BASR: Discourse Journal

Teaching and Learning > DISCOURSE

Spirituality in Healthcare, Social Work and Education

Author: Paul Dearey

Journal Title: Discourse

ISSN: 1741-4164

ISSN-L: 1741-4164

Volume: 9

Number: 2

Start page: 81

End page: 98

Return to vol. 9 no. 2 index page

My recent experience in teaching about spirituality comes from directing an MA programme delivered at the University of Hull. The MA arose after a number of years of activity among academics drawn from different faculties and departments in the University, specifically nursing, education, social work and the humanities. Members of the interdisciplinary group worked on a range of projects before eventually forming the Centre for Spirituality Studies.¹ The Centre engages in research independently and with other similar research centres throughout the UK. One of the Centre's aims from its inception has been to provide postgraduate teaching about spirituality. The task of designing and delivering the MA in Spirituality Studies fell to me.

This paper is the outcome of my reflections upon the strengths and weaknesses of the MA. I will try to remark upon both evaluations, but the emphasis of the paper is upon points of dissatisfaction. The MA was worked out collectively, with the intention of reflecting what academic practitioners have to say about spirituality and conveying this to learners so that they might benefit from this knowledge in their professional practice. I myself am not a practitioner, and so when I come to reflect upon the content of the MA in private, as it were, the interests and concerns of professional service providers are not at the forefront of my thoughts. Theoretical considerations gain in importance, and it may be that these are too remote from matters to do with meeting the spiritual needs of service users to be of any practical worth. Nonetheless, the study of spirituality cannot be confined to the legitimate interests of public service professionals, nor the research methodologies of academic practitioners. As long as it is a valid aim of higher education to develop critical self-awareness concerning one's own practice, criticisms of a more theoretical sort are due consideration.

The Masters programme has three core modules. Theorising Spirituality examines different conceptualisations of spirituality. It does not attempt to reconcile different approaches, but rather to represent spirituality as it appears in the helping professions. It therefore identifies spirituality in the context of secular welfare services. A second core module, Researching Spirituality, introduces students to the distinctive methodologies that are involved in the study of spirituality, ranging from hermeneutics and phenomenological analysis to the use of specialist research databases. The final core module is a Research Seminar series in spirituality: students attend seminars delivered by academics and also make presentations themselves on their work in progress. In addition to these core elements there are optional modules. Three specialise in spirituality in social work, education, and nursing. They examine the specialist literature on spirituality in the separate disciplines, relating it to professional practice and policies. The MA also has besides these a range of optional modules available as part of the University's postgraduate training scheme. Finally, a further core element is the MA Dissertation, in which students reflect upon aspects of their professional practice.

On the whole, the MA contextualises spirituality, which is to say that it represents spirituality as this is known relative to the policies and operations of public services in health, social welfare and education. The sociological and historical structures of these services are undoubtedly important to the way in which spirituality is represented. Such an approach, which one might say is common in social scientific researches, is not entirely unproblematic; at least not when one considers that the reality of spirituality is also known in other ways. Of particular importance for the purposes of this paper is the point that spirituality is understood both philosophically and theologically in the Christian tradition. From this perspective, spirituality informs epistemology, in the sense that the spirit presents itself in knowing and that knowing takes in the presence of spirit. The paper considers the implications that follow from this for the status of questioning concerning spirituality in research carried out by academic practitioners in the helping professions.

The declaration for spirituality that is found in Christian theological and philosophical reflection may be perceived as a source of difficulty for some social scientific researchers. It is, after all, three and a half centuries since spirituality has been a regulating idea in any science; three and a half centuries since Cartesianism split the mind from itself, and the mind ceased to elevate nature to the spiritual plane. Contemporary research methods—the ethnographies, the discourse analyses, the sociological researches—tell us that spirituality is so diverse, so plural and so fragmented that, in fact, it cannot refer to anything that displays unity. And these researches are not wrong, inasmuch as they are scientific, i.e., inasmuch as they seek evidence, formulate inductive conclusions about the state of spirituality, and faithfully pursue an epistemology that is sundered from ontological principles.² Indeed, under these conditions, they are right to conclude that spirituality exists in a veritable marketplace of ideas.³

