Dear Arlene,Arlene, Thanks for your thoughts on spiritual maturity and the reference to a web site on spiritual maturity. I looked at the article on that site explaining spiritual maturity as the progressive revelation by way of active learning about God and the Bible. The learning would take place along several lines based on what means were available, books, Internet searching, teachers, films, etc.The following link provides a broad outline for this learning:Learning is an active verbLearning is an interesting topic and one which many have much to say about. Generally, we have a supporting or opposing viewpoint on most topics and do not really pursue an active investigation of these topics. Maturity probably assumes the development of a viewpoint that can incorporate several viewpoints, instead of just one. As a matter of fact we often have derogatory adjectives to describe those with a single viewpoint: one-track mind, dyed-in-the-wool, or even fanatic.I think the philosophical principle espoused by Hegel and others can be useful in creating an understanding of mental maturity regarding a subject such as spirituality. In it we postulate that we only really learn and make a part of ourselves what we can consider in three different ways. The names for these ways differ from one person to another. The cold terms positive, negative, neutralizing are one set of terms. Another is affirming, denying and reconciling. Hegel used the cold terms for his triad dialectical thesis: thesis, antithesis and synthesis, or being, nothing and becoming.The triadic Hegelian dialectic can be explained in simple everyday terms too. First we would need to consider the topic under investigation for learning in a favorable and positive light. We would learn what the adherents of such a viewpoint have to say to defend their belief or faith. This is the viewpoint that we would use in affirming the truth of the topic.Second, we would examine what the opponents of the topic have to say and why they think it is a fallacious, misleading or dangerous belief. This is the viewpoint we would use in denying the validity of the topic. Sometimes this is called playing the Devils' advocate in an argument or debate.Finally, we would set these two sets of viewpoints and their rationales at arms distance and see how we could accept them both if we adopted a higher viewpoint in which each view was simply a particular evaluation, rather than absolute, unchanging truth. This reconciling action would lead us to the synthesis that Hegel had in mind and which would presumably be more mature that either of the two original polarizing viewpoints.When we consider spiritual maturity we would need to first specify the field of spiritual understanding or belief we are discussing, i.e., Christian, Judaic, Buddhist, etc. Next we would examine in a careful , active way the reasons that support a belief in each system of faith. Then we would look at the opposition reasons for each system. Finally we would try our best reconcile the supporting and opposing reasons.------------I am also a senior citizen and try to use my experience garnered over many years to understand the world that now exists, which can at times be very different from that of previous years.YBIC,Robert