A conversation about happiness on BBC Radio 4 yesterday. Apparently happiness depends upon a range of things, eg money, family, friends, work ... and of course religion.
At the mention of religion, the programme became interesting. The woman who was speaking seemed to be rather embarrassed at the word. Of course, she said it's not so much religion as spirituality. She stumbled around this several times before settling on spirituality rather than religion. So, spirituality makes you happy and religion does not and that's official!
Of course we can all see what she's driving at ... dreadful church or temple or mosque services ... men who lead and don't allow women or gays to lead. We've all been there ... But it does seem likely religion does make some people happy, if only the men who control it ... and in reality many more than them.
Some time ago, Jonathan Sacks , the Chief Rabbi, said something which rang true to me. Religion is, he said, applied spirituality. It is (this is me) spirituality applied in a particular time and place. It is spirituality grounded, not just in the head. It is spirituality made public.
So, religion is spiritual but spirituality is not necessarily religion in this specific sense. Is the reluctance to see religion as a source of happiness an admission that spirituality as a source of happiness is an escape from reality?
But who said religion aims to make us happy? Religion is only in the hands of tiresome old men (or indeed other tiresome people) if we let it be so. It is ours to apply together in any time and place we choose. As such it helps us make sense of our lives but it is not painless. When we deal with religion, we are dealing with things that make us alive, not necessarily happy.
Comments