At the same time, there is much to consider in the complaint that may be made against these researches, namely that despite taking spirituality as their theme, they do not say how the objective reality of spirituality is known. It is by no means certain that the methods of social and cultural analysis which are typical of the researches of academic practitioners do actually have either the spiritual or its concept in view. If there is in fact some confusion of the objects of the historical and social sciences, on the one hand, with the spiritual objects of philosophical comprehension on the other—such as truth, goodness, beauty, purity, holiness, simplicity, intellect, immensity, power, spirit, being, etc.—then this is due, at least in part, to the centuries of philosophical neglect of spiritual matters. Nonetheless, within the Christian tradition, the spirit is known to be the formal object of philosophy, which is to say that reason grasps spirit as an unlimited concept. It should be added immediately that spirit is at the same time a formal object of theology, and therefore something also known by the act of faith.

Indeed, it is as an object of theology that spirit appears at the heart of philosophical reflection. Were this not so, then reason alone would grasp spirit as concept, à la Hegel, and the self-revelation of the sovereign and free God would be excluded from the topic of spirituality. In its concept, spirit transcends the distinction between finite and infinite being. But in the Christian tradition, it is not the metaphysical universality of spirit that is taught, but rather the self-revelation of spirit as the mystery of being itself. Such a revelation cannot be reduced to the concept, but can be grasped only with the help of the divine illumination by grace. The act of faith guides philosophical reflection to its knowledge of the spirit.

It is also relevant to point out that in the Christian tradition the spirit is not understood to be the material object of the social and historical sciences. This is a recent psychological innovation. There is, however, no social scientific research that can determine the answer to the question of spirituality, for unlike the many other questions from which it has unburdened philosophy and theology, this question, concerning the reality and the essential nature of the spirit, is definitively philosophical and theological.

This is not to suggest that spirituality is an improper subject for social scientific research. Difficulties arise only when methodologies are applied with apparent insouciance regarding spiritual traditions.⁴ For instance, when one speaks of spirituality within religious traditions, one is referring to spiritual practices that belong to a way of life. A person's spiritual practice draws upon the example of how other people have lived, learning of this from certain traditions that have grown up and been remembered through the generations. There emerge not only recognisable spiritual practices but also a body of literature reflecting upon these. With this comes the possibility of critical reflection upon the study of spirituality within particular traditions; for example, on the different spiritual schools, movements and personalities that have been recorded in history. Difficulties in comprehension are caused when spirituality is represented without reference to such sources. Generally, one does not find a great deal of such information in the research literature of academic practitioners. There is reason, then, to suspect that research methods are intended not to lead to objective knowledge about spirituality—i.e., not to guide the mind to attain the philosophical and theological objects to which the concept of spirituality refers—but rather to record data about social behaviours.

This is all the more puzzling when one considers that the common element of contemporary studies in spirituality is the ubiquitous theme of transcendence. The claim (which is virtually unanimously accepted among researchers) that spirituality is directed toward a transcendent object, towards a reality which is in itself transcending, ought to lead to considerations of what is encountered in some religious practices as a real and infinite object. But research does not go this way. There is, quite simply, no active engagement with religious knowledge. This may be observed especially in the research of social work and healthcare academics, which is sometimes resistant to the authenticity of religious experiences.

In these circumstances, perhaps, engagement with philosophy might be expected instead. Philosophical thinking is itself an inherently spiritual activity; at least as it is understood within the Christian tradition. Philosophy has its recorded history and its critical literature, of course, but apart from this it is essentially the quest for truth, for the knowledge of that which is real and of the being of all things. In this sense, philosophy is fundamental to each person's spiritual nature. I admit that this does not describe what goes on in philosophy departments in our universities. But this is hardly pertinent, since they have abandoned the topic of spirituality and, besides, say nothing either of spirituality in professional practice. Since our concern is with spirituality, the character of philosophical knowledge as it is understood within religious traditions has special relevance, and here philosophical reflection is thought of as possessing knowledge of spiritual realities.5 The chief quality of thought in view is that it is sapiential. That is to say, philosophical reflection is thought that concerns the wisdom which inheres in each person and which is encountered inwardly as a way of knowing.

