ESSENTIALISM IN FEMINIST THEOLOGY: IDENTITY IN NARRATIVE AND NATURE

J. M. CALLAGHAN

Précis

            Theologian Serene Jones, the first female president of Union Theological Seminary, has stated that, “assumptions about what women are, and should be, are built into our theology and practices.”^[1] A brief survey of two-thousand years of church history and the works of its theologians, reveals a tradition replete with claims about the female nature.^[2] The vast bulk of Christian literature during this time has preserved what most perceive as a subordinate view of women. Contrast this with the conviction of the complete equality of women with men, the staple of feminist thought and theology. What is less clear however is, to what degree (if any) there is a difference between the female and the male essence. Those who continue to embrace the notion that biological and non-biological differences between women and men are not just socially constructed but are somehow partially natural, generally fall under the umbrella category of “essentialists.”

As such, this paper will explore revised and newly framed formulations of essentialist theology which attempt to discard old, outdated and restrictive claims about the female essence, in favor of strategic or “pragmatic essentialism,” which provides a structure of narrative for a woman’s identity.^[3] For our purposes, this mode of essentialist speculation will be rooted in the Christian tradition and a synthesis of secular and theological thought. In this process we will examine some historical developments within feminist and gender theory that are relevant both to Christian theology and also for constructing a framework around the significance of “femaleness.” All of this will be used in an attempt to explain why many women and men still choose to embrace “universal” claims about sexed nature, which undoubtedly provides a sense of foundational narrative for our individual and communal lives.^[4]

Introductory Remarks

Christian feminists have, over the past half-century, sought to bring their respective critiques and observations regarding society and culture into critical dialogue with the disciplines of theology and biblical studies.^[5] In many respects, the general aims of secular and Christian feminists feature shared convictions about women’s equality and the need to address oppressive practices and ideas in the world at large. The immense diversity within feminist thought, however, inevitably leads to differences. These differences are more apparent for feminists who remain committed to the historic, Christian faith, because their starting point is fundamentally distinct from secular feminists. Thus, there is always a dialectical push and pull between the two. This relationship is put well in the following, “There is not only a unity of concerns between feminist and Christian voices in this journey, but also a persistent and fruitful tension between them.”^[6] Elaine Storkey provides us with a more specific label, “biblical feminists,” which describes those whose epistemological foundation begins with an acceptance of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures as somehow revelatory in nature and as “authentic communication from God.”^[7] Christian feminists who identify with some kind of biblical commitment are then, as a result, tasked with theologizing about what attention the bible gives to female existence and what it means to be a woman.

The Imago Dei that humankind reflects is on its own a subject for philosophical pontification concerning the nature of humanity. The character of the Genesis creation account is such that it predisposes the Judeo-Christian tradition towards an adherence to a doctrine of creation.^[8] What is particularly relevant is not just that humanity is formed in the image of God, but that humanity is composed of female and male individuals, who both represent God in some fashion. The following quote illuminates more precisely the ambiguity that essentialist theology might attempt to elucidate;

That we are created male and female, and that this difference plays a large part in the central human tasks of “reproduction, nurturing, survival,” is indeed “beyond critical scrutiny.” But what that fixed point of reference signifies, is by no means beyond analysis.^[9]

Feminism, Essentialism & Historical Development

            As alluded to earlier, feminist thinkers have been hesitant to embrace “difference,” as an appropriate term for the unique embodiment of men and women. Following the early women’s right’s movements, the goal of early feminism was to establish the “foundational, non negotiable premise that women and men are equal.”^[10] This expanded beyond the suffrage movement to women’s opportunities in the workplace and in society at large. During this pivotal time, many held that “equal rights and opportunities could only be grounded in the presumption that women and men share the same nature.”^[11] For there was an understandable concern about the danger of over-emphasizing or conceding to the existence of differences between men and women. More specifically, a primary concern here, was that an affirmation of a “natural female essence…potentially reinstates and reinforces the very abuses feminism intends to fight.”^[12] In short, if one granted that women possessed an essential nature or a universal set of fixed characteristics, the inevitable result would be that fixed gender roles and attributes would be ascribed to all women, thus limiting the female experience. And even if one accepted the premise that there were differences between women and men, this emphasis on difference was altogether subjective, since one could just as easily make the case that the similarities between men and women far outweigh the differences.^[13] Thus, many argued that any differences, whether actual or assumed, should be dismissed altogether so that women and men could interact as equals in daily life. But this solution was rejected by others. And so many began to argue that the answer to how the patriarchy “devalued” womanhood was “not to deny but to appreciate those differences.”^[14] Some even began to argue that ignoring difference was just as much of an issue and was another method of erasing female existence. The point here being that, “Difference and equality were never intended to be at opposite poles.”^[15]

            And so this brings us to both a divergence among feminist thinkers, but also a middle ground for others, where a “both/and” perspective was embraced.^[16] Over decades of feminist discourse, a number of theoretical impasses would emerge, highlighting some not insignificant ideological breaks. One of the first, was the sex-gender distinction made by gender theorists such as Simone de Beauvoir, which we will review shortly. The second and related juncture was the constructivist-essentialist divide. A third question, which like the previous two, remains unresolved for many, has been whether or not there is a single male-female nature or dual natures.^[17] All three of these points of contention persist in academia today and are of course deeply interrelated. Before we outline the basic critiques of essentialism, we need to delineate what exactly these criticisms are directed towards and so we will quickly define older forms of essentialism.

Pre-modern and Biological Essentialism

            The basic thrust of essentialism is the, “idea that a certain ‘essence’ defines the center of our identity as human beings and as men and women.”^[18] This has typically translated to some notion of “fixed characteristics” for both genders, which are natural.^[19] Additionally, these fixed attributes have been considered to explain why gendered roles are and should be both descriptive and prescriptive. This older or “pre-modern” essentialism is especially pertinent in a Christian context, because for most of history, and still for a great many Christians today, it has been viewed as normative for men and women. Typically, this involves defining womanhood and manhood with absolutized characteristics that are or should be true across cultural and societal lines.^[20] Traditional forms of essentialist theology almost always translate to expectations within gender roles. Examples of this in Christian praxis might include; female exclusion from the clergy, male headship in marriage and general expectations about behavior, attire and sexuality.^[21]

            Additionally, we have “biological essentialism,” which focuses on the natural differences (i.e. anatomical, physiological and hormonal etc.) between women and men and builds an essentialist paradigm in light of them.^[22] For early feminists, this form of essentialism was still an acceptable fact of life. But as we will see next, many feminist thinkers would come to reject biological essentialism as well, due to its deterministic outlook.^[23]

The Constructivist Account: A Critique of Essentialist Claims

Even before many of the historical dynamics described above had taken place, gender theorists were beginning to question the parameters of gender as a category. One of the major innovations was the sex-gender distinction, which accepted that sex was biological, but stressed that gender was social.^[24] Thus, one can see how the idea of gender being constructed rather than inherent, quickly emerged once this distinction was made. Because humans are unstable beings with inescapable mutability, change in personality always occurs over the course of one’s life. Experiences and the environmental location in which we develop clearly play roles in shaping our identity. Therefore, in constructivism, “the body (sex) is raw material on which socially constructed mores (gender) inscribe themselves.”^[25]

A number of pointed objections are then levied at essentialism and their validity should be well-taken. We’ll list just a few. Essentialism posits a “universal feminine,” which tends to be either abstract and undefinable or contingent upon the gender norms of each particular time period.^[26] Essentialism presupposes the existence of binary categories such as sex/gender, male/female and culture/nature.^[27] Likewise, feminists argue, due to concerns about a biologically based essentialism, that it “makes women’s historical subordination to men seem like a natural fact rather than a cultural product.”^[28] While by no means exhaustively representative of the criticisms essentialism has been subjected to, these points do capture some of the primary observations which have undermined the legitimacy of essentialism as it pertains to human sex and gender. One further philosophical development must be addressed before we see how a recapitulated essentialism has escaped relegation to the intellectual basement.

The Postmodern Problem

            The complex and often vague philosophical term that is “postmodernism” carries a host of meanings with it. The postmodern claims relevant to a discussion of essentialism have primarily to do with “deconstruction.” Furthermore, for postmodern thinkers, “there are no essentials, no metanarratives, no overarching explanatory formulas.”^[29] The implications of these propositions should be self-evident, especially for Christians who take the metanarrative of scripture as a frame of reference for reality. The notion of deconstruction provides another conundrum for our conceptualization of sex/gender, for postmodernists not only claim gender is constructed, but sex!^[30]

Responding to Constructivism & Postmodernism: Strategic Essentialisms

Where does this dizzying array of critiques leave someone with essentialist inclinations? One has to wonder if essentialism is even viable anymore given its historical impedimenta. Certainly among scholastics, to speak of essential female or male natures or immanence (to borrow Beauvoir’s language) or of a “basic feminine character structure,” has become uncommon, but not unheard of among feminist theorists.^[31] An inherent feminine nature is “no longer orthodox,” and for many gender theorists especially, it is a “rather heretical view.”^[32] But where there is heresy, there are also heretics and for many outside of the academic sphere, forms of essentialism are still embraced, unconsciously or consciously. While by far the minority within academia, a number of thinkers, both secular and religious, have postulated new approaches to essentialist paradigms.

The starting point for these voices is to acknowledge many of the criticisms aimed at pre-modern essentialism. There are a plethora of problems for an essentialist ideology or theology. At the same time there are some advantages, particularly from a Christian perspective. A starting point for a valuable essentialism takes place when it is a “representative metaphor entailing human agency and practice, rather than a realist retreat into a nature against which human beings are powerless.”^[33] The worry about a kind of biological destiny is evident here. As such, too much emphasis on biology’s role in gender identity should be taken into account as well as a realization that men and women share many similarities and thus it might be more helpful to focus on similarities rather than differences, depending on the context.^[34] However, the counter-response to concerns about “biology as destiny”^[35] is a concern over a total denial of differences rooted in male-female bodies. And when it comes to theorizing about the natural differentiation between women and men, an essentialist “two-nature” theory does have some advantages as explained in the following;

Drawing from the account of creation in Genesis 2, the two-nature theory emphasizes the fact that men and women have very different bodies and reproductive tasks, but also more subtle differences. Men have more testosterone, women have more estrogen…The two-nature theory seems to explain some persistent patterns in human nature…The two nature-theory also takes account of the ways biological differences shape human lives.^[36]

The single nature theory does emphasize the unity of human nature and reiterates that all faculties and abilities possessed by individuals are universal to women and men. At the same time, a shared human nature does not exhaust the unique “diversity” of embodiment for women and men. Thus, it is important to place these theories of human and sexed nature in dialectical reciprocity.^[37] But beyond biology and its role in the female identity, recovering or rethinking essentialism has come in a number of forms. For example, while most feminist essentialists would reject motherhood or “mothering” as a manifestation of essentialism since not every woman chooses to have children and some cannot biologically produce children, it is still a feature of life for the majority of women around the world both historically and presently. But to speak of motherhood is not to speak universally but rather in generality, for it is a staple of most women’s lives. And to reject a very broad truth about existence simply because it is not true for every single individual is not helpful either. Take Wittgenstein’s concept of “family resemblance,” where he noted that members from any given family can share some “resemblance” without necessarily bearing all of the same qualities. In other words, general shared traits vs universal shared traits. Wittgenstein then applied this to words or conceptual categories, noting that the word “game” can refer to many activities that are vastly different. Thus, with this in mind, the words or categories, “motherhood” or “male/female,” can refer to broad characteristics shared within a certain category without universalizing particular aspects in a determinative manner.^[38] Furthermore, even “for many radical feminists, the solution to such dichotomies lies not in women’s rejecting childbearing and child raising but rather in their regaining control of both…By retrieving motherhood on their own terms…”^[39] This “retrieval” or reclamation of certain typically “feminine” associated experiences is precisely that. However, while some feminists have encouraged women to embrace and take back certain female identities, they have rejected any claim that an identity of one woman is normative for the next and thus prefer to speak in generalities. This means that, while feminists might acknowledge women’s unique experience as a nurturer, this does not exhaust or define the lives of all women, nor does it imply that men are any less capable of nurturing qualities. Thus as with feminist thinkers like Luce Irigaray, there is a call for the woman to free herself from the patriarchy and to “become herself,” while also embracing the beauty of difference between not just men and women but among all women too.^[40] What emerges from this delicate balance is what has been coined as “strategic essentialism.”^[41]

            While modern essentialists often end up in a very defensive posture, they have raised some critical points about the weaknesses of the constructivist account and postmodern philosophy. The most obvious response to social constructivism is that it makes us as humans mere byproducts of societal and environmental mores, which in some sense share deterministic parallels with biological destiny.^[42] Additionally, essentialists protest that strong forms of constructivism can lead to relativistic outlooks where “standards” by which to describe female suffering and injustice disappear into a larger paradigm that ultimately disadvantages women.^[43] Seemingly, both accounts present faults. But, while postmodernity is critical of constructivist and essentialist language, it offers only less ground to stand on, making it increasingly difficult to create narratives about who we are as humans and as men and women. Furthermore, the postmodern deconstruction of both sex and gender as categories contains a number of flaws. Postmodernists insightfully tell us that language (and thus the usage of terms like “essentials,” “sex” and “gender”) has limitations alongside its inherent power. For, “language constructs reality,” and there is a profound “instability of all categories.”^[44] If this is the case, we then have to carefully reconsider and deconstruct how we’ve delineated these categories, including those of sex and gender.^[45] Because language is limited and is also used to accumulate power, there should be a hermeneutic of suspicion directed towards its usage. This postmodern critique makes important observations, but its own logic must be applied upon itself.^[46] Furthermore, while there is of course a deep value to deconstruction, particularly regarding universal claims that have to do with our day to day existence, at some point we need to construct meaning for our lives and our self-perception. Ultimately, the rejection of any kind of metanarrative, of even an abstract notion of the “universal feminine,” which for many people carries a great deal of significance, is what makes the postmodern deconstruction of sex and gender unhelpful for many. This is why, despite remarkable limitations, a theological narrative around the nature of sex/gender matters. Similarly, despite legitimate concerns about exaggerations promulgated by biological essentialism, postmodern deconstruction ultimately founders on the rock of biological reality. Consider the unique health challenges that men and women face, where for example, females but not males are at risk for cervical cancer. This is not a socially constructed reality and can be rooted in normative biological categories.

The Importance of Narrative and Nature

            Elaine Storkey gives us four paradigms from which to understand the biblical depiction of female-male existence, uniqueness and relations; difference, sameness/similarity, complementarity and union.^[47] Each of these themes represents separate but interrelated aspects of our “essentialized” createdness in the image of God. Storkey highlights the connection between sameness and difference in the following:

As Christians, we understand that both men and women are created in God’s image, and that both are the subjects of redemption history. Thus men and women are fundamentally equal. Yet the Creator, whose appreciation of diversity vibrates throughout creation, made both men and women as human beings embodied differently and thus bound to experience the creation in certain unique ways. Accordingly, equality and diversity are at the heart of creation, and at the center of the human community.^[48]

There is then a complementarity implied in the differences, at least biologically, in that reproduction requires specific contributions from each sex. And finally the differences and complementarity make the concept of “union” possible, given that union, as opposed to uniformity, requires differences coming together in a complementary manner.

Thus, we can see how the Genesis narrative captures all four of these paradigms. Creation begins with sameness before differentiation takes place. But shortly after, the complementary nature of reproduction and mutual partnership leads to unity. The concept of union necessitates a difference and what brings the differences together is the complementarity (not in the hierarchical sense).

            Many commentators have noted that in the Genesis creation account, humanity is only seen as wholly complete when both male and female are present.^[49] A dismissal or misuse of the Genesis account loses sight of its theological and existential weight. For regardless of debates about historicity or interpretation, the story of Eve and Adam is the beginning of the Christian tradition and it carries with it the authoritative gravity of God’s creative designs for humanity. This means that while individuals will always form their own essentialist (or constructivist) identities, we must also define ourselves on a larger scale;

Individualistic solutions…cannot unravel the complexities of gender, for in the end gender is not about individual men and women but about the differences that emerge when men and women are in relationship in human communities. To understand and attempt to connect the injustice of gender relations, we must explore the dynamics of men and women in relationship with each other.^[50]

Conclusion

            A theologically essentialist paradigm is grounded in the narrative of scripture with the diversity of humanity showcased in the added diversity among all women and all men. The distinctive features between the sexes and among the both sex groups are reasons to uphold and celebrate the ways in which attributes found in both men and women reflect God. Similarly, we can honor and recognize that, “Male and female are sexual categories and we experience much of our identity through our sexuality.”^[51] An essentialist may contend, with many qualifications, that, “the female body carries meaning in and of itself, which is the ground for women’s identity and also potentially for women’s solidarity as a group.”^[52] Essentialism based on narrative and collective identity, moves beyond individualistic and subjective ways of identifying, allowing women and men to enter into a larger story. This narrative, speaks of the radical equality, difference, similarity and createdness of human beings and highlights that we are more than mere byproducts of stardust, but also more than just our surroundings. To humbly embrace the distinctiveness endowed upon us by our Creator provides a foundation to build a purposeful life. And lastly it reminds us that;

Sustaining a dynamic dialogue between Christianity and feminism occurs when unique and distinct voices are not collapsed into one another. Preserving distinction when appropriate allows us to walk alongside those with whom we disagree, and it is this type of relation that the possibility of hearing a corrective voice or new word occurs. Often this means allowing the light of truth in feminist theory to perform the demanding work of chipping away at patriarchal traditions Christianity often inherits and generates. Equally important, it implies continually asking what light the revelation of God’s self in scripture, tradition and experience may bring to feminist theory.^[53]

Bibliography

DallaValle, Nancy A. “Neither Idolatry Nor Iconoclasm: A Critical Essentialism for Catholic Feminist Theology.” Horizons 25, no 1 (Spring 1998): 23-42.

Japinga, Lynn. Feminism and Christianity: An Essential Guide. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999.

Jones, Serene. Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2000.

Knoppers, Annelies, Margaret L. Koch, Douglas J. Schuurman and Helen M. Sterk. After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation edited by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993.

Leclerc, Diane. “Two Women Speaking “Woman”: The Strategic Essentialism of Luce Irigaray and Phoebe Palmer.” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006): 111-126.

Lindley, Susan Hill. “You Have Stept Out of Your Place.” A History of Women and Religion in America. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.

Maeckelberghe, Els. “Across the Generations in Feminist Theology: From Second to Third Wave Feminisms.” Feminist Theology 23, (January 2000): 63-69.

Powell, Elizabeth. “In Search of Bodily Perspective: A Study of Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray.” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006): 81-109.

Storkey, Elaine. Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001.

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophische Untersuchungen. Revised Fourth Edition. Translated by G.E.M. Anscombe, P.M.S. Hacker and Joachim Schulte. West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2009.

^[1] Serene Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2000), 23.

^[2] French philosopher and feminist theorist Simone de Beauvoir made note of how women’s nature has been described both as inferior and as deficient. Beauvoir draws attention to the commentary on women found in Aristotelian literature and that of the great scholastic theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas as just two examples of deeply embedded negative perceptions about the “different,” and “lesser” nature of the female sex. St. Aquinas asserted that the woman was both an “imperfect man,” and an “incidental person.” See Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex translated by Judith Thurman, (New York, NY: Vintage Books, 2011), 5.

^[3] Serene Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 44.

^[4] By narrative, we mean, “story,” in which a certain paradigm or worldview provides us with both a map to navigate the world and concepts in which to relate to and build our personal and collective identities off of. For helpful works that delve into how story, narrative and mythology relate to reality and human consciousness see Stephen D. Crites, “The Narrative Quality of Experience,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 39, no. 3 (September 1971): 291-311.

^[5] Feminist theology (which shouldn’t be interpreted as a uniform ideology with a singular set of systematic principles) as a modern school of thought or philosophy gained momentum following the work of Valerie Saiving and an article authored by her in 1960. See Valerie Saiving, “The Human Situation: A Feminine View,” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 28, no.1 (1960): 75-78. Subsequent early major Christian feminist thinkers in the 1960’s and afterwards included; Mary Daly, Rosemary Radford Ruether, Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza and Phyllis Trible. Feminist critiques of religion and Christianity also appeared in the 19th century and can be found within the works of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Margaret Fuller and Matilda Joslyn Gage. See Susan Hill. Lindley, “You Have Stept Out of Your Place.” A History of Women and Religion in America, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), 275-297. Feminist responses to the Christian faith and its relation to women varied in both the 19th and 20th centuries. For an introduction to some of the basic concerns and issues raised by feminist theologians see Regina M. Bechtle, “Feminist Approaches to Theology,” The Way 27, no. 1 (April 1987): 124-131.

^[6] Elizabeth Powell, “In Search of Bodily Perspective: A Study of Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray.” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006): 103.

^[7] Elaine Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 111-112. Storkey explains how the starting point of biblical femininsts functions distinctly from the primary feminist hermeneutic of experience in the following insightful comment; “…biblical feminists are at odds epistemologically with much of the rest of feminist theology, for they reject the primacy of women’s experience as the interpretive framework with which to approach the Bible. For them, although experience is crucially important, it cannot be the standpoint from which we understand reality. As authentic communication from God, the biblical text cannot simply be subject to women’s experience as some “higher order” that ultimately arbitrates over it. Women’s experience cannot have the last word, for experience itself has to be examined and understood. There has to be an intricate two-way relationship of experience and revelation, in which experience is seen in relation to God. Since the basis of human identity is given, created by God, not simply constructed out of the particulars of our world, we have to be prepared to allow the depths of God’s revelation to interpret us as we seek to understand our worth and calling before God.” (112).

^[8] And because Christians uphold God as creator, there is already an element of “creation/nature” imbued into humanity and one could argue an essentialism in the Imago Dei that each individual inherently possesses. Elaine Storkey reiterates the relevance of this point to the creation-construction debate, “If we are brought into being by a Creator, and thereby dependent on that Creator for our existence, we have already come down on one side of the creation-construction debate. Yet, we can still hold that our sexuality is put into creation by God and recognize that our differences  might also be developmental and cultural. See Elaine Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 97-98.

^[9] Nancy A. Dallavalle, “Neither Idolatry nor Iconoclasm: A Critical Essentialism for Catholic Feminist Theology,” Horizons 25, no.1 (Spring 1998): 32. Here Dallavalle is quoting theologian and gender theorist Eileen Graham. See Eileen Graham, “Gender, Personhood and Theology,” Scottish Journal of Theology 48, (1995): 341-358.

^[10] Susan Hill. Lindley, “You Have Stept Out of Your Place.” A History of Women and Religion in America, 426.

^[11] Ibid.

^[12] Diane Leclerc, “Two Women Speaking “Woman”: The Strategic Essentialism of Luce Irigaray and Phoebe Palmer,” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006): 112.

^[13] “Far from being an expression of natural differences, exclusive gender identity is the suppression of natural similarities.” See Gayle Rubin, “The Traffic in Women: Notes on the ‘Political Economy’ of Sex,” in Toward an Anthropology of Women edited by R.R. Reitr (New York, NY: Monthly Review Press, 1975), 179-180.

^[14] Lindley, “You Have Stept Out of Your Place.” A History of Women and Religion in America, 426.

^[15] Margaret Koch, “A Cross-Cultural Critique of Western Feminism,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation edited by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 104.

^[16] Lindley, “You Have Stept Out of Your Place.” A History of Women and Religion in America, 426.

^[17] Generally speaking, “Two explanations for the similarities and differences of men and women have emerged in psychological and religious literature. The first emphasizes the differences and claims that men and women actually have two different natures. The second emphasizes the similarities, arguing that men and women share the same nature and differ only in the biological structure and capacity of their bodies.” See Lynn Japinga, Feminism and Christianity: An Essential Guide, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999), 81.

^[18] French philosopher Jean Joseph Goux places this in the category of “pre-modern” thought. See Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 25-26. The term essence itself is rooted in Platonic philosophy, but has been redefined or re-articulated by many figures and schools of thought since antiquity.

^[19] Ibid., 26.

^[20] Serene Jones explains this kind of essentialism in the following. “The notion of universality highlights the all-pervasive scope of essentialist claims about women’s nature, namely the belief that features of womanhood cover women’s lives in every place, age, and culture without exception.” See Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 26.

^[21] The “Danvers Statement,” published by CBMW (The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood) is reflective of this traditional perspective. See https://cbmw.org/about/danvers-statement/. CBE International (Christian Biblical Egalitarians) represents a differing perspective on sex and gender roles amidst evangelical Christians. See https://www.cbeinternational.org/.

^[22] Storkey acknowledges that, “It would be foolish to deny that biology plays a part in human relationships and sexual differentiation. Men and women are not only sexually different, they are different chromosomally, reproductively, anatomically, hormonally…” See Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 28.

^[23] In short, biology is not inevitable. Women and men cannot be reduced to simple products of biology.

^[24] Simone de Beauvoir is credited with pioneering this distinction. More recent figures like Judith Butler have been critical in developing and promulgating gender theory and the notion of gender as “performative.” See Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, (Abingdon, UK: 1990).

^[25] Elizabeth Powell,  “In Search of Bodily Perspective: A Study of Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray,” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006): 82.

^[26] “The essentialist camp, in bringing the body back into feminist discussions, reifies it and so becomes a naive and ultimately destructive universalism.” The reification fallacy is when something immaterial is made material. Thus abstract essentialism which talks about a male or a female “essence.” See Elizabeth Powell, “In Search of Bodily Perspective: A Study of Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray,” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, 91.

^[27] Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 28.

^[28] Ibid., 29.

^[29] Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 49.

^[30] Ibid.

^[31] Diane Leclerc,“Two Women Speaking “Woman”: The Strategic Essentialism of Luce Irigaray and Phoebe Palmer,” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia edited by Allyson Jule and Bettina Tate Pedersen, 111.

^[32] Ibid., 112.

^[33] Here Storkey is quoting from the work of Elaine Graham. See Elaine Graham, Making the Difference: Gender, Personhood and Theology, (London, UK: Mowbray, 1995), 190.

^[34] Especially from a theological perspective, feminists are keenly aware of the dangerous usage of “difference” language. Margaret Koch concurs that, “with the entry of sin into the world, differences were no longer simply an expression of God’s creativity and the basis for human mutuality. Since the Fall, difference has become the foundation on which we have built prejudice, discrimination and oppression…[Thus]…The ongoing misuse of difference to harm some groups and concentrate power in the hands of others gives feminists a realistic reason to be wary of any discussion of difference.” See Margaret Koch, “A Cross-Cultural Critique of Western Feminism,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation edited by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, 101-102.

^[35] See Inmaculada, de Melo‐Martín, “When Is Biology Destiny? Biological Determinism and Social Responsibility,” Philosophy of Science. 70, no. 5 (2003): 1184–1194.

^[36] Lynn Japinga, Feminism and Christianity: An Essential Guide, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999), 82. Japinga also notes that single-nature theory, on the other hand, focuses primarily on Genesis 1, “asserting that human nature takes on one basic form rather than two. Men and women are far more alike than different and share the human characteristics of reason, emotion, body and spirit…Human beings are very diverse, but the differences are not divided neatly along gender lines” (82).

^[37] Japinga points out that,“The single-nature theory also has its limitations. Its emphasis on sameness and equality tends to downplay the role of the body, making it little more than a vehicle for procreation. The body and sexuality affect all of human life, not just the procreation event; thus the single-nature theory may not pay enough attention to the differences men and women experiences regarding their bodies. [Additionally], The single-nature theory fails to adequately account for diversity, if it assumes that all human beings are the same… [Lastly], There is no single feminist opinion  about human nature. Some feminists emphasize the role of the body; others, the role of socialization.” See Lynn Japinga, Feminism and Christianity: An Essential Guide, 84.

^[38] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophische Untersuchungen, Revised Fourth Edition, translated by G.E.M. Anscombe, P.M.S. Hacker and Joachim Schulte, Revised Fourth Edition, (West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2009).

^[39] Mary Stewart, “Western Feminism Since the 1960s: Lessons from the Present,” In After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation edited by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 58-59. See also Sara Ruddick, Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politics of Peace, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1989).

^[40] Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 43.

^[41] Jones adds that “strategic essentialism” has also been called “normative constructivism, pragmatic utopianism and pragmatic universalism.” See Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 44.

^[42] Essentialists caution that “although constructivists defend agency, the logic of constructivism might lead to a cultural determinism eve more oppressive than the determinism of essentialism.” See Jones, Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace, 41.

^[43] Ibid.

^[44] Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 53-54.

^[45]  “Its own commitment is deconstruction, the questioning and dismantling of all that we previously thought of as real. There are no boundaries to what can be deconstructed. We can include the past, the present, categorical explanations, concepts, language, meaning, sexuality, biology, sociology and theology. In the process of deconstruction, we discover that what were once thought of as “absolutes” are only particulars, and even the particulars can be seen through myriad different perspectives depending on the location of the perceiver.” See Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 53.

^[46] “Deconstruction seems to poise feminism on the edge of a relativistic humility that may undercut the entire feminist project.” See Margaret Koch, “A Cross-Cultural Critique of Western Feminism,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation edited by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, 70-113.

^[47] Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 129-131.

^[48] Margaret Koch, “A Cross-Cultural Critique of Western Feminism,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation, 101.

^[49] Helen Sterk, “Gender Relations and Narrative in a Reformed Church Setting,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation, 212.

^[50] Koch, “A Cross-Cultural Critique of Western Feminism,” in After Eden: Facing the Challenge of Gender Reconciliation, 103.

^[51] Storkey, Origins of Difference: The Gender Debate Revisited, 28.

^[52] Elizabeth Powell, “In Search of Bodily Perspective: A Study of Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray,” In Being Feminist, Being Christian: Essays from Academia, 82.

^[53] Ibid., 103.

Spinoza and Union with God Through “the Spirit of Christ”

Aldo Di Giovanni

“At that time certain things seemed to me to tend to the detriment of Religion, when I measured it by the standard provided by the common herd of Theologians, and accepted Formulas of the Confessions …But now as I rethink the whole matter more deeply,  many things occur to me which persuade me that you are so far from trying to harm true religion, or solid philosophy, that on the contrary you are working to commend and establish the authentic purpose of the Christian Religion … I now believe that in your heart you have this intention …your old and honest Friend, who longs for the happiest outcome of such a godly plan.…

Henry Oldenburg, 1^st Secretary of the Royal Society
to Benedictus de Spinoza, (Ep 61, 1675), concerning:
the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus

Abstract

The first section (A) of this study considers Spinoza’s “divine agency”, which is the spirit (idea) of Christ, and which “inscribes” the human mind and heart generating a person’s true human essence providing the person with a mind like the mind of Christ, determined by their indwelling idea of Christ. Such a mind reveals “divine natural law” inherent in human nature or the in essence of the human mind. Because Spinoza considers this natural, he is at odds with philosophers of nature who undertake to objectively mechanize or mathematize nature or God, which Spinoza claims is a fictional aspiration. Spinoza proposes and demonstrates the existence of immediate and mediate necessary and infinite modes of God. He also proposes the existence of finite modes which are fixed and eternal things. Together these proposals provide an ontological framework for Spinoza’s Christology and soteriology.

