James Fowler's Stages of Faith

Development
James Fowler's Stages were most extensively explained in his Stages of Faith: The
Psychology of Human Develoment and the Quest for Meaning,which appeared in 1981.
(Harper San Francisco)

In it he outlined six stages of developmemt a person might go through as they mature

through adulthood. While he was not referring literally to religious faith, the book is full of
references to religion, I suppose as an example of a type of faith in which a person might
mature. But James Fowler's Stages, formulated on interviews of actual people wherein their
religious beliefs were sometimes extensively discussed, has been widely accepted as
referring to spiritual develpment in general if not specifically to religious belief.

I first became aware of this work after reading some of M. Scott Peck's writings where
Fowler is mentioned. I have to admit that however great my interest was in this topic, I
gained only the most rudimentary understanding the first time I read about James Fowler's
Stages, but have gained more each time I read. In the paragraphs below, I am going to
summarize these stages as I understand them in hopes of: 1) inspiring people to read the
actual text for a more complete understanding and 2) trying to show how Fowler's stages fit
in with the overall idea of spiritual development as expressed by the other theorists.

Early Stages
James Fowler's stages start with what he calls a "pre-stage" that refers to infancy, called
Undifferentiated Faith. Here the infant, (none of whom were interviewed!) develops basic
trust and mutuality (or lack thereof) with the one's providing care. The quality of
interactions in this phase underlie all future faith development for the individual.

When thought and language begin to open the child up to the use of symbols in speech and
ritual play, the child moves on to Stage 1: Intuitive-Projective Faith which is typical of
children ages 2 through 7. Here the child is egocentric. In this stage, the child's imagination
is formed.

But in this stage, reality is not well-differentiated from fantasy. For this reason, adults
preaching about the negative aspects of religion - the devil and the evils of sin - can cause
great harm to a child of this age, leading him toward a very rigid, brittle and authoritarian
personality as an adult. When a child attains the capacity for concrete operational thinking,
he can begin to move toward the second of James Fowler's Stages.

Stage 2 - Mythic, Literal Stage

Fowler's Stage 2 is called the Mythic, Literal Stage. Here the child (or adult person stuck in
this phase) is likely to start sorting out the real from the make-believe. Story becomes the
major way of giving unity and value to experience, but the symbols in those stories are
seen as one-dimensional and literal. Moreoever, beliefs, moral rules and attitudes are also
held literally. Thus, God is an anthropomorphic being in the sky; heaven and hell are viewed
as actual places.
The person in the second of James Fowler's Stages is also more able to take the perspective
of another person but his view of reciprocity is also rather literal. "If I follow the rules, God
will give me a good life." "If I pray, God will grant my wish."

A person may begin to grow out of this phase when he encounters conflicts and
contradictions in the stories he is interpreting literally and begins to reflect on the real
meanings.

Stage 3 - Synthetic, Conventional Stage

A person will normally move into the third of James Fowler's Stages, the Synthetic,
Conventional stage around puberty but apparently, many adults never move beyond it.

Here authority is located outside the self - in the church leaders, in the government, in the
social group. Religious concepts are what Fowler calls "tacitly" held - the person is not fully
conscious of having chosen to believe something. Thus the name "Synthetic" - beliefs are
not the result of any type of analytical thought. Any attempts to reason with a person in this
stage about his beliefs, any suggestion of demythologizing his beliefs is seen as a threat.

The name "Conventional" means that most people in this stage see themselves as believing
what "everybody else" believes and would be reluctant to stop believing it because of the
need they feel to stay connected with their group. It turns out that most of the people in
traditional churches are at this stage. And in fact, Fowler comes right out and states that
religious institutions "work best" (p. 164) if the majority of their congregation is in Stage 3.
(Now THAT explains a lot of the preaching we hear that sounds destined to discourage
people from questioning! To properly assure their continuance, churches apparently need
people to remain in Stage 3. )

When a person cognitively realizes that there are contradictions between some of his
authority sources and is ready to actually reflect realistically on them, he begins to be ready
to move to the fourth of James Fowler's Stages.

