Where do these assumptions come from? Religious traditions are condensed experiences. People can follow traditions without ever having had the experiences themselves that led to that tradition. Martin Buber describes that every culture (so presumably every religious culture) had a true relational moment as its starting point. Religious traditions would thus be reminders of these original moments of relationship.

I-It

Man cannot live constantly in true relationship. Martin Buber describes (in “I and Thou”) how man knows two ways of relating. Both types of relationships are described by word pairs. One word pair is “I-Thou,” while the other word pair is “I-It.” The I-It relationship is related to things. This reference is delimiting and descriptive. We describe the world and use the world. Values and traditions are also part of this external demarcation.

For example, in an assumption about the world, if something is good and something else is not-good, that is descriptive and delimiting. If I call my friends by name and introduce them to someone else, that is also descriptive and shows those friends as “their own people” facing someone else. It is this demarcation that is part of our world and that we need in order to move in the world. There is a relation, but it is obtained from otherness, from differences and delimitations. When I say “man” or “woman”, these are not things, but the quality is gained from differences, from description and from delimitation. This is the I-It relationship with the world around us.

I-Thou

In contrast, there is another kind of relationship, which Martin Buber describes with the word pair “I-Thou”. It is a different quality. There is no demarcation here, but a direct encounter. In this kind of encounter, all descriptive and delimiting characteristics fall away. It is an immediate encounter. It is a moment of true relationship, from I to You. The being is touched and nothing stands in between anymore.

This immediate encounter cannot last. We alternate between the two types of relationships, perhaps experiencing the I-Thou relationship only occasionally. Then we slide back into the I-It relationship, wherein we describe, use, and wherein we demarcate ourselves (and others). However, the true encounter for us humans is this I-Thou encounter. It is perhaps also this quality that is meant when the apostle Paul writes that God will one day be “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28).

Religiosity and tradition

It may be obvious that religiosity and tradition always only depict the I-It relationship. They are descriptive and delimiting actions and opinions. They are never to be confused with the essence. Even if the origin of a certain religiosity or tradition is based in a true relational moment, it has fallen out of that relational moment (as inevitably happens). Only then, in fact, can it become a religious behavior or a certain tradition.

So what is the value of religiosity or tradition? They are image and not to be confused with the true relationship itself. However, you can point out. If one gets stuck in religiosity or tradition, then the real goal is lost. But occasionally, despite religiosity or tradition, one can gain a perspective on the original relationship moments and find one’s own relationship moments. This is perhaps the closest description to what is described as living faith.

Religiosity and tradition can (not: must) carry people through times of personal spiritual drought. They can (not: must) form a key to understanding. In this sense, religiosity and tradition are quite human bridges or perhaps only “crutches” so that a true core can be carried through the world.

Image and note

When we read the Bible, it is not the relationship itself, but the Scriptures can point to the relationship. The Bible does not speak of itself, but of God. It is about Him. Christ does not speak of Himself, but He speaks of His God and Father and leads to Him. That is His task and that is why He came into the world. We should recognize Him. Paul prays over and over again that believers may know God. We should learn to > examine what is essential.

If I have the goal of the true encounter, the true relationship with God, in mind, then it probably does not matter to which tradition I belong, in which church I am at home and in which environment I once grew up. Of course, I can distance myself from certain ideas, I can distance myself from opinions that I don’t agree with, or I can consciously join a community. All this may be necessary and desirable. But it is not the core. It is not the kind of relationship we are designed to have. They are only means to an end and they are not to be confused with that. God is not religious and He does not ask us to be.

Deepening in conversation

• What value do traditions (teachings, views, values…) have in your life?
• Do you know personal moments of direct encounter, as Martin Buber writes about them?
• What can we promote in our churches and communities? What is it about?
• How does relationship and encounter affect your life?
• Is God Religious? Why (not)?