The second section (B) considers Spinoza’s descriptions of people living in the “state of nature” and living in a “state of religion”. Living in a state of religion is living according divine natural law while still in the state of nature. He also speaks about a fictional state of nature absent divine natural law. Spinoza describes how in emending a person’s intellect, the divine agency unites the person to God. In union with God, the person’s original natural freedoms and rights transfer to God, subjecting the person’s mind to divine natural law. An existential covenant is established in our union with God. The divine agency generates a second spiritual birth in which the person’s essence of mind according to the world after the flesh is supplanted by the acquired essence of “Christ according to the spirit” or by the spirit of Christ. The natural indwelling idea of Christ generates or determines the ideas of the person’s acquired mind to be like the ideas of the eternal mind of Christ. Dissenting from the new spiritual essence (mind) renders a person sinful or in privation of God. Assenting to the new spiritual essence (mind) establishes salvation. Awareness of the union makes a person blessed. Finally, the study illustrates the correspondence of some 29 letters between Spinoza and Oldenburg are evidence of Oldenburg’s written declarations that Spinoza’s work aimed at advancing Christian religion; and, that Oldenburg encouraged Spinoza to that end. For his part, Spinoza fully claimed what Oldenburg sensed.

A

Spinoza[1]  was justifiably offended by accusations of being an atheist[2]. In reality, there is a solid, credible Christology embedded in Spinoza’s few but influential writings, making his work important to Christian philosophy and Christian theology.  Spinoza’s Christology provides for an eternal and infinite Christ, sub specie aeternitatis or “series of fixed and eternal things”, and a temporal and finite Christ in the circumstantial “series, or order of existing”[3]. Articulating Spinoza’s particular Christology will contribute to understanding Christianity philosophically and theologically, especially his advancement of the place of the idea and mind of Christ in individual human freedom from bondage to salvation.

Detractors of Spinoza’s Christian thinking and beliefs may claim he is a denominational heretic. Spinoza was not a denominational Christian; therefore, to hardline denominationalists he would be thought to be a heretic. They cannot claim he is not religiously Christian, except in terms of their limited denominational biases. In regards to his Christian experience, thinking and belief, Spinoza speaks for himself. The reality of Christianity, for Spinoza, is not in the words and images used in denominational doctrines, statements of belief, etc. He tends to avoid using their language in his Ethics.

Spinoza identifies a crucial “divine agency”[4] inherent in the human intellect and thought, which inscribes the human mind[5] with the Wisdom or Word of God, “the true original text of God” or “God’s laws”[6]. Spinoza maintains the intellects of all people inherently contain this “divine agency”[7] that inscribes their hearts and minds to generate their spiritual essence or nature. This divine inscribing into our intellect and mind determines our mind to be “the first cause of divine revelation”[8]. Spinoza references the apostle Paul and Jeremiah,

“God, however, has revealed through his Apostles[9] that his covenant is no longer written with ink, or on stone tablets, but written on the heart, by the spirit of God.”[10]

“…Jeremiah (31: 33) proclaimed to them a time to come, when God would inscribe his law in their hearts. So at one time it was appropriate to contend for a law written in tablets … It is not suitable at all for those who have it written in their minds.”[11]

In chapter 1 of TTP, Spinoza describes the difference between natural universal revelations of God’s essence or nature, given to all people through the mind of Christ[12]; and, the individualized circumstantial revelations given to Prophets (and Apostles) through their limited imagination for use at the time and place. Writes Spinoza,

“The words and the visible forms were either true, and outside the imagination of the Prophet who heard or saw them, or else imaginary”[13]

According to Spinoza, among prophets, only Moses[14] uniquely heard true words that were “outside the imagination” or not “imaginary”. The words were abstractions all the same, but were true abstractions. Moses ‘heard’ true words and understood them. Only Moses, as a prophet, uniquely heard God’s truths by way of a true voice[15] and not in an imaginary way. Moses ‘heard’ only words from the voice of god[16] and only ‘saw’ God face to face; he did not immediately connect to God “mind to mind”[17] or spirit to Spirit, as Christ immediately[18] did.

Spinoza did not consider Christ to be a prophet[19] because Christ taught accessible truths naturally common to all people, which does not require special circumstantial revelation given in imagination alone[20]. Christ did not ‘hear’ the kind of voice Moses heard and did not see’ God face to face. Rather, Spinoza says, Christ is the “mouth of God”[21] which forms the “voice of God”[22] or the Word of God, which through Christ speaks to people, not with words, but by inscribing[23] people’s minds, ‘mind to mind’ not with words. Likewise then, Christ did not ‘see; God face to face; Christ is the intelligible face of God that the human mind is able to grasp and know. The temporal Christ used words to teach and preach, not to actually inscribe human minds. “God’s laws as truths” [24]  are known through the eternal mind of Christ, rather than through his temporal words, the knowledge is spiritual and given in real intuitions of “universal revelation”[25].  Spinoza sets down a thorough 21 paragraph analysis of the use of the phrase the spirit of God in scripture, during which Spinoza shows that according to scripture the spirit of God is the same as mind of God[26]. Based on that biblical analysis[27]  and other statements by Spinoza; we can also say that the spirit of Christ, about which Spinoza has much to say, is the mind of Christ. What Spinoza writes concerning the spirit of Christ applies to his understanding of the mind of Christ, visa versa. Finally, as a whole the mind of Christ is determined by an idea: the idea of Christ.

When Spinoza speaks about the temporal finite Christ, including the idea of Christ and the ideas of the mind of temporal finite Christ that simultaneously involves the eternal infinite Christ; for the temporal finite Christ exists as an idea in eternity as does the idea of the eternal infinite Christ. This is an important element of Spinoza’s Christology.

In Spinoza’s thinking about divine revelation we find:

• special revelation given to prophets, including Moses, through their corporeal senses by way of words and images,
• revelation given to Moses in a special way, through his understanding words spoken by the voice of God, concerning some universal ideas (i.e. that God exists, that we should worship God, and that we are to trust God. These are found in doctrines 1, 5, and 7, of Spinoza’s 7 doctrines of universal faith.[28])
• universal revelation given to the whole human race through the mind of Christ.

In the universal revelation given in having a mind like the mind of Christ, God communicates his essence to all people without corporeal means[29]. God’s essence is immediately communicated to us by means of our union with God in which we possess the idea of our essence according to Christ. We use our possession of the our idea of Christ to conceive, determine or generate ideas of our mind to be like the ideas of the mind of Christ along with their properties and governing divine laws. Such a constitution of our mind reveals the divine natural law inscribed in us. That divine natural law cannot be deduced by reason or from

“things which aren’t contained in the first foundations of our knowledge, and can’t be deduced from them”[30]

Our second acquired human mind governed by natural divine law is only like the mind of Christ; the ideas of the human mind are only like the ideas of the mind of Christ.

Spinoza applies several theological phrases to describe Christ. Philosophically they are all simply the idea of Christ, which itself determines the ideas of the mind of Christ in eternity along with their properties and governing laws. The spirit of Christ[31] (i.e. our idea of God to an extent) is an idea of “a particular affirmative essence”[32], namely a distinctly specific and determinate mode[33] of substance.  Spinoza writes, numerous times, that all people have the spirit of Christ in them[34]. That means all people have the idea of Christ[35] in them. Our union and communion with God is in the natural acquisition of a mind like the eternal mind of Christ through the understanding’s intuitions is “a more excellent way, which agrees best with the human mind”[36].

Spinoza differentiates the spirit (idea) of Christ, the Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost. What people call the Holy Spirit is people sensing the effects of the activating spirit or idea of Christ in us[37]. The Holy Spirit is the effects or signs of the spirit or idea of Christ actually forming or generating[38] us in second spiritual birth[39]. Spinoza thinks some people confuse the effects of the spirit (idea and mind) of Christ with our indwelling activating idea of Christ as it is in itself. That includes our ideas conceived to be like the ideas of the mind of Christ. People use their temporal sensations of the effects of the idea or spirit of Christ to weave together a kind of quasi-corporeal ‘object of the senses’[40] which Spinoza thinks is what people call the Holy Ghost.

The “divine agency” of regeneration[41] or second birth[42] is neither the Holy Ghost nor the Holy Spirit. It is the “particular affirmative essence”[43] which is the actual idea (i.e. spirit) of the eternal Christ that we all individually possess, actively determining “true Universal Faith” in us[44]. ‘Christ’, the ‘spirit of Christ’ or ‘Christ according to the spirit’ has a singularly critical role to play in human salvation and ultimate existential freedom described by Spinoza in his Ethics. Spinoza says all people have Christ in them, but by that he does not mean all people have the temporal, historical finite Christ in them. The idea (spirit) of the eternal Christ should not be confused with the temporal Christ in duration, of which Spinoza “believes” certain things. In TTP chapters 1 and 4, Spinoza forcefully states that the eternal mind of Christ illuminates the human race through a kind of universal revelation naturally given to all people through our understanding, which he says he demonstrated in chapter 1 of TTP.

“Christ was not so much a Prophet as the mouth of God. As we have shown in Chapter 1, God revealed certain things to the human race through the mind of Christ”[45]

As the mouth of God, Christ is the existential portal for the breath and spirit of God, through which God breathes life into people and through which the Word of God is given to us. Those revealed certain things (i.e. the divine things from which we come to know divine natural laws) are universally revealed to all people; therefore they are not mere subjective imaginings. Revelations given through the mind of Christ are intuited products of a natural emendation of the intellect, according to the fixed eternal idea and mind of Christ. Spinoza writes that assuming or taking on a human nature, Christ or rather the idea of Christ, “was the way of Salvation”[46]. Based on scripture alone, Spinoza says,

“So I do not believe that anyone else has reached such perfection, surpassing all others, except Christ[47], to whom the decisions of God, which lead men to salvation, were revealed immediately — without words or visions. …Christ, indeed, communicated with God mind to mind. We have asserted, then, that except for Christ no one has received God’s revelations without the aid of the imagination, i.e., without the aid of words or images.”[48]

The particular revelations “without words or visions” given to the temporal Christ were not “immediately communicated to human minds”[49]. Instead in his earthly teaching and earthly preaching, the temporal Christ in flesh and blood terms only communicated words and images, re-presenting what God immediately communicated to him “mind to mind”. Those words and images were seen and heard as corporeal “objects of the senses” through imagination of other people. They are the means of human salvation.

From our temporal perspective, Christ took on human nature in temporal duration. From God’s eternal perspective the idea of Christ took on human nature in eternity. At first glance it would seem that in the above passage, Spinoza was speaking only about the temporal Christ after the flesh. But Christ after the flesh housed or tabernacled Christ after the spirit. He was speaking about latter, while it was yet in the flesh. The ideas of the mind of Christ were immediately given to the temporal Christ through Christ’s mind to mind immediate communion with God. The fixed and eternal Christ had the ideas of God as they are in themselves, and these ideas were in the temporal Christ’s mind. Unlike the temporal Christ, we do not ‘incarnate’ the eternal mind of Christ; we only ‘incarnate’ a mind like the mind of Christ. Our mind is “inscribed” by our native idea of Christ, which inscribing Spinoza calls “divine agency”[50]. Christ’s mind is not like that of the prophets, Apostles or any other person whose minds are generated or formed in second birth. In generated second spiritual birth, we assume or take on the divine nature through our idea of the immediate, necessary and infinite mode of the eternal Christ, modifying or emending our mind, determining it[51] to be like the mind of Christ.

The “divine agency” referred to by Spinoza in TTP i, 4-6, is aptly characterized by Christ in John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7, as the spirit of Truth, and in Greek that guide (and guidance) is called the “Paraclete” (literally: para=alongside clete=calling). The Paraclete is our idea of the eternal Christ. In John 16:12, Christ says, “when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth”[52]. The Patriarchs, writes Spinoza, were “guided by the Spirit of Christ, i.e., by the idea of God”[53], i.e. their idea of the eternal Christ, to recover human freedom.  Like Paul, Spinoza holds that people actually being guided by the idea of Christ[54] or the Paraclete and having a mind like the mind of Christ are “the true original text of God”. In Paul’s words in 2 Corinthian 2:14-6 and 3:3, such people are a “letter from Christ” who exhibit the fruits of the spirit like an “aroma”. The eternal intellect and mind of Christ is constituted with ideas that cannot be inferred or deduced from the foundations of the understanding’s knowledge[55]. They are existentially given, i.e. revealed, in the make of the understanding in human nature as “guided by the spirit of Christ”[56]. They are also reflected in scripture, properly read. Spinoza points out that the mind of Christ was revealed to the Apostles[57] through their minds’ understanding and in this way Apostles could teach people[58] to be Pious or Moral[59].

Spinoza identifies God’s divine law as “a principle of living”  “which aims only at the supreme good”[60] of human kind. This principle is the basis of Spinoza’s ethics. Spinoza says Christ writes “the law” “thoroughly in their hearts”[61] producing an intellectual knowledge of the operations of natural divine law[62] in people. The natural laws of physical nature as described by ‘mechanizing’ natural philosophers or scientists at the time or since, do not convey this “aim”, “principle of living” or rather natural property of human nature inclining the human mind to the supreme good. Inscribing divine law in the mind activates and reveals knowledge of divine natural law in people’s understanding, which knowledge in turn engenders their actions and obedience.  Obedience or praxis to the divine law is natural to those who take possession of it as the touchstone of their understanding. Spinoza references Paul in Romans 8:9 to drive home the role of the divine inscribing of the mind of Christ,

“… Romans 8: 9 teaches that no one becomes blessed unless he has in himself the mind of Christ, by which he perceives God’s laws as eternal truths.”[63]

The activating idea of Christ is the “divine agency” naturally “in” people, inclining minds emended according to the idea of Christ, to desire[64] the supreme good or union with God and knowledge of that union.

“…God’s eternal word and covenant, and true religion, are inscribed by divine agency in men’s hearts, i.e., in the human mind, and that this is the true original text of God, which he himself has stamped with his seal, i.e., with the idea of him, as an image of his divinity.”[65]

In his thinking Spinoza identifies the knowable God of our actual intellect[66] to be God as God is to an extent only[67]. This extent is expressed, for example, in Spinoza’s phrase, “God insofar as he constitutes the nature of the human Mind”[68]. God in so far as he constitutes the nature of the human body is not knowable by the human mind[69]. Insofar as God constitutes the nature of the human mind, the human mind knows God to an extent and intuitively knows itself.[70] We cannot know the nature of the human mind through the human body or its interactions with other bodies[71]. Furthermore, neither can we adequately know the human mind through the series of things in the common order of nature[72] under the attribute of thought. If and when the human mind is related to “God insofar as he constitutes the nature of the human mind” we can adequately know our mind, including the idea of God[73] in our mind. God constitutes the nature or essence of the human mind when God, in an immediate, necessary and infinite mode[74] of thought, assumes or takes on human nature. This creates human nature or the essence of the human mind and does so in the eternal, immediate, necessary and infinite Christ.

“God’s Wisdom, that is, a Wisdom surpassing human wisdom, assumed a human nature in Christ, and that Christ was the way to salvation”[75]

God’s Wisdom is the idea (spirit) of the eternal Christ, which is an immediate, necessary and finite mode under the attribute of thought. The idea of Christ constitutes the nature of the human mind when the human mind is ordered not according to the series of the ideas of our affections in the common order of nature, but when it is emended and ordered according to certain fixed and eternal things (i.e. the idea of the eternal Christ and the necessary and finite ideas of the mind of Christ[76] determined by the idea of the eternal Christ. From our human perspective in duration, the divine immediately assumed a human nature twice: once in essence in eternity as the idea or spirit of the eternal Christ; and once, in the series of events in the common order of nature in the temporal mind of the fleshy person of Christ.

God as God is, is absolutely infinite, eternal Being in itself, identified as self-causing Substance “God or Nature”[77]. Spinoza’s understanding of “Nature”[78],  Spinoza writes to Henry Oldenburg, (Secretary of the Royal Society, theologian, natural philosopher and intermediary between Robert Boyle and Spinoza) is not the Nature “defended” by the “Modern Christians”[79] of Oldenburg’s acquaintance.

 “…I maintain …all things are in God and move in God, I affirm, I say, with Paul, … Nevertheless, some people think the Theological-Political Treatise rests on the assumption that God is one and the same as Nature (by which they understand a certain mass, or corporeal matter). This is a complete mistake.”[80]

When Spinoza documents that he agrees with or documents citations of Paul or John, he is effectively self-identifying as a Johnnine/Pauline Christian, which is not a denominational or ‘church’ defined Christian. An example of this is his epigraph for the TTP, which cites 1 John 4:13. He repeats the citation in TTP xiii, 22; xiv, 17; and Ep 76.

In Ep 73 to Oldenburg, Spinoza distanced himself from “Modern Christians” views of Nature, i.e. natural philosophers, or ‘scientists’ like Descartes or Boyle, etc. Spinoza did not objectify or anthropomorphize God; neither did he objectify Nature. Spinoza’s Natura (even as perceived under the attribute of extension) includes more than “a certain mass or corporeal matter”; it includes real divine things, their properties and divine natural laws. Spinoza wrote to Oldenburg that “modern Christians”, i.e. the mechanical philosophers’ and theologians’ understanding of Spinoza’s “God or Nature” “is a complete mistake”. For Spinoza there is a marked difference between abstract mechanized laws applied to nature and errantly taken to be Nature itself; and the natural divine law of God’s nature as it is in itself to an extent, resides in human nature.

It is not surprising that in his Ethics, dealing with human bondage and freedom from captivity, in the part that concerns “the nature and origins of the mind[81]”, in the scholium to corollary of E IIP10, dealing with the “constitution” of the “essence of man”[82], Spinoza tries to ensure that people not confuse the “fictions” of “the things that are called the objects of the senses” of “Modern Christian” natural philosophers and theologians. They errantly look to corporeal objects of the senses. Spinoza first looks to incorporeal, i.e. mental, objects of the senses. Spinoza says of those “Modern Christians”,

“…many say … they believed … that the things that are called objects of the senses are prior to all…”[83]

Theologians[84] who believe people are naturally depraved are forced to look outside and past humanity to find God. They appeal to superstitions or try to find God in Nature, which they do not understand. Looking to mechanized or even mathematized nature, natural philosophers and natural theologians look for God outside past a human nature with inherent divinity, and look to the great empty machine they presume nature to be. The tendency to prefer such fictionalized worldviews has continued despite the replacement of earlier fictions being replaced by other fictions favoured at the time. Spinoza looks to human nature emended by the spirit or nature of Christ, to find God.

“For example, if God’s nature is known to us[85], then affirming that God exists follows necessarily from our nature, just as it proceeds from the nature of a triangle that its three angles equal two right angles.”[86]

Spinoza situates the experience-able and knowable spirit (idea) of Christ in the “constitution” of the “essence of man”, which essence is a natural thing made divine by the spirit or idea of Christ in us.

The mechanization of nature is so subtly entrenched in our thinking that it is prudent to keep in mind that not only is Nature not mechanized for Spinoza, neither is substance, modes, thought or extension. While we may be inclined to consider these things in a mechanized way; they should not be considered this way. What modes are and what are modes are made of must not be taken to be mechanical in nature. For Spinoza the science of mechanics, like geometry is abstract not real. If substance is not mechanical in nature, how should we understand the nature of modes of substance? In themselves modes are neither modes of extension or thought. Immediate, necessary and infinite and finite modes are modes, specifications or distinctions of existence and existing itself. Mediated necessary and infinite modes are further specified or distinguished modes of immediate necessary and infinite and finite modes. These are not corporeal “things that are called objects of the senses”.

The idea of Christ or the spirit of Christ is incorporeal; it not what Spinoza calls an object of the (corporeal) senses. It is not corporeally touched, seen or heard. It is an eternal, immediate, necessary and finite mode of Existence and Existing. It is a person’s incorporeal union with God’s essence determined by “divine agency”, which we actually experience and perceive in thought as the essence of God. Nor are the ideas of the mind of Christ corporeal objects of the senses. The effects or products of the ideas of the mind of Christ, i.e. fruits of the spirit, may appear and seem to be evident as corporeal objects of the senses. Just because we corporeally see the effects of the wind blowing, that does not mean we understand the incorporeal wind, or where it comes from or where it goes (see John 3:7), so it is with evidence of the presence of the fixed and eternal Christ. The idea of or the spirit of Christ is sensed or felt by the mind as an incorporeal intellectual object[87].

Those corporeal “things that are called objects of the senses”, are human constructs that re-present our actual temporal experience of things in themselves. They are sensations that form representations or form fictional things of the imagination that represent things in themselves. Such representations are utilized in the study of religion as much as the study of nature or science. When fictional things of the imagination are de-constructed, the remaining mere sensations have no significance or meaning that is not inherent in them merely as sensations distinct from what they had represented. If the construed fictions are mistakenly taken to be real things and people connect their hopes and fears to them, superstition[88] and superstitious beliefs emerge rendering people in bondage, susceptible to abuse and exploitation..

In their study of their corporeal perceptions of natural objects (i.e. “their first fictions, on which they had built the knowledge of natural things”) “Modern Christians” thought they were properly studying God as God is. Instead they were studying ‘man’-made fictions, they then inappropriately applied to God. If the laws of science as articulated by them were the only natural laws of God, Nature would be a kind of dead machine. In regards to those philosophers and theologians, Spinoza concluded,

“So it is no wonder that they have generally contradicted themselves.”[89]

The fictional mechanization of Nature led to a severe limiting and an enduring impoverishment of Christian natural theology. In that paradigm, Nature or God exists apart from people. Subsequent theories of nature maintained the separation. Significantly, theologians’ undertook to apply similar corporeal fictions to spiritual things, in particular to Christology. Experience and reasoning of a natural theology derived only from corporeal (mechanical) natural philosophy, and its successors, is “not clear and distinct but confused” [90]. Spinoza discounts that prevailing natural theology[91] and instead proposes[92] an enlarged natural knowledge that includes certain intuitions of divine knowledge which are natural to our human intellect. Theologians also “have generally contradicted themselves” by thinking that the truths of the bible as perceived by them only through abstract words and images, are prior to the truths of real actual experience of their intuitions of incorporeal the spirit (idea and mind) of Christ. For Spinoza, scripture provides knowledge through imagination[93]; i.e. first through the body’s perceiving the appearance of a physical scroll or book, and second by our reading a record of no longer existing historical events. It does not reveal our personal present first hand or direct experiencing of God or the things of God, as does our union with God and our conceiving our mind to be like the mind of Christ.

Spinoza defines reality and perfection as the same[94]. People have more or less real actual perfection[95] or more or less reality.  They are ‘more or less’ actively united with God. Spinoza describes how people go from a passive essence to an active essence or from a less perfect to a more perfect essence[96]. A person’s passive “godless” essence cannot and does not co-exist with the person’s active Godly essence[97]. Ideas of the mind are organized and connected according to either one of two concurrent yet exclusive systems or ‘orders’[98]. One is the series of events in the common order of nature, as determined by things external to our person[99]. The other order is the order of the infinite intellect, conceived from within our mind and known under an aspect or as a species of eternity, i.e. sub specie aeternitatis[100]. Being incompatible, the passive mind’s essence and the active mind’s essence strive against each other[101]. Our union with God emends our mind according to the order of the intellect. God to an extent is clearly understood or explained in union with us, “…through the nature of the human mind, or insofar as he constitutes[102] the essence of the human mind”[103],

In the temporal Christ, God immediately constitutes the idea of God to the extent of human understanding and immediately constitutes the ideas of the mind of Christ. In all other people, union with God is immediately determined by divine agency, i.e. the idea of the eternal Christ, which determines or conceives their ideas to be like the ideas of the mind of Christ.  Because the idea or spirit of Christ is the essence of being truly human, people in union with God conceive or generate their spiritual formation and assume their true essence when have a mind like the mind of Christ.  Ideas, that are actively caused or objectively determined by the intellect’s intuition of its idea of God, are active conceptual[104] presentations of things in themselves or presentations of “the essence of things”[105] sub specie aeternitatis.

‘Supernatural’ revelation, says Spinoza, is given to few people, e.g. prophets of various nations[106], through their imagination[107]. Importantly, Spinoza identifies another kind of revelation: divine natural knowledge of “divine natural law”[108] at work in the human mind. We naturally have the idea of God to an extent in us[109]. We naturally participate in God’s essence[110] and in doing so have knowledge of God’s essence, including God’s divine natural laws.  Knowledge of divine law revealed in the imagination of the Prophets and Apostles is limited by the nature of the corporeal imagination. It is caught up and snared in cultural biases leading to privation of our knowledge of divine natural law. Universal truths caught in special revelations can be reliably discerned by natural light. Spinoza writes,

“… I wanted to ask [in Chs. 4 and 5] whether universal Religion, or the divine law revealed to the whole human race through the Prophets and Apostles, was anything other than what the natural light also teaches?”[111]

Spinoza concluded that the main precept of scriptural texts[112] inadequately revealed only to a few people through their imagination is adequately revealed to all people through natural intellection[113]. Universal Christian Religion and its divine laws, is revealed and known through the mind of Christ, which says Spinoza, “we have shown in Chapter 1” of TTP[114] .

Spinoza is clear that “God’s law” or “divine law” is both universal and natural to people because it is “inscribed divinely in our mind”.

“I said explicitly in Ch. 4 that the chief point of the divine law— which I said (in Ch. 12) has been inscribed divinely in our mind— and its main precept is that we should love God as the greatest good…”[115], [116]

“… the Nature of natural divine law, … is universal, or common to all men, for we have deduced it from universal human nature; … it does not require faith in historical narratives, … For since this natural divine law is understood simply by the consideration of human nature[117], it is certain that we can conceive it just as much in Adam as in any other man, just as much in a man who lives among others as in a man who lives a solitary life.”[118]

Given our idea of Christ and our conceiving ideas like the ideas of the mind of Christ along with their properties, we sense and become aware of the “natural divine law” that governs them. From these properties of the idea of Christ and from the ideas of the mind of Christ, we abstract common notions that we fashion into our abstract understanding of divine natural law using abstract reasoning. This is why Spinoza says that he has “deduced it[119] from universal human nature[120]”. The wisdom of God, which is surpasses our original human understanding, does not surpass Christ’s original wisdom, because God’s wisdom assumed human nature in Christ, in effect constituting human nature or the essence of the human mind perfectly or most real. Divine natural law was not inscribed in the mind of Christ; it constitutes the fixed and eternal mind of Christ. What is more, it is the constitution of the ‘living’ or activating fixed and eternal idea and mind of Christ that inscribes other minds to be like mind of Christ. Divine natural law is naturally inscribed or revealed by intuition “to the human race through the mind of Christ”[121], when members of the human race acquire minds like the mind of Christ.

The main precept of scripture[122] is also the “main precept” inscribed in the individual human mind[123]. The latter we know clearly and adequately, the former we know “through a glass darkly” and inadequately. The divine natural law given in the intellect is not the abstract mechanistic laws of nature described by “Modern Christian” natural philosophers such as Descartes, Boyle or those in the Royal Society. Oldenburg describes the Royal Society as pursuing “Mechanical Arts” and that “we regard it as settled” that things are best explained “on Mechanical Principles”[124]. Spinoza’s position is that we have actual knowledge of natural divine law from within our divinely inscribed mind; whereas we only have knowledge of natural mechanical laws of nature from our perceptions of the endless effects of external bodies on our body. God’s Wisdom, wrote Spinoza, assumed or took upon itself “a human nature in Christ”[125]. The “divine agency” that “assumed” or took on human nature and “inscribes the mind” is the essence or spirit of eternal idea and eternal mind of Christ built in the nature of human understanding itself.

The mind’s natural sensing of the intellect’s intuitions of incorporeal internal experience[126] of God and of the things of God, reveals knowledge of the divine natural laws of the idea and the mind of Christ[127]. Citing Paul, Spinoza holds that,

“…everyone, by natural light, clearly understands God’s power and eternal divine laws from which he can know and deduce what he ought to pursue and what he ought to flee…”[128]

The “natural light” by which “everyone” “clearly understands God’s power and eternal divine laws” is the spirit (i.e. essence or idea) of Christ, or Word of God; and the “natural light” within us is the natural foundation of universal ethics based on God’s nature.

In our union with God, we possess our singular idea (i.e. spirit) of Christ which “is not the consequence of anything else, but is immediate” and intuited. Intuited revelations of God to an extent are given and known through the intellect or mind of Christ[129] constituted by ideas determined by the idea of Christ. To be united with God, we do not know God as God is; we need only to participate in the essence, spirit or idea and mind of Christ. We possess the fourth intuitive kind of knowledge in our possessing knowledge of God as God singularly is in “Christ according to the spirit”.

“I do not say that we must know him as he is; it is enough for us to know him to some extent in order to be united with him. … That this fourth [kind of] knowledge, which is the knowledge of God, is not the consequence of anything else, but immediate, is evident from what we have previously proven, viz. that he is the cause of all knowledge which is known through itself alone, and not through any other thing.”[130]

“…the knowledge of singular things[131] I have called intuitive, or knowledge of the third kind (see IIP40S2), can accomplish, and how much more powerful it is than the universal knowledge I have called knowledge of the second kind.” [132]

Attributes do not cause effects in one another[133]. The mind (thought[134] or spirit) does not and cannot determine the body to motion; the body (extension) does not and cannot determine the mind to thinking[135]. Therefore, it is important to know that in his temporal manifestation Christ not only had a body determined in the series of things in the common order of nature, but also had a mind immediately determined by the idea of Christ. Nothing of Christ’s corporeal body, under the attribute of extension, determined Christ’s mind to action under the attribute of thought. Similarly, our knowledge of our union with God is given under the attribute thought though our participation in it[136]; it cannot be acquired by our understanding of things external to thought.

It has been suggested that the infinite intellect of God is an immediate, necessary and infinite mode[137]. That is not something Spinoza directly suggests. Even if the infinite intellect of God is an immediate, necessary and infinite mode, that does not mean Spinoza considers the spirit of Christ to be the infinite intellect of God. We have and know the certain and determinate or finite mind of Christ[138]; we do not have and know the infinite intellect of God as it is[139]. The idea of Christ is an immediate, necessary and finite mode of thought that in a certain and determinate way constitutes the human Godly essence naturally in[140] all humans. The infinite intellect of God is beyond limited human understanding and would be nothing like the intellect of the mind of Christ[141], which is within the reach of human understanding. The specific and distinct eternal idea (spirit) of Christ, native to the human intellect, and the specific and distinct ideas of the eternal mind of Christ determined by the indwelling eternal idea of Christ, are different from the infinite intellect of God in the singular fixed and eternal individuality.