Truth as it is known by reason and as it is given in faith are two forms of reflection proper to spiritual life. Yet what is encountered in the research of academic practitioners from the helping professionals is, in most cases, a view of spirituality that recognises neither wisdom nor faith as forms of knowledge. This, in my experience, is the fundamental difficulty in teaching about spirituality. The MA in Spirituality Studies programme is designed, as has been mentioned, for professionals in the healthcare, social care/social work, and educational sectors. Workers in these areas have it as part of their roles to indentify and provide for what are termed the 'spiritual needs' of clients. The research carried out by academic practitioners offers constructions of 'spirituality'. They represent spirituality as 'known' on the basis of empirical evidence, but without dwelling upon the reality of that which is known; and also without reflecting upon the status of knowing as a spiritual act. Spirituality, it is suggested, is simply 'known' according to empirical research methods.

This is perhaps the single most decisive characteristic of studies of what is sometimes called 'secular spirituality'. Spirituality is conceived as lacking any apologetic intent of any sort: there is no truth about spiritual possession to be defended. Spirituality attests to nothing other than itself, neither to being nor to God; it affirms nothing that goes forth as a revelation, nor that is salvifically willed by God; it does not know the unity, the truth, or the simplicity of being, nor the image of the God who is; nor yet does it know the effective symbols of this image, nor that this image dwells within us. Furthermore, in strictly philosophical terms, it does not attest to the act of being, nor to the intentionality of spiritual objects, nor their reality, whether potential or actual, nor either to their causes.

Since such knowledge is not pragmatic, it is easily disregarded; and, it should be added immediately in mitigation, it is expedient to disregard this, since the reserach funding bodies for the professional disciplines support research concerning evidence based practice. This, in any case, is the overriding impression given by the majority of the approximately five hundred bibliographical items that I read when researching what academic practitioners say concerning spirituality in the professional disciplines. The great majority of these items are articles published in professional journals. There are also several dozen books, mostly in education and nursing. None of them are of the sort that is produced as 'lifestyle' or 'body-mind-spirit' literature for popular markets. All are academic publications, with a few official publications included.

The questions that arise for me out of this reading are these. How is spirituality reduced to the level of mundane phenomena in education, social work, and health care research literature? How does it become a collection of truths that serves us, or more exactly that serves the secular mandate of professional service systems? Why does the concept of 'spirituality' no longer evoke a truth that we may serve? Why should we be convinced that the spiritual possession which a person may desire is achieved in idea only and not in reality?

On the whole, the research literature tries to represent spirituality as purely mundane and categorical, as a chosen object upon which a person may decide, and which he or she may at a later time deem to be inadequate and replaceable. To get a precise view of the matter I will explore three reductions of spirituality which are typical of current research. Collectively these observations comprise an argument that the application of empirical research methods to spirituality achieves a rigorous reduction of the subjective conditions of spirituality; with the unfortunate outcome—and this is the chief critical point that I would emphasise—that the field of unconditional givenness which opens up in spiritual experience is unacknowledged. 'Spirituality' emerges as consciously affected by the concrete questions of the present-day individual. It is represented as being about the individuality of each person, defined as it were by their life-history, and understood as a narrative or text. In general, spirituality is understood with reference to culture and social context, but without judgement concerning true being.

Self-identities

On the whole, the professions of health, social work, and education treat spirituality as a complex, contemporary cultural phenomenon that in some way obliges professional praxis to submit to the experience of service users. Definitions and explanations of spirituality in health care, social work, and educational research literature reflect the service roles of professionals in the major institutions of the secular state. The advantage of studying spirituality in this way is that it enables us to reckon with the secular as a dimension of spirit.

More exactly, it enables consideration of one of the most basic meanings of secularity, namely that the subjectivity of human freedom is factual and historical, rather than transcendental. This is effectively to withdraw from spirituality any regulative function in relation to the epistemological principles of educational, nursing and social work practice. Or, to put this another way, it is to question the conformity of spiritual truths to the state of professional knowledge. Such conformity is typically secured on an intersubjective model of truth, for instance through the use of research methods such as discourse or narrative analysis.

