The case study I read was Passionate Journeys by Marion Goldman. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book and was moved by the stories of the women who decided to devote their lives to Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh. I had never heard of Rajneeshpuram or sanyassins before reading this book. Goldman tells the life stories of 3 women, although each composite is made up of multiple women. This was something that was difficult for me to wrap my head around, because Goldman was so descriptive of each of their lives.  After reading the book, I google searched to discover more about Bhagwan’s movement. Many of the articles had titles like “Crazy Stories from Inside Oregon’s Sex Cult”. After reading Goldman’s book and understanding the stories of some of the women who were a part of this movement, to see it reduced to a sex cult was very jarring. In each of the women, I saw parts of myself and of others I know. Part of Goldman’s message in this book was to show that the decisions and commitments these women made were not so different or crazy compared to decisions we make all the time. Each women always felt like they were missing something and seeking for something more, and none of them were satisfied until they discovered the Rajneesh movement. These women were smart and successful, and ended up on the path they did due to a mixture of things internal and external. It is easy to look at pictures of Rajneeshpuram where devotees are wearing all orange, and headlines reducing the movement to a sex cult, and believe that all who joined must have been crazy, irrational, etc. But when reading the stories of the women and recognizing how intelligent and analytical about their choices they were, and also seeing how their life played out, their decisions seemed to make sense. I appreciated how Goldman used the stories of successful female sanyassins to ask general questions about women in America and their searches for fulfillment.

This week I was interested in the section of Chapter 4 in McGuire’s book that discussed the “Paranormal and Occult” (McGuire 120). The section made me think about how “belief in paranormal occurrences is fairly widespread” (McGuire 120). Most of the people I interact with believe in some sort of paranormal aspect of life. From what I have observed, belief in the paranormal/occult can be as simple as the belief in ghosts or as complex as a completely altered worldview that revolves around mystical occurrences. I have noticed that the paranormal and occult is particularly prevalent and appreciated in popular culture for entertainment value. There are countless movies and television shows that are about ghosts and other paranormal experiences. In addition, astrology and horoscopes are present all over the internet and social media. These types of paranormal beliefs are seen more than those that are from other cultures. It seems unfair that certain types of paranormal/occult experiences are appreciated in Western society but non-western “beliefs and practices are [seen as] characteristic only of the poorly educated or of recent immigrants from other cultures” (McGuire 121). It is unreasonable to value some beliefs over others, especially when they are of considerable importance to an individual. In addition, many people do not realize that official religions have aspects that are paranormal/occult. For instance, in the Christian faith, it is widely believed that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Why is it reasonable for one to believe Christ rose from the dead, but it is unreasonable for someone to believe that they still have connections to those that have past? We cannot make a double standard that only accepts certain cultures’ and official religions’ beliefs as “worthy”. Even if we do not agree with someone else’s beliefs, we have a duty to respect them as we would want our beliefs to be respected.

As the semester continues, I learn more about religion has a role in much of our entertainment and media culture. Since I am a media and visula culture major, I am required to analyze specific movies throughout multiple courses. Today, in my Indian cinema class, we watched a film called “Pyaasa”. At first, I realized no religious symbols whatsoever, however through an in class analysis on the film, we discovered there were numerous religious symbols throughout. In the movie there is a scene where a man is resurrected from the dead and goes to his memorial service and you can see how he stands in a doorway with his arms in a T formation, with the light coming from behind him, which creates the visual that he is Christ. This movie is a Hindu film, which is interesting to see how there would be a Christian motif in the movie. This really opens my eyes to how religion plays a factor not only in peoples religious affiliations and lives, but it also something that is familiar to everyone in a way to if you were to see it in a film, you could identify how important the scene must be, considering the resurrection of Jesus Christ is such a influential moment that it was included in an international film. This goes along with how there not only is such a large Christian population in America, but also in India. We have to identify that using this symbol is a reflection of the influence that religion has amongst popular culture.

As my family was having a serious discussion about religion and how they enjoy when church speakers go to their homes once a week to talk about a bible version or any thoughts about the word of God. Hence the majority of my family is Catholic they really implement religious figures and tradition in everyday life like praying before a meal, praying and confession or talking to God. I was targeted by my mom saying that I was atheist for the reason that I didn’t like going to church and doubted the image of God.  So I looked up the definition of an atheist and I found this article on the types of non-believers and listed some alternatives. Atheists is the lack of a God concept with no moral core.  I somewhat believe that there is some energy, but I don’t necessarily identify an image of a God like person.

The second “non-believer” on the list was agnostic which represents  various perspectives on the importance of one’s own right. In other terms they don’t know if here is a God but believe there will be an answer in the future.

Third on the list is a skeptic which is someone who doubts a religious concept and will believe based on evidence. Another non-believer is a “freethinker” which I didn’t know was a classified groups but are those who oppose the church and the literal biblical idea. There will only believe the logic and with evidence and will decide on what is real or not.

Next are “humanist” who are set on ethical values like compassion and self-determination. It dwells on the concept of inner peace and spiritual connotation like recognize the benefits of a spiritual community and having rituals instead of the supernatural. “Pantheist” do not believe in a person-god but rather in the idea of natural order who see humans as a small grain of said in a whole universe and what exists.

https://www.alternet.org/2012/06/no_religion_7_types_of_non-believers/

In my reading of the case study, The Spirit’s Tether: Family, Work, and Religion among American Catholics by Konieczny, it was really interesting to see the analysis of the religion to which I personally belong. It was definitely interesting to see the spectrum of communities within the broader community of the Catholic church. In my reading, I found that I related a lot to Konieczny’s description of Our Lady of Assumption. This church practiced more conservation values and operated under the organization of church as a family. In my personal experience, my family and I did not have the same interests of our church. As a result, we felt alienated from the Catholic church and thus left our religious community. While reading Konieczny, Assumption felt very familiar to me, but at the same time, uncomfortable, considering my conflict with a similar community.