Under the attribute of thought we know things, from a human perspective, according to the series of things in the common order of nature, i.e. the series of mutable changeable things[142]. Under the attribute of thought in our union with God we know things from the perspective of God, i.e. according the order of fixed and eternal things[143] sub specie aeternitatis. In regards to Christology the idea of the eternal Christ and the ideas of the eternal mind of Christ are fixed and eternal things that determine the presence of Christ in our changeable minds. We participate in the idea and mind of Christ and to an extent know what Christ knows.

Our idea of the eternal Christ is immediately communicated to us in our spiritual (ideational) generating or forming because we, in our actual union with God, actively participate in thought. The properties and governing laws of the eternal idea of Christ constitute the necessary and infinite ideas of the eternal mind of Christ, including real, actually existing loving-kindness, gladness, peace, patience, beneficence, goodness, good faith, gentleness and self-restraint[144]; trust[145]; consideration for others[146]; as well as mercy or charity, hope, righteousness, justice, and love of God and others; etc. These ideas are some of the ideas expressed in Christ’s messages and teaching in scripture. The immediate idea of the mind of the eternal Christ and the immediate ideas of the eternal mind of Christ are immediately manifested in the singular temporal mind of Christ in duration[147]. Of Christ’s temporal mind in duration, we can only have an inadequate knowledge through imagination. Spinoza therefore speaks of only believing[148] certain things about the temporal Christ.

From the nature of our intellect, we immediately intuit our idea of God to an extent, which is the idea of the idea (spirit) of Christ we naturally possess, because we actively participate in God to an extent, so that God’s essence is actively in us. We participate in our acts (fruits of the spirit) caused in our union with God. Writes Spinoza,

“…we clearly understand that God can communicate himself immediately to men, for he communicates his essence to our mind without using any corporeal means”[149]

God immediately communicates or inscribes his essence or nature, as it is in the immediate, necessary and finite idea of Christ, to our mind or intellect, under the attribute of incorporeal thought. That communing or rather uniting is determined by the “divine agency” that “inscribes” the mind with “the true original text of God”[150]. Being so inscribed, the mind actually produces fruits — fruits of the spirit — in its actions.

In “assuming” a human nature, the Word or wisdom of God forms the essence of human nature in the eternal idea of Christ, through which God immediately communicates himself to the human mind sub specie aeternitatis. This actual indwelling idea of Christ producing our mind to be like the mind of Christ “is the first cause of divine revelation” [151]. That first cause of the universal divine revelation communicates to and determines in us the true essence of human nature involving divine natural law by inscribing our minds to be like the mind of Christ. Citing Paul in Romans 8:9, Spinoza says we perceive “God’s laws as eternal truths”, (i.e. as divine natural laws), when we have a mind like the mind of Christ in us[152]. We “clearly and distinctly understand” [153] spiritual things because our emended spiritual mind contains God nature. First our immediately intuited idea of Christ is given in our union with God; and second, the intuitions or ideas of our mind are mediated or determined by our native or natural idea of the eternal Christ. Without real immediate and mediated necessary and finite modes or ideas of Christ, as well as our actual idea of Christ and our actually conceiving a mind like the mind of Christ, there would be no real Christology or means of human salvation and freedom in the very nature of God or Nature, i.e. in reality itself. It is not that the idea and mind of Christ is separate from reality, rather they are the reality of God to the extent required for our union with God.

The immediate eternal finite and necessary idea of Christ is different from our immediate temporal indwelling [154]idea of the eternal Christ. The latter is determined in our personal temporal existence which in itself is not necessary[155] until it actually exists. Though not one and the same, the two ideas of Christ have common properties. If, like the Patriarchs[156], we are led by our idea of Christ (which all people possess) to emend our intellects and minds according to the idea (spirit) of Christ, we would have the properties and divine laws of the mind of Christ in common with people whose intellects are likewise emended, and we would understand and know those commonalities in other people.

Spinoza identifies a kind of difference (e.g. between the eternal idea of Christ and our idea of Christ), when he writes,

“For the intellect and will which would constitute God’s essence would have to differ entirely from our intellect and will, and could not agree with them in anything except the name. They would not agree with one another any more than do the dog that is a heavenly constellation and the dog that is a barking animal. I shall demonstrate this…”[157]

Unlike Spinoza’s constellation and barking dog example, the eternal mind (i.e. spirit) of Christ and our emended mind like the mind of Christ share properties and governing laws. It is necessary for to become the other.  Though sharing common properties, they exist each in its own kind. Christ, as divine agency, connects and unites people to God to the extent or the certain and determinate mind of Christ. The immediate communion between God and Christ conveys Godliness in the immediate communion between Christ and our individual self.

Imagination[158] involves the mind’s remote passive perceptions or representations of things in themselves. Intellection[159] involves experiencing the immediate active conceiving and conceptions of incorporeal ideas and their interactions in themselves. We intellectually sense these internal thought experiences in our mind[160]. As Spinoza writes, we need to know how our senses work[161], both our corporeal and incorporeal senses. We can perceive or feel external objects of the bodily senses through images of eyes, ears, touch etc., and their processing. We also can sense or feel internal objects of the mental senses through intellectual ‘images’, notions, ideas and intuition and their processing. The two processes, their elements and governing laws differ,

“…we know that those activities by which imaginations are produced happen according to other laws, wholly different from the laws of the intellect, and that in imagination the soul only has the nature of something acted on.” [162]

While recognizing that the laws that govern “singular, changeable things” differ from the laws that govern “fixed and eternal things”, it is not clear how these synchronize in actually existing. For example, it is not clear how laws of causality found in singular changeable things work relative to fixed and eternal things. In regards to necessary infinite and finite modes, including the eternal idea of Christ and the eternal ideas of the mind of Christ, Spinoza says,

“…these fixed and eternal things are singular, nevertheless, because of their presence everywhere, and most extensive power, they will be to us like universals, or genera of the definitions of singular, changeable things, and the proximate causes of all things. But since this is so, there seems to be a considerable difficulty in our being able to arrive at knowledge of these singular things. For to conceive them all at once is a task far beyond the powers of the human intellect[163].”[164]

However many fixed and eternal singular things exist, what matters in regards to human salvation or freedom are those that actually determine our union with God and inscribe God’s decrees or decisions regarding salvation in our mind. We do not need to conceive them all at once to adequately know some, i.e. God to an extent[165].

“For we can’t imagine God, but we can indeed understand him. We should also note this here: I don’t say that I know God completely, but only that I know some of his attributes, not all of them, nor even most of them. Certainly being ignorant of most of them does not prevent my knowing some. When I began to learn Euclid’s Elements, I understood first that the three angles of a triangle equal two right angles. I understood this property of the triangle clearly [NS: and distinctly], though I was ignorant of many other properties of the same triangle.”[166]

We cannot imagine the spirit of Christ or Christ according to the spirit, but we can understand it in our understanding of the mind of Christ. We only require that our idea of Christ actually determines in us what is required in our union with God and our salvation. When determined by the fixed and eternal idea and mind of Christ, the “singular, changeable things” (i.e. people’s minds) manifest God in their existence and existing, evidenced in the presence of the fruits of the spirit, i.e. “the offspring, or fruits of the intellect”[167].

It is difficult for people to at once know these “singular” “fixed and eternal things” regarding human salvation and freedom, from “first foundations of knowledge”[168]. Spinoza says this was not true for the temporal Christ. God’s “decisions” were given immediately to Christ without words (reasoning) or images (imagination)[169]. There is no agency between the idea of God and Christ. The divine agency in the human intellect is the idea and mind, (i.e. spirit) of Christ that unifies us and God. For his part, Spinoza envisioned that we might come to demonstrable knowledge of the process of divine universal revelation common to all people uniting with God.

“Before we equip ourselves for knowledge of singular things[170], there will be time to treat those aids, all of which serve to help us know how to use our senses and to make, according to certain laws, and in order, the experiments that will suffice to determine the thing we are seeking, so that at last we may infer from them according to what laws of eternal things it was made, and its inmost nature may become known to us, as I shall show in its place.”[171]

The “thing we are seeking” is our personal, highest human good or our union with God, and knowing how our union with God is determined by fixed and eternal things generating or determining a human nature “stronger and more enduring than”[172] our own. Spinoza had acquired such a character and he wanted to help others acquire[173] it as well.

B

According to Spinoza, people are determined to exist, experience and have knowledge under the attribute of thought in two ways, each exclusive of the other[174]. In one we are captive, made passive in bondage to things other than our true essence. This way creates the illusion that we construct our own human essence from our experience of Existence and Existing. In the other, in union with God we freely express or manifest our true human essence. In one way, our mind is acted on. In itself, our mind after the flesh is not the cause of ‘our’ acts[175]. In the other way the mind acts in in union with its indwelling idea of God. Emerging as disorganized, inadequate and confused, a person’s first or original intellect and mind[176], is passive in its formation, being bound to and being bound by the vagrant series of events of the world after the flesh[177].  By way of intellectual emendation informed by the intellect’s indwelling idea of God[178] as explained by human nature, a person conceives or generates a second active[179] intellect and mind. In union with God, we are essentially active in the formation or cause of our mind or spirit. In this second way, we act in union with God, driven by the power or conatus of God we necessarily, naturally and knowingly act obedient to God’s nature or to divine law. In this second ‘religious’ mind, we are, in union with God, the cause of our mind’s acts.

Spinoza is clear that we do not and cannot possess an adequate idea of God as God is or know God as God is[180]. The idea of God to an extent actualizes in our intuition of the simple idea of Christ; a phrase not used by Spinoza.  The mind of Christ[181], a critical phrase used by Spinoza in significant ways, is constituted with specific and distinct ideas, their properties and governing laws, distinctly and specifically determined by the idea of Christ. The emendation of a person’s intellect and mind through personal second spiritual birth actually conceives the person’s mind to be configured like the mind of Christ. The emending aligns or reconciles the person’s intellect and mind to the infinite intellect of God within the parameters of the idea and mind of Christ.

Towards the end of his Ethics, Spinoza writes

“And really, he who, like an infant or child[182], has a Body capable[183] of very few things, and very heavily dependent on external causes[184], has a Mind which considered solely in itself [185]is conscious of almost nothing of itself, or of God, or of things. On the other hand, he who has a Body capable of a great many things[186], has a Mind which considered only in itself[187] is very much conscious of itself, and of God, and of things[188]. In this life, then, we strive[189] especially that the infant’s Body may change (as much as its nature allows and assists) into another, capable of a great many things and related to a Mind very much conscious of itself, of God, and of things.”[190]

The difference in human mind or human spirit which that scholium points to is a difference in human essence. It is a difference in generation[191] or difference in formation of the mind’s active essence.  In response to Blijenbergh’s Ep 20, Spinoza explains difference of the first and second  minds essences or constitutions, and therefore of what is true human essence, to Blijenbergh in Ep 23,

“Finally, I should like it noted that— though the acts of the pious (i.e., of those who have clearly that idea of God according to which all their acts and thoughts are determined), and of the godless those who do not have that idea of God, but only confused ideas of earthly things, according to which all their acts and thoughts are determined), and, finally, the acts of everything there is, follow necessarily from God’s eternal laws and decree, and continually depend on God— nevertheless, they differ from one another not only in degree, but also essentially.”[192]

Spinoza is clear the mind of the “man of the flesh cannot understand”[193] “the divine law and its highest precept”[194]. And concerning “godliness” in people, Spinoza contends divine law, “is the ultimate end toward which all our actions ought to be directed”[195]. And concerning “godless” people, he says, “they lack the love of God” “through which alone” “we are said to be servants”[196].  “Bodily birth after the flesh, when the person unites with their body, provides a person of “flesh” with “godless” experience in a “state of nature”, [197] generating an original passive mind deprived of its true essence or human nature. The religious ‘man’ in union with God generates and experiences a second spiritual birth[198] generating an acquired active mind which situates ‘him’ in “a state of religion” under natural religious command or law[199]. The first birth is a corporeal event or ‘object of the senses’ that is prior in time to the second incorporeal event. We are not the cause of our first-birth-mind; it is generated by the affects of the world after the flesh on our body. In union with God we participate in our spiritual generation in, of and from God and do so under a form or aspect of eternity, while we are yet in the flesh. The spiritual person in a “state of religion” generates or acquires an active mind manifesting his or her true essence realized in union with God. This spiritual mode manifests certain divine laws of nature, which can be discerned[200] like any other law of nature. The actions of religious or spiritual minds are guided by “spiritual things”[201]. Spinoza writes that the essence or nature of the minds of these two kinds of people: “differ from one another not only in degree, but also essentially”[202].

“…such a constitution of mind is contrary to all the others which we call evil. Therefore, they cannot exist in one subject.”[203]

What has often been translated as “born again” (literally “born from above”) in John 3:3 should be understood in conjunction with John 3:5-8.  It involves being “born of the spirit (3:8)”, not born of the flesh (3:6) or “of water (3:5)”. It is the birth of an essence generated by the spirit i.e. “wind (3:8)” and not caused any way by corporeal “objects of the senses” which we corporeally “hear (3:8)” with our corporeal senses. The second spiritual birth which forms the spiritual person is not a ‘rebirth’ of the same one spirit or mind; it is not same essence that transforms into a different essence. The spiritual person is different in essence from the person of flesh. The second spiritual birth from above generates a completely different person whose essence, according to Spinoza is contrary to the person of flesh. The spiritually born person formulates activities producing fruits of the spirit or in effect “offspring”[204] or products of the mind of Christ, common to all whose mind is like the mind of Christ.

Savan demonstrates the importance of Spinoza’s scientific study of biblical texts,

“…Spinoza showed that the methods of the natural sciences could be fruitfully extended to the scientific study not only of the Bible but of historical texts generally. Spinoza is the founder of scientific hermeneutics. … It was in the extension of the scientific outlook and scientific methods to the study of the historical texts that Spinoza was innovative and influential.”[205]

Nevertheless, scientific hermeneutics is not to be confused with the study of true religion, which Spinoza defines without reference to scriptural texts or their study,

“Whatever we desire and do of which we are the cause insofar as we have the idea of God, or insofar as we know God, I relate to Religion.”[206]

In regards to Religion, scripture corroborates or demonstrates what is already known of religion by intuition. Spinoza had and used intuited knowledge of “Christ according to the spirit”[207] in him to recognize the main precepts of divine law in scripture. Spinoza’s Christology begins with reality itself, not the texts of historical accounts. Spinoza writes to Blijenbergh,

“…anyone who perceives the Method of Demonstrating[208] will judge that Scripture, just as it is, is the true revealed Word of God. I cannot have a Mathematical Demonstration of it, except by Divine Revelation. And for that reason I said “I believe”— but not “I know in a mathematical way…”[209]

We “cannot have a Mathematical Demonstration”, unless the demonstrating is based on naturally accessible universal divine revelation. Spinoza undertook to articulate Christ from reality itself or from Existence itself, free of reference to prophetic revelations or the texts of scripture. Spinoza provides and demonstrates an ontological argument for the necessary and infinite existence of Christ as well as the idea and mind of Christ in eternity.

Scripture is not the foundation or basis of Spinoza’s Christology; neither is reason. Spinoza writes about knowledge based on reason and reasoning.

“… when the essence of a thing is inferred from another thing, but not adequately. This happens, either when we infer the cause from some effect, or when something is inferred from some universal, which some property always accompanies.”[210]

Knowledge construed from abstract reasoning, even if true, is inadequate. It does not arise from our union with God, nor does it further our actual union with God. Says Spinoza about reason,

“…we can, in a sense, say that we have an idea of the thing… But still, it will not through itself be the means of our reaching our perfection.”[211]

It is one thing to construct a reasoned model[212] mind of Christ and demonstrate it by deduction, inference and experimentation properly done; it is quite another thing to actually conceive a personal mind that is like the mind of Christ. The “means of our reaching our perfection” is our actual encountering, experiencing as well as intuitively knowing or understanding God’s immanence to the extent of our actual existence and existing in union with God as determined by “Christ according to the spirit.”

In an obtuse passage that underlies his Christology. Spinoza, in effect, argues the immediate idea and the immediate ideas of the mind (or spirit) of Christ is “the most excellent of all”, and that people are excellent in essence and existence when they manifest Christ’s excellence.

“… the end[213] turns nature completely upside down. For what is really a cause, it considers as an effect …What is by nature prior, it makes posterior. And finally, what is supreme and most perfect, it makes imperfect. … as has been established in PP21-23, that effect is most perfect which is produced immediately by God, and the more something requires intermediate causes to produce it, the more imperfect it is. But  if the things which have been produced immediately by God had been made so that God would achieve his end, then the last things, for the sake of which the first would have been made, would be the most excellent of all.”[214]

Spinoza says the mind of Christ surpassed the minds of others because it was more perfect and the ideas of Christ’s mind were given immediately by God “mind to mind”[215]. Spinoza cautions when he claims that in Christ God’s Wisdom or the Word of God assumed or took on human nature and that Christ is the “way of salvation”, that he does not mean “things that some churches[216] claim about Christ”[217]. His Christology is not like their Christologies. Their doctrines confuse corporeal “objects of the senses”, with things in themselves; as well as things according to the flesh and things according to the spirit. Spinoza does not speak against the doctrines of those denominations: he quite simply admits or says he does not understand them[218]. Spinoza does not understand churches who claim the infinite transforms into the finite, vice versa. Spinoza only speaks against any actions of any denominations that harm others. In Spinoza’s Christology, those unfounded doctrines established by church denominations centuries after Christ temporal existence contradicts reality as he understands it. In regards to metaphysics and ontology, Spinoza’s Christology accounts for the infinite and the finite, for the eternal Christ and the temporal Christ, as well as their relation to God. For his part, Spinoza speaks of the historical Christ in duration when he is talking about things in duration. But when speaking about things in eternity, Spinoza considers the eternal and infinite Christ existing in eternity and considers the temporal, finite, historical Christ existing in eternity sub specie aeternitatis. Spinoza does not attempt to miraculously merge the finite and the infinite by way of ‘mystery’, his approach accommodates both — there is no need for a supernatural solution because there is no problem.

If Christ exists so God can ‘save’ people; then in essence people are God’s primary creation and concern, not Christ. For Spinoza it is because Christ is prior to people that Christ established what human essence is and establishes that people manifest that essence, which is the idea of the eternal Christ. Spinoza holds to an “order of Philosophizing”[219], which starts with perfect reality, God or existence itself, then emanates to creatures (i.e. people) of that reality, that God or that Existence and Existing. Christ does not exist to save people; rather because Christ exists people find salvation. A person’s true human essence is attained as an effect or manifestation of the reality of the eternal idea of Christ in their essence and existing. When the idea of Christ we possess, is determining the conceiving of our ideas to be like the ideas of the mind of Christ, this emendation or emanation manifests God’s nature as perfect as possible for the individual person.

Spinoza’s own view, and his reading of Paul, is that everyone has divine “natural light” by intuited natural revelation because God operates in them, apart from what is inferred by or deduced in abstract reasoning.

“Finally, we must not by any means pass over that passage in Paul (Romans 1: 20) where he says (as Tremellius[220] translates from the Syriac text): for from the foundations of the world, God’s hidden things are visible in his creatures through the understanding, and his power and divinity, which are to eternity; so they are without escape. By this he indicates clearly enough that everyone, by the natural light, clearly understands God’s power and eternal divinity, from which he can know and deduce what he ought to pursue and what he ought to flee. Hence he concludes that no one has any escape and none can be excused by their ignorance, as they certainly could be, if he were speaking of the supernatural light, and of the fleshly passion of Christ and his resurrection etc.”[221]

Of “God’s hidden things” scripture says, ‘they have ears but do not hear, eyes but do not see’[222], or in Spinoza’s terms “God’s hidden things” are not clearly “visible” through corporeal imagination or abstract reason. Those things of God according to Paul and Spinoza are known through the intellect’s ‘hearing and seeing’ using its natural light. They are neither ‘supernaturally’ given to only few specially chosen people, not constrained by the limits of historical events known, once again, only by a few selected and chosen people.

In regards to denominational doctrines about the blood-sacrifice and corporeal resurrection of the “fleshly” Christ, Spinoza simply did subscribe to the global notion (after the flesh) that human weakness or sin requires compensation through the taking of life in blood sacrifice. Nor did Spinoza think that there was a need for the “fleshy” Christ to endure in the flesh after dying in the flesh. The ontological status of Christ is not altered whether he endures in the world in the flesh or not. Spinoza’s Christology allows for the idea of a temporal finite Christ to eternally exist in God’s eternal infinite intellect as well as allowing the idea (spirit) of the eternal Christ to exist eternally in God’s infinite intellect, as an immediate, necessary and finite configuration of the essence of substance or God. In eternity, the two are connected by one and the same essence: one is perceived by people in duration, the other is conceived by people sub specie aeternitatis.

As discussed above, we participate in extension when we unite with our temporal bodies. Sensing and becoming aware of our union with our temporal bodies and the effects of that union is bodily birth in and of the flesh[223]. Our first, original emergent mind is passively formed in our first corporeal birth and corporeal experiences. Using our inadequate ideas of our bodies’ affects[224], we passively participate in thought in forming our first, original passive minds[225]. In E IIP2S, Spinoza points out that knowledge of our body and how it functions is extremely limited. We also participate in and have awareness of our union with God under a species or form of eternity. Sensing and becoming aware of our union with God, in terms of our human nature’s intellect, and sensing and becoming aware the incorporeal effects of that union, is “spiritual” generation, formation or birth in and of the spirit. With spiritual birth and life we are united to God so that God is in us and we are in God, while we are yet in the flesh. We actively participate in thought through our intellect to form our idea of Christ immediately determined in our union with God.

In E IIP12, 13 and 13C, Spinoza considers corporeal things (bodies) under the attribute of extension, which we perceive with our corporeal senses. The human body is an object of the senses representing affections of our body from which we infer perceptions of other bodies acting on our body, under extension. The human body is the object of the idea of the human mind in so far as that mind is constituted according to experiences of the. We do not and cannot have an adequate knowledge of the corporeal object of our mind (our body) or of the corporeal objects of the senses which appear to interact with our body. Our mind’s emendation according to our union with God in a certain and determinate way is the object of innate idea of the essence of God. Our mind’s understanding is informed by our idea of God (as explained by the nature of the human mind. As Spinoza puts it,

“since our mind— simply from the fact that it contains God’s Nature objectively in itself, and participates in it… whatever we clearly and distinctly understand, the idea and nature of God dictates to us.”[226]

“There is, as we have said, this idea[227] … which pertains to the essence of the Mind[228], and which is necessarily eternal[229]. …we feel and know by experience that we are eternal. …the eyes of the mind[230], by which it sees and observes things, are the demonstrations[231] themselves. … we nevertheless feel that our mind, insofar as it involves the essence of the body under a species of eternity, is eternal and that this existence it has cannot be defined by time or explained through duration. “[232]

Our body’s essence considered under a species of eternity is not “defined by time or explained through duration”. When our body’s true essence is conceived “under a species of eternity” it is the object of a mind that exists and is understood or known as eternal, with God as first cause. This is not at all our body in “the series, or order of existing” being the object of the mind. According to 1 Corinthians 15 (which Spinoza cites in Ep 75), Paul likewise thinks the eternal ‘resurrected’ mind is not like the carnal flesh and blood mind[233]. We sense the effects our eternal union with God[234], our intuiting the idea of Christ and our intuiting our ideas to be like the ideas of the mind of Christ,

“… no one can doubt this unless he thinks that an idea is something mute, like a picture on a tablet, and not a mode of thinking, viz. the very [act of] understanding. … As the light makes both itself and the darkness plain, so truth is the standard both of itself and of the false.”[235]

We do not have adequate knowledge of the human body[236] as it is in duration, but we have adequate knowledge of the human mind[237] known under a form of eternity[238]. Intuitions are ideas in themselves, which are not experienced as objects of the corporeal senses but are self-evidently experienced in themselves.

People corporeally experience and interact with other extended bodies through union with their body[239]. They have only inadequate imagination knowledge of such interactions[240]. Their first or original “worldly”, “earthly” passive intellects and minds[241] are determined by things external[242] to their true human essence. Knowledge about our essence and existence from our original or first externally determined mind is confused, inadequate and disorganized. People also experience “incorporeal” spiritual things[243] (i.e. ideas) determined in their union with God, which they consequently know adequately under the aspect or form of eternity from their union with God or Nature.

Using abstracted common notions and properties of revealed intuited ideas of Christ, a person can use reasoned inference and deduction to construct a perfect reasoned character “model of human nature”[244]. A properly[245] construed “model of human nature” is a practical aid in establishing true rules or a true plan of living, and using the plan to live “according to the guidance of reason” based on our idea of Christ. Spinoza calls following such an abstract plan of reason is called “Piety” or “Morality”. “The Desire to do good generated in us by our living according to the guidance of reason, I call Morality.”[246] “living according to guidance of reason” presupposes the possession of the idea of Christ on which that reasoning is based. Quite apart from developing those notions or things of reason (ens rationis); the intellect has real guiding Inner Light within itself. “It pertains to the essence of the human Mind (by IIP47) to have an adequate knowledge of God’s eternal and infinite essence.”,[247] or intuited knowledge of the idea of Christ.That “adequate knowledge” is an activating knowledge; it is not passive. Spinoza calls it to “Religion”[248]. In regards to “Religion”, Spinoza identifies the indwelling “divine agency”, the eternal, necessary and infinite Christ as the “only”[249] and “necessary” “way of salvation”[250]. Christ after the flesh in duration is external to us, not in union with us in the fabric of our emended minds[251]. Christ after the flesh would be inadequately known to us through our perceptions by imagination (words and images) both at the time or subsequently.

The saving work of Christ in us is two-fold. One venue is universally in each thinking thing (person); the other varies with the particular capacities given to each individual thinking thing. All thinking people possess the fixed and eternal idea of Christ which expresses God’s essence in way that it is explained and understood by the individual person. People’s capacity to conceive the ideas of the mind of Christ as determined by their idea of Christ is gifted in different degrees, therefore “…is not a gift common to all”[252] in equal measure. The actual, real properties of the idea of Christ, manifest in the actually produced fruits of the spirit of Christ, include, for example, loving-kindness, gladness, peace, patience, beneficence, goodness, good faith, gentleness, and selfrestraint, mercy, hope, joyfulness, patience, loving-kindness, etc.[253], are different from our knowledge of the ideas that constitute the mind of Christ. Knowing is not necessarily being. In regards to our real and active idea of Christ and our ideas conceived by it to like the ideas of the mind of Christ. Knowledge and necessary obedience or necessary action meld into Christian praxis, operationalized by God in us uniting us to God as participants in God’s nature.

Spinoza identifies two states or conditions of human existence and existing: “the state of nature” and “the state of religion”[254]. In temporal existence, our mind actually exists first in a state of or condition of privation of divine knowledge. Given the privation in our original state or condition, we are not bound to live by divine natural law. We are generated, in duration, a second time into a state of religion when we acquire knowledge of divine natural law and use that knowledge to free ourselves from bondage to our first mind according to the flesh.  Being free from that mind frees us from captivity. It does not necessarily liberate our true essence expressing itself in a new second spiritual or religious mind. Being aware of divine law in a state of nature; we can dissent from it and continue to be deprived of God in our dissenting condition. In actual human existence, the state of nature is “prior in nature and in time” to “the state of religion”. Spinoza discusses natural rights under a state of nature in TTP xvi and xvii, as well as in TP iii. He discusses people’s surrender their original natural rights and come to exist under divine natural law, as given in the idea of Christ.

In entering into “the state of religion”, according to Spinoza, people surrender their original rights and freedoms under the state of nature. People’s rights and freedoms transfer to God as God “inscribes” the person’s mind and heart with God’s Word. In their knowledge of God’s Word or God’s wisdom, people become aware that they are actually bound by divine natural law. When we surrender or transfer our original rights to God, we assume our rights under religion. Religion, or being religious, is an existential condition. Our desires and actions are caused by the idea of God “insofar as we know God”[255] We are freed from bondage to the original state of nature by immanent natural divine law to do and know as Christ does or knows. Under the state of religion our conatus is that of Christ or God explicated by the nature of the human mind[256]. This is a major theme in Paul’s letter to the Romans. In the state of or condition of religion, people can knowingly exist and live assenting to divine natural law or knowingly exist and live dissenting from it. Spinoza writes that his “conception” or views are confirmed by the authority of Paul[257].To enter a state of religion people surrender to or align their minds to the God in existential union in accord with the laws of the mind of Christ. It is of ultimate importance that people’s minds are not in bondage to or united with perceptions of corporeal “things that are called objects of the senses…”[258] Surrendering to corporeal ‘fictional’ objects of the senses (i.e. idolatry), is to dissent from our given natural knowledge of divine law.

There is no “super” in Spinoza’s Nature; only certain events and things we cannot explain with the knowledge we have. There is nothing spiritual in the performance of miracles. It is noteworthy that Spinoza considers the performance of miracles to be a natural gift after the flesh exercised through people’s natural rights[259].The performance of a miracle in the world after the flesh, i.e. our temporal world, produces a natural product or natural fruit. It may amaze, cause wonder and carry material power, but in itself it does not produce a spiritual fruit or product. Miracles can be used and have been used to encourage and promote Piety, but can equally well be used as a means to control people through their fears and hopes. Miracles may be performed by those who assent to natural divine law, but they are also used by those who dissent from it to perform miracles for their own purpose or ends.

On the surface, Spinoza’s 7^th “doctrine” of “universal faith”, or 7^th “fundamental” principle “aimed at by the whole of Scripture”, is puzzling. It is rooted in “pardons”, “sin” , “No one is without sin”, “believes”, “mercy”, “repentance”, knowing “Christ according to the spirit” and “having Christ in” us. These are not typical ‘philosophical’ wordings.

“VII. Finally, God pardons the sins of those who repent. No one is without sin. … whoever firmly believes that God, out of mercy and the grace by which he directs everything, pardons men’s sins … that person really knows Christ according to the Spirit, and Christ is in him.”[260]

The puzzle is resolved as follows. Like a thought experiment that considers a candle burning in a vacuum[261], in a fictitious or hypothetical ‘state of nature’ people’s privation prevents them being aware that they are bound to obey divine natural law. The “state of nature” absent the natural divine law, is a fiction. In reality, because divine natural law is native to understanding itself, in their very existing and thinking spiritually activated people are naturally aware of divine law inherent in their essence[262]. If they exist and live dissenting from the divine law inherent in their essence, they “sin” against God by sinning against their own true nature in God. Except for Christ, all people in privation, under their first birth and its accompanying original passive mind, dissent divine law[263] because their first original carnal mind according to the flesh emerged out of the world after the flesh; it differs from their mind according to the spirit  “not only in degree, but also essentially”[264]. The mind according to the flesh is “contrary” to the mind according to the spirit, “Therefore, they cannot exist in one subject.”[265]Actively transferring their natural rights and freedoms to God, people exist and live assenting to the divine law inherent to their essence, repenting in virtue of their second birth. Guided by the idea (i.e. spirit) of Christ[266], to emend their minds to be like the mind of Christ, Christ is actively in them. Having a mind determined by the idea of the eternal Christ in them, the emendation provides “forgiveness” by the nature of their union with God. And, in that union they really know “Christ according to the Spirit”. Spinoza concludes that in reality all people naturally having the idea of Christ in them are essentially bound to obey universal divine law, as they are bound to live in accordance with reason.