This is a major contribution to our understanding of spirituality; one that, perhaps, is likely only when the approach taken arises from practical experience of service provision. Academic practitioners tend to view spirituality as an expression of the secular consciousness of subjectivity, as a narration or recitation of the secular conditions of subjective identity, which leave the content of philosophical and religious doctrines alone.⁶ The emphasis falls upon subjective experience and subjective self-consciousness, with particular attention to spiritual accounts of self-identity. Such an approach is valuable not only for its objective content, but also in causing renewed consideration of the relationship between the materiality of the individual and the spirituality of the transcendental subject. The validity of this contribution to knowledge about spirituality cannot be doubted.

At the same time it should be borne in mind that what are recounted as experiences of spirituality may, or may not, correspond with objective knowledge of spiritual realities; research findings have to be tested further, beyond the warrant that is provided by the application of social scientific research methodologies. A great obstacle is erected to viewing spirituality objectively when it is presupposed that the processes of cognition are wholly mediated by cultural conditions such as language, existing beliefs, etc. This has the consequence that the mind cannot apprehend spiritual objects, since spiritual discourses are supposed only to have figurative meaning. Indeed, such factors justify the application of qualitative methodologies in the effort to accurately describe the appropriation of the spiritual things in any given area of life. But such an approach fails to consider that spirituality may entail an understanding of cognition in its own terms. The faculty of thought, in some philosophical traditions, signifies the spiritual and cognitive power of the soul.⁷ The spiritual faculty has functions other than those of reciting subjective identity or religious/spiritual beliefs; it exercises judgement, reason, reflection, self-consciousness, attention, and in general those modes of personal activity that exhibit a cognitive power of a higher order. From this perspective, the study of spirituality involves a second-order reflection upon epistemological principles.

Academic researchers in spirituality are keen to point out a contrary view (one supported by contemporary psychology), when they apply notions of intelligence to the emotional and even the sensuous modes of cognition. It is typical for researchers to laud this tendency under the sobriquet 'holism'.⁸ Whether this is anything more than a device to rule out the possibility that spirituality may involve its own positive doctrine concerning cognition is as yet an unexamined question.

The concept of 'holism' is thought to indicate that the person is to be looked at in a holistic way, with a greater awareness of the capacity for imagination and creativity, for emotion and feeling, and not just as a calculating and instrumental being. However, if we consider not only the inclusive terms that are associated with holism, but also what the concept signifies, namely a certain exercise of judgement that is critical of rationalist and idealist epistemologies, then we may appreciate that judgement of a higher order of reflection concerning spirituality is implied, one which understands that spirit exists in relation to the Absolute. Indeed, nothing could be more 'holistic' than the identity of knowing and being that is caused in the act of encountering the absolute Other; which is to say, nothing is more 'holistic' than the ability to declare 'You are'.

What I wish to suggest is that any definition of 'spirituality' should include not only the terms in which it is represented, but also the spiritual meaning of knowledge of the Other, or one might say of the being of spirituality in the act of discerning spiritual realities. The discernment of spiritual realities is the gift of those who exercise judgement, and not only of those who apply research methods. It is the intellect that gives a thing its spiritual meaning. The question of the 'whole person', i.e., of the human subject and its freedom, cannot come more clearly into focus when discussing spirituality than in this way.

If this is correct, and the intellect does indeed have a constructive role, rather than simply a declarative role, in what is meant by spirituality— and further this role is beyond that of society but is rather of an essentially personal nature—then the direction provided by both philosophy and theology needs to be followed. What the histories of these disciplines show is that spirituality is conceptualised with reference to the Absolute.

Historically, the great point of dispute is whether the human subject is understood as having the same substance as, or as being an emanation from, the Absolute; or, on the contrary, whether human subjects can have relations with the Absolute as one person with another. It can be seen that the great creation myths as well as some rationalist and idealist modern philosophies are variations on the first option; while the Jewish, Christian and Islamic religions teach the second. But in all cases, fundamental anthropological questions of philosophical and theological significance are asked. The relation that in some way distinguishes the self from the Absolute ensures that the concept of the 'whole person' is more than an empty abstraction, and that it can be defended as the transcendental condition of spirituality.

