you performed as you'd preferred)

5) Ask: What did I do right and where did I make progress? (it is important to look for things to praise as well)

6) Ask: What do I plan to do tomorrow that will further improve my habits and my spiritual practice? (these might be disciplines, better adherence to practices, read/study more, work harder, better mindfulness or things such as being more compassionate, considerate, or being kinder in demeanor, and more)

7) The next morning, re-read your previous night's entry. You will be surprised how well it helps you reset your focus and stay on the path. If you need to, read it again later in the day too.

Feel free to comment on how journaling has helped you, or even come back later after trying this to report your experiences!


Subscribe to The Humanist Contemplative
Share on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
On your mobile phone: text "follow dtstrain" to 40404


[1] Professor Keith Seddon, "The Stoics on why we should strive to be free of the passions". [LINK]

Should the word "sin" be part of our political vocabulary?

I have contributed recently as one of the writers at the Texas Reason Blog, which is a secular response to the questions addressed by several religious leaders at the Dallas Morning News' Texas Faith Blog, which has decided not to present a Humanist viewpoint.

Today's question is:

Should the word "sin" be part of our political vocabulary?


Subscribe to The Humanist Contemplative
Share on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
On your mobile phone: text "follow dtstrain" to 40404

Humanist Charities needs help amidst cholera in Haiti

This is based on a notice, just in, from Humanist Charities...

Last year when a devastating earthquake hit Haiti, Humanist Charities donors provided water, food, medicine, and supplies for the people of Jacmel—a city that hadn’t received any relief assistance until humanist volunteer Sebastian Velez arrived. Since then, Sebastian has worked to bring contraceptives and reproductive care for the women of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, and Humanist Charities has helped to establish two humanist clinics that provide medications and services to hundreds of patients every month.

But now cholera is spreading in Haiti, fueled by lack of latrines. One community of subsistence coffee farmers at the border between the Dominican Republic and Haiti is especially vulnerable to a cholera outbreak. Because the community is upstream from several other villages, an outbreak could affect thousands. Sebastian is working with community members with a goal of installing 100 latrines, enough for all the houses in this small community.

To learn more or offer your support in helping these villagers' fight against cholera, please see: http://humanistcharities.org/haiti.php


Subscribe to The Humanist Contemplative
Share on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
On your mobile phone: text "follow dtstrain" to 40404

How we view Nature and control

Click to enlarge.

My wife and I were talking last night about one way someone could think about the different faiths, religions, traditions, and philosophies. Most of these, in some way, address (1) how we view the world, and (2) how we should act in light of that. In more specific terms, one could consider how a spirituality looks at Nature, and how it looks at the issue of control.

In the first case, you have a spectrum that ranges from acceptance of Nature as one all-inclusive interdependent whole. Nothing 'transcends' or is outside of Nature. If the system includes deities, those would be immanent rather than transcendent. In other words, they would exist in and throughout Nature rather than outside it. On the other end of that spectrum is rejection of Nature as a lesser kind of thing, with a superior 'transcendent' reality outside or above Nature. By this view, Nature is something to be overcome.

On the other axis you have another spectrum that deals with how we are best off approaching the world in order to achieve happiness. On one end of that spectrum you have the outlook that we must learn about the important matters of our world so that we can better manipulate them and get them to do as we need. This end focuses on externals and external conditions, and the power to control them. On the other end of that spectrum, the focus is on self control. By this view, we must understand our world and ourselves so that we may condition ourselves to be in harmony with it, thereby being happy as a result.

So, looking at the graphic pictured here, you can see that in the upper left quadrant would be systems that say all of Nature is one interconnected whole, deities (if any) are immanent, and we are made happy by aligning ourselves with Nature. This would include Stoicism, Taoism, and much of conservative (earlier) Buddhism.

In the lower left quadrant, you have those that say all of Nature is one interconnected whole, deities (if any) are immanent, and we are made happy by learning to manipulate and control Nature. This would include many practitioners of Wicca, much of Paganism (particularly those with an emphasis on casting spells or conducting other rituals to bring about desired results), and much of New Age.

In the upper right, you have those that say Nature is to be rejected for a higher truth, deities (if any) are transcendent, and we are made happy by aligning ourselves with that transcendent truth. This would include some later Buddhism, but also those parts of Christianity that emphasize self discipline and acceptance of God's will.

In the lower right would be those that say Nature is to be rejected for a higher truth, deities (if any) are transcendent, and we are made happy by learning to manipulate and control higher powers. The words "manipulate" and "control" can have negative connotations those in this quadrant would likely reject, but the gist is that, by performing certain actions or having a certain disposition, one can get the higher powers to do things desired by the practitioner. This includes much of Christianity that prays for interventions and specific outcomes, as well as 'prosperity doctrine' within Christianity. It also includes some of the other Abrahamic religions, in part. Some of New Age also falls into this quadrant.

Most spiritual traditions will mix and match a little of each of these aspects, which is why it is better to view these as gradient spectra, with the traditions occupying a space that may overlap the central lines. But, generally speaking, this can be an illuminating way to look at these issues.