“In the state of nature each person is bound by revealed law in the same way he’s bound to live according to the dictates of sound reason: it’s more advantageous to him and necessary for his salvation.”[267]

To be free and saved, people must live “according to the dictates of sound reason”, as some people in a state of nature might plan to do and also do according to their plan. In the actual reality of existence, we are necessarily bound by our native or revealed knowledge of natural divine law to be obedient to divine law. We “strive”[268] or “desire” to act and live according to divine natural law, in the state of religion in two ways. We desire to live by the Inner Light or idea of Christ following a reasoned plan of living in accordance with that idea. Spinoza calls this desire and action Morality[269] (which also translates as Piety). Or secondly, we live actually possessing the idea of Christ determining our mind to be like the mind of Christ, generating actions which Spinoza calls Religion[270].

In chapter 2[271] of his Political Treatise, Spinoza describes nature’s laws as though separate from divine law, but also spells out the existence and manifestation of divine natural law in nature. Speaking particularly about religion[272] in paragraph 22, Spinoza writes

“So we ought to remember that a man can indeed do something against these decrees of God insofar as they have been inscribed as laws in our Mind, or in the Mind of the Prophets[273]. But he can’t do anything against God’s eternal decree[274], which has been inscribed in the whole of nature and concerns the order of the whole of nature.”[275]

The “decrees of God” can be violated by people because the decrees are natural divine laws that are not inscribed in the whole of nature. In regards to people in duration, they are inscribed and take effect only in the human mind when that mind is like the mind of Christ. When people violate divine natural laws, they violate themselves in themselves, not nature in itself. Spinoza’s views are in keeping with those of Paul as found in Romans. The study of the natural world absent divine natural law, as undertaken by “Modern Christian” [276] natural philosophers, will never provide knowledge of how in union with God, we are freed from bondage into salvation or freedom. In reality, God is to be found and adequately known only in people who in union with God possess an intelligible idea of the eternal Christ, Inner Light or the Word of God within.

Spinoza says the purpose of the TTP was to separate faith from philosophy[277]. That is, separate mere belief from truth. Mere belief itself is not saving. He notes

“Faith[278] is not saving by itself…”[279]

Therefore he argues, in regards to their faith people can believe anything[280] that encourages their piety, providing their belief or faith encourages and supports obedience to divine law not disobedience to it. An act of authentic Christian religion is not a verbal utterance or a passive knowing; it is an action of the spiritually generated person’s essence. Such action generates evidence of saving faith. Actual salvation is in actually being guided by the spirit of Christ to be and act according to the idea and mind of Christ. How that comes to be is irrelevant. What matters is what we desire and do. Saving faith is the work of the idea (i.e. spirit) of Christ in us, which causes us to be bound to divine natural law revealed to us in the mind of Christ. The measure of saving faith is obedience to God[281] following from our revealed knowledge of divine natural law. If obedience to God or divine natural law does not follow from our faith or belief, then the faith or belief is an illusionary empty fiction serving some other thing or purpose.

In the 1st chapter of TTP, Spinoza speaks to natural divine knowledge, special revelation by imagination, and natural (i.e. not abstract) universal revelation by intellection, the Spirit of God, as well as the spirit and mind of Christ as these are given in scripture. Given in scripture, these revelations are things of the imagination, words and images representing something else. Given in reality itself, intuited natural universal revelation, the immanent Spirit or essence of God constituting the spirit and mind of Christ, are real things in which we actually participate while they actually participate in us as first cause of our essence or spirit.  The means of our participation is Christ. Spinoza discusses in detail, his analysis that

“…except for Christ, no one has received[282] God’s revelation without the aid of imagination, i.e. without the aid of words or images.”[283]

With Christ in them, people received “God’s revelation”. We do not know the inmost essence of Christ through the series of events in the common order of nature. Based only on what is found in scripture, Spinoza states that only Christ is described in scripture as immediately communicating with God mind to mind. According to scripture everyone else had communication through their imagination. We learn about special revelations recorded in scripture through words and images in our imagination, not from direct real experience. Spinoza explains that prophetic special revelations of the Spirit of God are indirectly revealed, in a limited way, in prophets’ imagination. On the other hand, Spinoza goes on to say that the real idea of the eternal Christ actually in people, actually determines them to conceive a mind like the mind of Christ that causes them to intuitively acquire adequate knowledge of the things and laws of God, apart from scripture. Putting on a mind like the mind of Christ, reveals, like a clarifying lens of a microscope or telescope, God’s revelations to us. Citing Paul in Romans chapters 2 and 3[284], Spinoza says, these are revelations given to the whole[285] human race through the mind of Christ. They are given to a person’s intellect but only through or in and from Christ’s fixed eternal mind (i.e. spirit), which is God’s Wisdom or the Word of God expressed in human terms.

In keeping with John 1:1 and 1:14[286], Spinoza holds that the Wisdom or Word of God assumed or took upon itself human nature [287]   in Christ. In Ep 73, and then in Ep 75, Spinoza says Christ manifested God and suggests,

“To express this more powerfully, John said that the word became flesh.”[288]

The preeminent Johnnine scholar Raymond Brown, interpreting the phrase “The Word became flesh” in John 1:14, notes of “the Word”,

“…this divine being has taken on human form and has thus found the most effective way in which to express himself to men.”[289]

The eternal, necessary and infinite idea and mind of Christ did not morph, transubstantiate or transform into finite flesh, nor did finite flesh turn into the eternal mind or spirit of Christ. With Christ in John 3: 6, Spinoza holds that flesh does not beget spirit[290]. In our union with God, the Spirit begets our spirit[291] to be like the spirit of Christ.

Spinoza writes of his belief[292] that only in the historical Christ[293] was a person’s original mind not mediated. The actual finite ideas of the mind of the historical Christ were immediately determined by the necessary and finite modes constituting the ideas of the mind of Christ (i.e. Christ’s own mind). The “fleshly”[294] body of Christ was determined by the series of events in the common order of nature, but critically, the actual intellect and mind of the historical Christ in duration was not. In Spinoza’s Christology, the flesh and blood events of the historical Christ is not the “divine agency”[295] that inscribes “God’s eternal word and covenant, and true religion” which “is the true original text of God” in the human mind. The human heart and mind is inscribed according to the spirit or mind of Christ by the fixed and eternal idea and mind of Christ.

In Spinoza’s thinking, acquisition of the activating knowledge of divine natural law engenders natural obedience to the things and laws of God. For Spinoza, Christian praxis is the bedrock of Christian faith.

“According to the foundation we’ve given, faith must be defined as follows: [Faith is] thinking such things about God that if you had no knowledge of them, obedience to God would be destroyed, whereas if you are obedient to God, you necessarily have these thoughts. … Now I’ll briefly show what follows from it:
1. Faith is not saving by itself, but only in relation to obedience.”[296]

Authentic Christian faith is existentially active or alive. It is actually being caused or being determined by the ‘living’ idea of God indwelling specifically in our idea of Christ. Faith is in our activating union with God producing actions or fruits of the spirit, and attendant intuitive knowledge of the union and its actions. This provides each individual person with positive or affirmative ‘ultimate existential significance’.

“For as I’ve said, with John, justice and loving-kindness are the unique and most certain sign of the true Universal faith. They are the true fruits[297] of the Holy Spirit. Wherever they are present, Christ is really present; wherever they are absent, Christ is absent. For only by the Spirit of Christ can we be led to the love of justice and loving-kindness.”[298]

Spinoza distinguishes between “the unique and most certain sign of Universal Faith” and authentic faith itself. For example, the apparent effects of the wind described by Christ in John 3:7 are different from the Spirit that causes those effects.

Spinoza writes that only “a very few” people effectively use a reasoned model ethical character under “the guidance of reason” to “acquire a habit of virtue”. Such success is “hard” and “rare”[299].  “…only a very few (compared with the whole human race) acquire a habit of virtue from the guidance of reason alone.”[300] Reflectively comprehending and understanding salvation with an exact knowledge of God is given to few, and is very difficult to attain. The “rare”^[301] , “very hard” and “difficult” way abstractly described by Spinoza[302] in his Ethics is not merely a way of obedience to the idea of Christ; it is a difficult way. Experience shows that most people follow a simpler path.

Echoing Paul’s letter to the Romans 1:25, Spinoza proposed an “order of philosophizing[303], to properly determine the “essence of man”. Spinoza notes,

“We can’t perceive by the natural light that simple obedience is a path to salvation. Only revelation teaches that this happens, by a special grace of God, which we cannot grasp by reason.”[304]

That universal “revelation” is what the mind of Christ reveals to us to be human essence. Knowledge that obedience to the Word of God ‘living’ in people is the path that leads to salvation does not come from the natural light of reason; it is a revelation in the our acquisition of knowledge of “divine natural law”[305], given “by a special grace of God” in having a mind like the mind of Christ. Most people attain salvation in simple obedience to what is revealed in their simple idea of Christ, which is the core of their mind and heart. They do not require complete knowledge of all the ideas of the mind of Christ to be obedient to the essence or spirit of Christ[306]. He explains this to Boxel in Ep 56, and uses the successful application of geometry even if one does not know the whole of geometry. Spinoza writes, “I do not say that we must know him as he is; it is enough for us to know him to some extent in order to be united with him.”[307]

In light of the above study of Spinoza’s Christology, it comes clear that in the exchange of correspondence with Oldenburg from June 1675 to February 1676 (Ep 61, 62, 68, 69, 71, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78 and 79), Spinoza was freely explaining his Christian understanding as distinct from that of “superstitiously religious and Christian” kinds of people identify by de Vries in Ep 8, as well as distinct from Oldenburg’s “Modern Christian” acquaintances (i.e. people in the Royal Society and its precursor). Of the 84 letters in Spinoza’s extant correspondence, the 29 letters between him and Oldenburg make up a full third. It is clear from many of Oldenburg’s letters to Spinoza, including the earlier letters, that Oldenburg was well dispose towards Spinoza’s religious or spiritual thinking. But, in regards to the views of prominent theologians, Oldenburg considers them a “foolish”[308] “common herd”[309] and a growling “mob”[310], and whose “accepted Formulas of the Confessions (which seem to be too full of partisan zeal)”[311] and were detrimental to “authentic purpose of Christian Religion”. Of particular interest to Oldenburg is Spinoza’s views on the nature of God, the power of the human mind, the union of the human spirit or mind to the body, Oldenburg is not the only acquaintance of Spinoza that testifies to Spinoza’s “godly plan” “to commend and establish the authentic purpose of Christian Religion”. For his part, Spinoza writes that as friends, they would share “especially spiritual things”[312]. Apart apart from pedantic descriptions of experiments and updates on ‘science’, the extant Oldenburg-Spinoza correspondence largely concerns their Christian faith. In Ep 61 of June 1675, Oldenburg wrote that he had just read or reread Spinoza’s TTP and had altered his previous poorly formed opinion of Spinoza’s views concerning the “authentic purpose of the Christian Religion”.  Oldenburg writes,

“…I indicated my opinion of that Treatise, which now, having subsequently examined and weighed the matter more carefully, I certainly think was premature. At that time certain things seemed to me to tend to the detriment of Religion, when I measured it by the standard provided by the common herd of Theologians, and the accepted Formulas of the Confessions (which seem to be too full of partisan zeal). But now, as I rethink the whole matter more deeply, many things occur to me which persuade me that you are so far from trying to harm true religion, or solid philosophy, that on the contrary you are working to commend and establish the authentic purpose of the Christian Religion, and indeed, the divine sublimity and excellence of a fruitful Philosophy. Since, therefore, I now believe that in your heart you have this intention [to advance the cause of true Christianity], … I shall only endeavor to gradually dispose the minds of good and wise Men to embrace those truths you sometimes bring into a fuller light, and to abolish the prejudices conceived against your Meditations. If I’m not mistaken, you seem to see very deeply into the nature and powers of the human Mind, and it’s Union with our Body. “[313]

In the 11 letters involved in the 1675-1676 correspondence, references to “virtue” or “religion” should be taken to be references to Christian virtue and Christian religion. Spinoza did not dispute Oldenburg’s description of Spinoza’s intentions. On the contrary in Ep 73, Spinoza writes to Oldenburg effectively declaring that “no one can attain blessedness” unless they know Christ according to the spirit or unless they have a mind like the mind of Christ. In Ep 78, Spinoza uses Paul as an example of this. Spinoza tells Oldenburg that Paul was not deceived about Christ’s resurrection, as many others were.

“But Paul, to whom Christ appeared afterward[314], gloried that he knew Christ not according to the flesh[315], but according to the spirit.[316]”[317]

Besides a few letters to Tschirnhaus concerning the variety of bodies (May 1676 to July 1676) and a single note to Jelles (?) from the same period, there no other surviving letters from Spinoza last years. In effect the last words we have from Spinoza about Christology, affirms what he wrote in Ep 73 and 75:  Paul, Spinoza claims, experienced Christ as Spinoza describes the idea of the eternal Christ in Spinoza’s Christology.

Resources:

1. Balling, Pieter. Het Licht op den Kandelaar, 1662. See: Jarig Jelles, The Light on the Candlestick, 1663, (mistakenly attributed to William Ames). <hTTP://universalistfriends.org/printable/candle_printable.html#3>.

2. Rufus, M. Jones. Coornhert And The Collegiants — A Movement For Spiritual Religion In Holland, in Spiritual Reformers in the 16th and 17th Centuries, MacMillan and Co., Limited St. Martin’s Street, London 1914 Copyright. <hTTP://archive.org/stream/spiritualreforme24934gut/24934.txt>.

3. Lee, Ethel Rosa. The Influence of Mennonites, Collegiants and Quakers on the Life and Writings of Spinoza, Thesis, 1917.

4. Kennington, Richard, Analytic and Synthetic Methods in Spinoza’s Ethics, in The Philosophy of Baruch Spinoza; Studies in Philosophy and the History of Philosophy, Catholic University of America Press ; Washington, 1980.

5. Cadbury, Henry J. Spinoza and a Quaker Document of 1657, Jr. of Med. Renn. St., Vol 1, pp. 130-32, 1961.

6. Popkin, Richard H., Spinoza’s Relations with the Quakers in Amsterdam (Quaker History, Vol. 73, No. 1, 1984, pp. 14-28), 14-19.

7. Richard Henry Popkin, Some New Light in the Roots of Spinoza’s Science of Bible Study, in Spinoza and the Sciences, in Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science Series 91 (Boston: Reidel, 1986) xix + 336 pp. Ed. Debra Nails and Marjorie Grene, pp 95 – 123.

8. David, Savan. Spinoza: Scientist and Theorist of the Scientific Method, in Spinoza and the Science, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science Series 91 (Boston: Reidel, 1986) xix + 336 pp. Ed. Debra Nails and Marjorie Grene, pp 95 – 123.

9. Fix, Andrew, Prophecy and Reason: The Dutch Collegiants in the Early Enlightenment, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1991.

10. Wiep van Bunge & W.N.A. Klever (Ed.). (1996). Disguised and Overt Spinozism around 1700. Papers presented at het International Colloquium held at Rotterdam, 5-8 October 1994 (Brill’s Studies in Intellectual History, 69). Leiden/New York/Köln: E.J. Brill.

11. Herman De Dijn, Spinoza on Revealed Religion, Studia Spinozana 11 (1995), 39-52.

12. Micheil Wielema, Spinoza in Zeeland: the Growth and Suppression of” Popular Spinozism (c.1700-1720), Wiep of Bunge & Wim Klever (ed.), Disguised and Overt Spinozism Around 1700, Leiden: Brill, 1996, pp. 103-115. 103-115.

13. Graeme, Radical Protestantism in Spinoza’s Thought. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2005.

14. Brown, Raymond E., The Gospel According to John, The Anchor Bible, Vol. 29, Yale University Press, 2006.

15. Polka, Braydon, Between Philosophy and Religion: Spinoza, The Bible, and Modernity, Lexington Books, 2007.

16. Wiep van Bunge, Spinoza Past and Present. Essays on Spinoza, Spinozism, and Spinoza Scholarship, Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2012.

17. Halmi, Nicholas, Coleridge’s Ecumenical Spinoza, <hTTP://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1018604ar> Digital Publication : Sept. 30, 2013.

18. Belcheff, David, Spinoza on the Spirit of Friendship, Thesis, Arizona State University. May 2014.

19. van Cauter, Jo, Spinoza on History, Christ and Lights Untamable, Philosophy Doctoral Dissertation, Ghent University, Faculty of Letters and Philosophy, in May 2016.

Footnotes:

[1] Spinoza, Benedictus. The Collected Works of Spinoza Vol I & II, Curley, Edwin. Ed &Trans. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, Digital Edition, 2^nd, Printing, 1988.

(KV = Short Treatise on God, Man and His Well-Being = Short Treatise; TdIE = Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect = Treatise on the Intellect ; Ep. = Letters; CM = Appendix Containing Metaphysical Thoughts; E = Ethics; A = axiom; D (immediately following a roman numeral) = definition; D (immediately following an arabic numeral) = demonstration; P = proposition; C = corollary; S = scholium; PP ID5 = Descartes’ Principles, Part I, Definition 5; E IP8S2 = Ethics, Part I, proposition 8, scholium 2; KV II, xxv, 1 refers to Part II, chapter xxv, section 1 of the Short Treatise; “TdIE, 101” refers to section 101 of the Treatise on the Intellect; “TP II, 5” = Political Treatise chapter 2, paragraph 5.The translator adds text in square brackets to support his translations.) All italics are the writer’s emphases.

[2] Ep 6, 30, 43; see also Ep 68 and TTP ii, 2

[3] TdIE 99-103

[4] TTP i, 4-6

[5] This approach is akin to a nativist approach in that the presence of the divine agency and its determinations of in the dynamics and structure of the human intellect or mind.

[6] See E IDviii; IVPref. IP29S; and E IIP31, D

[7] TTP i, 4-6

[8] TTP i, 5

[9] i.e., Paul, see 2 Corinthians 3:3; Romans 2:15, 7:6. Prophets ad Apostles would have both universal revelations and special individualized revelations.

[10] TTP xviii, 2; see also v, 1 and 5

[11] TTP xii, 3

[12] TTP i, 20

[13] TTP i, 9

[14] TTP i, 21

[15] TTP i, 20 Spinoza identifies Christ as the voice of God, so that Christ articulates words, he does not hear another’s voice.

[16] TTP i, 17-18

[17] TTP i, 24

[18] TTP i, 23

[19] TTP i, 4

[20] TTP ii, 25, iii, 44

[21] TTP i, 19-20

[22] TTP i, 23

[23] TTP i, 41; v 1 and 5; xvii, 2; Ep 73

[24] TTP iv, 36

[25] See TTP Pref, 23; iv, 30-31

[26] TTP i, 41

[27] TTP i, 25-41

[28] TTP xiv, 24-28

[29] TTP ii, 22; KV II, xxii, 7

[30][30] TTP i, 22; KV II, xxii, 7

[31] TTP v, 46; Ep 73, 76

[32] TdIE 93, 100-103

[33] While specific and determinate, this eternal mode is immediate, necessary and infinite mode that we know as a mode under the absolute nature of thought perceived as God’s essence.

[34] TTP iv, 36; TTP i, 4-6

[35] Spinoza makes clear in TTP i, that spirit and mind (i.e. idea) are one and the same thing.

[36] TTP i, 3-6; E IIP40S, VP36CS

[37] TTP xv, 41

[38] See Ep 4

[39] KV II, xxii, 7

[40] See E IIP10CS

[41] See title of KV II, xxii.

[42] KV II, xxii, 6-7

[43] See TdIE 93, 98

[44] Ep 76

[45] TTP i,  19-20

[46] TTP 1, 23

[47] i.e., the temporal, historical finite Christ who housed the idea of Christ and the mind of Christ in themselves.

[48] Ibid

[49] Ibid

[50] TTP i, 4-6

[51] See E VP39S

[52] See John 14 and 16

[53] E IVP68S

[54] See E IVP68S

[55] TTP iv, 22

[56] E IVP68S

[57] TTP i, 22-23

[58] See TTP xi

[59] Spinoza’s definition of Morality or Piety: “The Desire to do good generated in us by our living according to the guidance of reason, I call Morality.” E IVP37S1

[60] TTP iv, 9; This principle of living is native to human nature as the indwelling idea of Christ.

[61] TTP iv, 34-36

[62] see TTP xvi, 55-57

[63] TTP iv, 36

[64] See TdIE 13-15;

[65] TTP i, 4-6

[66]

[67] KV II, xxii, 2; or as he says in in his definition of religion (E IVP37S1) “insofar as we know God”.

[68] E IIP23D

[69] See E IIP24-29

[70] See E IIP32, 46, 47; P23D; VP22, 30, 31

[71] E IIP6, 7, 19, 23-5

[72] E IIP29C

[73] See E IIP20, 32, 46, 47

[74] E IP21-23

[75] TTP i, 23, Ep 73 and 75

[76] i.e., ideas of the necessary and infinite modes mediated (see E IP21-23) or determined by the idea of the eternal Christ.

[77] See E IDviii; IVPref. IP29S; and E IIP31, D

[78] Spinoza’s “Nature” is Existence itself.

[79] EP 73; i.e. the modern Christians are Oldenburg’s acquaintances in the Royal Society and its precursor.

[80] Ibid

[81] By mind Spinoza understands spirit, see TTP i

[82] See also E IIP11C

[83] E IIP10CS

[84] See TTP ii, 2

[85] Which it is,  see E IIP47

[86] EP 21

[87] E VP23S; IIP43S; TTP xiii, 17; KV II, xxii 7

[88] See TTP Pref; E IIIP50S

[89] Ibid

[90] E IIP28

[91] E IIP28, D and S

[92] E IIP32 and 47

[93] Knowledge of the first or second kind,  not of reason or intuition; see E IIP40S2; TdIE 19; TTP i, 4-6

[94] E IID6

[95] E VP40

[96] E IVpref

[97] Ep 23

[98] see Ep 23, IIIP5

[99] IIP2, D, S; IIIP3, D, S

[100] E VP23D and S

[101] IIIP7, see also Ep 23

[102] i.e. assumes or takes on; see TTP i, 23, Ep 73 and 75

[103] E IIP11C

[104] see E IID3Exp

[105] see E IIP40S

[106] TTP iii, 35

[107] TTP i; iv, 30-37; ii, 46

[108] TTP iv, 18, 20, 21, 39; v, 14

[109] E VP30

[110] E IIP47, D, S; IVP6, S

[111] TTP Pref, 23

[112] see TTP iv, 38-47; Ep 43

[113] see TTP iv, 9-36

[114] TTP iv, 31

[115] Ep 43

[116] Natural divine law is embedded in human nature by the idea of Christ.

[117] i.e., The true human nature of the emended human mind.

[118] TTP iv, 18

[119] i.e. natural law

[120] i.e. not from scripture or tradition

[121] TTP iv, 31

[122] TTP iv, 38-47

[123] TTP iv, 31; TTP iv, 36; TTP i, 4

[124] Ep 3

[125] TTP i, 23, Ep 73 and 75

[126] KV xxii, 7; see also E IIP5 and D; VP23S; TTP xiii, 17

[127] TTP i, 23; iv, 32

[128] TTP iv, 47-48

[129] TTP iv, 31; TTP iv, 36; TTP i, 4

[130] KV II, xxii, 2-3; see also Ep 56

[131] i.e. the idea of Christ and the ideas of the mind of Christ

[132] E VP36CS

[133] E IID2; E IIP5, 6; IIIP2, D, S

[134] i.e. from Spinoza’s analysis mind is spirit

[135] E IIIP2, D, and S

[136] E ID4

[137] Yetzhak T. Melamed, “Christus secundum spiritus” Spinoza, Jesus and the Infinite Intellect, in Neta Stahl (ed.), The Jewish Jesus. Routledge (2012).

[138] TTP iv, 31, 36; also Spinoza frequently writes that we have the spirit (i.e. mind) of Christ in us.

[139] E IP17C2S; see also CM Appendix 2, chapter 11

[140] E IIP47

[141] Ibid

[142] TdIE

[143] TdIE

[144] TTP v, 50

[145] TTP v, 30

[146] TTP v, 41

[147] TTP believe given immediately only to Christ

[148] TTP 1, 23

[149] TTP i, 22-23

[150] See E IDviii; IVPref. IP29S; and E IIP31, D

[151] TTP i, 4-6

[152] TTP iv, 36; TTP i, 4-6

[153] TTP i, 3-6

[154] See E IIP37-39

[155] E IIP10

[156] E IVP68S

[157] E IP17C2S; see also CM Appendix 2, chapter 11

[158] E IIP40S2, TTP i, 22-24

[159] E IIP20, P21, P40S2; E VP24, P25

[160] E VP23S, IIP43S; TTP xiii, 17; KV II, xxii 7

[161] TdIE 102

[162] TdIE 86

[163] These cannot be deduced or inferred from the foundations of our knowledge; they are universally revealed.

[164] TdIE 100-103

[165] KV II, xxii, 2-3, see also Ep 56

[166] Ep 56; see also KV II, xxii, 2-3

[167] TTP iv, 20

[168] TTP iv, 22

[169] TTP i, 23

[170] i.e. the “fixed and eternal things” (TdIE 100-103)

[171] TdIE 100-103

[172] TdIE 13

[173] TdIE 11-14

[174] Ep 23

[175] E IVP37S1

[176] i.e. spirit, Spinoza

[177] E IIP29, C, S; E IIP40S2

[178] See E IVP37S1, P68S, VP18D

[179] E IIP14, also see E IVP37S1, P68S, VP18D

[180] See CM Appendix 2, chapter 11; TTP xiii; TTP xxii, 24; E IP17S

[181] i.e. the spirit of Christ

[182] See Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:11-12

[183] Capable of actions which it itself causes, apart from those caused other bodies

[184] i.e. the series of events in the common order of nature acting on the passive mind

[185] i.e. solely and not in union with God determining its true existential essence

[186] Capable of actions which it itself causes, apart from those caused other bodies in the series or order of existing

[187] i.e. only itself while in union with God, that is itself in its true existential essence

[188] Things related to God, “All things, insofar as they are related to God are true.” E  IIP32

[189] See E IIIP7, D; P9S

[190] E VP39S

[191] See Ep 4

[192] Ep 23

[193] TTP iv, 16

[194] TTP iv, 15

[195] Ep 19

[196] Ep 19

[197] TTP xvi, 53-55; TP II, 18, 22

[198] KV II, xii, 6-7

[199] TTP xvi, 54; xii, 113

[200] TdIE 100-103

[201] Ep 2; TTP v, 8; (also see discussion on Paraclete above and John 14-16)

[202] Ep 23

[203] Ibid

[204] TTP iv 20

[205] David, Savan. Spinoza: Scientist and Theorist of the Scientific Method, in Spinoza and the Sciences. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science Series 91 (Boston: Reidel, 1986) xix + 336 pp. Ed. Debra Nails and Marjorie Grene, pp 95 – 123.

[206] E IVP37S1

[207] TdIE 14; TTP xiv, 28; see also Ep 73

[208] i.e. not mathematical demonstrating

[209] Ep 21

[210] TdIE 19

[211] TdIE 28

[212] See E IVPref; TTP viii, 26-30; TdIE 13

[213] In E IApp Spinoza identifies the propensity for people to imagine that God is like they imagine themselves to be, therefore God acts to achieve some end which is like people’s carnal aspirations

[214] E IApp

[215] TTP i, 24-25; iv, 31-32.

[216] i.e. denominations

[217] TTP i, 23-24

[218] Spinoza does not understand how some church contain the infinite in the finite;

[219] Ibid

[220] Tremellius was a Jewish convert to Christianity (1510-1580): first to Catholicism and a year after to Calvinism. He translated the bible from Hebrew and Syriac (Aramaic) to Latin), which was favoured by John Milton.

[221] TTP iv, 47-48

[222] See Psalms 115:5, 135:16; Ezekiel 12:2; and Mathew 13:15.

[223] KV II, xxii, 6-7

[224] E IIP19, 22, 24, 27, 28

[225] See KV II, xvi, 5; Ep 23; E IIP20, 21 and S; E IVpref; E IID3Exp

[226] TTP i, 3-6

[227] i.e. the idea of our existence in union with God, according to Christ after the spirit (which in Ep 78, Spinoza says Paul had)

[228] i.e. the eternal idea of Christ that determines true human essence

[229] Note – but not infinite

[230] i.e. intuitions

[231] i.e. natural self-evident demonstrations

[232] E VP23S

[233] See Ep 75

[234] KV II, xxii, 7

[235] E IIP43S

[236] E IIP24, 25, 27, 28, 29

[237] E IIP47, 46, 32, 40

[238] Under the attribute of thought but having a corresponding mode under extension

[239] E IIP13

[240] E IIP27-31

[241] See KV II, xvi, 5; Ep 23; E IIP20, 21 and S

[242] E IIP16, P19, P22, P24, P25

[243] KV II, xvi, 5; Ep 23; E IIP20, 21 and S

[244] See E IVPref; see also TTP viii, 26-30; TdIE 13

[245] E IApp

[246] E IVP37S1

[247] E IVP36S, see also E IVP36; and E IIP47, D, S

[248] E IVP37S1

[249] See TTP v, 50; Ep 76

[250] Ep 78; TTP i, 23 and 24; in 24, Spinoza cites John 14:6.

[251] See also John 14:16-20;  17:21-23

[252] TTP xiii, 9; xv, 45; E VP42S

[253] See also Ep 76

[254] TTP xvi, 53-55

[255] See E IVP37S1 – Spinoza’s definition of religion.

[256] E IIP11, D, C, 40, D, 43, D, S47, D, S

[257] TTP xvi, 54

[258] E IIP10CS

[259] TTP v, 50; TP iii, 10

[260] TTP xiv, 28

[261] See TdIE 57-58

[262] See TTP xvi, 56-57; TP II, 18, 22

[263] TTP iv, 47-48

[264] Ep 23

[265] Ibid

[266] See EIVP68S

[267] TTP xvi, 56-57; TP II, 18, 22

[268] See E IVP58D

[269] E IVP37S1

[270] E IVP37S1

[271] This TP chapter 2 encapsulates TTP and E; in particular TP II, 22, captures a number of points in Spinoza’s Christology.

[272] E IVP37S1

[273] The same decrees were given to the minds of the prophets and to all our minds, by way of intuiting thoughts or ideas. This is different than what was especially given in unique ways to a few prophets through their imagination.

