Metamodern Religion is Just Getting Started 

It is not surprising that many feel a need to return to a traditional experience, as we all need a home. But anyone acquainted with the metamodern approach probably underwent a metamorphosis and will be forever changed. The journey needs vision, thanks for the pep talk reminder.

I tried for many years to make my own designer spirituality. I ended up being alone in my basement doing middle pillar mediations worshipping a God of my own image. The legacy religions are much more than a bag propositions one needs to affirm. They contain subtle and interwoven aspects that are not apparent to us because they are the product of evolution. We are barely self-aware of our own instincts, we struggle to parse what is real. It's a prideful endeavor because by creating our own religion we fall into the trap of our own ego. Such a religion will only validate our ego's desires and not challenge us so that we can self-transcend. Also a metamodern religion can't be just for elites and intellectuals it has to enfold everyone. If the religion can't appeal to the so called "normies" then it's cultural impact is dead on arrival. Whether metamodernism or Integral theory there's always lip service to the inclusion of the previous paradigms but I've notice at least in the metamodern/Internal spaces there's an allergy towards the traditional paradigm. It's a performative contradiction. I also detect the suspicion anyone upholding the value of legacy religions is seen as a regression. I submit it's more likely to succeed to evolve the traditional religions in a metamodern mode than to wholesale invent a new religion.

metamodern spirituality never affirms or rejects the idea of grand narratives for faith and transcendence...it's grey zone like postmodernism but white pill in that it's not nihilistic...I see it most in architecture now...I'm interested in new "holy spaces" for "worship."

Christ is Lord. Everything else is straw.

just start a cult bro

As a Saraswat Brahmin, I personally feel inclined to explore Advaita Vedanta from a metamodern perspective and aspire to live a syncretism of the two in my daily life.

Why is there a God pivot? Let me posit that there are three versions of metamodernism: dialectical, developmental and transcendental/transformational. The earliest first form of metamodernism can be seen as a dialectical synthesis of modernism and postmodernism, the final stage of refinement of modernism (which explains the oscillation between postmodernism and modernism). The second version of metamodernism includes traditionalism. This version of metamodernism sees cultural codes as developmental in that the latest cultural code is the most complex but earlier cultural code can still be more effective in certain areas, such as dealing with challenges of life, due to its long(er) history of refinement. The dialectical metamodern Christianity begins with modernism; therefore it cannot accept traditional-devotional religious framework because it is not evidence based (and the evidence it presents is debunked through historical-critical analysis) and it has to assert supernatural elements such as virgin birth, resurrection and so forth. The chasm between belief and evidence or doctrine and demonstration is too big. Transcendental metamodernism wants something that allows people to transform, not merely change their knowledge, and only the traditional worldview has something like transcendence. Thus transcendental metamodernist people pivot to the traditional Christianity in order to incorporate the concept and practice of transcendence into their mindset. Has traditional Christianity been successful in transcendence and transformation? Hardly, but at least it talks about it. Right now dialectical and developmental metamodernism can only include but not integrate for integration requires transformation and transcendence as a pre-requisite. There is a succinct example for a shift in perspective. When the steam engine was introduced to the sailboat, it was described as 'sailboat with steam engine'; after a cognitive shift, it was described as 'steamboat with sails'. In a similar manner, the current metamodernism is postmodernism with metamodern intention or desire (which is perfectly normal). The anchor is still moored in the postmodernism. Until there is a shift or transformation, there is no clean, disruptive transition into a fuller version of metamodernism, which I call cosmodernism, for it transcends the the theocentric perspective of the traditional Christianity and anthropocentric perspective of modernism/postmodernism (materialism, empiricism and psycho-culturalism). Cosmodernism sees theocentric is materialism is psychologism, all three faces of the same reality; therefore the integration is already there at the beginning. The process of inclusion is akin to finding more pieces of the picture puzzle; integration requires seeing that whole picture prior to inclusion. In this sense, metamodernism is the caterpillar of the cosmodern butterfly.

I don't like the idea of worshipping. I find it the opposite of ennobling. :(

Thanks. What drew me to metamodernist thought was this idea that the only way I could engage with religion-like ideas is akin to poetry, which I take to mean "awe without really believing", with some social aspect added on top. I'd also say blasphemy is much more of a religious act than people think, and (as Daniel Görtz points out in your conversation) it should be part of the foundations of any new religious movement. Overall, it's exciting to see people thinking deeply about this, it had been bugging me for more than a decade.

Thanks for sharing your enthusiasm and some specifics for the metamodern project. I am right there with you! I consider myself a progressive Christian & attend a UCC church. Most of the baggage of pre modern theology is left behind in my church community: virgin birth, bible literalism, original sin, blood atonement etc. We are open and affirming. Our pastor embraces and teaches scripture through a historical/critical lens. We retain a basic Protestant church format on Sunday. Would you consider our group to be a metamodern form of faith & practice, or a metamodern form of a legacy religion?

