Deism was a popular form of spiritual belief in colonial times. It acknowledged a higher being, a god of some sort, uninvolved in human affairs. That idea left it up to humans to make their own way as best they could. The enlightenment had given them confidence that human reason alone was sufficient to make the way good and profitable for all people. Christianity, as they understood it, was OK as a fanciful excuse for avoiding human accountability, a refuge for those who could not appreciate the power of reason, and the church was a social institution that helped give order to the community to which superficial commitment was sufficient. Jesus was a wise teacher but as to his divinity, it wasn’t worth debating with believers. Let them believe what they wanted and wish them well.
Deism has not gone away. It’s been rebranded as the spiritual but not religious. It might be uncertainty defined as belief in spiritual reality superior to ordinary daily human existence. Whether it is divine in some sense or the emanation of an enlightened human mind is a matter of conjecture. One might add up to the other. In any case it holds out the promise of spiritual self realization bringing an abundance of blessings into one’s life according to the level of spiritual enlightenment one can achieve.
It borrows heavily from Christianity, Judaism and Buddhism, and adds random elements from mystery religions and pop culture. Spiritual but not religious aficionados have opened up an attractive market for an updated Manichaeism in which self styled gurus have offered classes and access to secret knowledge that would enable spiritual seekers to become enlightened masters, stage by stage, for a fee that promised all they desired…eventually. It is a niche market that hasn’t appeal to everyone. Most spiritual but not religious are content inventing their own way, relying on whatever they’ve heard is the latest thing.
The contemporary church has to shoulder a good deal of the blame for the rise of a new deism in the form of spiritual but not religious. I suspect we clergy have too often tried to explain God by comparing ‘him’ to known things and processes. The bearded old man in heaven and the European looking Jesus portrayed in art are the worst examples, but not far behind are descriptions of God by the tasks assigned to ‘him’: creator, sustainer, redeemer, for instance. However well intended, they represent God as an object. A far different sort of object from all others, but an object nonetheless. Even my use of the masculine pronoun for God is misleading: it’s a weakness in the English language. As theologian Rowan Williams has observed, God is not an object among other objects. God is being itself. It is not the same thing as a higher power. A higher power is still an object and God is not an object. God is also not an amorphous eternal oneness of the universe.
God is self revealed to humanity as engaged with, concerned for, and intentional about the destiny of creation God has brought into being the spiritual and material existing in symbiotic relationship. It is most clearly revealed in God’s “word” made flesh for a time in Jesus. God as being but not an object leaves humans too much adrift. We can’t seem to help objectifying everything. I guess it proves the saying that “seeing is believing,” and explains the popularity of idols like statues, crystals, money, careers, fame, and material belongings. The perfect and only objectification of God is Jesus Christ as born, lived, taught, crucified, buried and and ascended. He is the lens through which human eyes can behold the One who is being itself defined, if we must, as pure love.
If we clergy have not proclaimed that reality boldly enough, the rise of a new deism lies at our feet. I wonder if we have fed people too much with the empty calories of spiritual fast food rather than the solid food of the crucified and risen Christ. It could be one reason why several generations have looked at Christianity and said “Nothing of value here, let’s look somewhere else.” But God is the source of life and there is no other. God has chosen to be made known to us through self revelation, and we must be bold in proclaiming it. Platitudes offered as reasons to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than not enough, it is a big mistake. The source of all being, of love, and of what is good and right is in God. However else God might be made known, ‘he’ is made known most fully in Jesus Christ, who is neither prophet nor sage but God incarnate.