[274] i.e. a single decree that establishes Natura Naturata

[275] TP ii, 22

[276] See Ep 73; and the related discussion below.

[277] TTP xiv, 5

[278] TTP xiv, 13

[279] TTP xiv, 14

[280] TTP xiv, 30-34

[281] TTP xiv, 13-20

[282] i.e. immediately

[283] TTP i, 2

[284] TTP i, 44-45

[285] TTP iv, 30-31

[286] Spinoza references passages those passages in Ep 75

[287] TTP i, 23

[288] Ep 75

[289] Brown, Raymond E., The Gospel According to John, The Anchor Bible, Vol. 29, Yale University Press, 2006, p.32.

[290] E IIIP2, D, and S

[291] KV II, xxii 7

[292] i.e. something he could not ‘mathematically demonstrate’

[293] TTP i, 23, 25; Ep 73, 75; E VP36D

[294] TTP iv, 47-48

[295] TTP i, 4-6

[296] TTP xiv, 13

[297] These “fruits” are signs of the properties and laws of existence itself according to the spirit of Christ.

[298] Ep 76

[299] E VP42S

[300] TTP xv, 44

[301] TTP i, 47

[302] E VP42S

[303] E IIP10CS, considered above

[304] TTP xv, 45

[305] TTP iv, 18, 20, 21

[306] Ep 56; see also KV II, xxii, 2-3

[307] KV II, xxii, 2-3; see also Ep 56

[308] Ep 6,

[309] Ep 61

[310] Ep 16

[311] Ep 61

[312] Ep 2

[313] EP 61

[314] i.e. after Christ’s fleshly death

[315] i.e. as an “object of the senses”

[316] i.e. according to the intellect or mind

[317] Ep 78

Marc Apkarian, PhD
Associate Professor, Biola University, La Mirada, CA

Abstract: In the discipline of exercise science, the attributes of physical fitness lie in the domains of cardiorespiratory endurance, muscular endurance, muscular strength, body composition, and flexibility. If combined conceptually, most commonly performed categories of exercise among the general population could be identified as muscular strength, cardiorespiratory endurance, and flexibility, or simply strength, endurance, and flexibility. In scientific understanding, muscular strength is usually inclusive of maximum ability, as the maximal force that muscles can generate. Cardiorespiratory endurance has a continuous nature, as the ability of lungs, heart, and blood vessels to deliver oxygen adequately to tissue and cells to sustain prolonged physical activity. Flexibility follows unimpeded movement, whereby the body’s joints can move through a full range of motion. In spiritual terms, strength, endurance, and flexibility also can be seen to possess great significance in Christian faith. At times, a Christian needs to stay firm in convictions and be strong, as Ephesians 6:10 exhorts one to do. In other circumstances, the challenges of life require patience and endurance, as referenced in James 1:3. Being yielded to various ways God leads one’s life as a believer, or being flexible, is also an important aspect of behaviour, as illustrated in James 4:13-15. Unlike physical training, the development of spiritual strength, endurance, and flexibility is not necessarily a guided, strategic endeavour, often occurring in response to circumstances outside the control of an individual, though it could be a deliberate pursuit as well. Strength, endurance, and flexibility are robust, dynamic attributes of significance in physical fitness and in the Christian faith, with manifold illustrations in exhortations, biblical directives, experiences of those in scripture, and in the life of Christ.

Keywords: Strength, Endurance, Flexibility, Training.

Statement of Original Unpublished Work: By submitting this document to the Editor in Chief of CJSCF, I am making a Statement of Original Unpublished Work not submitted to another journal for publication.

Introduction

In the disciplines of exercise science and kinesiology, physical fitness has been a construct of significance for well over a century. The study of physical fitness and its assessment dates back to the pioneering work of researchers in the late 1800s and early 1900s, even gaining political attention when President Dwight D. Eisenhower created the President’s Council on Youth Fitness in 1956 (Institute of Medicine 2012). Over time, definitions of physical fitness have also been created, such as “the ability to carry out daily tasks with vigor and alertness, without undue fatigue and with ample energy to enjoy leisure-time pursuits and to meet unforeseen emergencies” (President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports 1971).

While such a description of physical fitness is broad and holistic, its wide scope led to further distinction between health-related physical fitness as of importance for all people, and skill-related physical fitness as of predominant interest for athletes (Pate 1983). Moreover, physical activity has been identified distinctly from exercise (which specifically confers physical fitness), in that physical activity is broadly inclusive of all forms of human movement performed by an individual, including daily activities, while exercise is a subset of physical activity, being performed in a structured and deliberate fashion (Caspersen, Powell, and Christenson 1985). The goal of this discussion is to utilize the construct of health-related physical fitness as physical fitness, with its broad applicability to the physical health of the general public, and relate its attributes with spiritual parallels and principles of significance in Christian faith.

Characterizing the Attributes

The components, or attributes, of physical fitness classified within the arena of health-related physical fitness have been identified as encompassing the domains of cardiorespiratory endurance, muscular endurance, muscular strength, body composition, and flexibility (Caspersen, Powell, and Christenson 1985). While other components of fitness could be distinguished as well, such as those related to physical skill (e.g., for instance, agility or balance), these five attributes have received the greatest attention in scientific study, given their fundamental importance and relationships with the physical health of individuals. Of the five, many commonly performed exercises and training programs for general health and fitness tend to involve three of them specifically – muscular strength, cardiorespiratory endurance, and flexibility development. These distinct domains have been defined scientifically by various authors as follows.

Strength. Muscular strength, commonly referenced with the inclusion of maximum capability, is defined as “the maximal force that a muscle or muscle group can generate” (Kenney, Wilmore, and Costill 2020, 228).

Endurance. Cardiorespiratory endurance is by nature continuous, and is defined as “the ability of the lungs, heart, and blood vessels to deliver adequate amounts of oxygen to the cells to meet the demands of prolonged physical activity” (Hoeger et al. 2019, 37).

Flexibility. Flexibility has complete, unhindered movement as its central concept, and is defined as “the ability of joints to move through their full range of motion” (Insel, Roth, and Insel 2020, 345).

Although muscular endurance appears individually among the domains, and can be distinctly developed and targeted in training, it is often enhanced alongside muscular strength or cardiorespiratory endurance training, in a “side effect-like” fashion. Additionally, the very essence of body composition, or ratio of muscle to fat tissue quantity, is related to and functionally dependent on the development of muscular strength (hypertrophy, or “muscle size”) and cardiorespiratory endurance. Thus, from these five domains of physical fitness, if body composition is disregarded as an entity due to its dependence on other physical fitness components, and the modifiers “cardiorespiratory” and “muscular” are removed as well, the terms strength, endurance, and flexibility remain. Indeed, strength, endurance, and flexibility are fundamental key attributes of physical fitness, applicable in several contexts, including general health, exercise, sport, and/or rehabilitation.

Developing the Attributes

Numerous guidelines for developing aspects of physical fitness have been created over time, endeavouring to offer specific parameters by which individuals might enhance their physical well-being. With on-going discovery about the science of exercise and its implications for physical health and well-being, the standards given for the development of strength, endurance, and flexibility have been modified according to factors such as age, prior training experience, and health status of various populations, and have appeared in numerous books, journals, and reports.

The second edition of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) publication “The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans” is a systematic review compiling the results of extensive physical activity and health research over decades, and presents broad public health recommendations for performing physical activity among Americans of all ages (Piercy et al. 2018). The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) position stand “Quantity and Quality of Exercise for Developing and Maintaining Cardiorespiratory, Musculoskeletal, and Neuromotor Fitness in Apparently Healthy Adults: Guidance for Prescribing Exercise” is another authoritative pronouncement summarizing a wealth of physical activity and exercise science research based upon decades of studies (Garber et al. 2011). Its comprehensive collection of recommendations for various aspects of physical fitness development includes minimum thresholds or target ranges for the general population. Although the focus of this discussion is not on technical detail concerning physical fitness, a brief summary of broad recommendations for the three domains addressed herein is provided for reference.

Strength – Guidelines. Muscular strength: > 2-3 days/week; 8-15 repetitions/set; 1-4 sets; resistance training exercises for each of the major muscle groups

Endurance – Guidelines. Cardiorespiratory endurance: > 30 minutes/day; > 5 days/week; or in total, > 150 minutes/week (moderate intensity); OR > 20 minutes/day; > 3 days/week; or in total, > 75 minutes/week (vigorous intensity); continuous exercise such as running, walking, cycling, swimming

Flexibility – Guidelines. Flexibility: > 2 days/week; 10-60 seconds/exercise; flexibility exercises for each the major muscle–tendon groups

Connecting the Attributes

Having established a foundational understanding of the attributes and characteristics of physical fitness from a scientific standpoint, it can be realized that each physical fitness component – strength, endurance, and flexibility – possesses a figurative counterpart in the Christian faith. Throughout the lifetime of a Christian individual, there will be the need to remain strong in certain situations, endeavour to endure through specific experiences, and be flexible in particular circumstances. Expressed differently, a Christian may need to stay firm in convictions and actions, reflecting strength. At other times, the challenges of life require a Christian to exhibit perseverance and patience, reflecting endurance. Finally, it is important for a Christian to remain yielded to, or actively seek, various ways God may lead the course of life for a believer, reflecting flexibility. 

It is intriguing to note that in a majority of cases, the attributes are involved or expressed in response to circumstances outside the control of the Christian. Strength, endurance, and flexibility are often engaged by choice – actively, intentionally, and willingly through life’s experiences, challenges, and hardships. In some instances, as with physical training, attributes develop by purposeful engagement – flexibility can be seen in seeking to be led by the Spirit of God, such as through a concerted effort to pray for wisdom, in a decision-making process. This, however, is much more of a fluid, subjective pursuit – it does not follow according to performance of minutes in a session, number of days per week, or some metric of intensity.

To that end, participation in physical activity as a means to experience spiritual activity in some regard requires an accurate understanding of how each attribute is engaged, and a sensible strategy for its engagement. For instance, strength training exercises typically involve lifting weights for a specific goal number of repetitions in a set to reach momentary failure by the end of the set. When the exercise is repeated for consecutive sets, fatigue makes it increasingly difficult to reach the goal number each time, as the developing discomfort and sensation of “burning” in the muscles requires a strong, deliberate effort and tremendous resolve to endure in order to reach the goal.

Although occurring in a completely different context, on a different scale, and with entirely less significance, the determination to “work through the pain” in order to reach the end of a set has been likened to persecution and physical suffering for the Christian faith. That is, as one considers or reflects – with all due reverence – upon the extreme suffering and pain endured in physical persecution, it may provide the psychological fortitude necessary during the painful moment of exercise for one to continue movement, persist to the end of the set, and not “give up”.

Alternatively, endurance training commonly takes the form of activities such as running, cycling, or swimming. These all share the need for dedication, perseverance, and the determination to maintain continuous, rhythmic movement until the prescribed end of the exercise timeframe is reached. Given the challenge that extended duration endurance exercise can present to the will of the exerciser, an approach to engage in meaningful spiritual activity can involve prayer. Praying before an exercise session for help to remain committed to the timeframe goal, and determining to see the session as an act of sacrificial worship, can sustain the spirit and will of an individual as they persevere through the exercise, further developing both physical and spiritual endurance.

Finally, the development of flexibility often occurs through slow movement leading to a fixed body position. When performing static stretches, it is beneficial to move into and out of stretched body positions slowly, both to avoid injury, and to ensure adequate focus is placed on the correct position attempting to be reached and maintained. In performing such stretches, a deliberate effort can be placed on being calm, breathing slowly, and minimizing movement. Doing so fosters the opportunity for a concerted effort to be made toward such things as reflective prayer, meditative thoughts on the character of God, or recalling to mind a scripture that reinforces the activity (such as a portion of Psalm 46:10 “…be still and know that I am God…”).

These spiritual attributes of strength, endurance, and flexibility are reflected in multiple contexts throughout several books of the Bible, and by various means or applications. In certain cases, they are expressed as commandments or admonitions, in others, as examples in life experiences of an individual, group, or nation, and in still others, illustrated by a story or other biblical passage.

Thus, scripture can function as an exhortation, warning, guideline, or aim in the life of a Christian. The experiences of the Israelites wandering in the desert, the writings of several Psalms, the words of Paul to the early church, and the life of Jesus all present excellent illustrations of strength, endurance, and flexibility. The scriptures which follow depict examples throughout books of the Old and New Testaments of each of these attributes (New International Version).

Strength – in Scripture

Exodus 14:14. The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.

Joshua 1:9. Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go.

Psalm 91:1-2. Whoever dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the Lord, “He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.”

Isaiah 40:30-31. Even youths grow tired and weary, and young men stumble and fall; but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.

1 Corinthians 1:27. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

2 Corinthians 12:9. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.

Ephesians 6:10-11. Finally, be strong in the Lord and in His mighty power. Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.

2 Timothy 4:17. But the Lord stood at my side and gave me strength, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. And I was delivered from the lion’s mouth.

Endurance – in Scripture

Deuteronomy 2:7. The LORD your God has blessed you in all the work of your hands. He has watched over your journey through this vast wilderness. These forty years the LORD your God has been with you, and you have not lacked anything.

Joshua 5:6. The Israelites had moved about in the wilderness forty years until all the men who were of military age when they left Egypt had died, since they had not obeyed the LORD. For the LORD had sworn to them that they would not see the land he had solemnly promised their ancestors to give us, a land flowing with milk and honey.

Romans 15:4-6. For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope. May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you the same attitude of mind toward each other that Christ Jesus had, so that with one mind and one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Corinthians 1:6. If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer.

Colossians 1:9-12. For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you. We continually ask God to fill you with the knowledge of His will through all the wisdom and understanding that the Spirit gives, so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God, being strengthened with all power according to His glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience, and giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of His holy people in the kingdom of light.

1 Timothy 6:11. But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.

Hebrews 12:1-2. Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before Him He endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Hebrews 12:7. Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as His children. For what children are not disciplined by their father?

James 1:2-4. Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.

Flexibility – in Scripture

Genesis 12:1-4. The Lord had said to Abram, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” So Abram went, as the Lord had told him; and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he set out from Harran.

Exodus 13:17-18. When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them on the road through the Philistine country, though that was shorter. For God said, “If they face war, they might change their minds and return to Egypt.” So God led the people around by the desert road toward the Red Sea. The Israelites went up out of Egypt ready for battle.

Exodus 13:21-22. By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night. Neither the pillar of cloud by day nor the pillar of fire by night left its place in front of the people.

Psalm 5:8. Lead me, Lord, in your righteousness because of my enemies – make your way straight before me.

Psalm 27:11. Teach me your way, Lord; lead me in a straight path because of my oppressors.

Psalm 61:1-2. Hear my cry, O God; listen to my prayer. From the ends of the earth I call to you, I call as my heart grows faint; lead me to the rock that is higher than I.

Psalm 139:24. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.

Acts 10:17-23. While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon’s house was and stopped at the gate. They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there. While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, “Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them.” Peter went down and said to the men, “I’m the one you’re looking for. Why have you come?” The men replied, “We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. A holy angel told him to ask you to come to his house so that he could hear what you have to say.” Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his guests. The next day Peter started out with them, and some of the believers from Joppa went along.

Galatians 5:18. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

James 4:13-15. Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.”

Conclusion

Given the examples of strength, endurance, and flexibility found in scripture that are presented above – and myriad others which could be identified throughout the Bible – the life of Jesus Christ provides a unique example. While several experiences, teachings, and words of Christ, along with many passages in the Bible, might reflect one or another of the attributes, it is difficult to identify situations or circumstances that truly require the three attributes to operate in concert with one another. However, the experience of Jesus being tempted by Satan in the wilderness presents a case unlike others, as an incredible depiction of the attributes engaged together.

Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where for forty days He was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them He was hungry. The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.” Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’” The devil led Him up to a high place and showed Him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to Him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. If you worship me, it will all be yours.” Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’” The devil led Him to Jerusalem and had Him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. For it is written: “‘He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’” Jesus answered, “It is said: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left Him until an opportune time (Luke 4:1-13).

As Jesus was tempted by Satan in three different circumstances, He stayed strong, and did not waver or give way to temptation. As Jesus fasted and remained in the wilderness for 40 days, He maintained endurance throughout the experience. As Jesus allowed the Spirit of God to lead Him into the challenge of the desert ahead, He remained flexible – with the additional aspect of letting Satan even lead Him to a high place to see the kingdoms of the world, and then to stand atop the highest point of the temple.

There was opportunity to engage each attribute, or not to, but Jesus made the decision to be strong, to endure, and to remain flexible. This account of what Jesus underwent is an incredible illustration that goes far beyond the realm of the usual human experience, portraying an extraordinary combination of strength, endurance, and flexibility as an example for the life grounded in faith. For the Christian, it presents the ultimate example of victorious achievement throughout adversity, and through no one better to look to than Christ Himself.

Bibliography

Caspersen, Carl J., Kenneth E. Powell, Gregory M. Christenson. 1985. “Physical activity, exercise, and physical fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research.” Public Health Reports 100 (2): 126-131.

Garber, Carol Ewing, Bryan Blissmer, Michael R. Deschenes, Barry A. Franklin, Michael J. Lamonte, I-Min Lee, David C. Nieman, David P. Swain. 2011. “Quantity and Quality of Exercise for Developing and Maintaining Cardiorespiratory, Musculoskeletal, and Neuromotor Fitness in Apparently Healthy Adults: Guidance for Prescribing Exercise.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 43 (7): 1334-1359. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb.

Hoeger, Werner W.K., Hoeger, Sharon A., Fawson, Amber L., & Hoeger, Cherie I. 2019. Fitness and Wellness (13^th Ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage. Pg. 37.

Insel, Paul M., Roth, Walton T., Insel, Clarie E. 2020. Connect Core Concepts in Health (16^th Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.  Pg. 345.

Institute of Medicine. 2012. Fitness Measures and Health Outcomes in Youth. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13483.

Kenney, W. Larry, Wilmore, Jack H., Costill, David L. 2020. Physiology of Sport and Exercise (7^th Ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Pg. 228.

Pate, Russell R. 1983. “A new definition of youth fitness.” The Physician and Sportsmedicine 11 (4): 77-83.

Piercy, Katrina L., Richard P. Troiano, Rachel M. Ballard, Susan A. Carlson, Janet E. Fulton, Deborah A. Galuska, Stephanie M. George, Richard D. Olson. 2018. “The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans.” JAMA 320 (19): 2020–2028. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.14854.

President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. 1971. Physical Fitness Research Digest. Series 1, No. 1. Washington, DC: President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports.

Author Bio: Marc Apkarian (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Kinesiology at Biola University in La Mirada, CA, having been a faculty member there since 2003, and served as department chair for 12 years. His teaching specialties and involvement span the areas of exercise physiology, exercise physiology laboratory, fitness evaluation, fieldwork and internships, and exercise and health, with particular interest in Christian faith integration. Dr. Apkarian enjoys incorporating applied learning, skill acquisition, and professional development opportunities to empower students to think analytically, solve problems, and reach others, being passionate about enabling them to appreciate stewardship of health and the human body. Marc is also an American College of Sports Medicine Certified Exercise Physiologist, and National Strength and Conditioning Association Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist, and has worked with individuals of all ages in contexts ranging from exercise training and athletic development to post-rehabilitation conditioning since entering the health and fitness industry in 1995. Marc and his wife enjoy time with their daughter, family, and friends, exercise, travel, and involvement in both youth and adult ministry opportunities at church.

Lacie Webb, PT, DPT1
Physical Therapist, SporTherapy

Colin G. Pennington, PhD
Assistant Professor, Tarleton State University – Fort Worth

Abstract: Religion, medicine, and healthcare are related. Research states that religiosity and spirituality have a positive effect on a patient’s health. There is a high belief in God in the United States, but clinicians are not inquiring about religion and spiritual aspects in patients’ healthcare today as patients would prefer. In the case of some physical therapy preparatory programs, the concepts of health and Christ-like values are related, if not, dependent on one another. This sparks intrigue into research exploring the intersectionality between faith, spirituality, and physical recovery. The purpose of this article is to (a) discuss what the medical and physical therapy community states are their broad missions and where those missions overlap with faith, (b) provide examples in the literature where faith and the pursuit of health have been connected and successful in terms of positive healing, and (c) express the benefit of spiritually-charged preventative health and physical therapy returning to healthcare.

Keywords: Physical Therapy, Faith Intervention, Occupational Therapy, Spirituality, Physical Activity.

Statement of Original Unpublished Work: By submitting this document to the Editor in Chief of CJSCF I am making a Statement of Original Unpublished Work not submitted to another journal for publication.

Introduction

Religion, medicine, and healthcare have all been related in one way or another in all population groups since the beginning of recorded history (Koenig, King and Carson 2012). The departure from the history of linking health, religion, and spirituality is currently taking place in most cultures. This departure has been particularly prevalent in American culture for a number of decades. Research denotes that the religious and spiritual practices and beliefs of patients are powerful factors in coping with serious illnesses, making ethical choices about treatment options and decisions about end-of-life care (Puchalski 2001; McCormick et al. 2012). In a collection of 2013 polls, 56% of individuals asked claimed that ‘religion is important in their own lives’ and 22% stated that religion is ‘fairly important’ (Gallup 2013). It is shown that, in the United States, 77% of medical patients would like to have their spiritual issues discussed as a part of their medical care, but less than 20% of clinicians discuss these issues with their patients (King and Bushwick 1994). These polls indicate there is a high belief in God in the United States, but clinicians are not inquiring about religion and spiritual aspects in healthcare today as patients would prefer.

Therefore, the purpose of this article is to (a) discuss what the medical and physical therapy community states are their broad missions and where those missions overlap with faith, (b) provide examples in the literature where faith and the pursuit of health have been connected and successful in terms of positive healing, and (c) express the benefit of spiritually-charged preventative health and physical therapy returning to healthcare.

The Mission of Medical Care and Physical Therapy

There has been an increased call for attention to various aspects of spiritual challenges as part of whole-person or holistic care. The National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care has established standards for clinical practice that include the spiritual, religious, and existential aspects of care as among the core domains (VanderWeele, Balboni and Koh 2017). Spirituality is defined as a multidimensional part of the human experience and includes cognitive, behaviour, and philosophic aspects. The cognitive and philosophic aspects include searching for meaning, purpose, and truth in life, and the behavioural aspect as the way an individual externally manifests spiritual beliefs and inner spiritual state (Anandarajah and Hight 2001). Religion is defined as an attempt to respond to mankind’s spiritual questions and that each has developed a specific set of beliefs, practices, and teachings (Anadarajah and Hight 2001). However, action to include these aspects in the core domains of care is, at best, limited. Over half of medical schools in the United States provide opportunities for instruction in spiritual care to their students, but most practicing physicians did not receive spiritual training while in medical school despite research-based evidence that including chaplain involvement improved patient satisfaction in the hospital setting (VanderWeele et al. 2017). Official collaboration between spiritual educators and clinicians is absent.

In accordance with the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), promoting health and wellness is an integral responsibility of the therapist. Because therapists often educate their clients on the benefits of a variety of health-enhancing behaviours, and provide a variety of movement opportunities, physical therapists may be in an ideal position to promote overall health and wellness in their patients and clients (Benzer 2015). Movement is a key to optimal living and quality of life for all people that extends beyond health to every person’s ability to participate in and contribute to society (APTA 2014). With the broad goal of physical therapy to allow individuals the opportunity to reach their full potential of health and wellness, it is practical that physical therapy schools would be considerate of individual’s religiosity and spirituality in this process. The correlation between health outcomes and religious commitment has been evaluated, and while some disagree, most authors report that positive relationships between religious commitment and mental and physical health were found in up to 84% of studies that involved a measure of religious commitment (Anadarajah and Hight 2001). Therefore, a spiritual history could – if not should – be incorporated in a school’s curriculum[1].

 For example, one Christian-affiliated, accredited physical therapy doctoral program emphasized that their overall mission and vision is to promote the following:

[The program aspires to…] prepare graduates in an interprofessional, Christ-centered learning community to promote and improve the health and well-being of individuals and communities. … [The program] emphasizes healing the body, nurturing the mind and inspiring the spirit through rigorous academics, local and global service and innovative scholarship… Our mission is to prepare leaders in a Christian environment who promote health, wellness and quality of life through excellence in professionalism, scholarship and service. (Samford University 2019)

In the case of this physical therapy preparatory program, the concepts of health and Christ-like values are related, if not, dependent on one another. This sparks intrigue into research exploring the intersectionality between faith, spirituality, religiosity, and physical recovery.

The Healing Power of Faith

Research has stated that religiosity and spirituality have a positive effect on a patient’s health. Religious and spiritual commitment tends to lead to a quicker recovery from illness and surgery. In a study of heart transplant patients, it was found that patients who participate in religious activities and expressed that their religious beliefs were important complied better with follow-up treatment, had improved physical functioning at the 12-month follow-up visit, reached higher levels of self-esteem, and experienced less anxiety and fewer health worries than patients who did not view their religious beliefs as important (Harris et al. 1995). As a result, within the medical field, interest is rising concerning the role of religion as preventative medicine and an alternative (or supplementary) treatment to physical ailments (Koenig, King and Carson 2012; Price 2018). Prayer and being a member of a religious community has been shown to have physical, mental, and economical benefits for patients and physicians alike (Bopp, Peterson and Webb 2012; Campbell et al. 2007).

Many health professionals recognize that spirituality plays an important role in the adjustment of individuals and their families after traumatic injuries. However, spirituality is not always proactively addressed during rehabilitation efforts. Spirituality, and specifically religious belief, is perceived to sometimes raise difficulties for clients and staff (Jones, Dorsett, Briggs and Simpson 2018). There is potential for better incorporation of religion and spirituality into practice. The spiritual needs of clients and their family members during physical rehabilitation are important and could be better addressed. For example, Jones and colleagues (2018) suggested a range of initiatives including staff training and the use of standardized spiritual assessment tools.

Patients can uncover strength and peace in spirituality, by both deep connections with family and friends, as well as through religious communities (VanderWeele et al. 2017). However, modern day practicing clinicians often miss opportunities to include aspects of spirituality when assessing the health of their patients or even themselves. This recent neglect demonstrates the departure from history linking health, religion, and spirituality which is currently common in most cultures (Koenig, King and Carson 2012).

Clinicians can start to acknowledge spiritual health and wellness by incorporating religious/spirituality-focused questions within the routine social history interview. Brown University School of Medicine has developed a teaching tool to help begin the process of incorporating a spiritual assessment into the patient interview in which they employed the acronym of HOPE questions. The ‘H’ pertaining to the individual’s basic life spiritual resources such as hope, ‘O’ as organized religion, ‘P’ as practices that are most helpful for the individual, and ‘E’ as the effects of the individual’s perspective on end-of-life discussions (Anadarajah and Hight 2001). These religious/spirituality-focused questions do not need to immediately focus on words such as religion and spirituality, but can allow for open-ended exploration in the individual’s spiritual resources and concerns. For example, a question phrased, “Do you feel a positive presence while being physically active while in nature?” meets this objective.

Other example questions may include “Is faith and spirituality important to you?” and “In your times of need, do you have a religious or spiritual support system you could reach out to?” Questions such as these maintain respect for the patient while learning important information that might impact present or future care. In appropriate times, clinicians can also ask if a patient attends regular religious services, and how attending these services might affect the patients’ physical and emotional well-being outside of treatment (VanderWeele et al. 2017). Clinicians might also benefit from attending to their own spiritual health (VanderWeele et al. 2017), as pressing professional issues related to burnout, avoidable medical errors, attrition, and higher suicide rates among physicians than among the general population are an increasing concern (Balboni et al. 2013; Yoon, Daley and Curlin 2017). More opportunities to spiritual resources and practices for medical students and practicing clinicians could decrease these concerns. Just the act of clinicians providing spiritual care to patients may encourage clinicians to search for their own internal spiritual resources (VanderWeele et al. 2017).

Enacting Preventative Medicine

Preventative health is a personal passion of mine (Webb). Along that theme, it has also been noted that preventative health-measures (e.g., decreasing tobacco use, increasing physical activity and exercise, improving nutritional intake, engaging in safe sexual practices) also appear to be linked to religion and spirituality (Koenig et al. 2012). Research has suggested the importance of community leaders (e.g., physical therapists), while demonstrating healthy behaviours, can increase the chances of on-looking community members to also adopt healthy behaviours and to adhere to exercise programs (Webb and Bopp 2017).

Paradoxically, generally speaking, key leaders within faith-based organizations (e.g., ministers, pastors, preachers) are disproportionately affected by obesity and chronic disease (Bopp, Baruth, Peterson and Webb 2013). The effectiveness of preventative faith-based health and wellness programs can be strongly influenced by the attitudes, perceptions, and participation of key leaders within faith-based organizations. As a form of preventative medicine, physical activity programs endorsed by leaders in the faith community could potentially influence health-enhancing behaviours of those who look to them as examples for direction (Webb, Bopp and Fallon 2013).

Conclusion

Connecting to God through physical activity is a route many individuals may choose to take. For example, ‘prayer walking’ and ‘walking meditation’ have been shown to serve the dual purposes of spending time with God and achieving physical activity thorough movement (Koenig et al. 2012). Many Christians pursue to be active and connect with their faith, while maintaining a balanced approach to exercise, health, and physical well-being. That said, a balanced approach can be achieved when healthcare clinicians recognize different spiritual and religious values and beliefs, and integrate those values and beliefs in the development of the ‘care’ plan for patients. If done responsibly, healthcare clinicians can incorporate religious and spiritual aspects in their practice as patients would prefer. Respect for patient values and beliefs can be maintained by returning to the linkage of health, religion, and spirituality.

Bibliography

American Physical Therapy Association. 2014. “Vision Statement for the Physical Therapy Profession”. Retrieved from https://www.apta.org/Vision (March 21, 2019).

Anandarajah G. E. Hight. 2001. “Spirituality and Medical Practice: Using the HOPE Questions as a Practical Tool for Spiritual Assessment”. American Family Physician. 81-88.

Balboni, Michael J., Adam Sullivan, Adaugo Amobi, Andrea C. Phelps, Daniel P. Gorman, Angelika Zollfrank, John R. Peteet, Holly G. Prigerson, Tyler J. VanderWeele, and Tracy A. Balboni. 2013. “Why is spiritual care infrequent at the end of life? Spiritual care perceptions among patients, nurses, and physicians and the role of training.” Journal of Clinical Oncology 31, no. 4: 461.

Benzer, Janet R. 2015. “Promoting health and wellness: implications for physical therapist practice.” Physical Therapy, 95, no. 10: 1433–1444.

Bopp, Melissa, Jane A. Peterson, and Benjamin L. Webb. 2012. “A comprehensive review of faith-based physical activity interventions.” American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 6, no. 6: 460-478.

Bopp, Melissa, Meghan Baruth, Jane A. Peterson, and Benjamin L. Webb. 2013. “Leading their flocks to health? Clergy health and the role of clergy in faith-based health promotion interventions.” Family & community health 36, no. 3: 182-192.