By contrast (and despite its explicit interest in 'holism'), what is found in the research literature of education, social work, and health care academics is, generally speaking, a predominant emphasis upon humanist interpretations of subjectivity. There is on the whole a fundamental lack of confidence in, indeed a positive suspicion of, anything that is not grounded in us. The modernist assumption that all things are realised insofar as they are ascertained by us—that this separatist epistemology, rather than the active judgement, constitutes spirituality as something distinct in quality—is decisive in the methods and contents of education, health and social care researches. The suggestion of a foundation of spirituality in anything other than ourselves is often dismissed as biased opinion.

Yet to think realistically about spirituality clearly involves more than the application of empirical research methodologies. It involves intellectual activity, especially judgement. At the very least one may hope for a retrieval of philosophical conversation concerning human understanding.⁹ For even without an appeal to religion, the understanding tells us that knowledge involves an actual relationship to spiritual realities. It tells of relations that precede the epistemological and psychological category of the subject that posits itself. Each individual subject understands its being self-aware, which is the great sign that the human subject contains within itself of a capacity for the Absolute.

Empiricist epistemology

The insight mentioned above in passing, that the human subject may relate to the Absolute as one person to another, is a spiritual and a religious one. It is also a difficult one for practitioners to deal with in their research; perhaps even the most difficult. The requirement that research funding bodies support evidence based research promotes the obverse idea, namely that empirical science alone can reach objective knowledge and that, consequently, knowledge of an essentially personal nature has at best the function of support for the sciences;¹⁰ and this leaves metaphysical judgements with possibly no discernible role whatsoever.¹¹

However, philosophical inquiry is not merely a matter of confirming the epistemological criteria of the sciences. Philosophy possesses an idea of real and objective knowledge according to which philosophy itself—and let it be said theology also—is capable of knowledge. Asearch for truth is intrinsic to philosophy, just as a claim to truth is intrinsic to every act of faith. To distance assertions about spirituality from claims about truth is to mistrust reasoning itself. In general, however, it can come as no surprise that judgement about spirituality is scarcely practiced in published research. This is a consequence of the rejection of the philosophy of being in our culture (including our universities), and with this the rejection of the different orders of spiritual knowledge that have a supreme personal principle as their cause. A corollary to the oblivion of being is the widespread assumption of antirealism as well as constructivism in conceiving of any philosophical or theological objects, such as being, truth, or spirit. This is a working assumption in empirical researches concerning spirituality.

The consequent proliferation of specialised knowledge about spirituality in educational, health and social work research proceeds under the guidance of diverse epistemological principles, which is to say of methods. All this effort revolves around the conviction that there is no declarative truth corresponding to spiritual realities (especially the existence of God and the creation). For all its objective content, empiricism about spirituality weakens any connection between ontological causes and epistemological principles. It systematically reduces any knowledge of spiritual realities to opinion. What is sought after by researchers are data, the material from which may be fabricated an intersubjective—or even an interprofessional—consensus about spirituality. The 'truth' about spirituality thus consists in its efficient and utilitarian aspects.

This is symptomatic of a difficult problem for contemporary intellectual culture and its standing towards both philosophy and theology: how does one reconcile knowledge in the human sciences with religious conscience (both natural and theological)? It is one of the most important (yet still outstanding) tasks of research in spirituality to delineate a resolution which accommodates religious knowledge. Yet this should be an urgent task since there is religious knowledge, just as there is spiritual discernment. Because these are more abstract realities than the inductive methods of the social sciences can represent, the only possibility of a settlement concerning the question of spirituality would appear to come from the religious traditions.