Interestingly enough, reading about the second church, Saint Brigitta, was equally interesting in its espousal of egalitarian views and tension with the Catholic institution. In some ways, I feel like if my family had been involved with a Catholic church more similar to Saint Brigitta rather than Our Lady of Assumption, we may have not had a falling out with the church. Overall, it was really interesting to see how people’s attitude concerning religion can be vastly different depending on their church of memory, and how the church we attended played a major role in my family’s separation from Catholicism, rather than Catholicism itself.

This week my group is presenting onTradition in a Rootless World: Women Turn to Orthodox Judaism by Lynn Davidman. The theme of lineage appeared multiple time throughout the course of this book. Women were seeking out Judaism as a way to connect with their roots and thereby felt empowered through their inert connection because of their ancestry. This theme isn’t unique to this book, nor is it unique at all. I am currently reading The Life of Milarepaand The Life of the Buddha and the same theme of lineage runs throughout. Also, it is present in the bible with the laundry list of lineages from Moses to Jesus! I wonder what this importance of lineage is? Why do so many religious stories begin with ancestry? This seems strange to me because I have been exposed to so much choice in my life. American religious movements that I study in my major haven’t been around long enough for an ancestry within to form. I guess that is the point, those people that do have that intrinsic connection to a religious organization that stems back centuries have a special tie to it.

This makes me think about the contrast between established religions like Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. that have had hundreds to thousands of years to create webs of connections throughout humanity and newer religions organizations that have not created those ties. And if this emphasis on lineage is valid (as it keeps appearing over and over again) then there is no way I can see a demise in these traditions. So, while we see an increase in “spirituality” and a decrease in adherence, I’m curious to know if it’s just new religious movements that should be scared for their future? Especially when taking into account things like Hansen’s law of third-generation and similar types of “reconnection” that is possible within the world’s oldest religions. So while we might witness downward trends in numbers in all religious organizations, it makes sense to me that if those numbers ever did increase they might be for religions that have “roots”?

In my reading of Lynn Davidman’s Tradition in a Rootless World: Women Turn to Orthodox Judaism, one question kept occuring to me. Could the wave of religious extremism that seems to be becoming more prominent be considered the modern counterculture? There seems to be an increasing number of membership, or at least more media attention, for sectarian-edging religions. Davidman mentions that her book, “tells the story of two groups of secular Jewish women who were troubled by some of the characteristic dilemmas of modern life, such as feelings of isolation, rootlessness, and confusion about gender. These women sought solutions in an unusual way through participation in Orthodox  Jewish resocialization programs.” The thought process of these women seems very similar to John Milton Yinger’s definition of a contraculture, which he defines to be at, “conflict with the values of the total society.” The women in Davidman’s book are confused by and at odds with the liberal society that surrounds them. They sought for a, perhaps odd, method of coping with this discrepancy. 

To me, this appears to bare semblance to a countercultural movement. The massive amounts of attention being paid to religious movements in the media is undeniable and definitely at odds with mainstream liberal society. However, this ultra-conservative push back hardly resembles the countercultural movements of the past. Historically, countercultural movements have been very emotional liberal and progressive such as Romanticism of the early 1800’s, the Beat Generation of the 50’s and 60’s, and the Hippie movement of the 60’s and 70’s. Is it possible for there to be a conservative counterculture, because, if so, if would be the first of its kind and point towards the ushering in of a new era of thinking. This new era would be marked by a liberal mainstream and a heavy conservative push back that mimics the liberal ones of the past.

In class this past week the first group presented on Protestantism in America. There were three churches represented in their presentation. The Hope Chapel, Vineyard and Calvary. I found it intriguing that these names rang a bell with myself regarding having previous knowledge of these Churches due to the rising population within these churches. These churches have an open, relaxed, casual atmosphere that allows for individuals who are trying to discover what they want in a church more appealing than the standard Formal Churches. My first time going to a church that was outside of my personal norm was a Church like the Calvary Church. It didn’t feel as if I was even at church and because of that it led me to want to have continuous visits to this church. On the other hand, If I decided not to go every Sunday it didn’t feel as if the organization was going to shun me. Currently, individuals in college, or just out of college tend to need a flexible schedule and when days don’t go as they are planned for themselves the last subject that a young adult is going to want to think about is how individuals will view them at their church. A church should not be a place where an individual feels more pressure added on to their daily life, it needs to be a release and an escape to recollect oneself resulting in a clear mind in order to get through harder days. The presentation made me reflect on this and evaluate this as being a possibility as to why the interest rate of these types of Churches are growing rapidly  

Continuing to work on our group project has brought a few things to light for me about the differences with people and religion. My groups book was Sacred Stories and Spiritual Tribes. The whole book was about the different religions different people have and the different demographics of the people that were surveyed. So many different people can be in a different “tribe” within a church. Nancy Ammerman talks about the definition of tribe is a group of people with the same interests. An example of this would be when professor Spickard brought up megachurches. Everyone is there for the pastor, but the church is so big its hard to connect with people. People then find more people with similar interests making them a tribe within the church.

Also, the term theistic and extra theistic kept coming to our attention. The definition of theistic is relating to or characterized by belief in the existence of a god or gods. Extra theistic people have more of an outside look on things compared to theistic people. The most interesting thing that I found out was the relationship with pets. People who considered themselves extra theistic would more likely be a pet owner compared to someone theistic. Also asking for prayer over smaller things compared to theistic people. Being a theistic person would lead to more meaningless prayer as well. An example would be praying around the dinner table. Families do it every night because it is routine, making it less meaningful then someone praying over someone who is very sick.