Campbell, Marci Kramish, Marlyn Allicock Hudson, Ken Resnicow, Natasha Blakeney, Amy Paxton, and Monica Baskin. 2007. “Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned.” Annual Review of Public Health, 28: 213-234.

Gallup. 2019. Poll – “How important would you say religion is in your own life?” In Religion. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com/poll/1690/religion.aspx (March 21, 2019).

Harris, Ronna Casar, Mary Amanda Dew, Ann Lee, Michael Amaya, Laurie Buches, Deborah Reetz, and Greta Coleman. 1995. “The role of religion in heart-transplant recipients’ long-term health and well-being.” Journal of Religion and Health 34, no. 1: 17-32.

Jones, Kate Fiona, Pat Dorsett, Lynne Briggs, and Grahame Kenneth Simpson. 2018. “The role of spirituality in spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation: exploring health professional perspectives.” Spinal Cord Series and Cases 4, no. 1: 54.

King D. E., B. Bushwick. 1994. “Beliefs and attitudes of hospital inpatients about faith, healing and prayer”. Journal of Family Practice, 39: 349-352.

Koenig, Harold, Dana King, and Verna B. Carson. 2012. Handbook of religion and health. Oxford University Press. USA.

McCormick, T.R., Hopp, F., Nelson-Becker, H., Ai, A., Schlueter J.O., Camp J.K. 2012. “Ethical and Spiritual Concerns Near the End of Life”. Journal of Religion, Spirituality and Aging, September: 301-313.

Price, Harry. 2018. “More than medicine: the role of physical activity, psychological interventions, and religion and culture in a primary care medical setting.” Kent State University Conference. Kent, OH.

Puchalski C. M. 2001. Spirituality and Health: The Art of Compassionate Medicine. Hospital Physician, March: 30-36.

Samford University. 2019. “School of Health Professions: About”. Retrieved from
https://www.samford.edu/healthprofessions/default (March 21, 2019).

VanderWeele, Tyler J., Tracy A. Balboni, and Howard K. Koh. 2017. “Health and spirituality.” Journal of the American Medical Association, 318, no. 6: 519-520.

Webb, Benjamin L., and Melissa J. Bopp. 2017. “Results of walking in faith: A faith-based physical activity program for clergy.” Journal of Religion and Health 56, no. 2: 561-574.

Webb, Benjamin, Melissa Bopp, and Elizabeth A. Fallon. 2013. “A qualitative study of faith leaders’ perceptions of health and wellness.” Journal of Religion and Health, 52, no. 1: 235-246.

Yoon, John D., Brendan M. Daley, and Farr A. Curlin. 2017. “The association between a sense of calling and physician well-being: a national study of primary care physicians and psychiatrists.” Academic Psychiatry 41, no. 2: 167-173.

Author Bio: Lacie M. Webb (PT, DPT) is a recent physical therapist graduate from Samford University in Birmingham, AL and received a B.S. in Biology from The University of Alabama in 2016. Lacie has a variety of clinical experiences including post-operative orthopedic surgery rehabilitation, acute care in cardiac intensive care unit, sports medicine rehabilitation, and rehabilitation to individuals with neurological impairments. She has served as volunteer, technician, and student physical therapist in numerous cities, and has experience working with patients possessing a wide-range of functional abilities. The majority of Lacie’s clinical interests have focused on sport-related injuries, and return-to-sport and injury preventative programs. Preventative health is one of Lacie’s passions and she incorporates all aspects of preventative health in her clinical practice. Outside of work, one of Lacie’s passions is involvement in medical mission trips. Her mission is to live out the message in 1 Peter 4:10, “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms.”

Author Bio: Colin G. Pennington (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Kinesiology at Tarleton State University where he works with Exercise Science majors and carries out research on physical education teacher effectiveness and other pedagogical and health-related applications of the kinesiology sub-disciplines. Colin currently teaches courses including Physiology of Exercise, Anatomical Kinesiology, Capstone in Kinesiology, and formally a number of courses within the sport pedagogy sub-discipline of kinesiology. His interests and research focus on teacher socialization, physical education teacher training, character development programs within physical education and sport, and health and wellness.

Footnotes:
[1] Furthermore, and providing attention to the bio-psycho-social-spiritual model, a patient’s spiritual history could be included in their personal medical records for reference.

Colin G. Pennington, PhD

Assistant Professor, Tarleton State University – Fort Worth

Abstract: Within the complex system of compulsory school physical education, there are opportunities for physical educators to meet goals beyond physical-health related objectives. Positive moral socialization can occur through physical education; students who develop prosocial competence during the years of their formative education are more likely to be successful throughout their lives, promoting the belief that character and Christian-like values are what we are supposed to teach in physical education more than anything else. This leads some to make the assertion that participation in Christian-based physical education and physical activity can help young people appreciate health, exercise, and fitness; learn about themselves and handling adversity; and experience teamwork and prosocial attitudes in safe environments grounded in Christian values and ideals. After a brief review of Muscular Christianity and the historical origins of church-based physical education, this article explores the concept of Christian faith and physical education. Finally, this article provides a brief review of successful health-enhancing interventions held in church settings.

Keywords: Physical Education, Physical Activity, Christianity, Faith-Based Intervention

Statement of Original Unpublished Work: By submitting this document to the Editor in Chief of CJSCF, I am making a Statement of Original Unpublished Work not submitted to another journal for publication.

Introduction

Many believe the main responsibility of school physical educators is to provide physical- and health-enhancing experiences for children in their care (Pennington 2017). It is also a broad goal of physical education to assist students in developing social and moral values (Hellison 2011). Therefore, one way teachers of physical education can reach these lofty goals is by demonstrating faith and Christianity through physical activity and facilitating meaningful student social interactions with their peers.

The purposes of this article are to: (1) briefly summarize the concept of Muscular Christianity, describing how Muscular Christianity laid the foundation for how physical education developed and is executed in K-12 schools, (2) establish the need for compulsory physical education in K-12 settings, and discuss how Christian physical educators can meet the needs of children in their care, and (3) remark on the success of church-based physical activity interventions occurring outside of, and in addition to, K-12 physical education.

Muscular Christianity

The concept of connecting Christ, Faith, and Christianity to bouts of physical activity is not a novel concept. In fact, by intent, England’s medieval games were originally closely related to the Church (Hartley 1969; Redmond 1978). The Church had stimulated interest in these games through annual feats of physical contest to which each village sent its champion. Games brought together all people and thus created better understanding among the social classes. The merit of such games was that they were social and universal. The games provided a place for every man who chose to participate (Winn 1960). As was a function of the times, women did not participate as robustly as the men during this period. At the turn of the twentieth century, American middle-class male Protestants turned to sports and muscular pursuits in the face of the increasing power of women (Millikan 2006). Recently, the question has again arisen as to when, how, and why ‘muscular Christians’ have also championed women’s sport (McLeod, Justvik and Hess, 2018; Putney 2009). Today, the legacy of the muscular Christian ethos lives on, but the gender politics have become much more ambiguous and complicated (Millikan 2006); this article will not make any attempts at providing a gender-based perspective. And of course, games also served the important function of strengthening the body; an important feature considering that individuals of this era were likely to perform physically demanding professional and/or agricultural roles.

Among the early manuscripts featuring faith is a classic article authored by William Winn (1960). Winn references the pioneering work of author Thomas Hughes, who penned the seminal novel, Tom Brown’s School Days (1857), which has become known for laying the ground work for Muscular Christianity. Winn (1960) described Hughes:

Tom Hughes had a natural love for boxing, and as boxing coach at the Working Men’s College, the school founded by himself and other Christian Socialists in London, he formulated moral and intellectual values for that sport. ‘To knock someone down, and to be a good fellow and a Christian ever afterwards’ was the creed of Muscular Christianity. (Winn 1960, 70)

This term, Muscular Christianity, was a philosophical movement that originated in England in the mid-19th century, characterized by a belief in patriotic duty, manliness, the moral and physical beauty of athleticism, teamwork, discipline, self-sacrifice, and “the expulsion of all that is effeminate, un-English, and excessively intellectual” (Newsome 1961, 216). The fundamental concepts of Muscular Christianity were derived from scriptural beliefs suggesting that since man was born with a body as well as a mind, the body should be given just as careful treatment as the mind (Watson, Weir and Friend 2005). Man’s body was a God-given gift. Therefore, man would be judged by the way in which he took care of this gift (Winn 1960). It should be acknowledged that the original advocates of Muscular Christianity promoted physical activity more for men than women, whereas contemporary society would be inclusive of all genders being physically active (Elliott and Hoyle 2014). Additionally, because the body and mind are connected, an individual who exercised properly would be able to achieve greater mental heights (Heckman 2018).

Muscular Christianity has continued through organizations that combine physical and Christian spiritual development (Roberts and Yamane 2011). One such example is through the Young Men’s and Women’s Christian Associations (known colloquially as the YMCA and YWCA, respectively), an outgrowth of Muscular Christianity, which in some areas has become largely secularized, albeit very valuable to society. Most results of Muscular Christianity have been very positive in character. In fact, it should be acknowledged that the compulsory physical education programs developed for schools were spawned from the concept of Muscular Christianity, and physical education has been extremely valuable (Winn 1960).

The Relationship between Youth Physical Education, Physical Activity, and Faith

Children can spend 50% or more of their waking hours at school. It is, therefore, incumbent on schools to provide students with sufficient opportunities to accumulate recommended levels of physical activity. Comprehensive school physical activity programs (CSPAP) advocate for a mixture of physical education, recess, classroom activity, before- and after-school physical activity programs, active transportation to/from school, and intra- and extra-mural sport (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2013). Promotion of physical activity through faith-based, self-regulated mindful movement – in lieu of sedentary behaviour – throughout the school day provides an additional option used alongside the commonly promoted CSPAP components (Kahan, Lorenz, Kawwa and Rioveros 2019).

To increase youth and adult physical activity success, the 2016 National Physical Activity Plan (NPAP) identified nine sectors for targeting strategies and tactics to increase physical activity. These include: business and industry; community recreation, fitness and parks; education; faith-based settings; healthcare; mass media; public health; sport; and transportation, land use, and community design (National Physical Activity Plan Alliance 2016). Bopp and colleagues (Bopp, Peterson and Webb 2012) argued for the potential of religious programs and spaces to positively contribute to physical activity behaviour. The merging of faith into religious school settings supports two domains identified in the NPAP: schools and faith-based organizations (Kahan et al. 2019). Among church-attending youth (11–13 years), most perceive some connection between faith and health and the need for churches to provide physical activity interventions for children (Wilmot, Martinez and He 2018). To wit, at least one Christian curriculum intervention aimed at increasing physical activity during Sunday school (using a similar approach as CSPAP) resulted in the intervention group accumulating a significantly greater step/minute rate during Sunday school than in the control group (Trost, Tang and Loprinzi 2009).

School Physical Education: Demonstrating Christianity

Compulsory K-12 physical education is often expressed as a means of encouraging students to become physically active (Gorely et al. 2011; Pennington, 2019). Some scholars view participation in physical education can provide health, social, cognitive, and affective benefits while also encouraging lifelong participation (Webster, Stodden, Carson, Egan and Nesbitt 2016). That said, some physical education scholars and health professionals (continue to) view physical education as a response to the growing concern of a public health epidemic, believing school physical education is the ideal setting for teaching students the benefits of leading a healthy lifestyle (Dwyer, Coonan, Leitch, Hetzel and Baghurst 1983; Sallis et al. 2012). Furthermore, given that part of the broad mission of education has continued to be to help students develop character and prosocial values (Stoll and Beller 1993), schools and teachers should allow children opportunities to develop healthy social skills (Pennington 2017). According to Hellison (2011), students who develop social competence during their formative education are more likely to be successful throughout their lives. The physical educator has the opportunity to create situations that will enhance students’ social and character development as well as advocate for participation in sport, physical activity, and positive social relationships (Pennington and Sinelnikov 2018).

Because past research has revealed that students hold mixed perceptions towards the merits of physical education or participating in physical activity (Bailey et al. 2009; Flintoff and Scraton 2006), discovering what barriers to enthusiastic participation is important to the field (Elliott and Hoyle 2014). In recent years, physical education pedagogues and researchers have studied, theorized about, and provided practical suggestions related to social identities (e.g., religious affiliation) and how those identities impact participation in compulsory physical education. Such efforts have had a profound impact upon those who have suffered the consequences of being ‘othered’ within physical education (ContinYou 2010). Few physical education scholars have focused closely upon the role that Christian religion affiliation might play within physical education (Robinson 2019); consequently, very little research exists regarding Christianity as a moderator to participation in K-12 physical education or the role physical education should/could play in providing opportunities for movement and physical health-enhancing behaviours. Be that as it may, some Christian physical educators believe that participation in physical activity should be encouraged (MacDonald and Kirk 1999; McLeod, Justvik and Hess 2018; Zang, Hong and Huang 2018).

The body is integral to the discourses of health and physical education just as it is to the discourses of religion. When health and physical educators hold particular religious views, there are implications for how the body is positioned in concert with questions of identity and lifestyle. (MacDonald and Kirk 1999, 131)

However, devout Christians and those adhering to the more traditional denominations (e.g., Pentecostals, Mormons) might experience religious-based barriers, in particular, issues surrounding modesty (Elliott and Hoyle 2014; Sporting Equals 2012). Those who hold fundamentalist beliefs may claim to follow a literal interpretation of the Bible. Nonetheless, despite a lack of direct evidence regarding Christianity and participation in physical activity in general, it does seem that for some Christian secondary school students, barriers to physical education might be impacted by their level of religiosity. Notwithstanding, it appears that for ‘typical’ and contemporary Christians, faith should have limited influence (Elliott and Hoyle 2014). In fact, many believe Christianity advocates for, rather than restricts against, physical activity for all (ContinYou 2010). Be that as it may, some religious-based issues (e.g., mixed-sex venues, dress code, family disapproval, and a belief that certain forms of physical activity, such as dance, can be perceived to be un-religious) might restrict sport and exercise participation, particularly for females (Elliott and Hoyle 2014). Further, some studies have determined that women participants have reported feelings of great discomfort if physical education uniforms do not meet the minimal modesty requirements (Pennington and Nelson, forthcoming).

Along with doctors, therapists, and nutritionists, physical educators are also widely considered members of their communities’ health-care team. Christian school physical educators can be resources for others who require education and guidance to maintain or improve physical health. Christian physical educators can provide emotional support and inspiration to those who need to make lifestyle changes. In fact, support for individuals looking to be physically active, physically fit, and emotionally well by adopting the principles taught in physical education may be greater in Christian-based groups (Whisenant, Cortes and Hill 2014).

Church-Based Health and Wellness Interventions

One commonly agreed-upon physical education goal is to establish the pursuit of life-long healthy behaviours (Pennington 2019). However, once a student’s time in compulsory physical education comes to an end, sometimes so does their engagement in general physical activity. Of those individuals, some choose to re-engage in health-enhancing behaviours, but may need a catalyst to re-ignite their physical activity motivation (Pennington, forthcoming). Here, church-based health and wellness interventions occurring outside of, and in addition to, K-12 physical education demonstrate their value.

Church-based health promotion interventions can reach broad populations and have great potential for reducing health disparities (Campbell et al. 2007). Christian affiliation and church attendance can improve physical and psychological health across demographic variables. Physiological benefits include less smoking, less substance abuse, better cancer and cardiovascular disease survival, improved blood pressure, body composition, waist circumference, and waist to hip ratio, increased steps/week, healthier systolic blood pressure, and burning more kcal/week (Bopp, Peterson and Webb 2012; Bopp et al. 2009). Psychological health improvements include greater longevity, less depression, less suicide, less divorce, greater social support, greater meaning and purpose in life, greater life satisfaction, more charitable giving, more volunteering, greater civic engagement, reduced depression, greater enjoyment in physical activity, and valuing social support from church members (Kark et al. 2006; Koenig, King and Carson 2012). Possible attributions to these welcomed effects include positive social networks and social support provided by fellow members, and the role of prayer, beliefs, and religious practices in psychological well-being (Fiala, Bjorck and Gorsuch 2002). Additionally, teachings about the body being a gift from God, or a temple wherein God dwells might encourage health-promoting behaviours such as exercise (VanderWeele 2017). A summary of physical activity interventions delivered in faith-based organizations revealed that overall, many of the faith-based interventions resulted in increases in physical activity among participants (Bopp et al. 2012). The effectiveness of faith-based health and wellness interventions can be heavily influenced by the attitudes, perceptions, and participation of key leaders within faith-based organizations such as the Pastor, Preacher, etc. (Webb, Bopp and Fallon 2013).

Conclusion

Physical activity has a tremendously great place of importance, but it should not be our only Christian priority, as the Lord desires other attributes from us than our physical fitness. Be that as it may, in his message discussing the value of physical fitness for the Christian, Daryl Wingerd (2014) pointed out four reasons for Christians to develop healthy physical behaviours leading to a healthy lifestyle (e.g., nutrition, regular exercise), which is promoted by modern, holistic, and meaningful physical education practices: (1) good stewardship, (2) learning self-control, (3) staying ready for usefulness, and (4) loving others. Each of these reasons holds a relationship between faith and physical activity. For example,

…establishing self-discipline in exercise can teach principles that help one become more self-disciplined in Bible study and prayer. The self-control required to [avoid] too much unhealthy food or the temptation to sleep in rather than work out can help you become more effective in resisting temptations to sin. (Wingerd 2014, 1)

The Bible acts as a guide, laying out important principles of how we are to live. “Christians are instructed that their body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, to cleanse from what harms body or spirit, to glorify God in whatever they do, and to present the whole self as a living gift to God” (Whisenant, Cortes and Hill 2014, 189). Therefore, it is the responsibility of physical educators to provide experiences for students in their care to demonstrate faith and Christianity through physical activity, and meaningful social interactions with their peers. In that way, both the teacher and the students are using their bodies and minds as stewards for God.

Bibliography

Bailey, Richard, Kathleen Armour, David Kirk, Mike Jess, Ian Pickup, Rachel Sandford, and BERA Physical Education. 2009. “The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: an academic review.” Research papers in education 24, no. 1: 1-27.

Bopp, Melissa, Jane A. Peterson, and Benjamin L. Webb. 2012. “A comprehensive review of faith-based physical activity interventions.” American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine 6, no. 6: 460-478.

Bopp, Melissa, Sara Wilcox, Marilyn Laken, Steven P. Hooker, Deborah Parra-Medina, Ruth Saunders, Kimberly Butler, Elizabeth A. Fallon, and Lottie McClorin. 2009. “8 steps to fitness: a faith-based, behavior change physical activity intervention for African Americans.” Journal of Physical Activity and Health 6, no. 5: 568-577.

Campbell, Marci Kramish, Marlyn Allicock Hudson, Ken Resnicow, Natasha Blakeney, Amy Paxton, and Monica Baskin. 2007. “Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned.” Annu. Rev. Public Health, 28: 213-234.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2013. Comprehensive school physical activity programs: a guide for schools. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

ContinYou. 2010. Engaging young people from faith communities in PE and sport out of school hours. Retrieved from https://www.continyou.org.uk/what_we_do/supplementary_education/files/bmesport/.

Dwyer, Terry, Wayne E. Coonan, Donald R. Leitch, Basil S. Hetzel, and R. A. Baghurst. 1983. “An investigation of the effects of daily physical activity on the health of primary school students in South Australia.” International journal of epidemiology 12, no. 3: 308-313.

Elliott, Dave, and Kathryn Hoyle. 2014. “An examination of barriers to physical education for Christian and Muslim girls attending comprehensive secondary schools in the UK.” European Physical Education Review 20, no. 3: 349-366.

Fiala, William E., Jeffrey P. Bjorck, and Richard Gorsuch. 2002. “The religious support scale: Construction, validation, and cross‐validation.” American Journal of Community Psychology 30, no. 6: 761-786.

Flintoff, A., & Scranton, S. 2006. Girls and physical education. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O’Sullivan (Eds.), The handbook of physical education (pp. 767-783). London, UK: Sage

Gorely, Trish, Rachel Sandford, Rebecca Duncombe, Hayley Musson, Charlotte Edwardson, Tess Kay, and Ruth Jeanes. 2011. “Understanding psycho-social attitudes towards sport and activity in girls final research report.” Institute of Youth Sport, Loughborough.

Hartley, A. J. 1969. “Christian Socialism and Victorian Morality: The Inner Meaning of Tom Brown’s School-days.” The Dalhousie Review.

Heckman, Christopher. 2018. “The Effect of Mindfulness and Meditation in Sports Performance.”

Hellison, Don. 2011 Teaching responsibility through physical activity. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Kahan, David, Kent A. Lorenz, Eyad Kawwa, and Andrew Rioveros. 2019. “Changes in school-day step counts during a physical activity for Lent intervention: a cluster randomized crossover trial of the Savior’s Sandals.” BMC public health 19, no. 1: 141.

Kark, Jeremy D., Galia Shemi, Yechiel Friedlander, Oz Martin, Orly Manor, and Solomon Hillel Blondheim. 1996. “Does religious observance promote health? mortality in secular vs religious kibbutzim in Israel.” American Journal of Public Health 86, no. 3: 341-346.

Koenig, Harold, Dana King, and Verna B. Carson. 2012. Handbook of religion and health. Oup Usa.

MacDonald, Doune, and David Kirk. 1999. “Pedagogy, the body and Christian identity.” Sport, Education and Society 4, no. 2: 131-142.

McLeod, Hugh, Nils Martinius Justvik, and Rob Hess. 2018. “Sport and Christianity: Historical Perspectives–An Introduction.” 1-8.

Millikan, Matthew. 2006. “The muscular Christian ethos in post-second world war American liberalism: Women in Outward Bound 1962–1975.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 23, no. 5: 838-855.

National Physical Activity Plan Alliance. 2016. “National physical activity plan.” Retrieved from https://www.physicalactivityplan.org/docs/2016NPAP_Finalforwebsite.pdf

Newsome, David. 1961. “Godliness and good learning: Four studies on a Victorian ideal.” Murray.

Pennington, Colin G. Forthcoming. “Promoting Youth Physical Activity Using the Transtheoretical Model of Behavioral Change.” Health, Nutrition, Exercise Science.

Pennington, Colin G. 2019. “Sport Education and Physical Activity.” International Journal of Physical Education, Fitness and Sports, 8, no. 1: 122-125.

Pennington, Colin G. 2017. “Moral Development and Sportsmanship in Physical Education and Sport.” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 88, no. 9: 36-42.

Pennington Colin G. and Larry Nelson. Forthcoming. “Physical Activity Contribution of a Modified “Dancing Classrooms” Pilot on Middle School Students Using Accelerometer Technology and Heart Rate Telemetry.” The Physical Educator.

Pennington, Colin G., and Oleg A. Sinelnikov. 2018. “Using Sport Education to Promote Social Development in Physical Education: Column Editor: K. Andrew R. Richards.” Strategies 31, no. 6: 50-52.

Putney, Clifford. 2009. Muscular Christianity: Manhood and sports in protestant America, 1880-1920. Harvard University Press.

Redmond, Gerald. 1978. “The First Tom Brown’s Schooldays: Origins and Evolution of “Muscular Christianity” in Children’s Literature, 1762–1857.” Quest 30, no. 1: 4-18.

Roberts, Keith A., and David Yamane. 2011. Religion in sociological perspective. Sage Publications.

Robinson, Daniel B. 2019. “Religion as an other(ed) identity within physical education: A scoping review of relevant literature and suggestions for practice and inquiry.” European Physical Education Review 25, no. 2: 491-511.

Sallis, James F., Thomas L. McKenzie, Michael W. Beets, Aaron Beighle, Heather Erwin, and Sarah Lee. 2012. “Physical education’s role in public health: Steps forward and backward over 20 years and HOPE for the future.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 83, no. 2: 125-135.

Sporting Equals. 2012. Issues for Sport and Physical Activity Factsheet – Christianity. London: Sporting Equals.

Stoll, Sharon Kay, and Jennifer M. Beller. 1993. “The effect of a longitudinal teaching methodology and classroom environment on both cognitive and behavioral moral development.”

Trost, Stewart G., Rebecca Tang, and Paul D. Loprinzi. 2009. “Feasibility and efficacy of a church-based intervention to promote physical activity in children.” Journal of Physical Activity and Health 6, no. 6: 741-749.

VanderWeele, Tyler J. 2017. “Physical activity and physical and mental well-being in church settings.” 1023-1024.

Watson, Nick J., Stuart Weir, and Stephen Friend. 2005. “The development of muscular Christianity in Victorian Britain and beyond.” Journal of religion and society. 7.

Webb, Benjamin, Melissa Bopp, and Elizabeth A. Fallon. 2013. “A qualitative study of faith leaders’ perceptions of health and wellness.” Journal of religion and health 52, no. 1: 235-246.

Webster, Collin Andrew, David F. Stodden, Russell L. Carson, Catherine Egan, and Danielle Nesbitt. 2016. “Integrative public health-aligned physical education and implications for the professional preparation of future teachers and teacher educators/researchers in the field.” Quest 68, no. 4: 457-474.

Whisenant, Debra, Cyndi Cortes, and John Hill. 2014. “Is faith-based health promotion effective? Results from two programs.” Journal of Christian Nursing 31, no. 3: 188-193.

Wilmot S, Martinez E, He M. 2018. “Hispanic church attending youth’s perceptions of healthy bodyweight promotion in faith-based community”. Journal of Child Obesity, 3(1).

Winn, William E. 1960. “Tom Brown’s schooldays and the development of “Muscular Christianity”.” Church History 29, no. 1: 64-73.

Wingerd, Daryl. 2014. The Value of Physical Fitness for the Christian. Retrieved March 6, 2019, from https://bulletininserts.org/the-value-of-physical-fitness-for-the-christian.

Zhang, Huijie, Fan Hong, and Fuhua Huang. 2018. “Cultural Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Modernization of Physical Education and Sport in China, 1840–1949.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 35, no. 1: 43-60.

Author Bio: Colin G. Pennington (PhD) is an Assistant Professor of Kinesiology at Tarleton State University where he works with Exercise Science majors and carries out research on physical education teacher effectiveness and other pedagogical and health-related applications of the kinesiology sub-disciplines. Colin currently teaches courses including Physiology of Exercise, Anatomical Kinesiology, Capstone in Kinesiology, and formally a number of courses within the sport pedagogy sub-discipline of kinesiology. His interests and research focus on teacher socialization, physical education teacher training, character development programs within physical education and sport, and health and wellness.

Diane M. Wiese-Bjornstal, PhD, CMPC

Professor, University of Minnesota Twin Cities

Abstract: Research in psychology and medicine supports that religiosity functions as a protective and resilience factor among people facing diverse health challenges. Athletes risking and responding to health challenges associated with sport injuries likely benefit from religiosity and religious ways of coping, and yet associated mechanisms of influence are largely unexplored within sport psychology. This paper introduces a religiosity-adapted version of the integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process as a conceptual framework for research examining religiosity within sport injury prevention and care. Examples from the Christian faith illustrate model predictions. Psychological antecedents expected to influence vulnerability to sport injuries include personality (e.g., positive values), life stress (e.g., lower stress perceptions), and coping resources (e.g., utilizing prayer). Once injury happens, personal (e.g., religious commitment) and situational (e.g., support of faith community) factors are hypothesized to affect athletes’ health and well-being (e.g., spiritual health), and in turn their psychological responses to sport injuries. These responses include cognitive appraisals (e.g., God controls injury recovery) that affect feelings (e.g., gratitude for God’s work through health care providers), influence religious behaviours (e.g., church service attendance), and impact recovery outcomes (e.g., stress-related growth). Religious interventions within sport injury contexts such as referring athletes to clergy or coaches praying with athletes are predicted to benefit religious athletes. Overall, an inductive consideration of research evidence for model predictions supports that religiosity likely advantages the mental and physical health of many Christian athletes during sport injury recoveries. The integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process provides a basis for generating more explicit research investigations into the mechanisms of influence between religiosity and health within sport injury contexts.

Keywords: Sport Psychology, Sports Medicine, Religious Coping, Athletes, Spiritual Health

Statement of Original Unpublished Work: By submitting this document to the Editor in Chief of CJSCF, I am making a Statement of Original Unpublished Work not submitted to another journal for publication.

Introduction

Research examining the psychological aspects of sport injuries is of significant relevance to the work of sport psychology consultants, sport coaches, and sports medicine providers. These professionals can benefit athletes by adopting holistic approaches to the prevention and care of sport injuries that include consideration of psychological factors. Diverse psychological factors relevant to the sport injury experiences of athletes include personality, motivation, anxiety, stress perceptions, coping mechanisms, and rehabilitation adherence behaviours. This paper proposes that religiosity – the beliefs and behaviours of athletes as influenced by specific religious faiths – be considered among the many psychological factors affecting sport injury vulnerability and recovery. It presents a conceptual model illustrating hypothesized interconnections between religiosity and the psychological aspects of sport injuries. Research on religiosity among Christian athletes is used to provide research examples lending preliminary support to model predictions (Beck and Haugen 2013; Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a).

Religiosity, as described within the psychology literature, is a complex multidisciplinary construct exhibiting intrapersonal, interpersonal, and physiological dimensions (Hill and Pargament 2003). It encompasses attitudes, beliefs, emotions, and behaviours (Hooker, Masters and Carey 2014). Religiosity involves adherence to specific, institutionalized belief systems focused on gods, deities, higher powers, or ultimate truths, characterized by explicit codes of ethics and common rituals, and encompassing social connections to others of the same faith (Hill and Pargament 2003). A key function of religiosity is connection to one’s spirituality. Psychological and health care scholars describe spirituality as an individualized, abstract, and subjective construct referring to one’s beliefs and values concerning meaning, purpose, connection, and transcendent sacredness in life (Center for Spirituality and Healing 2016; Greenstreet 2006). Religious adherents such as Christians most often identify as both religious and spiritual, but individuals who identify as spiritual do not necessarily report being religious (Pew Research Center 2018).

A wealth of literature in psychology and medicine supports that religiosity is largely positive in protecting mental and physical health and in promoting psychological resilience among those facing health challenges (Koenig 2012; Pearce 2013; VanderWeele 2016; Wiese-Bjornstal 2019b). Yet, in spite of this relevance of religiosity to protective and resilience functions within health contexts, social science literature examining religiosity within sport in general (Gibbons and Braye 2019), and within sport injury contexts specifically (Wiese-Bjornstal, Wood, White, Wambach and Rubio 2018) is extremely limited. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to present and describe the integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process as one means of stimulating research that explores intersections between religiosity and sport injury. This model was developed as an adaptation of the integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process (Wiese-Bjornstal, Smith, Shaffer and Morrey 1998), which is frequently adopted in the sport psychology literature as a conceptual framework for research examining the psychological aspects of sport injuries (Wiese-Bjornstal, 2019b). The purposes for presenting this adapted model are to (a) establish predictions upon which to base research examining the protective and resilience influences of athlete religiosity within the contexts of sport injury prevention and care, and to (b) operationalize expected pathways through which sport, medical, and psychology professionals could intervene to tap into the benefits of religiosity to athletes within these experiences. Examples are derived from literature review and incorporate consideration of Koenig’s (2012) theoretical models illustrating the ways in which adherence to Western monotheistic religions (i.e., Christianity, Judaism, Islam) influences mental and physical health. Research findings regarding the psychological and social aspects of sport injuries integrated with medical literature showing connections between religiosity and health provide preliminary support for the adapted model predictions. However, many of these predictions are speculative within the context of sport injuries and future research testing of these predictions is essential to determining the viability of the model.

