Strong
Religious Belief: Sick or Healthy?
By Bishop Paul V. Marshall
July, 2004
The psychological world once listed “strong religious belief” in
its official diagnostic manual. It was removed from the list of diseases
in the early 1990s.
With contemporary neurological researchers and St. Paul, I wonder
about that decision. Some religious attitudes and beliefs may have
little to do with health.
Andrew Newberg and Eugene d’Aquili, medical doctors, have
done neurological research into spiritual experience and brain functioning.
They reported their findings in Why God Won’t Go Away (Ballantine
Books, 2002).
Not themselves religious people, they were surprised to discover
physical evidence that our brains work differently, in some senses
better, when we engage in spiritual activity. They ask the question
science itself cannot answer, whether we are in some sense made for
communion with the divine.
Along the way, the authors review the physical health benefits of
spiritual practice. They are not shy about the differences, overall,
in everything from marital happiness to longevity in those who walk
the road less traveled.
So far, so good. As a professional in the religious world, I find
it reassuring to know that there is evidence that what I try to help
people find is in every sense good for them.
I have nonetheless always been troubled by extremists, people whose “strong
religious belief” puts chips on their shoulders that can make
them, sadly, everything from pests to terrorists. It is not easily
forgotten that the perpetrators of 9/11 died with religious language
on their lips.
Newberg and d’Aquili take this question up in trying to separate
genuinely mystical from delusional experience. They provide an interesting
secular test to distinguish between healthy spiritual experience
and something unhealthy, even psychotic.
They find people whose religious experience is healthy to be characterized
by joy, serenity, and wholeness, by “loss of pride and ego,
a quieting of the mind, and an emptying of the self.” Those
whose religion tends toward the delusional, however, are marked by
fearfulness, isolation from others, “grandiosity and egotistical
importance.”
The authors were looking for psychological, not theological, criteria,
but there was for me an overwhelming shock of recognition when I
read their words. When Saint Paul wrote to the embattled community
of believers in Galatia two millennia ago he made a similar point.
Paul’s contrast was “flesh,” the baseness that
leads to chaos and destruction, versus “spirit,” life
in communion with God the redeemer. After observing that morality
is summed up in “you shall love your neighbor as yourself,” Paul
came up with a test to let people know which force was governing
their lives. His test was practical not doctrinal.
He lists fifteen symptoms of unspiritual living, and includes our
doctors’ list as he mentions “enmities, strife, jealousy,
anger, quarrels, dissentions, factions.” Among his list of
indicators of spiritual living: “joy, peace, patience, kindness… gentleness,
and self-control.” The choice to live the spiritual life, Paul
concludes, is a daily battle and choice to put the base urges to
death.
If one’s religion tends to lead to or reinforce one feelings
of superiority, arrogance, hostility fighting, and so on, both the
apostle and the psychologist (for perhaps different reasons) think
something is wrong.
All religions I know about have divisions and disagreements, just
as points of view differ in science, law, and in every walk of life.
Religious people are caught in a double bind, however: disagreements
that include swaggering, demonizing of others, and a inner state
of turmoil just are not spiritual, and, if the doctors are right,
could indicate something much worse.
When it leads from peace and joy toward discord and kingdom-building, “strong
religious belief” may itself be very sick indeed.
Return
to the index of Bishop Paul's columns for the secular press
Please direct any
questions or comments to the webmaster@diobeth.org