The Ray Way is back with a very lengthy explanation on how I will handle a certain aspect of life. I had every intention of tackling the final frontier of this mortal coil and writing The Ray Way: Death. However, late last month a good friend died and it seems like it would be ill-advised to talk about death with the sense of humor with which I normally approach these posts. I'm not saying that I won't eventually tackle mortality in a blog post of this kind and that death is something so morbid and tragic that we shouldn't be able to lighten it with laughter. I'm just saying that with Ken "Firehose" Aker's recent passing and so many who knew him still grieving the loss it would be in poor taste to make light of my own possible death at this time. Ken Akers was a remarkable fellow and a good friend to me and my blogging. He was one of the eight original followers of my first blog, Friday Night Writes, and always gave me encouragement in my writing whether it was blogging, articles for the Xavier Newswire, or plays for Xavier Players. So instead of Death, I'm going to tackle a subject that I'm sure Ken would want me to take on and which I'm sure couldn't offend anybody: religion.
As I established earlier this month, I listen to Kevin and Bean in the morning on 106.7 KROQ. They recently had friend of the show, Adam "The Ace Man" Carolla, on and he introduced us all to a wonderful new game called "More Harm Than Good". This game simply involves thinking of people, places, or things that were introduced with good intentions, but that are currently doing more harm than good. You can't say the internet because despite all of the malicious activity that takes place in cyberspace...the good clearly outweighs the bad. You can't cite land mines because I'm pretty sure that they were invented with malice in mind. Some examples he gave were ski masks and panel vans. Ski masks were designed to keep people's faces protected from the cold while they were skiing. Now they are only worn by Al-Queda and high society jewel thieves. Panel vans were also designed under fairly innocent auspices. But as Carolla states, "More people are abducted than furniture is moved."It's an interesting game and I would expect myself and perhaps some guests to play it on this blog at some point. But today I'm going to go it alone as I take on the most contentious "More Harm Than Good" issue ever. I am of course referring to organized religion. It has saved and killed millions alike and we are entering an age in which it's value in our world is at it's most debated. Maybe this is because organized religion is not being applied in the correct way, and hasn't been for a while. Which is why Ray is going to consider forming his own religion, and he's here to tell you how he'll do it in this edition of The Ray Way.
To answer the question that wasn't officially asked in the last paragraph: I do not believe that organized religion does more harm than good. I believe that organized religion is still valuable to the world. I just think that it could be done significantly better. Sure religion has been and is being used as a tool to discriminate and kill, but not since the Crusades has this philosophy come from the top. This agenda is normally started by some crack pot sect who thinks that it knows what is best. So how ironic that I think that I know best and am planning on starting a crack pot sect. I say that I will be forming a sect because I have absolutely no intention of building my new religion from scratch. I am a practicing Catholic and Catholicism has worked for me for quite some time. When observed correctly, it provides me with everything that I need, spiritually. However, where it doesn't work for me is when the more orthodox amongst its ranks try and convince me that I'm not a true Catholic if I don't observe and follow all of the Vatican's teachings. That doesn't work for me. There are several tenets and beliefs of Catholicism that I just can't abide by. If you've read even just a few of my previous posts...you can probably guess what some of those are. However, my church needs a foundation so we'll go with Catholicism. All of the other Christian sects stemmed from Catholicism, which itself stemmed from Judaism. And many of them (Calvinists, Lutherans, etc.) named themselves after their founders...so I'll do the same. My new religion will be called Rayism. I figure that works better than Church of the Grim Fandango or something crazy like that. However, I will also be borrowing heavily from other religions that are not Catholicism. I follow many of the teachings of other faiths in my everyday life already. Though I'm not sure that my firmly held belief that cameras steal a piece of your soul per Native American mysticism is a good one to meld into my religion should I want to attract followers. However, beliefs from religions ranging from Islam to Buddhism are going to be considered and implemented.
