When One Religion Isn’t Enough: The Lives of Spiritually Fluid People by Duane R. Bidwell

When One Religion Isn't Enough: The Lives of Spiritually Fluid PeopleWhen One Religion Isn’t Enough: The Lives of Spiritually Fluid People by Duane R. Bidwell

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

I requested a pre-publication review copy of this book some time ago but was denied, and as I had some time available while recuperating from surgery, read it now. As I am still trying to understand why people have one religion, I thought perhaps Mr. Bidwell might have some insight on that line as he explains why people have more than one religion.

Well…he seemed to explain the “how”, but I didn’t find out anything new as to the “why”. I think that’s because despite being “spiritually fluid”, possessing “religious multiplicity”, having “multiple or complex religious bonds”, Bidwell is still trapped by perspective. Oh, he does think outside the box, obviously, given his unconventional subject, but … there is always a box. The edges of his (admittedly large) box are religion and he does not address what is outside it.

Bidwell, in addition to being a Buddhist, is “a minister of the Presbyterian Church (USA), part of the Reformed tradition of Christianity. [he is] authorized to represent that tradition, and [he is] accountable to it.” I rather liked that he called it a tradition, as it tacitly acknowledges that other interpretations of his Christianity hold different views than his chosen one. This is further cemented when he says “I do not believe that God is one or that all paths reach the same mountain. Religions are not different descriptions of a single reality; they describe different (and sometimes related) realities.” He earns points with this astute observation:

It’s dangerous to reduce everything to a “logic of the One,” because the qualities of the ultimate “one” usually look suspiciously like the ultimate reality proposed by the tradition of the person making the claim to unity.

Really good observation; gods are formed in our image. He also leveled up when he recounted during his Presbyterian discernment, answering the question, “Mr. Bidwell, do you believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to achieve salvation and spend eternity in heaven with God?” with “No,” I said. “I don’t believe that.”, and then the next question, “Mr. Bidwell. Have you heard the phrase ‘I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through me’?” with

I nodded. “Of course,” I said. “But remember that Jesus in the Gospel of John is speaking as the Logos, the ruling principle of the universe, a concept Christians adopted from Hellenistic philosophy. And we don’t know that Jesus ever said those words; the writers of John had their own purposes for including them. Those words have a context we have to consider.”
I should have stopped with “of course.”

How many people do you know whospeak with some authority on a religion who actually talk about context? That John paints a considerably different picture of Jesus than the synoptic gospels is often either not understood, or a distinction that is avoided.

More telltales of his box, he relates a story of “Marie Romo” (he changes names and details to protect the identities of his examples) who suffered abuses and was able to divorce, becoming “a single mom with three children and no driver’s license, no diploma, no job, no work history, and no prospects” who “out of instinct, […] turned to God” (italics mine). No. Out of culture. Marie also practices Hinduism in her particular duality. Instinct may or may not have anything to do with it – I’m still processing Pascal Boyer on that account – but clearly, Marie’s Mexican culture was her “instinct”.

Still another revelation of the box in which he operates here, when discussing the problems spiritually fluid people suffer, whether to hide of disclose, he says

Disclosing multiplicity carries enormous risk. Spiritually fluid people often feel anxious when deciding whether to hide or disclose their religious multiplicity. Hiding it can protect them from judgment, conflict with others, and the need to justify themselves. But concealing multiplicity also compromises their honesty and authenticity; they’re unable to be vulnerable with people they care about, especially family and religious leaders.

Imagine a world where declaring no religion places someone in the ‘least liked” category. Multiple religions surely to be better than, … shudder…, none!

In wrapping up, Bidwell looks at W.E.B. Du Bois, who used “double consciousness” as a term to describe living between two social realities. Bidwell says

Yet double consciousness also empowers, bestowing what Du Bois called the “gift of second sight.” Because you live in two realities, you see things with more complexity. You are always aware of context and the ways that larger social systems shape how others perceive and receive you. You know the psyche of the dominant group as its members cannot. At the same time, you learn to decode and understand how others are seeing you. You anticipate their criticisms and micro-aggressions. You know how and when they consider you a problem. The gift of double consciousness allows you to trace the invisible commitments and values that collude to keep you in your place (as defined by more powerful people and communities). This knowledge makes it easier to resist and subvert attempts to devalue you, to keep you at the margin, and to convince you and others that you are illegitimate.

Bidwell’s thesis is spiritual fluidity, multiple religions, give someone this double consciousness. I offer something far less complex: Simple awareness of other cultures, traditions, belief systems… Humanism … is a greater “double”.