Stage 4 - Individual-Reflective Faith

According to Fowler, it is ideal that a person reach this stage in their early to mid-twenties,
but as has already been discussed, it is evident that many adults never reach it. If it
happens in the thirties or forties, Fowler says, it is much harder for the person to adapt.

In Individuative-Reflective faith, what once was tacitly held becomes explicit. The faith the
person never reflected about, and was not completely able to articulate how he arrived at it,
becomes filled with both a freedom that he now CAN reflect on it, and the burden that he
now feels he MUST examine. The responsibility of this can be frightening, and it seems
religious groups are always trying to discourage people from making this examination (of
course, because it threatens the viability of the institution if people start questioning!)

Fowler's Stage 4 faith requires that the person be willing to interrupt their reliance on
external authority and relocate the source of authority within himself. Fowler calls this the
formation of an "executive ego," which is not a bad thing, like the other kind of ego. It just
means the person is more able to govern himself without the need for rules from the
outside. In Fowler's Stage 4, meanings in stories are separate from the symbols
themselves, so the stories are demythologized. (In losing the literal meaning of the religious
symbols, people can - I think often! - at the same time lose ALL meaning of the symbol and
that is how you wind up with so many atheists and agnostics at this stage.)

Loss or demytholization of the symbols can result in grief and guilt in some cases, and the
process can take up to seven years to complete. But in the place of the literal symbol, the
person gains the ability to make comparisons and whatever meanings they retain are
explicitly held (and thus more authentic in that they are personal.)

The strengths of this stage lie in the capacity for critical reflection (and the willingness to
face truths that may cause distancing from comfortable thought patterns and thus pain.)
But a weakness of this stage is that the person may put excess confidence in the rational,
conscious mind, thus ignoring unconscious forces that become more prominent in the next
stage.

Stage 5 - Conjunctive Faith

According to Fowler, when the person in Stage 4 becomes ready to attend to the "anarchic
and disturbing inner voices" of the unconscious mind he becomes ready to move on to
Stage 5. Such a move is unusual before mid-life. Here the person begins to expand their
world beyond the "either/or" stance of the prior stage toward a "both/and" orientation
where the answers (and the power of the rational mind to figure them out) are not so clear.

I especially like this phrase Fowler used, but I don't know how if readers will see what he
meant by it: "In a mutual speaking and hearing, knower and known converse in an I-Thou
relationship." (p. 185) (I am on perhaps my fourth time reading this material, and I only
begin to understand what he meant here!)

People in this stage are willing to engage in dialog with those of other faiths in the belief
that they might learn something that will allow them to correct their own truths. To get to
this point, it is critical that the person has moved through the stage of demythologizing
phase of Stage 4 where they could move away from the literal meanings.

The person in Stage 5 has already had their symbols broken by rational inspection and
consciously wills themselves to a more comprehensive (dare we say
metaphorical?)interpretation of the symbol. (i.e. God is not a literal being, heaven and hell
are not literal places) I like this quote Fowler includes from a "Miss T" that his team
interviewed, cited as an example of Stage 5 faith: "...doesn't matter what you call it.
Whether you call it God or Jesus or Cosmic Flow or Reality or Love, it doesn't matter what
you call it. It is there. And what you learn directly from that source will not tie you up in
creeds....that separate you from your fellow man." ( p. 192) (...precisely what we are
calling a "Mystic" on this site!) So the Stage 5 person in Fowler's system is learning how to
reengage with some type of faith that is beyond their rational control, can recognize the
partial truths that any given religious tradition might offer but may choose to re-engage
with it anyway. He can appreciate and recognize symbols as such, without holding to their
literal meaning and is committed to a form of justice that extends to those outside the
confines of tribe, class, religious community or nation.

With this very inclusive worldview, people at Stage 5 are in an excellent position to make
huge contributions to society but alas! often give in to a paralyzing passivity out of fear for
their own comfort and well-being or are paralyzed by the huge gap between reality and the
view they would like to hold as real.
 Stage 6 - Universalizing Faith
The final of James Fowler's Stages - Universalizing Faith is reached only by the very, very
few. Examples he names are Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mother Teresa.