The problem with most modern religions is that they are not as inclusive as they claim to be. I expect for religions to be places of understanding with a mantra of "All are Welcome in this Place". Too often houses of worship can be houses of judgment. Religions are accepting of you providing that you are in compliance with their "Terms and Conditions". And this shouldn't be surprising as this is philosophy of almost every group or collective with a defined membership. And I'm not saying that that's always wrong. But shouldn't religion aspire to a higher level of acceptance than other groups and collectives. The more stipulations and parameters for living that you place upon your followers, the harder your target lifestyle is to achieve. That's why my religion will only have one necessary tenant. Just a single one. And that will be something akin to The Golden Rule...Treat others as you would like to be treated. It won't be exactly the same because while I try and live this tenant in my life it has become very clear that other people don't like to be treated the way that I like to be treated. Treat others as they want to be treated could also become unreasonable when you're dealing with people with big egos and severe senses of entitlement. So, we're going to call this singular tenet of my religion "Do right by your fellow man or woman". Use common sense when considering this tenet. Common sense will not be a necessary tenet of my religion, but it will be smiled upon. By employing only a single necessary tenet in my religion that means that the following tenets and beliefs are not requisites of my religion: belief in any sort of God or diety, attendance at services of worship, or any sort of dietary or aesthetic concessions. Will my religion believe in God? Yes. Will my followers have to? No. That's a very interesting idea, isn't it? It stems from the philosophy of my religion that was best summed up by Chris Rock in the Kevin Smith film Dogma: That it's better to have ideas than beliefs. There is no reason to mistreat other people because they don't see things the same way that you do. As long as we all believe in good will, peace, and harmony...does it really matter if we believe in things like eating meat on Fridays, reincarnation vs. celestial afterlife, or whether one God controls lightning and another controls the ocean? If your answer to that is "No" then perhaps you want to consider converting to Rayism. My religion would basically take the Ten Commandments and toss out the first three. You should still abstain from murder, stealing, lying, and adultery. However, the three Commandments that govern how we treat God don't need to be lived by. Most people who believe in God choose to believe in a non-malevolent God, and I am not of the opinion that an all-benevolent God really cares if he is worshiped as long as people act for the greater good. But that is my idea...as was previously stated, others are more than free to form there own.
So you might be asking yourself why we should even have a religion if we're not really worshiping anything or espousing any beliefs that can't be supported by the non-religious masses. Why not just call what I'm starting a charity, call it The Human Fund, and just help out my fellow man in that regard? My answer is that that would be overlooking the greatest benefit of organized religion. Organized religion is viewed by non-believers as being synonymous with corruption, fanaticism, and forcing niche lifestyle agendas. And unfortunately organized religion has not been doing its part to combat these notions. But organized religion does provide humankind with two very important contributions aside from its penchant for inner-city and third world charity. Those are a sense of community and a medium for reflection. And I want to start a religion because I want my followers to be afforded those two benefits.A sense of community is what has made organized religion so viable to this day in the developed world. I don't think that the popularity of religion has all that much to do with salvation or miracles, and everything to do with the sense of acceptance that people get from their places of faith. I think that the difference between people who believe in God and people who don't comes down to whether or not they have had life experiences that they would consider miraculous and that would give them reason to believe. For many of the looked-over and down-trodden in life, finding a place that will accept you without reservation is a miraculous occurrence. People who can lean on their families and friends are less in need of religion, but when you don't have a family or good friends that you can turn to...religion and the sense of community that it provides are invaluable. Everybody struggles at times in their lives and needs people to lean on and if organized religion falls upon tough times then this outlet of community support will be severely weakened. I wouldn't want my followers to be denied this important social commodity, which is why we will have religious communion. They won't be "masses" or "services" or "Salah" or any other standard form of prayer offering. I think they'll be called "discussions". This is because that is exactly what they will be. They will consist of a gathering of Rayist followers who just discuss their ideas. There's no agenda beyond the sharing of ideas, experiences, and problems with people who are interested in listening. I'd call them "sharings", but with a name that hokey it will shift perception from religious sect to cult.