In order to accomplish these purposes, the first section of this paper provides a visual schematic and general narrative overview of the model. This model captures a broad perspective about ways in which religiosity across multiple faith traditions connect to the psychological aspects of sport injury experiences. It is not exclusive to Christianity. In section two, however, examples drawn from the Christian faith tradition illustrate specific model components. The third section provides conclusions and future directions for research and professional practice connected to religiosity and its contributions to physical and mental health within sport injury contexts.

Integrated Model of Religiosity and Psychological Response to the Sport Injury and Rehabilitation Process

The integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 1998) has been widely used as a conceptual framework driving research on the psychological responses of athletes to sport injuries (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019b). Research generally has supported its basic premises, and thus it provides a relevant starting point for predicting how religious beliefs, behaviours, and relationships might serve as health protective, resilience, and intervention factors within sport injury contexts (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a). Figure 1 displays the newly adapted integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process. In the top segment of Figure 1, the flow begins with pre-injury psychological elements derived from the stress and injury model (Williams and Andersen 1998) that are predicted to continue to exert influence on post-injury psychological sequelae. Examples of religious constructs are integrated into these psychological elements in the religiosity-adapted model. Psychological antecedents (e.g., personality, history of stressors, coping resources) and pre-injury interventions independently and conjunctively affect the stress responses of athletes, as manifested in stress reactivity, attentional, and physiological effects. Antecedent psychological and intervention factors that promote and protect mental and physical health, such as religious faith and coping resources, are predicted to reduce the stress response, which lessens vulnerability to sport injuries (Ivarsson et al. 2017).

Figure 1. Integrated Model of Religiosity and Psychological Response to the Sport Injury and Rehabilitation Process
Source: Adapted from Wiese-Bjornstal et al. (1998). Reprinted by permission of the author.

Once a sport injury occurs, the psychological response and rehabilitation process segment of the model becomes relevant. The middle segment of Figure 1 shows that personal and situational factors frame an interactional approach to understanding the dynamic field of influences affecting holistic health and well-being. Personal factors such as religious values, beliefs, and behaviours interact with situational factors, such as the support of religious teammates and family, to influence dimensions of health and well-being. One of these dimensions, spiritual health, is of particular relevance to this paper, as it describes one’s relationship with God and sense of life purpose that affect health-related quality of life (Dhar, Chaturvedi and Nandan 2011). These global dimensions of health and well-being may influence sport injury-specific cognitive appraisals, affective responses, and behaviours, as depicted in the bi-directional cycles of Figure 1. Appraising sport injury as part of God’s plan, for example, may lead to feelings of calmness and comfort about care and support, which may lead to behaviours associated with diligence and commitment to a rehabilitation plan. Physical and psychological recovery outcomes shown at the center of Figure 1, such as return to sport and stress-related growth, are affected by these dynamic cycles of cognition, affect, and behaviour over time.

The bottom segment of Figure 1 represents religiosity-specific ideas about aspects of post-sport injury psychological care related to assessments, providers of psychological care, and types of interventions that may prove useful. The predictions based on this model would be that assessments could gather information about the religiosity-based health and well-being of the athlete, which in turn inform the selection of appropriate religious interventions used by mental and physical health care providers. It is essential that these health care providers demonstrate cultural competence through their recognition that religiosity may be an important priority for individual athletes, and through their willingness to cultivate and accommodate religiosity within their use of interventions and provision of health care.

Thus, the integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process shown in Figure 1 provides an overarching framework of religiosity influences within the sport injury context, and sets the scene for the next section of the paper. This upcoming section illustrates specific examples of evidence-based support for predictions about how Christian beliefs, behaviours, and relationships might function as health protective, resilience, and intervention influences on injured athletes.

Model Components and Christian Illustrations

While an overarching model of religiosity within sport injury contexts is a useful starting point, it is unrealistic to suggest that it accurately depicts the mechanisms of influence within all religious faith traditions. As presently drawn, it admittedly depicts pathways consistent with Western monotheistic traditions. Thus, this section of the paper provides illustrations of model components drawn primarily from one specific monotheistic tradition (i.e., Christianity).

Pre-Sport Injury Psychology

Returning to Figure 1, the uppermost pre-injury segment of the model identifies psychological antecedents that exert their influence on the stress response and sport injury vulnerability before injuries happen. The premise of this paper would be that it would be beneficial to tap into the psychologically protective effects that religiosity offers as a means of reducing vulnerability to sport injuries through the stress response pathway. Faith-related antecedents, such as religious beliefs, may influence stress responses through direct or indirect pathways. For example, athletes with a strong Christian faith may simply not perceive potentially stressful sports events as worrying (thus, religiosity exerts direct influence on reducing stress perceptions). Alternatively, athletes may use internal and external religious resources such as prayer and social support to buffer the effects of negative life events and maintain an attentional focus on meaning and purpose in sports competition rather than on fear or anxiety (thus, religiosity exerts indirect influence on reducing stress perceptions). By either perceiving less stress, or by better managing perceived stress, Christian athletes are less likely to display high levels of stress reactivity such as increased muscle tension, elevated heart rate, or distracted attentional focus. In turn, then, the avoidance of these high stress manifestations is associated with a reduced vulnerability to sport injuries (Ivarsson et al. 2017).

Other potential benefits may accrue via the personality antecedent, such as through the influences of religious identities (Watson 2011), virtues, and goal orientations. Proios (2017), for example, found a relationship between religious and athletic identities among adult athletes. This requires further exploration to find out what this means, because athletic identity is a construct that encompasses important aspects of social identity and affect and has demonstrated relationships to sport injury risks and responses in prior research (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019b). So, the question is, does religious identity promote or protect health, or can it compromise health such as by feeling that one must sacrifice health in order to fulfill one’s God-given potential (Lee Sinden 2013)? Kretschmann and Benz (2012) examined the moral thoughts and actions of Christian athletes relative to their own health and well-being and that of their opponents. With respect to religious orientation, for example, they cited evidence showing that athletes with traditional Christian beliefs evidenced greater emphasis on goal/mastery rather than competitive/ego orientations, the latter of which is more strongly tied to a willingness to do whatever it takes, including injuring others, in order to achieve victory. One Christian athlete, when talking about moral limits of body contact and hurting someone on purpose, said the following:

[Winning] is not so important to me that I would risk an injury or something like that in this case. I wouldn’t do that. Or to get an advantage through such ways, I personally probably could not be happy about it. (Kretschmann and Benz 2012, 513)

Kretschmann and Benz (2012) reported evidence showing that Christian athletes rated honesty and integrity as high priority values, compared with nonreligious athletes who rated values such as perfectionism higher. Honesty is an important and beneficial Christian value, and in a secular sense is a health protective virtue or asset within a positive psychology view of character strengths. Perfectionism, particularly perfectionistic concerns, associates with increased risks of sport injuries (Madigan, Stoeber, Forsdyke, Dayson and Passfield 2018). Other examples of strengths or virtues associated with religiosity and a positive psychology view would be hope, compassion, and gratitude; again, with the prediction that these would protect, rather than harm, health and well-being (Worthington et al. 2014).

Pre-injury coping resources reflect the use of internal and external coping resources as a means of controlling the stress response. Reducing anxiety and preparing for competitions, such as via the use of pre-game religious rituals and practices such as prayer, are evident among many athletes. Their reasons for using these often include safety and protection from harm or injury in the coming contest (Jirásek 2018; Watson and Czech 2005). For example, in their interview study about the role of sports chaplains within English professional soccer clubs, Gamble, Hill and Parker (2013) reported that the chaplains noted player pre-game prayers often focused on preventing injury and playing well. The chaplains facilitated these team and individual prayers. One athlete working with a sports chaplain attributed his improved play to the adoption of a pre-game prayer ritual. The ritual provided him with the capacity to manage better his in-match emotions due to a sense of peace about his purpose and preparation. This example illustrates a potential protective effect of religious interventions in that by feeling peaceful and less anxious pre-game thanks to prayer rituals, the stress response lessens and risk of injury decreases based on the stress and injury model predictions (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a).

Although religious rituals and practices are sometimes included in sport psychology and sociology studies describing “superstitions” in sport, thus relegating them to the realm of irrationality and chance control, several authors articulate the importance of distinguishing superstition from religious ritual and practices. Religious ritual and practices have specific rational and controllable meanings and serve functions beyond relying on luck (Hoven 2019; Hoven and Kuchera 2016; Maranise 2013). Maranise (2013, 84) contended, “Religious rituals practiced by athletes or integrated into sporting lifestyles promote greater holistic (mental, emotional, physical, and spiritual) well-being and add significant meaning to life in a way that superstitions cannot.” As such, it is logical to presume that religious rituals would serve not only a performance enhancing function (by focusing effort and promoting confidence), but also health protective (by promoting well-being) (Hoven 2019), and spiritual (by promoting meaning) functions.

Having explored some possible predictions relative to the role of religiosity as a health protective factor pre-injury, it is apparent that research on this topic is quite limited. In the context of health in general and allied literature, however, the evidence generally would support the predictions of the religiosity-adapted model and provide researchers with ideas for examining religiosity as psychologically influential during the pre-injury phase. Next, it is important to consider how religiosity influences psychological responses to sport injuries once they occur.

Post-Sport Injury Psychology

Based on the integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process, personal factors such as religious commitment, religious schemas, and locus of health control would comprise factors predicted to influence the spiritual well-being of athletes. Among Christians, for example, spiritual well-being involves living by faith in proper relationship with God and trusting in God’s steadfast love and mercy through Jesus Christ as the purposes for one’s life (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 2019). This spiritual well-being may influence athletes’ cognitive appraisals when sport injury occurs; for example, by interpreting sport injury as serving some larger purpose in one’s life. A few studies illustrate promising results regarding the generally positive influences of religiosity on spiritual well-being and coping with sport injuries. For example, in their qualitative study of religious well-being in intercollegiate sport, within one of their resulting coded data themes, Cope With Injury, Seitz, Sagas and Connaughton (2014) reported that some athletes used religious coping strategies indicative of positive religious well-being. One Christian athlete, Leslie, stated the following with respect to coping with a season-ending injury:

I think if most other people went through the same thing, injury-wise, they probably wouldn’t have stuck it out as long, and I think my faith had a lot to do with that. It made dealing with injury easy in the beginning because I was able to see that something good is going to come out of this. God has a purpose for everything, and I was trying to understand what that was. (Seitz, Sagas and Connaughton 2014, 227)

Spiritual well-being and associated cognitive appraisals influence emotional and behavioural responses and coping efforts of religious individuals (Newton and McIntosh 2010). Seitz, Sagas and Connaughton (2014, 227) reported that one athlete attributed his recovery from a career-threatening injury to the power of God: ‘‘My God rescued me from a pretty significant injury my freshman year. I was able to get back out there and play and I wanted to make the most of it.’’ Research examining the effects of religious beliefs and practices on the mental health and well-being of male professional athletes prior to surgery for anterior cruciate ligament injuries showed similar relationships (Najah, Farooq and Rejeb 2017). In comparing athletes who were high versus low in religious/spiritual belief and in praying/meditation practice, Najah, Farooq and Rejeb (2017) found that higher levels of religiosity/spirituality positively influenced adaptive coping and was associated with fewer negative emotions. Athletes higher in religiosity/spirituality at pre-surgery exhibited greater use of coping strategies such as acceptance, emotional support, and self-distraction, and reported lower scores on stress, anxiety, and depression.

A recent mixed methods study by Wiese-Bjornstal et al. (2018) correspondingly illustrated the roles of religiosity in cognitive, affect, and behaviour in response to sport injuries. Their study explored religiosity/spirituality specifically within the context of coping with sport injuries, based on predictions of the integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process. The responding sample of athletes and other physically active individuals were predominantly Christian, and the findings supported religiosity and religious coping as beneficial to psychological resilience following sport injury. The results showed that athletes identifying as religious and/or spiritual utilized more active coping strategies (e.g., acceptance, planning, positive reframing) than those identifying as not religious or spiritual. Further, stronger religious commitment predicted greater reliance on a God locus of health control for sport injury. It also predicted greater use of positive religious coping strategies such as seeing the ways in which God was caring for and strengthening them in their injuries. Higher religious commitment did not predict greater use of negative religious coping. Triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data reflected primarily positive benefits of religious coping strategies such as prayer, positivity, and priorities in managing the psychological challenges presented by sport injuries (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018). For example, a 21-year-old Christian female athlete who suffered a concussion playing high school basketball illustrated these positive benefits:

I grew closer to God. I prayed for my injury and was prayed for. I felt strengthened by others when they prayed over my injury and just seeing the healing process come through strengthened my trust in Him over my body. (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018, 13)

Overall, the findings from this study were consistent with the predictions of the integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process. They confirmed intersections between personal/internal factors (e.g., religious commitment) and situational/external factors (e.g., others’ prayers) on cognitive, emotional, and behavioural responses to sport injuries and the psychological and physical recoveries associated with these responses.

A related study focused on athletes embracing the Christian religion explored possible differences between Catholic/Mainline Protestant and Evangelical Christians in coping with their sport injury experiences (Wiese-Bjornstal, Wood, Principe and Schwartz 2019). The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships between religious commitment, religious engagement, God locus of health control, and religious ways of coping during the sport injury recoveries of athletes from diverse Christian denominations. As part of a larger mixed methods study, physically active adults (n=88) responded to an online survey including questions about their most serious or challenging sport injuries and several religiosity factors. The results showed that religious commitment (i.e., the importance and centrality of religious beliefs, values, and practices to one’s life) predicted religious engagement (e.g., attendance at religious services) and God locus of health control for sport injuries (i.e., a belief that God controls one’s health status). Further, religious commitment fully mediated the relationship between athletes’ Christian denominations and their use of positive religious ways of coping with sport injuries. Positive religious ways of coping were used significantly more than were negative, with seeking spiritual support, active religious surrender, and benevolent religious reappraisal the most frequently used strategies. Although negative religious ways of coping were less prevalent, self-directed religious coping, marking religious boundaries, and pleading for direct intercession were most used among them. This study illustrated the centrality of religious commitment as the driver of religious coping with sport injuries, regardless of Christian denomination, and demonstrated the intersections between spiritual health and cognitions, emotions, and behaviours following sport injuries.

These research findings demonstrate preliminary evidence showing that religiosity is associated with the use of primarily positive religious coping strategies among Christian athletes dealing with the stresses of sport injuries and recoveries. Koenig’s (2012; 2013) reviews of literature in the general medicine and health care fields also document that positive religious coping exerts beneficial effects for patients dealing with a wide variety of health challenges. Knowing this, culturally competent sports, medicine, religious, and psychology professionals should consider how tapping into athletes’ religiosity could play a role in psychological interventions designed to aid in the prevention and care of sport injuries, as next discussed.

Psychological Interventions/Return to Sport

Psychological interventions generally refer to professionals intervening via the development of interpersonal relationships and the utilization of activities or strategies with the purpose of improving individual health and well-being, such as spiritual, mental, physical, social, behavioural, or emotional health and well-being. The psychological care of athletes involves the integration of psychological assessments with the work of sport, religion, and medical professionals and the interventions they use, as depicted in the bottom segment of Figure 1.

Sports medicine providers, sport psychologists, sport coaches, and sport chaplains are among the many professionals that might intervene with varied religious strategies contained within the boundaries of their expertise and ethical standards (Gamble, Hill and Parker 2013; Wiese-Bjornstal 2000). Individuals within these professional roles are expected to demonstrate cultural competence. Cultural competence in health care and rehabilitation settings such as sports medicine or sport psychology refers to being culturally knowledgeable, sensitive, and effective in working with diverse populations in order to build resilience and restore health (Buse, Burker and Bernacchio 2013; Cartwright and Shingles 2011). This would include accommodating an athlete’s religiosity in sports training and health care (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a). With respect to support among sports medicine providers for accommodating religiosity, findings of a survey of program directors in United States athletic training education programs showed that 89% of program directors believed there to be a connection between spirituality and health/healing (McKnight and Juillerat 2011). Further, survey results with United States intercollegiate athletic trainers reported that 82% of athletic trainers agreed that addressing injured athletes’ spiritual concerns leads to more positive rehabilitation outcomes (Udermann et al. 2008). Thus, the implication is that when working with Christian athletes, the effectiveness of culturally-competent sport professional practices is improved by recognizing that religiously-committed Christian athletes engage in religious activities, believe that God exerts control over their sport injury recoveries, and benefit from utilizing primarily positive religious ways of coping when injured (Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a).

Given this evidence of the need for considering religiosity in health care, Plante’s (2014) paper “Four Steps to Improve Religious/Spiritual Cultural Competence in Professional Psychology,” provides useful guidelines for psychology professionals incorporating religiosity-based interventions. Plante (2014) identified the following four steps for psychologists: beware of biases (e.g., against religion), consider religion just as one would other types of diversity (e.g., worthy of respect and consideration), take advantage of available resources (e.g., material available in American Psychological Association journals such as Psychology of Religion), and consult colleagues, including clerics (e.g., religious clergy as professionals with whom to consult, and to whom to refer). Sport psychology consultants could incorporate religious practices such as Christian prayer and music into mental skills training (Mosley, Frierson, Cheng and Aoyagi 2015; Watson and Nesti 2005), or tap into the benefits of religious rituals, as suggested by Maranise (2013):

…the multidimensional aspects of adherence to religious rituals for athletes cannot be understated in their importance for they provide opportunities for utilization in sport psychological consulting, therapeutic techniques, and life-coaching which ultimately concretize and provide visible, experiential outcomes to what many have long-viewed as merely abstract and intangible. (Maranise 2013, 89)

Wiese-Bjornstal (2000) recommended similar strategies for use by sports medicine-related professionals, such referrals of athletes by sports medicine providers to a network of religious clergy, praying or sharing Scripture with athletes if appropriate and ethical within the specific work environment (Egli and Fisher 2017), and weaving athlete stories of faith and recovery from sport injuries into interpersonal exchanges (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018). The latter provides an example of tapping into the benefits of narrative health or narrative health psychology. Narrative health psychology is a research (Sools, Murray and Westerhof 2015) and communication model (Pallai and Tran 2019) through which health care providers and patients become better listeners, care providers, and patients through the sharing of personal stories, and, by extension, on drawing from the relevance of the stories of others negotiating similar health challenges.

These examples illustrate ways in which the model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process might help researchers and practitioners examine how religiosity may benefit the prevention and rehabilitation of injuries among Christian athletes. The ultimate benefit of exploring religiosity is to maximize the protective and resilience benefits it may offer to athletes. In the broadest sense, this paper has focused on the development of a model reflecting the integration of social science, religious faith, and health among religious athletes relative to the risks and consequences of sport injuries. Some concluding thoughts emerging from this review may be useful in guiding future research and professional practice.

Conclusions and Future Directions

Evidence-based findings evolved into an adapted conceptual model provided nascent yet potentially compelling evidence that religiosity, and Christian faith specifically, serves as a psychologically protective and resilience factor for athletes relative to sport injury risks and consequences. As a protective factor pre-injury, reduced stress reactivity accrues through the influences of strong coping resources such as those provided by religious social networks and through personal faith and rituals. Reduced stress reactivity may lessen the vulnerability of Christian athletes to injuries. This is a fruitful future direction for sport psychology research given that the extensive body of knowledge on psychological predictors of sport injuries has largely ignored religiosity. As a resilience factor post-injury, benefits of religiosity likely include positive mindsets, emotional control, adaptive behaviours, and stress-related religious and spiritual growth (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018). Since religiosity shows strong support as a beneficial psychological resilience factor for persons facing a variety of health challenges (Helmreich et al 2017), it could be an asset to sports medicine health care for researchers to find support for similar mechanisms in sport injury contexts.

Although the role of religiosity seems to be largely positive in preserving and promoting health and well-being among athletes, future work should further examine some potentially negative or harmful aspects of religiosity relative to sport injuries. These might include the role of pain in religious sacrifice and expression (Glucklich 2015), and the use of negative religious coping strategies, such as blaming God when living in chronic pain and “imprisonment” (Hunt and Day 2019, 1), or feeling abandoned and withdrawing from religious support after injury (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018). Career terminations resulting from sport injuries also represent vulnerable life transitions that could negatively affect, or be affected by, religious faith (Wiese-Bjornstal et al. 2018), such as believing that one has failed to live up to their God-given potential. There is evidence of some undesirable, conflicting, or negative influences of religiosity on health and well-being within sport that must be considered and addressed by scholars and practitioners moving forward (Lee Sinden 2013; Wiese-Bjornstal 2019a).

In conclusion, the integrated model of religiosity and psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process provides one way forward in generating future research on the roles of religiosity in preventing and recovering from sport injuries. As theory often drives research initiatives, the hope is that the presentation of this model serves toward that purpose. However, the model derives largely from a psychological, medical, and positivist science view of religiosity, and thus would greatly benefit from elucidation by scholars and professionals trained in liberal arts fields such as religious studies and theology, philosophy, and sociology (Gibbons, Watson and Mierzwinski 2019; Sullivan 2019). These individuals may better articulate some of the less scientifically tangible sacred and spiritual aspects involved when considering religiosity’s role in sport psychology and sports medicine, such as a deeper capacity to tap into the spiritual dimensions of coping that may benefit athlete health and recovery (Pargament 2009).

Bibliography

Beck, Richard, and Andrea Haugen. 2013. “The Christian Religion: A Theological and Psychological Review.” In APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality (Vol. 1): Context, Theory, and Research, edited by Kenneth Pargament, 697–711. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Buse, Natalie, Eileen Burker, and Charles Bernacchio. 2013. “Cultural Variation in Resilience as a Response to Traumatic Experience.” Journal of Rehabilitation 79, no. 2: 15–23.

Cartwright, Lorin, and Rene Shingles. 2011. Cultural Competence in Sports Medicine. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Center for Spirituality and Healing. 2016. “What is Spirituality?” Accessed May 25, 2016.
https://www.takingcharge.csh.umn.edu/enhance-your-wellbeing/purpose/spirituality/what-spirituality.

Dhar, Neera, S. K. Chaturvedi, and Deoki Nandan. 2011. “Spiritual Health Scale 2011: Defining and Measuring 4th Dimension of Health.” Indian Journal of Community Medicine 36, no. 4: 275–82. https://dx.doi.org/10.4103%2F0970-0218.91329.

Egli, Trevor, and Leslee Fisher. 2017. “Christianity and Sport Psychology: One Aspect of Cultural Competence.” Journal of the Christian Society for Kinesiology, Leisure and Sport Studies 4, no. 1: 19–27.

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. 2019. “ELCA Teaching.” Accessed March 30, 2019. https://www.elca.org/Faith/ELCA-Teaching.

Gamble, Richard, Denise Hill, and Andrew Parker. 2013. “Revs and Psychos: Role, Impact and Interaction of Sport Chaplains and Sport Psychologists Within English Premiership Soccer.” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 25, no. 2: 249–64. DOI 10.1080/10413200.2012.718313.

Gibbons, Tom, and Stuart Braye. 2019. “Christianity and Social Scientific Perspectives on Sport: Introduction to the Special Issue”. Sport in Society, 22, no. 2: 201–8.
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/17430437.2017.1360563.

Gibbons, Tom, Nick Watson, and Mark Mierzwinski. 2019. “Christianity as Public Religion: A Justification for Using a Christian Sociological Approach for Studying the Social Scientific Aspects of Sport.” Sport in Society, 22, no. 2: 209–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2017.1360565.

Glucklich, Ariel. 2015. “Pain and Religious Experience: Theory and Methods.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion, 1–19. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
DOI 10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.013.42.

Greenstreet, Wendy. 2006. “Clarifying the Concept.” In Integrating Spirituality in Health and Social Care: Perspectives and Practical Approaches, edited by Wendy Greenstreet, 7–19. Seattle, WA: Radcliffe.

Helmreich, Isabella, Angela Kunzler, Andrea Chmitorz, Jochem König, Harald Binder, Michéle Wessa, and Klaus Lieb. 2017. “Psychological Interventions for Resilience Enhancement in Adults (Protocol).” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017, no. 2: 1–43. DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD012527.

Hill, Peter, and Kenneth Pargament. 2003. “Advances in the Conceptualization and Measurement of Religion and Spirituality: Implications for Physical and Mental Health Research.” American Psychologist 58, no.1: 64–74. DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.64.

Hooker, Stephanie, Kevin Masters, and Kate Carey. 2014 “Multidimensional Assessment of Religiousness/Spirituality and Health Behaviors in College Students.” The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 24, no. 3: 228–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2013.808870.

Hoven, Matt. 2019. “Re-Characterizing Confidence Because of Religious and Personal Rituals in Sport: Findings From a Qualitative Study of 15 Year Old Student-Athletes.” Sport in Society 22, no. 2: 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2017.1360582.

Hoven, Matt, and Samantha Kuchera. 2016. “Beyond Tebowing and Superstitions: Religious Practices of 15-Year-Old Competitive Athletes.” International Journal of Children’s Spirituality 21, no. 1: 52–65. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1364436X.2016.1150814.

Hunt, Emily, and Melissa Day. 2019. “Narratives of Chronic Pain in Sport.” Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology 13, no. 1: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1123/jcsp.2017-0003.

Ivarsson, Andreas, Urban Johnson, Mark Andersen, Ulrika Tranaeus, Andreas Stenling, and Magnus Lindwall. 2017. “Psychosocial Factors and Sport Injuries: Meta-Analyses for Prediction and Prevention.” Sports Medicine 47, no. 2: 353–65. DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0578-x.

Jirásek, Ivo. (2018). “Religion and Spirituality in Sport.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology, 1–21. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.149

Koenig, Harold. 2012. “Religion, Spirituality, and Health: The Research and Clinical Implications.” International Scholarly Research Network, ISRN Psychiatry Article ID 278730: 1–33. DOI 10.5402/2012/278730.

Koenig, Harold. 2013. “Religion and Spirituality in Coping with Acute and Chronic Illness.” In APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality (Vol 2): An Applied Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, edited by Kenneth Pargament, 275–95. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Kretschmann, Rolf, and Caroline Benz. 2012. “God has a Plan: Moral Values and Beliefs of Christian Athletes in Competitive Sports.” Journal of Human Sport and Exercise 7, no. 2: 495–519.
DOI 10.4100/jhse.2012.72.14.

Lee Sinden, Jane. 2013. “The Elite Sport and Christianity Debate: Shifting Focus From Normative Values to the Conscious Disregard for Health.” Journal of Religion and Health 52, no. 1: 335–49. DOI 10.1007/s10943-012-9595-8.

Madigan, Daniel, Joachim Stoeber, Dale Forsdyke, Marcus Dayson, and Louis Passfield. 2018. “Perfectionism Predicts Injury in Junior Athletes: Preliminary Evidence From a Prospective Study.” Journal of Sports Sciences 36, no. 5:545–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2017.1322709.

Maranise, Anthony. 2013. “Superstition & Religious Ritual: An Examination of Their Effects and Utilization in Sport.” The Sport Psychologist 27, no. 1: 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.27.1.83.

McKnight, Cynthia, and Stephanie Juillerat. 2011. “Perceptions of Clinical Athletic Trainers on the Spiritual Care of Injured Athletes.” Journal of Athletic Training 46, no. 3: 303–11.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21669101.

Mosley, Michael, Desiree Frierson, Yihan Cheng, and Mark Aoyagi. 2015. “Spirituality & Sport: Consulting the Christian Athlete.” The Sport Psychologist 29, no. 4: 371–86. https://dx.doi.org/10.1123/tsp.2013-0123.

Najah, Amira, Abdulaziz Farooq, and Riadh Ben Rejeb. 2017. “Role of Religious Beliefs and Practices on the Mental Health of Athletes with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.” Advances in Physical Education 7, no. 2: 181–90. https://doi.org/10.4236/ape.2017.72016.

Newton, A. Taylor, and Daniel McIntosh. 2010. “Specific Religious Beliefs in a Cognitive Appraisal Model of Stress and Coping.” The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 20, no. 1: 39–58.
DOI 10.1080/10508610903418129.

Pallai, EmmaLee, and Kim Tran. 2019. “Narrative Health: Using Story to Explore Definitions of Health and Address Bias in Health Care.” Permanente Journal 23: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/18-052.

Pargament, Kenneth. 2009. “The Spiritual Dimension of Coping: Theoretical and Practical Considerations.” In International Handbook of Education for Spirituality, Care and Wellbeing, edited by Marian de Souza, Leslie Francis, James O’Higgins-Normal, and Daniel Scott, 209–30. Dordrecht, NL: Springer.

Pearce, Michelle. 2013. “Addressing Religion and Spirituality in Health Care Systems.” In APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality (Vol. 2): An Applied Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, edited by Kenneth Pargament, 527–41. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Pew Research Center. 2018. “Attitudes Toward Spirituality and Religion.” Accessed March 30, 2019. https://www.pewforum.org/2018/05/29/attitudes-toward-spirituality-and-religion.

Plante, Thomas. 2014. “Four Steps to Improve Religious/Spiritual Cultural Competence in Professional Psychology.” Spirituality in Clinical Practice 1, no. 4: 288–92.
https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fscp0000047.

Proios, Militiadis. 2017. “Exploring the Relationship between Athletic and Religious Identities.” Trends in Sport Sciences 24, no. 3: 117–22. DOI 10.23829/TSS.2017.24.3-4.

Seitz, Matthew, Michael Sagas, and Daniel Connaughton. 2014. “Religion and College Athletics: Antecedents and Consequences of Student-Athletes’ Perceived Religious Well-Being.” Journal for the Study of Sports and Athletes in Education 8, no. 3: 213–34. DOI 10.1179/1935739714Z.00000000031.

Sools, Aneke, Michael Murray, and Gerben Westerhof. 2015. “Narrative Health Psychology: Once More Unto the Breach.” Journal of Health Psychology 20, no. 3: 239–45. DOI 10.1177/1359105314566616.

Sullivan, Sean. 2019. “Single, Separate or Unified? Exploring Christian Academicians’ Views of the Body, Sport and Religious Experience.” Sport in Society 22, no. 2: 311–25.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2018.1360584.