Apparently people in this stage are able to overcome the action/inaction paradox of Stage 5
and are able to sacrifice their own well-being to that of their cause. NOT in the sense of a
soldier going off to war. This is very different! Fowler uses the word "subversive" to refer to
these people because their contributions are so radically different from the views of the rest
of society. Such people commit their total being to their identification with persons and
circumstances where the futurity of being is being crushed, blocked or exploited. (They risk
their own safety in order to help the helpless in unexpected ways.)

Summary
So, can you see how James Fowler's stages fit in with the others from this site? His Stages 0
and 1 (IF they were present in an adult) would be roughly equivalent to our (egocentric)
Lawless stage.

His Stage 2 and 3 are roughly equivalent to our "Faithful" (ethnocentric) Stage.

Fowler's Stage 4 is roughly equivalent to our "Rational" (world-centric) Stage.

And Stage 5 ( and 6, though we'd be hard pressed to find anyone at this stage) is roughly
equivalent to our "Mystic" (universal) Stage.

I hope this simplifies Fowler's work for you. If you have a serious interest, you really must
read his work directly. I am certain I have not done it justice at all!ol

Fowler's Six Stages of Faith are in your order of service. As we summarize the
stages,think of how your actions, your beliefs and those of the people in your life are
reflected in each stage.

In Stage 1, everything is real and has power. We think "magically". "Step on the crack
and break your mother's back." My parents are the ultimate authority. I trust that they
know everything, and will provide everything I need. My image of God is parent-like: He,
like my mother, has eyes in the back of his head, watches out for me, protects me and
punishes me when I do wrong.

At stage 2, my beliefs and understandings are less magical, more literal. An absolute
authority, outside of me, a parent, a teacher, a boss, a minister, God, makes the rules
which I follow without question. "My teacher says... The Bible says..." An ego-centric
Fairness rules. If you do that... then I will... The world is black and white, good and evil.

At Stage 3, I begin to break away from the imposed external authority which has shaped
my life. I identify with a sub-group which shares and validates my emergent
independent thinking. I begin to think abstractly and delight in discovering metaphor.
At Stage 4, I develop my own identity within a selected sub-group. During this stage, I
am so caught up in discovering and defining my roles, personally and professionally,
that I become an absolutist, a critic. There is only one right way, my way--"Back to
Basics", the Democratic party, raising my children the way my parents did--or didn't--
raise me! I have it all figured out and nobody (outside my group) can tell me otherwise.

At this stage I am becoming an abstract thinker. Symbols convey meaning at an

analytical, intellectual level. I am either a scientific rationalist or a religious absolutist. I
do not yet feel the universal power or passion that symbols may evoke. The Christian
cross, for example, is a symbol of a belief system that I reject, rather than a symbol of
universal love and connection to the holy.

At Stage 5, I have confronted enough in life to know that my "one right way" does not
always provide satisfactory answers, that there are other ways to see the world, to
choose to live in the world. I am comfortable with paradox-- I see that life is not black
and white. I know that an individual may act in ways that promote good and later act in
ways that promote evil, that even though I value the logic and rationality of science, I
know there are things that cannot be explained--and rather than feel threatened by that
paradox, I find it comforting and awe-inspiring. I don't need to be in control. I don't need
to know all the answers. I have given up arrogance and discovered humility.

Stage 3 typically begins in adolescence, says Fowler, but for many adults it
becomes a permanent resting place. "It is a 'conformist' stage in the sense
that it is acutely tuned to the expectations and judgements of significant
others but does not have a sure enough grasp on its own autonomous judgement
to construct and maintain an independent perspective.

"While beliefs and values are deeply felt, they typically are tacitly held .
. . there has not been occasion to step outside them to reflect on or
examine them explicitly or systematically." Authority is given to those in
traditional authority roles or to the consensus of a valued group.

The dangers of this stage are twofold. The expectations and evaluations of
others can be so deeply internalised that later autonomy of judgement and
action can be jeopardised; or interpersonal betrayals can give rise to great
despair.

Key characteristics of stage 3 faith include:

1. The need to conform to the norms, beliefs and practices of the group.
We see a strong parallel to this in the importance and influence of the peer
group in adolescence. The need to belong and to show this by having the
'right' clothing, hairstyle, music, jargon - by being seen in the right
places with the right people.

