Locklin 1

The first thing that stuck me about Reid Locklin’s work was how down to Earth he was and how

contemporary and modern his writing style was- he is concise and provides some information

about his own spiritual background early on. Right in the introduction he differentiates spiritual

as referring to a broad category but generally individual and religious as a commitment to an

institution. He then bluntly introduces his rejection of the idea that one can be spiritual but not

religious, saying, “…but indeed it should be unthinkable to claim one without also claiming the

other (4).” The themes of the next two chapters are introduced- seekers and teachers. One event

that Locklin mentions early on is the encounter with the priest that prompted his conversion into

a devout Christian. One reason some may call themselves spiritual but not religious is because

they have qualms with the institution that constitutes the object of commitment in the religious.

Locklin brings up one topic, corruption, to the priest, asking, “What about corruption? (14)” The

priest responds that, “Whenever people get together to organize much of anything they screw it

up. You inevitably find domination, manipulation, and vindictive assaults. (15)” The priest also

asks what Locklin will do about it- seemingly a call to action or an indication of people’s general

inaction. Another interesting idea that Locklin expresses is his paralleling Hindu texts to modern

music, bringing up the album beautifulgarbage. He suggests that we, “…reconsider the

profound `sense of disgust` that motivates spiritual pursuit. (23)” As the reading goes on Locklin

asserts his own role as a teacher and then initiates a discussion on the community between those

seeking out truth- between the seekers and the teachers who all work towards that common goal.

I think this is what he is implying religion is all about. The community and the teachers might be

giving the seeker the base from which to seek out his or her own truth.
Locklin 2

Locklin’s last two chapters, “On a Shared Communion” and “On the Mystery of Others,” seem

to be focusing on supporting his thesis that one cannot separate being spiritual and being

religious if they wish to have a fulfilling spiritual life. He continues to use both Christian and

Hindu logic to support his point. For example, in regards to the Eucharist, he provides a

quotation: “The fundamental meaning of koinonia at the level of these invisible elements of

communion is participation in the life of God in grace…It fundamentally means ‘sharing in one

reality held in common’ (89).” It’s held in common and therefore this spiritual engagement is by

its very nature communal. One factor I especially liked about his work was his openness to

inter-religious dialogue. Many consider religions to be mutually exclusive and incompatible, but

Locklin builds his spiritual self from both Christian and Hindu teachings. He leaves a much

greater opportunity for spiritual growth by not flat out abandoning all other thought processes

when he adopts Catholicism.

Locklin also brings up the Professor, the Priest, the Guru, and the Guide. The Professor conveys

to Locklin the uniqueness of Christianity, as oppose to other religions, in light of Christ. The

Priest lead to Locklin’s move towards the Roman Catholic Church as his choice of Christianity

and the Guru prompted the need for community and union as promoted by the shared

communion. The Guide was my favorite character. She was able to ask lots of questions without

having Locklin feel “the least bit threatened or attacked (95)” thereby allowing him to reflect on

religious commitment and reaffirm to himself that he really did want to become a baptized

member of the church.

Locklin, Reid B. Spiritual But Not Religious? An Oar Stroke Closer to the Farther Shore.

Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minnesota, 2005.