Take, for instance, the religious sensibility of dependency, which accompanies the spiritual awareness of the Absolute as different in nature from the world yet knowable as in a personal relationship. This sensibility is in itself of vanishing significance in epistemology. But it is a curious situation that researchers in education, health and social care are aware of it as an important aspect of their practice, which involves daily experiences of profound dependency. The unfortunate thing is that while this knowledge precedes reflection upon spiritual matters, the adopted epistemic standards for research in spirituality point in other directions. More exactly, the awareness of absolute dependency precedes reflection upon the unveiling of being (aletheia); that is, upon the truth as something that is allowed to appear, rather than as something decided upon. At variance with this is the cultural presupposition that being is not revelatory; that, in the present technological age, being reveals nothing. This cultural and existential condition makes even the possibility of spiritual knowledge appear intolerable, with its suggestion of the nearness of mystery, not to say of religion.

If we wish to gain an appreciation of what this means for the state of questioning concerning spirituality, we need only notice that the research literature says little about those dimensions of life which are tied to the supernatural unveiling of being. Take, for instance, the case of prayer to God the Father. The research literature in the professional disciplines provides no description of prayer whatsoever, even though Christian liturgical worship is arguably an instance of special importance when examining spirituality. For the Christian liturgy can be seen as the negation of secular humanist spirituality (which is, as has been mentioned, an underlying assumption of much research activity). Liturgical worship implies a critique not only of 'religious experience'— so often the point of reference for empirical researches in spirituality— but also of categorical knowledge concerning subjectivity generally. Because Christian liturgical worship represents in practice the historical conditions for the transcendence of human nature (which is to say the means of supernatural grace apart from any claim to earthly existence), it raises the question of spirituality as transcendence towards God and of humanity being rendered entirely spirit. Liturgical practice gets before the phenomenon of 'mineness' or 'selfhood', since in worship God enacts a relationship that is prior to each person's historical destiny.

Nothing of this, however, is acknowledged or even considered in published research, despite the fact that the means of grace, which is to say the Church, and the practice of Christian liturgy (especially in the form of sacramental rites), are present in schools, hospitals, and charities. A reasonable conclusion to draw about the state of questioning— reasonable at least if one assumes a realistic attitude towards liturgy— is that research in spirituality needs in some degree to displace current epistemological priorities; it needs to introduce inflections of absence, otherness, difference and unknowing. If this is correct, then what should be encouraged is a kind of knowledge of subjectivity that emerges and is experienced only inasmuch as it is from another; a knowledge of subjectivity as stretched between two poles of freedom, the divine and the human. Naturally, such an epistemic posture would draw research closer to theology than is presently the case, or at least to theology that aspires to express the mystical knowledge and experience whose cause is the personal God.

This kind of knowledge—should it be admitted as such—meets the requirements of worldly concerns for service provision when the profound desire of oneself is satisfied only through the authentic recognition of others. In this kind of logic, knowledge of existence and of freedom becomes dialogic. Caution is required, as E. Levinas has shown, lest knowledge of the good shining in the face of the other simply masks an orientation to self-interest and autonomy.¹² In Christian liturgy, however, intentionality is sustained by unconditional openness towards the Holy Spirit, and the other is not merely regarded by us, but is spoken to us by God along with the fundamental address of Himself which is accepted in prayer. Love of God and neighbour is the principle which informs prayer.

Historicism

The references that have been made to the Christian liturgy—which is to say, to God's self-disclosing action and to the free human response made in the name of Christ—will hardly impress the majority of academic practitioners who carry out research on spirituality, and who are, after all, directly concerned with what goes on in the workplace and not in the Church. But such theological considerations are not so easily put aside, since the signs of spiritual truth, once recognised, call for acknowledgement in a particular form, namely that of proclamation. This form of knowledge, with its particular consequences for epistemology, is not recognised in the research literature.

The proclamation of the spiritual truth of the Gospel means that a sacrifice is offered to God in every place, including every workplace. Individual researchers may resist the logic of this conclusion, arguing for example that the study of spirituality is a post-Christian phenomenon; 13 in effect, that Christian proclamation is not a form of knowledge at all. But whether the proclamation of the Christian Gospel has any meaning for research in spirituality depends on one fact; and that fact is not the consent of researchers, nor the application of their research methods. It is, rather, the fact—if it is a fact—of there having been an event of universal reconciliation that includes all historical being. For the Christian faith proclaims that God has bestowed Himself as salvation, and that He has filled the world with His glory by the Incarnation of His Logos.

