Catherine Groves

Freelance Writer, Copywriter & Editor

Effective, imaginative marketing solutions · Exceptional writing credentials
Known as the "Pit Bull of Proofreading"

Each a Different Kind

by Catherine Groves

"So where are the Christians in C*NAQ?" "Lots of Christian talk — so where are the New Agers?" Those were hot, recurring complaints in the early years of Christian*New Age Quarterly. And perhaps that type of debate surrounding the fledgling journal was inevitable. Christians saw the periodical as "too New Agey" and questioned if any genuine reflection of Christian beliefs appeared in our pages. Equally, those with alternative tastes accused the publication of falling short on the New Age side and catering far too much to Christianity. With no solution to the deadlock, I eventually realized that if the pitch of clamor was equal from both sides, C*NAQ just might be doing something right. Balance, after all, would not be found by accentuating either the Christian stance or the New Age voice. No, the evidence of having already achieved a healthy equilibrium could be heard in the passion of criticism C*NAQ drew from each side.

It's been some years since C*NAQ was itself a target for New Age/Christian debate. And I often breathe a sigh, relieved that those questions spun themselves out. Still, every once in a while a reader will pry open again that can of worms. And, of late, the nature of the question has prompted me to rethink: what constitutes calling oneself a Christian or a New Ager? All in all, I suspect each is a very different kind of thing.

Unless one has actively decided for another path, most people, when asked their religion, tend to reply with whatever the persuasion of their upbringing. In the Western world, that usually makes the answer, "Christian." But that type of self-identification doesn't necessarily mean one holds to Christian tenets at all. Far more often, it indicates what Nemour Landaiche called "culturally Christian" in his piece "Proposing A Bridge When The Other Sees No Divide."¹

On the flip side of the coin, few call themselves "New Agers," even when the beliefs they hold would identify them, to others, as immersed in the New Age milieu. Part of this stems from a New Age aversion to labels. But the larger and more significant part roots in the nature of the movement itself.

Absent from the New Age movement is the element of organized structure so characteristic of Christian churches. In the main, New Age ideology spreads through a casual web of personal tastes and affiliations, without dependence upon progressive levels of instruction or formal social settings. In but rare instances, one's experience in New Age circles is catch-as-catch-can, stay-till-you-leave: an individual's sense of loyalty to any single New Age group floats on the leading of a very fluid spirit.

And seldom do these groups host a comprehensive New Age agenda. Rather each loose circle focuses upon a certain teaching, cause or guide. Hence, participants are unlikely to view their own involvement as New Age; instead, one person may embrace an esoteric healing technique and see that as strictly a health matter, while another may study astrology, considering that pursuit more metaphysical than New Age. In the long run, the term "New Age" tends to be more useful as a sociological umbrella, for a wide range of practices and beliefs that often predate and exceed the movement, than as a means of identifying one's own beliefs.

So, then, if individuals are likely to identify themselves as Christians whether or not Christ-centered observances and faith are important in their lives, yet are unlikely to identify themselves as New Agers even when they espouse New Age practices and beliefs, what are we to make of such self-descriptive tags? No doubt, remarks such as "I am a Christian" or "I am a New Ager" can be revealing, but more so when taken with a grain of salt. As often as such comments tell of one's beliefs so are they subject to misinterpretation, simply because the terms "Christian" and "New Age" are rarely used in commensurable ways.

Picking this apart still further, how descriptive is the term "Christian" in understanding what a practicing, faithful individual believes? Even conscientious, well-churched Christians don't always accept, and often aren't familiar with, the doctrines of their denomination. And if the degrees of personal adherence to the teachings of one's church can wildly vary, far greater is the gamut of teachings that span the myriad denominations. The notion of a single Christianity, marked by a single set of beliefs, washes up empty in the face of the reality. What does a Christian believe? Well, find a Christian and ask him! (And then ask the guy next to him to get yet another answer.)

Granted, certain beliefs are typical of Christians in an ideal sense: that Jesus Christ existed historically; that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; that some sort of standard for moral conduct is worth emulating; and so on. But the key beliefs, which might comprise whatever our list, are, as I see it, quite few. Furthermore, if an individual does not accept a typical belief, that doesn't mean he or she isn't Christian. Specific beliefs are normative for, not the criteria of, a Christian.

If Christians are widely varied in what each believes and if a person can easily profess New Age beliefs without even recognizing them as New Age, can one hold Christian and New Age views at the same time? Not only is a composite of Christian and New Age concepts possible to a single individual, such is likely, even inevitable, as exposure to New Age ideas increases. And exposure is commonplace today, both through the media and in social circles, a trend in the direction of our cultural thought that shows no signs of diminishing.