So, the most important lesson of this book is for fluids in hiding to know that they are not alone. One wishes this good on them. Meanwhile, I still search for “why”.

View all my reviews


Galactic Diplomat by Keith Laumer

Galactic Diplomat (Retief, #2)Galactic Diplomat by Keith Laumer

Making my way through the Retief series, and making up for lost time as it were, Retief’s style of, uh… physical … diplomacy brings chuckles. Still, I suspect Laumer matures his product over time. There are still raw points, but also gems. Snark:

“Hardly the diplomatic approach,” Magnan sniffed. “For centuries now it’s been understood that if enough diplomats go to enough parties, everything will come right in the end.”


“As Chargé d’affaires in the absence of the Minister, I forbid drinking on duty!” Magnan roared. [Retief]“Surely you jest, Mr. Magnan ; it would mean the end of diplomacy as we know it—”


Retief sighed. “The trouble with taking over your boss’s job is discovering its drawbacks. It’s disillusioning, I know, Sozier— but—”

More humor:

“Well, gents, I guess maybe I had you figured wrong,” he said. He looked at Retief. “Uh . . . got time for a drink?”
“I shouldn’t drink on duty,” Retief said. He rose. “So I’ll take the rest of the day off.”

And tucked away in this 1966 scienmce fiction short story collection is a keen observation future reflective of 21st century American right-wing adherents (and Twitter users as a rule):

“There’s always a certain percentage of any population with the conviction that society is a conspiracy to deny them their rights. The right to be totally ignorant of any useful knowledge seems to be the basic one.”

Spot on. Things don’t seem to change, eh?

View all my reviews

Foursome: Alfred Stieglitz, Georgia O’Keeffe, Paul Strand, Rebecca Salsbury by Carolyn Burke

Foursome: Alfred Stieglitz, Georgia O'Keeffe, Paul Strand, Rebecca SalsburyFoursome: Alfred Stieglitz, Georgia O’Keeffe, Paul Strand, Rebecca Salsbury by Carolyn Burke

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I was provided a review copy of this from the publisher through First to Read. I admit unfamiliarity with three of the foursome, though I recognize Strand and of course, O’Keeffe (I got to see an exhibition of some if her works in Oklahoma some 30 years ago, too young to truly appreciate them) and I didn’t make many notes in this reading… just absorbed. There are intimate stories here. I do not know how much is known already to students of these four, but I suspect – obviously, as the book had to be written – that having them all together is new, and perhaps unknown.

More than a telling of their stories, Ms. Burke also frames the times that shaped them, shaped their arts. New arts to the world, new visions, self discovery and explorations. One of the things I appreciate about Ms. Burke’s exposition and sometime dramatization is that she qualifies any speculation; if she found no evidence to support suspected relationships, interactions, she doesn’t embellish. Or at least those parts of her narrative where she caveats “tempting to think … but impossible to know” would indicate.

We tend to think in two dimensions, and might think of a “foursome” as a rectangle/quadrangle, but they were rather a tetrahedron, with Steiglitz at the apex for most of their relationships. O’Keeffe eclipsed him in fame and ascended to that apex, but his … seniority … tended to prevail. This is not to say that any of the other three were not their own people, individual and distinct. Clearly, they were, but he was the progenitor of that foursome. They fed off of each other. Built. And also held each other at bay. To preserve their individuality.

This is about the people, and much less their arts, which serve to support here but not stand center. So what do I take away? Well, I looked up Salsbury’s reverse oils on glass, and Stieglitz’s and Strand’s photographs. And I revisited O’Keeffe. And I have things to think about.

View all my reviews

Walk in Space: The Story of Project GeminiWalk in Space: The Story of Project Gemini by Gene Gurney

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I like to sift and wander through antiques shops and even above the gadgets, gears and brass that attract me are books. I look for treasures. Some vendors know the values, some inflate them, sometimes there are just delightful finds and cost may not matter. This was one from a couple of months ago that I carved out a couple of hours for. It’s not that long…I just savored it. The middle books of trilogies are more often than not fillers – not as good as the first, sometimes better than the last. I’d love to find his Mercury and Apollo books (okay…I just ordered them!) This is still epic stuff.

Detailed while eminently engaging, this is a story well told. Each flight; each crew; each success; each failure – yet the failures were successes on their own in solving the problems that need to be overcome to get to the moon. Gurney wrote well in this telling and I look forward to his other two about the space program.

View all my reviews