Hi!I am Mohsin Raza from Pakistan..I am a teacher, critic and Phd Scholar ..I subscribed your RU-vid channel..I read thoroughly Modern­ism and Postmodernism ..I am inspired by Metamodernism but books are not available in Pakistan about Metamodernism..I want to introduce Metamodernism (Hope of New life) in Pakistan.For this,I need your help please

Brendan, what do you think about Peter Rollins and his 'Congregation of Contradictions' ? His post-structural deconstruction deals with Christology and the historical Jesus, the Death of God, desire, symbolism, etc. Listened to him on the Almost Heretical podcast and found it fascinating.

Currently reading a novel called Sun House which seems to be in line with this, in some sense. Really enjoyed Brendan's Easter posts. Hope you are all well!

Ben Shapiro's recent commentary on Richard Dawkins "Christian Society " quote drips with Metamodern sensibility

Thank our stars this beauty just dropped, Christian Atheism How to Be a Real Materialist Slavoj Žižek.

What you're describing is what I've been reaching toward for a number of years (a mystico-imaginal, mythopoetic spiritual praxis), but had no idea there were others doing this more publicly. You've given me a number of names to follow up on. Thanks for this summary Brendan!

Over here in the MetaModern space with Nietzsche and Tantra(Vajrayana/Saivism/Vedanta). Been lonely...

Check out Chris Langan and his unified cognitive theory.

There is one issue I have with most of the projects of metamodern religion: as most of "us" agree, there is no way of reviving old forms of worship (for million obvious and not so obvious reasons). Neither it is possible IMO to construct new religion from some intellectual premises a la Esperanto. So, the only way seems to be bringing the foundations from the source (you can call it Spirit or collective unconscious) anew - which makes the project a form of a Mystery Cult. And one of the best attempts in that IMHO was made by Rudolf Steiner. (Strangely rarely remembered BTW - I recall only Matt Segall mentioning it in conversation with John Vervaeke and Zack Stein if I am not mistaken)

Hey BGD.. Any chance that you will have an audiobook of your latest?

Watching your content has been immensely validating in my undergrad philosophy studies and personal spiritual journey. I can't begin to thank you for your rigorous work that distances itself from the woo side of it all. It does feel isolating at times diving into this new emerging terrain because no one in my analytic department talks about these crucial issues. I've been coming to these similar conclusions in my studies too and it makes me feel like not a madman so thank you. I'm curious what your thoughts would be with regards to trying to create a kind of spiritual humanist community where people can gather together and pursue humanity's cultivation while embracing the universal insights from all religions? Keep up the great work.

A lot of implicit criticism of traditional/premodern religion here. This implicit criticism then comes coupled with something like kneejerk neophilia. I understand and affirm the conjecture that traditional/premodern religion is not relevant nor is able to respond to the contemporary episteme. Indeed, no more than a monarchy is an relevant form of governance. But I am partial to the argument that a given reformation-era monk would not recognize the reformed traditions of today as descends of his own. Moreover, I wager an orthodox priest transplanted from the 1200's would feel like an orthodox service today bore only superficial resemblance to what he knew. The episteme is in the water. It pervades our experience of the world, our self expression. Don't be so sure you wont find something very much like metamodern conceptions of spirituality and religion in the epistemology of contemporary trads. Of a very different note, how aware of movements in theopoetics are you? To me, theopoetics maps as very post-postmodern.

When you mention that metamodernism should be "more radical", that does demand some framing. I had assumed that the brand of metamodernism here was one that was working as a counterbalance to the extremism that comes with total atheism and hedonism. There's quite a contrast between those who embrace the wild west of social liberation and material abundance and those looking to rescue the father from the belly of the whale. In that sense, metamodernism at its fullest is both of those things. However I tend to think the majority here would like to reinvent the traditional side in ways that it can live inside of and assuage the dangers of rapidly shifting Overton windows. When I hear the word 'radical' today, I have to question: compared to what? In the bigger picture I don't think you're doing anything extreme at all.

I think jumping right back into an old religious framework is a mistake. Those systems led directly to the miserable nihilism that took over the western world. Religion absolutely needs to be updated. I think Malcolm and Simone Collins are on the right track with what that might look like.

Thank you for exploring these ideas as religion evolves. It's exciting to know that people are bringing their whole hearts and minds for building a genuine and virtuous life.

The meaning crisis is ongoing and metamodern religion is too. Doesn't metamodern require a constant creativity that🎉🎉 folds and unfolds and continues to evolve?

I dig the toolesque cover photo!

Even this title struck me...I would've totally thought Metamodernism as a Philosophy just a few years ago. Do you you recognize a pivot? or did I have a poor grasp?

I'm still wondering if there is still room for non-monotheistic approaches to metamodern religion, or if metamodern religion is primarily just a gloss for metamodern monotheism. There are a number of implicit assumptions about the nature of transcendence, the sacred, hierarchy, the mind, the soul, the body, which make it fairly easy to translate from (and to) various flavors of traditional theism to various other forms of philosophical deism, quasi-monotheistic interpretations of pantheism, and so on. In other words, is metamodern religion aiming at something truly universal, or are we really just talking about a kind of "post-Christian" or "meta-Christian" "bloc" of incipient beliefs and practices?

So do you think that you can ever have new religious experiences that no one else is had? Like is meta modernism trying to make something new? Or is it just reconnecting with God as he has always been but in new ways? That’s where I’m confused. I’d love to learn more