When viewed in relation to the Christian proclamation the published research on spirituality by health, education, and social work academics may be said to be in a sense historicist. It is not historicist in the metaphysical sense of denying the reality of all things in being; research does not imply, for instance, that historical change is universal, eternal, and absolute. Nor is it historicist in the theological sense; it does not appeal to the history of spirit in order to dispute the identity of the Christian proclamation throughout the ages. Rather, research displays historicist approaches to spirituality when it defines its subject within the limits of professional praxis alone. Indeed, the research literature is quite anxious to make a virtue of this, since the disciplines, especially in the cases of social work and nursing, are enthusiastic about promoting their professionalism, and often do so on the foundation of applying scientific methods in their researches. In these circumstances, each discipline promotes its own knowledge system and entangles its professional identity with this. It is, then, no surprise that many of the research methods applied in the examination of spirituality reflect such an orientation, with the consequence that spirituality is represented as really being a matter of narratives, discourses, texts, and symbols; and the study of spirituality as really being a matter of the analytic techniques applied to decode these.

The truth of such historicist tendencies, a truth which research on spirituality reflects, is that the facts about spirituality are shown to conform to norms and concepts grasped by practitioners as true. But truth in the form of the event of salvation by grace does not signify some kind of factual truth, but rather the acceptance of the Incarnation in relation to oneself and the whole of creation. When the notion of spirit is examined by the application of research methods, a remarkable difficulty is encountered, namely that the reality of the Incarnation is inconceivable. For empirical researchers, Christ, who is the end and the fullness of all life, has no measurable historical reality. Contrary to empiricism, the history of Christ is related to the teaching of Christianity in Scripture and tradition.

Meeting the challenge of the historicist trend in spirituality research means questioning the exceedingly loose philosophical identification of God that very many researchers suppose contributes to the meaning of spirituality. There are numerous research papers which proceed on this basis. It is not inaccurate to say that this indulgence is due to the confusion of knowledge that consists in spiritual discernment with inferences about spirituality whose truth depends on the substantive terms within them. Are we to submit to this confusion, and to agree that method intentionally articulates suspicions of truth and values? Are we to agree that method undermines every assumption of supernatural realities which express the relationship between God and His creatures (i.e., the hypostatic union, the beatific vision, the bestowal of supernatural grace)? There are many researchers who affirm such a point of view, declaring method alone to be objective and unbiased. What is to be said about such opinions? That they promote a god-less thinking about spirituality? That they approach the topic of spirituality without desire for or intelligence concerning God?

The point I would make is that the state of questioning concerning spirituality could be greatly improved by undertaking critical conversations with philosophers who are knowledgeable about religious traditions and with theologians. The evaluation of empirical findings on spirituality begins only when these findings, already assured of their scientific status by virtue of the rigorous application of methods, are further tested in such conversations.

