• DOI:10.1080/0458063X.2015.1019259
• Corpus ID: 143294453

What’s in a Name? A Brief Introduction to the “Spiritual But Not Religious”

@article{Kenneson2015WhatsIA,
  title={What’s in a Name? A Brief Introduction to the “Spiritual But Not Religious”},
  author={Philip D. Kenneson},
  journal={Liturgy},
  year={2015},
  volume={30},
  pages={13 - 3}
}

• Philip D. Kenneson
• Published 12 May 2015
• Political Science
• Liturgy

Anyone paying attention will be aware of recent media coverage of the phenomenon known as “the rise of the Nones.” The term “Nones” refers to those who in surveys and polling claim that their religious affiliation is precisely that: none. A widely reported 2012 Pew Research Center study found that up to one-fifth of the American public (and one-third of adults under age 30) report being unaffiliated with any religion, the highest percentages ever in Pew polling. But these Nones are not, as the report makes clear, uniformly secular with no interest in matters of religion or spirituality. Although only 5 percent of the unaffiliated attend worship services on a weekly basis, a full third of them say that religion is important in their lives, two-thirds say that they believe in God, and a majority regard themselves as either religious (18 percent) or as spiritual but not religious (37 percent). This subgroup of the Nones represent only about 7 percent of the American population, yet have garnered enough media attention to have earned their own initialism: SBNR. The purpose of this introductory essay is to offer a brief overview of this now-popular designation by exploring several fundamental questions: What is the genesis of this designation, who uses it, and for what purposes? What is purportedly being named and tracked within contemporary culture by the SBNR designation? What assumptions underwrite the designation in both popular usage and the social scientific literature? How might some of these assumptions be problematic? Do these problematic assumptions render the designation useless, or is there still something important that the designation is trying to name and, if so, what? And finally, how might all of this bear on those in leadership positions in congregations and parishes who wonder how, if at all, they should be responding to what are widely reported as significant societal shifts?