Subscribe to The Humanist Contemplative
Share on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
On your mobile phone: text "follow dtstrain" to 40404

Exploring Humanism and Paganism with B.T. Newberg

B.T. Newberg

Many forms of Spiritual Naturalism are growing, inspired by the ideas and wisdom from many different philosophies and traditions. Naturalists also exist within paganism, and one website has been making strides in exploring the nexus between Humanism and Paganism.

B.T. Newberg is the editor of Humanistic Paganism, a website devoted to naturalistic spirituality for the 21st Century. I recently interviewed B.T. about his philosophy and his project...


DT Strain
Thanks so much for your time and your thoughts! I'll begin by asking, what is the best way to summarize Humanistic Paganism?

BT Newberg
Mythology and science married.  If you can picture that, you've got Humanistic Paganism.

In a nutshell, Humanistic Paganism is a naturalistic way of life rooted equally in science and myth.  Modern empirical science has revealed a startling universe that is a wonder to behold, and we have every reason to stand in awe.  At the same time, the world's ancient mythic traditions reveal our inner, psychological universe.  Both are valuable in the 21st century.  When it comes to science and religion, there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  One way of life that fully embraces both is Humanistic Paganism.

The website by the same name appeals to all those who feel akin to this way of life, including a wide range of folk from Neopagans to Spiritual Humanists to Taoists.


DT
What can you tell us about your background and what brought you to what you're doing with Humanistic Paganism today?

BT
There was a moment in late high school when I was riding along on a John Deere tractor in the tiny, all-Christian town where I grew up, when I had a eureka experience.  It occurred to me: If I'd grown up in China, I would be just as certain about Buddhism being "true" as I was about Christianity.  In a flash the spell of dogma was shattered, and I saw religions as natural cultural phenomena.  Since then I've been agnostic but intensely interested in spirituality.

Fast forward a decade or so.  I'd explored most of the world's religious traditions, looking for some way to still be spiritual and revere nature, but without the woo-woo of superstition or dogma.  Paganism made a deep impression, and it had a long tradition of naturalism as one of its many valid modes of belief.  So I have come to practice Paganism in a form that puts those naturalistic elements at the forefront.  I call it Humanistic Paganism.  Others call it Naturalistic Paganism, and still others prefer a broader label like Spiritual Naturalism.


DT
Beyond the philosophy itself, tell us about what you're doing with the website, and what your future goals are.

BT
The mission of the website is to amplify the voice of naturalism within spirituality.  To do that, we seek out and publish the best writing of spiritual naturalists.  Some of our writers are established authors, but we are particularly interested in everyday folk like you and I.  The most honest and candid pieces often come from those who are just struggling to work out some kind of meaning in their daily lives.

Some of the writings are about the science of spirituality, like Rhys Chisnall's Paganism and the Brain.  Others explore practices, like Thomas Schenk's Bicycle Meditation.  Still others are personal experiences, like Ryan Spellman's How the Universe Speaks to Me.  We've even done interfaith work, like our ebook Encounters in Nature, which brings together a Celtic polytheist, a Vodou priest, and a Humanistic Pagan to talk about experiences in the wild.

In addition to publishing articles, we also provide resources and community links so naturalists can find each other more easily.  Most of all, our site is there to help the struggling seeker realize there are valid ways to be spiritual without all the woo-woo.

In the future, we hope to expand our line of ebooks, and refine our goals and mission.  Our next ebook, tentatively titled Our Ancient Future, aims to refine our roots as well as our vision for the days ahead.  That vision will be directly shaped by debates happening right now on a weekly website feature called Thing on Thursday.


DT
What do you say to Humanists who might think you're including a lot of material they see as extraneous at best, or perhaps even too condoning of superstition?

BT
They are right to be suspicious.  They should investigate us with a critical eye.  That's what good science does, after all.  If they do so, they'll find we subject our experiences and practices to the same examination.  We're working toward theories of spiritual experience which are consilient with biology and the physical sciences, and which make the least extraneous assumptions about God or gods beyond the observable universe.  Superstition is precisely what we leave behind.

Where we might have differences of opinion is on whether mythic language has any value today.  We think it does.  The symbols of myth, including words like "spirit", "Goddess", or "Dionysus", raise the hackles on our necks.  They lead us into certain vital states of mind that cannot be experienced in any other way.  How they do so is a matter for scientific inquiry.  That they do so is simply self-evident from experience.  That it enriches our lives is equally self-evident.  Experiencing the depth of myth is no less natural than experiencing the beauty of the full moon.  And like the latter, it deepens the sense of wonder and mystery in life.


DT
What are some of the criticisms you envision from the Pagan side, and how do you respond to them?

BT
One person reported going to a Pagan gathering and being pitied for not being "properly wired" to receive signals from the gods.  Author Brendan Myers has been accused of being a non-Pagan.  I've been scolded for using the names of the gods of myth if I don't "really" believe in them.  These are the sorts of criticisms we find leveled against us.  You see, lately there's been a swing in Contemporary Paganism toward literal belief, the idea that deities literally exist "out there" somewhere, independent of our minds.  Now, naturalism has been around in Paganism for a long time, all the way back to the Stoics of ancient Greece and farther still.  It used to be strong in modern Paganism too, whether you interpreted deities as Jungian archetypes, metaphors, or what not.  But lately some have started to assume that literal belief is the only genuine belief.  It's not unlike the fundamentalism of certain other religions.  We're responding by developing a stronger presence, amplifying our voices so people know that naturalistic Pagans are "real" Pagans too.

