Is “faith” a loaded term these days? Perhaps a better question would be, “these days, what isn’t?” Consider, for example, the term “lunchmeat.” First, why “lunch”? Is this a none-too-subtle attempt to undermine some sort of culinary Establishment Clause by intimating that real lawyers consume three squares a day? While we’re at it, why “meat”? Is this a deliberate slight aimed at vegans, vegetarians, ovolactovegetarians, and those who plan to get by on rainwater and photosynthesis?
In a politically charged environment, how does an author compose an article of “faith”?
One path to salvation in this regard—well-known to our colleagues across the hall who administer lawyer assistance programs—is reflected the reference in Alcoholics Anonymous to a higher power “as we understood” that entity to be. Faith is a large tent … to say nothing of those who prefer to situate themselves outside the tent, gazing upward and drawing inspiration and enlightenment from the stars.
Along these lines, must “faith” be religious at all? As defined online by “Merriam-Webster: America’s Most Trusted Dictionary” (translation: “In Merriam-Webster We Trust” … is embracing the teachings of the Merriam brothers and Webster a form of polytheism?) we find in Merriam-Webster various definitions of “faith” that include “allegiance to duty,” “fidelity to one’s promises,” “sincerity of intentions,” “complete trust,” and “something that is believed especially with strong conviction.” It would not be necessary to hit one’s knees to get behind one of these manifestations of faith.
From a legal perspective, the United States Constitution refers twice to the notion of what must be done “faithfully.” In both instances, this involves obligations borne by the President, whose inaugural oath must include the words “faithfully execute the Office,” and who similarly must “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” The Constitution also utilizes the word “faith” itself in one instance when referring to “Full Faith and Credit.” Specifically, “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” Here, a State’s faith need not be as blind as its foundational Justice, given that “the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”
Faith is a concept that could scarcely dovetail more neatly with guidance proffered by the “National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being” (the “Task Force”), an entity “conceptualized and initiated by the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs (CoLAP), the National Organization of Bar Counsel (NOBC), and the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (APRL)” and made up of several other “participating entities” from within and without the American Bar Association.
The Task Force has identified six pillars or “dimensions” that combine to “make up full well-being for lawyers,” one of which is the “Spiritual” dimension, expressed in part by “developing a sense of meaningfulness and purpose in all aspects of life.” Are “meaningfulness” and “purpose” redundant notions? Not necessarily. It may be that the most purposeful of activities have no real meaning—every one of us, for example, made it to the other side of a year-long course in Civil Procedure.
To wade into the contemporary literature concerning faith and wellness is to be pressed on all sides by authors with other loaves and fishes to fry. This is only natural; again, these are contentious times. There do exist, however, secular as well as religious organizations that make every effort to steer clear of both proselytizing and debunking while extolling a righteous melding of faith and wellness.
For example, the University of California has published a “Faith Based Wellness Tool Kit” that asserts that “faith and wellness go together” and that encourages faith-based organizations to “adopt a health food policy” and “start a walking club.” The United Methodist Church—chosen randomly as another example—has posted an article by the Rev. Joseph Yoo that contemplates the need to maintain good health “mentally, physically, and spiritually,” reflecting that author’s belief that “it’s okay to believe in Jesus and have a therapist.”
“Faith” and “spirituality” can be seen as arguably equivalent and unquestionably overlapping notions. To observe that neither necessarily translates into “religiosity” is not to suggest that any of these three constructs is somehow distasteful.
Researchers from three different universities in Europe surveyed 595 respondents in order to investigate “The Relationship Between Spirituality, Health-Related Behavior, and Psychological Well-Being” . This study concluded that “both spirituality and health-related behaviors are positively related to psychological well-being,” that “the relationship with spirituality is also mediated by health-related behaviors,” that “only spirituality is associated with the type of acquired education, especially in the group of students whose studies focus on the human mind and spirit,” and that “spirituality in this group seems to display a stronger relationship with psychological well-being.” These researchers did not address religiosity as an element of these findings.
An article entitled “Spirituality Linked with Better Health Outcomes, Patient Care” addressed work by several Harvard University-affiliated doctors who conducted what the lead investigator described as “the most rigorous and comprehensive systematic analysis of the modern day literature regarding health and spirituality to date.” Results supported the conclusion that “attention to spirituality in serious illness and in health should be a vital part of future whole person-centered care,” encouraging “more national discussion and progress on how spirituality can be incorporated into this type of value-sensitive care.”
Do other schools and church organizations provide similar discipline-straddling resources in numbers too expansive to mention here? You bet your life. A review of studies tracked by the American Psychological Association’s “PsycNet” application identified no less than 579 publications that addressed the intersection of faith and wellness. 38 of these were released in the last eight months. Clearly, this is neither an obscure nor a dated issue for behavioral scientists. We can have faith that such studies will continue.
Reprinted with permission of the Kentucky Bar Association