My "discussions" will have a set meeting place so followers know where to attend, but there will be no ornate decorations or vestments and attendance need not be stressed. It will be a "come as you want" or "come as you personally need it" basis...though attendance will be encouraged to provoke discussion. Consider it like Book Club: The Religion...without any guilt over skipping or not reading the book. The recommended reason for coming to these is that the importance of religious service should not be out of obligation to the religion or place of worship but rather it should be beneficial to the worshiper. Humans lead such fast-paced and non-introspective lives that religious services are oftentimes the only time during a given week that they get time to reflect upon the direction that their life is taking. My religions services are simply a time to sit back and figure out if you want to reorient your life. If you don't...good for you. The other problem with religion is that it too often forces conflict with beliefs that aren't similar to it's own. Catholics and Muslims are at odds because Muslims aren't Catholic and Catholics aren't Muslim. But what if they were? My religion will have no qualms about religious dual citizenship. Much like most Buddhists, my religion will allow followers who are also followers of other religious faiths. Since my religion's only major belief is that you should treat your fellow man with decency...it really doesn't conflict with any other religions except for Satanism and Scientology. Religious followers are undoubtedly a resource and if religions would be willing to share there would be enough of that resource to go around. Sharing is a hallmark of most religions, is it not? Instead they have been using the promise of a certain way to salvation to hold on to followers and solidify those follower's devotion. My religion will lack any hard-set beliefs on salvation and that will probably hurt us in terms of getting followers since salvation tends to be the modus operandi for drawing parishioners amongst the major religions. Who doesn't want eternal life in heaven or 72 virgins or their own planet in the Crab Nebula? However, we are a religion of ideas rather than beliefs...so let me give you an "idea" of mine on salvation. I think that you are already saved. I think that you are saved no matter who you are. It doesn't matter if you've committed murder, if you masturbate half a dozen times a day, and it certainly doesn't matter if you don't worship my God. If we are to assume that there is a God and that he/she is benevolent, then why would it damn you to a hell of unspeakable pain and suffering for its decision to create you in region that is not partial to its one true religion. It seems a little silly. I don't like to think of Heaven as a night club with St. Peter acting as bouncer and telling all of the excluded "un-cools" that they aren't on the list and had better book it over to Club Hell. Sending anybody to eternal damnation just seems unreasonable, unloving, and unforgiving. And that's my idea...but you are welcome to your own.
I also am going to attempt to limit the role of traditions in my religion. Religions tend to lean on traditions pretty heavily and the problem with that is that things tend to get a little touchy when traditions need to be abandoned. Some people have a problem letting go. At our first "discussion" I will have to be very careful about the refreshments because this guy named Jesus had bread and wine for one important dinner and now his church does it every week. Their also probably shouldn't be a religious text because those tend to be taken pretty seriously as well. Many churches still cling to archaic traditions that don't really make sense anymore just because their religious texts tell them to. For instance, homosexuality and birth control are frowned upon by many of the world's major religions because that's what their religious texts told them. And it made sense when they were written. Back in the early centuries when plagues were wiping out a third of the world and saber-tooth tiger attacks were all the rage, humans needed to be as reproductive as they could be. With humankind numbering in the thousands it was all hands on deck to get your reproductive sexual mojo in gear and start warding off extinction. However, now that humankind numbers in the billions and is growing at an alarming rate it seems like we could go for a few more baby-free sexual escapades. However, even if you believe in the sweet righteous fires of hell or decry the sinful malignancy of sex outside of wedlock and without the objective on reproduction...you are still welcome to join Rayism. All are welcome to join Rayism. There is also no hierarchy in Rayism. That point may have been obfuscated when I dressed like the Dalai Lama in my header picture...but I assure you that all followers of Rayism are allowed to wear whatever garb they want to discussions. Our God or gods or lack of god isn't big on dress code. He/she/they/nobody is pretty laid back when it comes to pomp and circumstance. Nobody should feel excluded or belittled during discussions and I think that the only way that everybody can feel comfortable is if we enter into this noble experiment with the idea that nobody has any more clout within this religion than anybody else. However, as founder of this religion there is one respect that I wish for my followers to pay me: when you're organizing the discussion group beach volleyball tournament or paintball outing...let me know.
This post is in memory of Ken "Firehose" Akers.