Indeed, as I see it, New Age concepts and styles are proliferating within our society. Increasingly, people agree with New Age thought, simply because these ideas take on heightened credibility the more they are repeated. It is a natural, human process of absorbing prevalent cultural undertones. Unless a dramatic shift occurs in the drift of our society, I think it likely that, within the next few decades, New Age ideology will thoroughly permeate our culture, albeit in very pragmatic, mundane ways.

Hardly do I expect we'll all become channelers donning crowns of crystals — but whoever, anyway, would presume that some outward flash or garb or ritual is chiefly what the New Age is about? Rather, what we hold to be generally true will be shaped by an emphasis on planetary unity, the importance of discovering truth within, the downplay or even demise of the concept of sin, and so on.

That New Age ideas seem to be gaining ever greater ground in our social perspective need not mean Christianity will decline. In fact, I would expect the reverse. Once seen as ideological rivals, Christianity will likely assume a measure of New Age flavor. Concepts, earlier rejected outright, will begin to take on an appearance of plausibility, albeit when set into a distinctively Christian framework. Some ideas, of course, will not find acceptance in Christian circles; reincarnation, a view of the afterlife radically other than the kingdom of heaven, is, I suspect, one such unlikely candidate for assimilation into any mainstream Christian church. However, the notion that all religions share the same spiritual impetus and the idea that one's connection to God must be inwardly discovered are just two elements of New Age thought which already seem to be accepted by many Christians privately. In short, I suggest that Christianity, itself a bastion of our cultural disposition, will absorb New Age ideas no less than any other aspect of our society. Again, that is a natural process of adjusting to new waves of thought through simple, repeated exposure.

Fairly much of a no-brainer is it to say that our social order is undergoing great challenge, great stress. In these times of flux, fresh ideas soak into the larger culture at a lightning-fast pace. Were I to project ahead, based on what I have seen within my own lifespan, I would have to add that while New Age ideas will indeed change the texture of our society, this might not occur in ways New Agers would expect — or applaud.

As one who came of age in the sixties, I know that many of the concepts my children take for granted would not be much of a thought in anyone's mind were it not for those courageous, outrageous thinkers of the sixties. From views on sexuality to pacifism, from civil rights to women's rights, from ecology to globalism, the sixties movement transformed our worldview. Ideas scattered across a vast range of topics became focalized issues, given voice, power and momentum by a generation that took them up as its cause. Still, as influential as the sixties movement was, I am saddened to see its values now so watered down by decades of social digestion. As the culture assimilated our ideas, it stripped them of the sixties' spirit and relevance, often with insipid, even perverse, results. Sexual freedom, for example, takes a wholly other bent in the hardened, sterile head of the nineties than it had in the richly exuberant sixties' atmosphere.

In similar manner, while the impetus for what we may take for granted a couple-three decades down the road might rest today in the hearts of New Agers, once the larger culture begins to own New Age ideas, their direction and character will mutate in ways we cannot foresee, and may not much like. Moreover, the amorphousness of the New Age movement — even if the epitome of the culture at large, the very mirror of a disoriented historical moment — does not bode well for effecting a predictable change in the social order.

My own experience of the history that occurred within my lifetime shapes, yet colors my thoughts on what may eventuate from today's New Age movement. Still, that kind of inductive reasoning fails to allow for the possibility that what is happening today — and what will happen tomorrow — could be totally unprecedented, wholly new. While I look to the past as instructive for understanding what may come of the present, it is imaginable that this may be different. And that chance is one we must hold widely open, lest we become so inured to a normative pattern of social evolution that we blind ourselves to the newness and surprise of a totally other that stands straight in our face.

¹Christian*New Age Quarterly 8:1 (January-March 1996).

"Each a Different Kind" was originally published by Christian*New Age Quarterly 10:4 (October-December 1998). For more information on Christian*New Age Quarterly, write to Catherine Groves, Editor at PO Box 276, Clifton, NJ 07015-0276 or visit christiannewage.com. (And please bookmark this page prior to leaving this site.)

Résumé

Open Letter to Colleagues

Download
Prettier Résumé

Capabilities

Recommendations

Marketing Portfolio Tidbits

Absolute Joy to
Work With

Feng Shui Brochure

Second To None

Online Product Intros

Impressive

Image Ad for Bank