We're also responding by taking the situation as a challenge to refine our own understandings.  As John Halstead argues, when we psychologize gods as archetypes, we risk reducing them to "just" archetypes.  What we need to do is find a way to raise them back to gods, to express the truly godlike nature of archetypes, and to utter the numinous power of all such naturalistic phenomena.


DT
I like what Jung said in Halstead's article, that the gods refer to the "ruling powers" of our universe. That would indicate that, at least in some form, what the gods represent does indeed exist outside of our own minds wouldn't you say?  I'm reminded of Dr. Ellie Arroway in the film version of Contact - when the aliens appeared to her in a human form to which she could relate. Would you say that the gods are one way human beings can relate to those ultimate "ruling powers" of our universe which are difficult, perhaps impossible, to fully communicate in words?


BT
No.  There's a big "on the other hand..." coming up in a sec, but first I gotta say no.  I know a lot of readers will want to read that statement as supporting literalistic god concepts, i.e. intelligent beings with independent wills that respond to prayers and magical invocations, but with a minimally scientific twist.  We have to be very careful not to exploit science to justify our pet theories.  That happens a lot in Paganism, as when quantum physics is invoked to explain magic.  So, no, I wouldn't say it indicates something outside our minds, or alien-like entities unknowable except through myth.

On the other hand, if by "ruling powers" you mean the existential realities that shape our lives, like the sun, sky, death, love, or the profound sense of order in the universe, then my answer is yes.  They are outside our minds, and myths are uniquely capable of helping us fully express them.  Alternatively, if "ruling powers" means the archetypes, or modules in the unconscious mind that drive our deepest behavior patterns, then yes in that case too.  That's what Jung actually meant, as he makes clear elsewhere in the passage.  These are not outside our minds, but they are outside our conscious ego's control, so in that sense they are beyond us.  Since they are also beyond conscious perception, the symbolic images of myths help us glimpse them, just as Perseus glimpsed Medusa reflected in a mirror.  And I can't stress enough that this transcendence of the conscious self makes them godlike, deserving of religious awe.

This gives a sense of the razor's edge we walk when trying to heal the rift between science and religion.  The science has to be truly science, and the religion has to be truly religion.  It's not an easy path to tread.  But if we can do it, we may lead lives in which what we know about the world and what we need to feel fulfilled are in harmony.


DT
Yes, that latter sense of 'ruling powers' is the one I meant. Have you heard much from readers who are enthusiastic about Humanistic Paganism? And, what have you been most surprised and/or inspired by in those responses?

BT
I've been blown away by the response.  The website started out as a one-man show, a platform for my own personal explorations.  Within six months, it became a burgeoning spiritual community.  That was a big surprise.  We are now typically booked six weeks out with submissions from authors.

What inspires me most is the sheer number of folks out there, each trying to figure it out on their own.  Hey, there are others just like me!  At the same time, there aren't enough high-profile places for us to find each other.  So it's hard to connect, and easy to feel like you're on your own.  But others are out there.  We're out there.  And hopefully projects like Humanistic Paganism and the Spiritual Naturalist Society can help make it a little easier to link up. 


DT
Yes, I have high hopes for the Spiritual Naturalist Society. We'll be ready to launch soon and it's my hope that people doing work such as yours will find the Society a useful avenue to share what you're doing and contribute to an even larger community of Spiritual Naturalists that include Pagans as well as naturalists from many other traditions. How do you foresee your relationship with the SNS once it's up and running?

BT
Potentially intimate.  Humanistic Paganism can be seen as a form of Spiritual Naturalism, so it would fit right in as a close partner.  I'm looking forward to seeing what we can do for the SNS, and what it can do for us all.


DT
Is there anything else you'd like to share?

BT
Yes - we accept "challenge" pieces.  If you're reading this and you just don't buy it, write up your critique and submit it as an article!  As long as it's constructive and offered in the spirit of dialogue, i.e. not a rant or flame but a well-reasoned argument, we'd love to publish it. Peer review is an essential element of the scientific method.  Criticism may not be the most pleasant to hear, but it keeps us on our toes.  It's how all good ideas become great ideas. 

Finally, I'd like to finish up with a question:

What kind of spirituality is best suited for our times?

In this postmodern age of alienation and confusion, it is tempting to want to trade observable reality for simplistic supernatural models.  On the other hand, it is equally tempting to want to stamp out all spiritual language for fear of "fuzzy thinking."  We believe we can do better than both of these.

Imagine it: a natural world where the language of myth and the discoveries of science mutually reveal the wonder of life.

That's spirituality for the 21st century.


DT
Well said! Thank you so much for your time. I wish you all the best and look forward to working with you in the future.


Subscribe to The Humanist Contemplative
Share on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
On your mobile phone: text "follow dtstrain" to 40404