The parallels in faith are evident - associating strongly with 'our' church,
theology and worship style, as opposed to that of others. Holding key
leaders or people of influence in high regard and modelling strongly on them
in terms of practice, lifestyle - sometimes even mannerisms!

Each stage of faith is good and healthy in itself. Certainly much healthy
growth comes from modelling on and emulating a good role model. Difficulties
arise, however, if growth is arrested artificially rather than being
encouraged and embraced, even if this means going beyond or in a different
direction to an earlier role model.

2. Partial development of self-identity and self-assurance about the beliefs

held.

Largely the beliefs and practices of this stage are maintained and sustained
by the group rather than the individual. In stage 3 the need to examine
these beliefs critically has not yet emerged, nor is it encouraged in groups
which are predominantly stage 3 in their corporate faith.

Within the corporate life of the group, stage 3 Christians are secure in
themselves and in their beliefs. Outside the group, however, they may be
troubled by questions and doubts and may be unable to articulate, either to
themselves or others, quite what they believe or why.

3. Expectations and evaluations of others outweigh autonomous evaluation.

People in stage 3 are particularly vulnerable to abuse of all kinds because
the opinions and decisions of those in leadership roles carry such
authority. The stage 3 Christian has not developed the solid autonomous
belief to challenge or often even to question this.

This is a stage in which the inequality of power between leaders and

followers is great. Both the awful prevalence of professional sexual abuse
where a professional person (doctor, lawyer, minister, priest) abuses a
client or parishioner and the mass suicides of Jonestown are evidences of
exploitation of this vulnerability of people with stage 3 faith.

While voices are almost universally raised in outrage when such abuse is
uncovered there seem to be few, particularly in our churches, addressing the
need to support and encourage people to evaluate their own and others'
beliefs, practices and behaviour and to think for themselves.

4. Despair arising from interpersonal betrayal.

What are stage 3 Christians to do when a respected role model lets them
down? When leaders' private lives or behaviours are damagingly different
from their public personas and what they demand of their followers, or when
they fall and deny the faith? Because the locus of faith and security for
stage 3 believers lies largely outside themselves, such a failure or
betrayal by a respected leader is a failure of their own faith. Despondency
and despair will commonly accompany such betrayal.

Individuative-Reflective Faith
"For a genuine move to stage 4 to occur there must be an interruption of
reliance on external sources of authority. The 'tyranny of the they'- or the
potential for it - must be undermined. In addition to the kind of critical
reflection on one's previous system . . . of values . . . there must be . .
. a relocation of authority within the self.

"While others and their judgements will remain important to the

Individuative-Reflective person, their expectations, advice and counsel will
be submitted to an internal panel of experts who reserve the right to choose
and who are prepared to take responsibility for their choices. I sometimes
call this the development of an executive ego."

Stage 4's strength, says Fowler, has to do with its capacity for critical
reflection on identity (self) and outlook (ideology). Its dangers are an
excessive confidence in the conscious mind and in critical thought, and an
over assimilation of the 'reality' and the perspectives of others into its
own world view.

Here we see development. Reliance on external sources of authority has been

balanced by the individual claiming the right to choose and taking personal
responsibility for those choices.

People may hold the same beliefs at stage 4 as they did at stage 3. However
stage 3 people held them because they were the beliefs of the group as
expressed by its leaders or senior members, while stage 4 people hold them
because they have reflected on them, examined them against competing beliefs
and found them to be compelling. Of course in all likelihood the transition
from stage 3 to stage 4 will result in some change to the content of belief
as well.

Stage 4 people may challenge or question accepted group practices or

traditions. The enthusiastic expression of their newly discovered critical
faculties is easily misinterpreted as rebelliousness or undermining of unity
and authority, rather than as evidence of healthy growth.

Stage 4 is often marked by polarisation. Stage 4 Christians may see things

in very black and white categories. Having discovered clearly what they do
believe, they also see clearly what they don't believe.

This may lead them on a campaign to set others straight in their beliefs.
Their enthusiasm to 'convert' others to their newly discovered sense of
freedom can be threatening, if not damaging, to those who have not yet
developed the resources to evaluate their beliefs and take responsibility
for such freedom.