Endnotes

See the Centre for Spirituality Studies website at: http://www2.hull.ac.uk/fass/css.aspx.
The observations made in this paper are the outcome of reflections on a large number of publications from academic practitioners in education, social work, and health care. References will be made to illustrative publications. No attempt is made to give a comprehensive bibliography. On epistemology and spirituality see Betts, C. E., 'Progress, Epistemology and Human Health and Welfare: What Nurses Need to Know and Why,' Nursing Philosophy, 2005, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 174-188; Gillen, M. A., English, L. M., 'Controversy, Questions, and Suggestions for Further Reading,' New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (2000) no. 85, pp. 85-92; Estanek, S.M., 'Redefining Spirituality: a New Discourse', College Student Journal, (2006) vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 270-281; Hurtado, A., 'Theory in the Flesh: Toward an Endarkened Epistemology,' Qualitative Studies in Education, (2003) vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 215-226.
Heelas, P.; Woodhead, L.; Seel, B.; Szerszynski, B. and Tusting, K., The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality, (London: Blackwell, 2004).
An important exception is Swinton, John and Mowat, Harriet, Practical Theology and Qualitative Research, (London: SCM, 2006). Some others that take notice of traditions are Weld, C., and Eriksen, E., 'Christian Clients' Preferences Regarding Prayer as a Counseling Intervention,' Journal of Psychology and Theology, (2007), vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 328-341; Mountain, V., 'Prayer is a Positive Activity for Children—a Report on Recent Research', International Journal of Children's Spirituality, (2005), vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 291-305; Ortega Ruiz, P., 'Moral Education as Pedagogy of Alterity,' Journal of Moral Education, (2004), vol. 33, no. 3, p. 271- 289.
See Pope John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, Encyclical Letter, September 15, 1998.
Kofer, B. K., 'Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing: Integrating Domain Specificity and Domain Generality: A Response to Muis, Bendixen, and Haerle', Educational Psychology Review, (2006) vol. 18, no. 1; J. Campbell, Arnold, S., 'Application of Discourse Analysis to Nursing Inquiry', Nurse Researcher, (2004) vol. 12, no. 2., pp. 30-41; Sanga, D. and Sahoo, A. K., 'Social Work, Spirituality, and Diasporic Communities: the case of the Sathya Sai Baba Movement,' Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work, (2005) vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 75-88; Park, Yoosun, 'Culture as Deficit: a Critical Discourse Analysis of the Concept of Culture in Contemporary Social Work Discourse', Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, (2005) vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 11-33; Björnsdottir, K. 'Language, Research and Nursing Practice', Journal of Advanced Nursing, (2001) vol. 33, no. 2., p. 159-60.
Aristotle, De Anima, ii, 3.; Albert the Great, De Intellectu et Intelligibili and De Unitate Intellectus Contra Averroem; St. Thomas Aquinas, De Unitate Intellectus Contra Averroistas; idem. Summa Theologica, 1a, 79.
For example, Taggart, G., 'Nurturing Spirtuality: a Rationale for Holistic Education,' International Journal of Children's Spirituality, (2001) vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 325-339; Vogel, L. J., 'Reckoning with the Spiritual Lives of Adult Educators,' New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, (2000) no. 85, pp. 17-27; O'Brien, M. E., Spirituality in Nursing: Standing on Holy Ground, (Sudbury, Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 1999); Miles, Andrew, 'On the interface between science, medicine, faith and values in the individualisation of clinical practice: a review and analysis of 'Medicine of the Person' Cox, J., Campbell, A. V. & Fulford, K. W. M, ed. (2007)', Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, (2009) vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1000-1024; Bush, Tony; Bruni, Nina, 'Spiritual Care as a Dimension of Holistic Care: a Relational Interpretation', International Journal of Palliative Nursing, (2008) vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 539-545; Watts, Jacqueline H., 'Journeying with Morrie: Challenging Notions of Professional Delivery of Spiritual Care at the End of Life', Illness, Crisis & Loss, (2008) vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 305-319.
It would be wrong to give the impression that none is taking place. Take a couple of examples from education theory: Verhesschen, P., 'The Poem's Invitation': Ricoeur's Concept of Mimesis and its Consequences for Narrative Educational Research', Journal of Philosophy of Education, (2003) vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 449-465; Simon, R. I., 'Innocence Without Naivete, Uprightness Without Stupidity: the Pedagogical Kavannah of Emmanuel Levinas', Studies in Philosophy & Education, (2003) vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 45-59.
Shahjahan, R. A., 'Spirituality in the Academy: Reclaiming from the Margins and Evoking a Transformative Way of Knowing the World', International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, (2005) vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 685-711. Idem, 'Reclaiming and Reconnecting to our Spirituality in the Academy', International Journal of Children's Spirituality, (2004) vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 81-95.
From the perspective of metaphysics, the role of reflection upon judgement is to understand knowledge according to the order of being.
Levinas, E., Totality and Infinity: an Essay on Exteriority, trans. A. Lingis, (Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press, 1969), pp. 72-3.
Meehan, Christopher, 'Resolving the Confusion in the Spiritual Development Debate', International Journal of Children's Spirituality, (2002) vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 291-308.

Return to vol. 9 no. 2 index page

This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.