Udermann, Brian, Greta Schutte, David Reineke, William Pitney, Mark Gibson, and Steven Murray. 2008. “Spirituality in the Curricula of Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs.” Athletic Training Education Journal 3, no. 1: 21–7. https://natajournals.org/doi/abs/10.4085/1947-380X-3.1.21.

VanderWeele, Tyler. 2016. “Religion and Health: A Synthesis.” In Spirituality and Religion Within the Culture of Medicine: From Evidence to Practice, edited by Michael Petter and John Balboni, 1–39. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Watson, Nick. 2011. “Theological and Psychological Reflections on Identity in Sport.” Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 23, no. 2: 182–202. https://dx.doi.org.ezp3.lib.umn.edu/10.3138/jrpc.23.2.182.

Watson, Nick, and Daniel Czech. 2005. “The Use of Prayer in Sport: Implications for Sport Psychology Consulting.” Athletic Insight: The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, no. 4: 26–31.
https://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol7Iss4/PrayerinSports.htm.

Watson, Nick, and Mark Nesti. 2005. “The Role of Spirituality in Sport Psychology Consulting: An Analysis and Integrative Review of Literature.” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 17, no. 3: 228–39.
DOI 10.1080/10413200591010102.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane. 2000. “Spirit, Mind, and Body.” Athletic Therapy Today 5, no. 1: 41–2. https://doi.org/10.1123/att.5.1.41.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane. 2018. “Sociocultural Aspects of Sport Injury and Recovery.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology, 1–29. New York: Oxford University Press.
DOI 10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.174.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane. 2019a. “Christian Beliefs and Behaviours as Health Protective, Resilience, and Intervention Factors in the Context of Sport Injuries.” In Sport Psychology and Christianity: Welfare, Performance and Consultancy, edited by Brian Hemmings, Nick Watson, and Andrew Parker, 54–70. London, UK: Routledge.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane. 2019b. “Psychological Predictors and Consequences of Injuries in Sport Settings.” In APA Handbook of Sport and Exercise Psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1): Sport Psychology, edited by Mark Anshel, 697–726. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane, Aynsley Smith, Shelly Shaffer, and Michael Morrey. 1998. “An Integrated Model of Response to Sport Injury: Psychological and Sociological Dynamics.” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 10, no. 1: 46–69. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10413209808406377.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane, Kristin Wood, Francesca Principe, and Emma Schwartz. 2019. “Religiosity and the Use of Religious Ways of Coping Among Christian Athletes During Sport Injury Recoveries.” Paper presented at the 15^th European Congress of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Münster, Germany.

Wiese-Bjornstal, Diane, Kristin Wood, Andrew White, Amanda Wambach, and Victor Rubio. 2018. “Exploring Religiosity and Spirituality in Coping With Sport Injuries.” Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology. Advance online publication, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1123/jcsp.2018-0009.

Williams, Jean, and Mark Andersen. 1998. “Psychosocial Antecedents of Sport Injury: Review and Critique of the Stress and Injury Model.” Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 10, no. 1: 5–25.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209808406375.

Worthington, Everett Jr., Caroline Lavelock, Darryl Van Tongeren, Charlotte van OyenWitvliet, Brandon Griffin, Chelsea Greer, David Jennings II, Yin Lin, Kayla Jordan, and Man Yee Ho. 2014. “The Contributions of Christian Perspectives and Practices to Positive Psychology.” In Religion and Spirituality Across Cultures: Cross-Cultural Advancements in Positive Psychology (Vol. 9), edited by C. Kim-Prieto, 47–70. Dordrecht, NL: Springer.

Author Bio: Diane M. Wiese-Bjornstal (PhD) is a Professor of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Associate Director of the School of Kinesiology, and Director of the Sports Medicine Psychology Laboratory at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities, USA. She is a Certified Mental Performance Consultant (CMPC) and a Fellow in the National Academy of Kinesiology, the Association for Applied Sport Psychology, and the Society of Health and Physical Educators. Her research focuses on sports medicine psychology, which encompasses multidisciplinary theory, research, and practice in the social, psychological, and behavioural aspects of injury prevention and rehabilitation among physically active participants across the lifespan. Recent publication venues include the Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, Kinesiology Review, and the Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. Dr. Wiese-Bjornstal’s professional service encompasses election as a member of the Science Board of the United States President’s Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition and Associate Editor responsibilities for Elevate Health, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, and the Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. A former youth and collegiate volleyball and softball coach, she serves as an Affiliated Scholar with the Tucker Center for Research on Girls & Women in Sport at the University of Minnesota.

Louise McEwan, BA, BTh

Statement of Original Unpublished Work: By submitting this document to the Editor in Chief of CJSCF, I am making a Statement of Original Unpublished Work not submitted to another journal for publication.

Introduction

In a competitive culture, physical activity can become overly focused on results. Frequently, the enjoyment of movement, which first manifests itself as play, morphs into sport and competition.  But physical activity has another side. It can be an avenue for nurturing spirituality and a place of encounter with God. Both scripture and human experience support the role of physical activity in the quest to become a more mature, faith-filled individual.

A Definition of Spirituality

For the purposes of this discussion, a definition of spirituality is as follows. Spirituality is a receptiveness to the Holy Spirit at work in one’s life and the world. It involves an awareness of the transcendence and immanence of God. The spiritual journey is a quest to understand and deepen one’s relationship to the divine, to others, and to the world.

Wired to Move

The individual first experiences physical activity as movement within the womb. This movement includes small motions, such as swallowing and moving the eyes, to larger motions, such as vigorous kicking. After birth, the innate desire for physical activity manifests itself in the progression of basic gross motor skills, such as sitting, standing, crawling and walking. Young children experience physical activity in the form of exploration and play. Over time, exploration and play become more structured, and give rise to different dimensions of physical activity.

Physical Activity: A Good Gift from the Creator

The human person is made in the divine image. The human inclination to move reflects the creative energy of God. The opening chapters of the Book of Genesis describe the birth of creation. God speaks the cosmos and every living thing into being. “God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light” (Gn 1:3 NAB). This pattern repeats; God speaks and “so it happened”. Yet, the scriptures also describe God as making the dome of the sky, separating the waters, making and setting the sun and moon in place, making the great sea monsters, the animals, and last of all, man.

While one might envision God sitting passively, talking creation into existence like an armchair athlete coaching from the sideline, the work of creation entails an output of energy. The scriptures emphasize that God worked.

Thus the heavens and the earth and all their array were completed. Since on the seventh day God was finished with the work he had been doing, he rested on the seventh day from all the work he had undertaken. God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work he had done in creation. (Gn 2:1-3)

The second account of creation portrays God as physically shaping man and then planting a garden. “The Lord God formed man out of the clay of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and so man became a living being” (Gn 2:7). One might imagine God digging the clay, shaping it and bending over the lifeless mass; with an expenditure of breath, God gives the lump life. God takes the man and settles him in the garden of Eden, “to cultivate and care for it” (Gn 2:15). To use an athletic metaphor, God readies creation, sets the mark, and shoots the gun. It is as if God says to the man, “Go, be fruitful, and share my love with the world.”

In the Heart of God

I can think of no better example of the delight and joy to be found in physical activity than that observed in small children. I frequently pick up my five-year old granddaughter from school; one day, as we were walking along chatting, she asked me where her new baby cousin was before she was born. In an inspired moment, I replied, “She was in the heart of God.” With a jump in her step and a lilt in her voice, she responded with all certainty, “I’m in the heart of God.” She then grabbed my hand and began skipping with abandon, pulling me along.

Through her physical movements, she was expressing a joyful awareness of the transcendence and immanence of God. In grabbing my hand, she was sharing her insight that God was both beyond and within us. With the innate wisdom and innocence of childhood, she had intuitively connected physical activity, delight, and relationship with the presence of God.

My granddaughter is still “trailing clouds of glory … from God who is our home”, as William Wordsworth (1973) wrote of the natural inclination of children to recognize the sacredness in human existence and creation. For those of us who shook off those clouds of glory long ago, it may be more challenging to recognize the sacred intent behind physical activity.

Glorify God with Your Body

Frequently, physical activity is associated with results. Whether from the perspective of organized and competitive sport, or from an individual focus on fitness, most physical activity outside of childhood is purpose-driven and results-oriented. We play to win. We work out to achieve or maintain a healthy body weight. We exercise to feel good about our self. However, the lens of faith may help us re-orient some of our attitudes about physical activity.

Created in the image and likeness of God, the human person is a divine masterpiece, and enjoys an unparalleled dignity within creation. The psalmist sings of humankind, “Yet, you have made them little less than a god/ crowned them with glory and honour” (Psalm 8:6). The human person expresses this unique relationship to God through both body and spirit. Therefore, the spiritual life of the individual cannot be isolated from the physical body. Too much emphasis on the physical side of being human may endanger spiritual growth. Conversely, severe asceticism may harm the living, clay vessel that God lovingly breathed into existence.

In First Timothy 4, Paul warned against false asceticism. Although he specifically refers to deviations from the Christian message that prohibited marriage and required abstinence from certain foods (4:3), Paul also mentioned physical training.

Train yourselves for devotion, for while physical training is of limited value, devotion is valuable in every respect, since it holds a promise of life both for the present and the future (4:7,8).

Paul may be addressing an issue of strict asceticism of the body. Or, he may be using an athletic metaphor to drive home his message, as he does elsewhere.

In First Corinthians 9, for example, Paul used an athletic metaphor in defense of his rights as an apostle. Paul wrote,

Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win. Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one. (9:24, 25)

On the surface, Paul appears to hold physical activity of little account. However, Paul’s theology is always concerned with the interface between faith and daily life. For Paul, the death and resurrection of Jesus had made all things new. The Christian was a new creation in Christ, whom Paul urged to live a life worthy of Christ. So, while Paul recognized the mortal nature and the limitations of the body, he also acknowledged the body as the dwelling place of the Spirit;

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God and that you are not your own? For you have been purchased at a price. Therefore, glorify God with your body. (1 Cor. 6:19, 20)

The human person embodies the spirit of divinity. This spirit is a gift from God given at the time of creation. In the beginning, the man and woman walked in harmony with God in the coolness of the garden (Gn. 3.8). From the beginning, the human person was wired to walk with God, to move towards holiness. Thus, physical activity has a role in sanctification, in achieving the ‘imperishable crown’ to which Paul referred. Physical activity can be thought of as a spiritual practice. Spiritual practices render us more open and responsive to dynamic activities of grace, and move us towards greater spiritual maturity (Griffith 2009).

The Road to Emmaus

“The Road to Emmaus” (Lk 24:13-26) provides a starting point for understanding the role of physical activity in spiritual formation. In the passage, two disciples are walking from Jerusalem to Emmaus, a distance of about seven miles. Along the way they encounter a stranger, the risen Jesus whom they do not recognize. The pair are struggling to make sense of Jesus’ crucifixion and death, and their own dashed hopes. The stranger elucidates the meaning of the scriptures as they relate to the Christ. When they arrive at their destination, they invite the stranger to dine, and in the breaking of bread they recognize Jesus. Once again, the pair set out walking; they return to Jerusalem to share their experience.

While there are multivalent levels to the passage, the point for us is that the physical act of walking is integral to the disciples’ spiritual development. Along the road, they experience the transcendence of God in the wisdom of Jesus. As they walk with Jesus, their hearts ‘burn within’; they also experience God dwelling in and among them. Enlightened with deeper understanding, they are able to go forth. In Christianity, as in other spiritual traditions, walking is often a feature of the spiritual journey.

Lessons from the Walking Monk

A few years ago, I had a chance encounter with a Krishna monk who was on his fourth walk across Canada. It was early one spring morning. My daughter and I were out for a run when we passed Bhaktimarga Swami (2014) walking along a back road, his orange robe flowing in the early morning breeze. Not wanting to break our stride and spoil our pace, we said “Hello”, but did not stop. Towards the end of the run, we crossed paths a second time with the ‘walking monk’, as he is known. He stopped us for directions, and we learned that he was walking across the country. A few weeks later, I interviewed Swami for a column I was writing.

For Swami (2014), walking is very much an essential component of spiritual maturation. At the core of the self,

… there is a passion to move about and pick up on all the little nuances the world has to offer. Walking brings about a lot of revelation and epiphany about the self and one’s place in the universe. You learn not to be so passionate about results. (Swami 2014)

As the disciples on the road to Emmaus had the presence of God with them in the stranger, Swami (2014) has the presence of the divine with him as he walks in the chanting of the mantra. The mantra frees the mind from focusing on “the acquisitions you’re trying to achieve”, and the tendency to wander in the past and the future. “The Absolute or the Divine is there with you in their sound … The mantra keeps the spiritual in your midst” (Swami 2014).

My own experience of walking jives with the lessons from the road to Emmaus and those of the walking monk. I have found walking helpful in keeping me grounded in the present moment, enlightening my understanding, and nurturing my spirituality.

Conclusion

The story of creation as recounted in the Book of Genesis demonstrates that physical activity is part of God’s plan for human thriving. The human person is naturally inclined towards movement, and initially intuits the unity of physical activity and spirituality, of body, mind, and spirit. Over time, we may lose this awareness as physical activity becomes more results-oriented.

A shift in thinking may help to recover the sacred intent inherent in physical activity. When viewed from a faith perspective, rather than as a means to an end, physical activity can become a spiritual exercise. It can move the individual towards greater spiritual maturity. As an aid to spiritual growth, physical activity, such as walking, can help us enter more profoundly into the heart of God who asks us to go skipping forth with joy and love.

Bibliography

Griffith, Colleen M. 2009. “Catholic Spirituality in Practice” C21 Resources.  Spring: 1-2. Retrieved from https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/top/church21/pdf/Spring_2009.pdf (February 2, 2019)

Swami, Bhaktimarga. 2014. From interview transcript of Louise McEwan. Trail, B.C. (September 04, 2014).

Wordsworth, William. 1973. “Ode: Intimations of Immortality.” In Major British Poets of the Romantic Period, edited by William Heath, 257-259. New York; Macmillan Publishing Company.

Author Bio: Louise McEwan (BA, BTh) is a former elementary school teacher and catechist. She has a Bachelor of Arts (English Literature) from the University of British Columbia and a Bachelor of Theology from Newman Theological College, Edmonton, Alberta. Louise was a freelance religion columnist for ten years, writing for secular media on a broad range of topics from a faith-based perspective. Although retired, she continues to contribute opinion pieces on an occasional basis. Louise lives in Trail, B.C. with her husband, Chris. She is a mother of three, and grandmother of seven.

Brent Bradford, PhD

Associate Professor, Faculty of Education
Concordia University of Edmonton

Published in the Canadian Journal for Scholarship and the Christian Faith (journal.ccscf.org) on 2 October 2019

Welcome to the CJSCF’s Special Issue that will be examining the relationship between wellness-related topics and the Christian faith. For as long as I can remember, physical activity, and often times as a result, physical recovery, have been an important facet of my life. In my youth, I spent countless hours in hockey arenas throughout BC’s Kootenay region and northwest USA developing my hockey and team skills with my childhood buddies. These early experiences led me to continue to play organized competitive sports such as hockey, baseball, and soccer throughout my school years and into early adulthood and, with reduced competiveness, into my 30s and 40s. It was during those formal learning years spent practicing, competing, reflecting, recovering, celebrating, etc. that afforded me incalculable opportunities to develop knowledge, skills, and attributes related to discipline, sportsmanship, resilience, and one of my most cherished (but, often times challenging) characteristics – competitiveness.

That said, one constant has endured as a primary element in my life. This constant has been my faith in God. It was during my formal learning years in elementary school that I became a servant to God. And to this day I continue to dedicate myself to living out His plan through physical activity and sport with their accompanying threads of spiritual, physical, social, and emotional development.

Competing with Teammates
National Champion University of Alberta Golden Bears, 1999

Jogging along a Beautiful Nature Trail with my Son (Kane, 3 Years Old), 2016

Engaging in Service. As part of my faculty-related service, I choose to serve on the Canadian Centre for Scholarship and the Christian Faith Executive Committee. As a component of this committee work, I wanted to help establish a section in the Canadian Journal for Scholarship and the Christian Faith that focuses on the relationship between wellness-related topics and the Christian faith. This led to the initial step of organizing this Special Issue. Over the past several months, I have been surprised by the richness of focus this topic continues to receive around the world. It is, for example, exciting to see the work that has continued through Athletes in Action (see Table 1). Further, I had no idea there was a group of scholars engaged in the Christian Society for Kinesiology, Leisure, and Sport Studies (see Table 1). This new contact has led me to become a member, to prepare a presentation for an upcoming conference, and to collaborate with scholars interested in exploring the relationship between wellness-related topics and the Christian faith.

In addition to these organizations, I was introduced to scholars such as Dr. Brian Bolt (Professor, Calvin University), author of Sport Faith Life (see Table 1). Dr. Bolt is interested in sharing the “love of sport and how it intersects with Christian faith in our everyday lives” (see Table 1). I look forward to reading Dr. Bolt’s book in the near future. Further, while working on this Special Issue, I was introduced to outstanding work and messages from the contributing authors: Louise McEwan; Dr. Diane Wiese-Bjornstal; Dr. Colin Pennington; Lacie Webb; and Dr. Marc Apkarian. It was through this guest editorial process that I was encouraged to reflect on my own life experiences and how faith in Him has remained a constant. As you read through the articles, I invite you to reflect on the importance of faith, in whatever form it resides within you, and how it connects to your daily life.

Table 1: Related Resources

Special Issue (2019). First, I would like to extend a big appreciation to the peer reviewers who volunteered their time throughout the review process. Beginning with a Special Column, invited contributor Louise McEwan, a former elementary school teacher, catechist, and freelance religion columnist, explains how physical activity can be viewed as an aide to our spiritual journey. Sharing her story about communicating with the ‘walking monk’, Louise lends thought to how physical activity is a gift from God and is part of His plan for human thriving. Dr. Diane Wiese-Bjornstal, a professor and certified mental performance consultant, introduces a religiosity-adapted version of the integrated model of psychological response to the sport injury and rehabilitation process as a conceptual framework for research concerning religiosity within sport injury prevention and care. Dr. Wiese-Bjornstal raises the issue that although the role of religiosity seems to be largely positive in preserving and promoting athlete health and well-being, future research might examine potentially negative aspects of religiosity relative to sport injuries. Dr. Colin Pennington, a scholar interested in teacher socialization and physical education teacher training, shares how physical educators are afforded opportunities to meet goals beyond physical- and health-related objectives, including positive moral socialization. As part of his work, Dr. Pennington offers a brief review of Muscular Christianity along with historical origins of church-based physical education. Lacie Webb, a physical therapist passionate in medical mission trips, and Dr. Pennington offer their insights into research exploring the intersectionality between faith, spirituality, and physical recovery. As part of their message related to preventative medicine, Lacie and Colin point to research stating that patient religious and spiritual practices and beliefs become powerful factors in coping with serious illnesses, making ethical treatment choices and end-of-life care decisions. Dr. Marc Apkarian, an Associate Professor involved in both youth and adult ministry opportunities at church, discusses attributes and characteristics of physical fitness and how each aligns to a figurative counterpart in the Christian faith. Marc extends his message through a number of examples in which strength, endurance, and flexibility are depicted throughout books of the Old and New Testaments.

As stated, the intention with this Special Issue is to provide opportunities for readers to reflect on the relationship between their own wellness practices (e.g., physical activity, physical recovery) and their faith. And, it is hoped future contributions to CJSCF will include a local, national, and international flavour while raising global-level queries and broadening horizons of thought possibilities related to wellness and the Christian faith. I extend an invitation for all readers to become CJSCF contributors. As a member of the Canadian Centre for Scholarship and the Christian Faith Executive Committee, I invite you to explore your understanding of the relationships that can exist between wellness-related topics and the Christian faith.

Winter 2014

Zombies are everywhere! They are ubiquitously found in books, movies, comics, video games, TV shows and on the streets (zombie walks). What’s with all the zombies? What is the significance and meaning of zombies in our culture? Zombies are saying something to us about us—but what?

In my pride and prejudice (something no scholar should have!), in my ignorance, my initial critical assessment was (watching my son play Call of Duty Zombies): “I don’t know if the zombies are on the screen or behind the controls”. Or as one of my son’s online friends put it: “Every game has #@$%*@#* zombies in it—whoopty doo”! That, of course, expresses a doubt that there is much original or interesting or even good art to be found in zombie culture. Like my son’s friend (my son is naturally like this too): I am resistant to any popular trends and treat them with the utmost suspicion and scepticism—something all good scholars should do.

But even Timothy Madigan, in an editorial for Philosophy Now, had to begrudgingly concede the centrality and significance of the “Zombie Invasion of Philosophy”. Indeed Zombies are a complex reflection of who we are as individuals and culture—which raises very serious issues and questions. Zombie culture is telling us that life is a great big profound mystery—larger than any one of us as an individual. Actually, I think that zombies are a much more intelligent, deep, sophisticated and multi-layered metaphor for many of the struggles we are encountering on both an individual and societal level—even eclipsing Mary Shelley’s classic Frankenstein (and that’s good art!).

Irony is intrinsic to zombies: We can either be a victim of them or critically enlightened by what they are saying. So for example: If we are not thinking about what zombies are saying, we ironically end up a zombie with thoughtless, ceaseless and meaningless activity. This ceaseless activity also has the effect of desensitizing and numbing us eg to violence or purchasing. If we critically engage zombies as scholars, we will be blown away by the depth of questions and issues they raise. There are so many examples that I could explore in this article—but I will limit to a few.

My recent journey to zombie enlightenment began by watching my 16 year old son playing Call of Duty Zombies. Given that he is a lot more intelligent than me, I should have known that he knew something I didn’t. Then I heard a voice while driving in the vehicle with my son: A divine voice ironically infused in the death metal of COD Zombies—the voice of Elena Siegman. This in turn led me to the musical genius and mastermind of the COD Zombies music: Kevin Sherwood—who will be our keynote speaker at the Canadian Centre for Scholarship and the Christian Faith 2015 conference on Religion and Pop Culture.

As already noted: Zombie culture is intrinsically ironic eg they are the “living dead”. Sherwood masterfully conveys this irony and the anxiety of our existential angst by employing the Doctrine of Ethos in his music. The Doctrine of Ethos is a Greek philosophical concept that says that the music must “embody the idea or theme it is trying to convey and produce an effect on the listener”. This can be heard in the COD Zombie Canon—music composed for Call of Duty Zombies. Irony can be heard in Sherwood’s employment of Elena’s angelic voice emanating out of the genre of death metal and the anxiety of our existential angst in the “haunting effect” that won’t leave the listener alone. I am haunted by this music and its ideas as I listen to it on the way to work—and it haunts me all day long—and has done so for over a year now . . . .

Based on the Creation Theology of Genesis 1, I see theological analogies with Sherwood’s COD Zombie Canon—and its all good! Taking matter that God has already created (Genesis 1.1-2), Sherwood brings order (by the structure of his music) out of chaos (the zombie apocalypse). He brings beauty out of ugliness through his music and Elena’s voice eg the “Beauty of Annihilation”. Sherwood brings good (art) out of the evil of zombies. This is an example of how critical analysis enlightens us to profound ideas and beautiful art (including the graphic design of COD Zombies)—if we are, as scholars, open to learning.

Another prime example that explores the complexity of zombies is AMC’s The Walking Dead and Talking Dead. Talking Dead is a weekly debriefing of the episodes of The Walking Dead by guests from all walks of life. As an educator, I said to my wife and son last weekend that what excites me most about Talking Dead is the fact that The Walking Dead generates so much thinking, analysis and dialogue from all kinds of non-scholarly people in our culture. It means that people are thinking and talking about the big questions and issues! They are not becoming the ironic victims of zombies and watching “mindless” entertainment! They get it!

Marilyn Manson, in a recent TD, said that The Walking Dead is not about zombies: Its about “morality”. While I am sure that he would not agree with my take on it, we are a morally conflicted society who intuitively know that our views on morality are not working very well for us. Rick struggles with this very issue personally and as a leader. As a pastor, I see this moral confliction every week as students come for pastoral care—often related to the breakdown of the family and or romantic relationships—something for which I have nothing but compassion.

Adam Savage from Myth Busters made the point in TD that the prison in season 4, which has kept Rick’s community safe and secure for a while now, is actually a metaphor for us in society. As the prison walls teeter from the outside (representing external threat), a virus is killing survivors from the inside (representing internal threat). Savage comments that this really reflects our delusion: We think that we live in a stable society with a stable government. But intuitively we all know that governments can collapse (as reflected in the recent shut down of the US government) and put us into chaos. That is what the apocalypse represents: The breakdown of order into chaos—the reversal of Genesis 1 and the effect of Genesis 3 as ultimately reflected in the Book of Revelation. Even if we do live in the security of the prison, individually we can die from infection. The prison metaphor really represents the bondage that we are all in regardless of where we are: We are all trapped by circumstances whether we admit it or not. No one is safe nowhere at no time: Death is a clear and present danger for us all—and that’s what zombies represent. Moreover, zombies question whether we’re really free at all (individualism) or are we all the victims of circumstance (determinism)?

Christianity is represented in The Walking Dead throughout. We see theological questions raised about theodicy (“justice of God”), faith, hope, destiny and purpose. Hershel is a Christian man—with wisdom, grace, compassion, guts and practicality. In season 2, Hershel asks Rick if he believes. Rick answers that the last time he prayed to God about his son, he walked out of the church to the sound of a hunter accidently shooting his son and nearly killing him. Many of us have struggled with the unfairness, evil and hurt that life in the world can bring us. Rick and his confliction and lostness (is he a farmer or a cop?) represents this acutely in TWD.

In the episode Internment, Hershel raises the leitmotif of destiny, purpose (reason) and meaning with Rick. He tells Rick that no matter how bad the chaos, destruction and death, there has to be a reason for it, a higher purpose (meaning)—and that we need to persevere. Zombies represent the relentless pursuit of evil leading to death. Or as Sherwood puts it in his song Beauty of Annihilation: “They’re all around me. They’re waiting for me . . . . Descending. Unrelenting”. Perseverance is another theme in zombie culture—as reflected in Sherwood’s song Abracadavre: “I can’t give in. I won’t give in”. Hershel says that, no matter what, we must go on in life and hope for a better afterlife.

Indeed, meaning is yet another idea that The Walking Dead raises. So what if we survive the apocalypse, is there any meaning to living like this—killing, stealing and scavenging just to survive? Many people ask this of their 9-5 job. Are we any better than the zombies? Or do zombies actually have it better by not being conscious nor feeling any pain? These are questions that The Zombie Invasion of Philosophy in Philosophy Now asks. Sherwood asks in one of his songs “Where Are We Going [in life]?” . . . .

Hershel also represents hope and faith in The Walking Dead as noted in the Talking Dead. In Internment, we see Heshel’s courage and strength as he treats the viral patients and watches them die and change into zombies. Darrell comments that Hershel is a “tough sombitch”—to which Hershel replies with wise confidence “I am”. Hershel has a deep love and compassion. He hates death and killing because he is a life-affirming believer and “healer”. In season 2, he held out hope for a cure to the zombie virus in relation to his loved ones in the barn. Nonetheless, as he sits on his prison bed, after a long shift of rounds, he opens his Bible to read it—but breaks down and can’t.

Savage in TD wonders if Hershel is losing his faith and if the zombie apocalypse has finally worn him down. Being a scholar of biblical wisdom, I don’t see it that way. I see parallels with Job—a man who is in an acute faith crisis because of all the chaos and suffering life has thrown at him. Yet he never gives up on God and what he believes. He doubts, questions and rails on God but he perseveres. Job and Hershel are not in denial about the chaos, suffering and death they are experiencing in the real world. Hershel and Job are realists who are intelligent enough to understand the issues—but brave enough to keep on going. I view Job as a “tough sombitch”.

I also understand the problems that people and our society have with Christianity. But I am unwilling to surrender to the darkness that I view has only partial truth and is ultimately a “dead end”. Intuitively zombie culture knows that there’s got to be something more to life in the material world—and that there has to be some kind of “after life”. Or as Sherwood puts it in his song Where Are We Going?: “Where do we go [after life]?” I think that there is a clearer and better explanation for reality that is not limited by the material world but is found in metaphysics—and specifically the Christian Faith.

As a Christian interpreter of zombie culture, I see zombies as a reflection of our deep internal struggles with the big questions and issues of life and death. To quote Sherwood again: “How do we know?” This question inherently raises issues about epistemology: How much we can know and how do we know what we know? . . . .

Essentially I think that zombies are an intuitive reflection of the Fall in Genesis 3—divinely revealed in Scripture (how we know)—but existentially (theologically) experienced by all human beings (reality). What zombies are really all about is Original Sin that brought chaos and death into the world. Zombies reflect our sinfulness and the ugliness from within (low self-esteem based on moral wrongs) and without (chaos, death and destruction in the world). They represent a “living hell” of our own making. Zombies reflect our obsession with death and deepest anxieties and doubts about where we go after we die. The Book of Revelation calls this the “Second Death” or the “living dead”. Unlike Revelation, there is no Gospel of Zombies—just death, destruction and meaninglessness. Zombies are a “dead end”. But the Book of Revelation promises a “new heaven and a new earth” with a resurrected body and eternal purpose.

My bottomline analysis is that zombies are really all about our intuitive need for a Savior and eternal life. We are in a living hell of our own making—and we can’t kill, steal, scavenge or think ourselves out of it—and we know it! We have an intuitive knowledge of this truth vis-à-vis the Fall of Genesis 3—and that is why we are so anxious and hopeless in a dark and ugly world represented by the prevalence of zombie culture.

The anxiety of who we really are, and how we are a part of the problem (including our denial), is reflected in Sherwood’s song Always Running: “I’m running from the something that I’m coming from . . . . and becoming one means I’m running from all I am”. In my view, the something that we are always running from is Original Sin.

The church, while historically very flawed, is really the community that people are looking for—not the prison of our own making in The Walking Dead. It is the only real community who together will survive the apocalypse eternally. Because even if we survive the apocalypse in the material world—we all have to die—and then what? The church is “living living” that transcends our historical and sinful nature by faith—full of meaning and purpose in this world—who will rise again from the dead to the resurrection of eternal life.

This we see in Hershel in The Walking Dead. Hershel dies in the most violent way with a smile on his face and peace in his heart—knowing that he had lived a meaningful and purposeful life with full assurance of the resurrection unto eternal life. He lived and died this way all because of his Christian Faith based on the atoning death and resurrection of Christ.

Jesus created us and wants to redeem us. Jesus, like Hershel, died in the most violent way in the context of the evil of religious, cultural and political chaos. The ugly irony of the cross brings sense out of senselessness, purpose out of evil, clarity out of confusion, order out of chaos, beauty out of annihilation, atonement for sin, and life out of death. Jesus said that “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”. Jesus is the Answer people are really looking for as reflected in the questions and issues of zombie culture.