« December 2007 | Main | February 2008 »

January 31, 2008

"FFR" (part II)

"The royal road to a man's heart is to talk to him about the things he treasures most." --Dale Carnegie

"Anger and intolerance are the twin enemies of correct understanding." --Mahatma Gandhi

I check the Digg! site everyday for articles, news, images and videos of note around the web. "Diggers" make large or small stories visible for others by increasing popularity through voting; the higher the number of "diggs", the quicker a story moves up in rank. Oddly enough, I noticed numerous posts on Scientology last week in the Digg! site, the religion developed by L. Ron Hubbard in 1952. Numerous people know about this unique religion through Tom Cruise. Cruise continues to be vocal about the impact Scientology is having in his life, but erratic behavior on the Today Show with Matt Lauer regarding psychiatry and couch jumping on Oprah create suspicion for this system of beliefs. The posts on Digg are focused on a person (or group) simply known as "Anonymous". They are committed to destroying the presence Scientology has on the web. Thus far, they have hacked the primary site (www.scientology.org) and crippled the server. Other sites part of this religion are being slowed down or removed too. This "war" seems to stem from efforts by Scientology members who wish to have a video with Tom Cruise discussing his beliefs taken down from the web. When the smoke clears, both the church and "Anonymous" will continue their respective missions.

What strikes me in this battle of the wills is the intolerance present on both sides. "Anonymous" makes its claims, as do the members of Scientology. But each is deeply at odds with one another. "Tolerance" continues to be a buzzword in America, a nation of numerous ideologies, philosophies and systems of belief. Atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, scientologists and followers of Jesus interact on a daily basis. While spiritual discussions tend to be minimal in the workplace, they blossom outside the corporate environment. And this leads one full circle to the first amendment, the cornerstone of the United States: freedom of speech. In terms of the deeper questions of life, I call this freedom conversation, the ebb and flow of healthy dialogue and debate. The conversation, albeit deep, is quite simple: one person opens his or her mouth and talks about what's near and dear to the heart. The person across the table then takes his or her turn. But what underscores conversation with integrity is the recognition people share similar beliefs. Members of society are always quick to outline the differences they have in terms of spiritual understanding with others. But what if common ground is established first, the shared thoughts on the deeper questions about life, death, suffering, wisdom, eternity? When consensus starts, clarifying the diversions in belief becomes easier, even peaceful.

St. Paul writes in the Scriptures, "Let your conversation be always full of grace." When disagreements arise, grace becomes absent for many; anger and frustration replace it. Paul concludes the aforementioned statement with the identification speakers should "know how to answer everyone." People who are always in the know are "mavens", from the Hebrew word binah meaning "understanding". Malcom Gladwell popularized this word in his bestseller The Tipping Point (Back Bay Books, 2002). People who fully understand their beliefs have no difficulty expressing them to others. But another element exists in the equation: listening and respecting the beliefs of another. Case in point: Electronic Arts recently released a video game entitled "Mass Effect". FOX News quickly criticized the game for its sexual elements, enlisting the assistance of psychologist and author Cooper Lawrence. A video game correspondent for Spike TV was also invited to defend the game. In fact, he asked Cooper if she has played it. She quickly replied with a no. After the program aired, angry gamers "spammed" her book on Amazon, posting one star reviews. The intent for the reviews was simple: comment on a book without reading it, much like Cooper did with the video game. Lawrence later apologized for her review in the NY Times, even adding, "I've seen episodes of 'Lost' that are more sexually explicit."

Returning to Scientology, a question emerges: do people who ascribe to this teaching share common ground with atheists, Hindus, students of Jesus? Very little in terms of holy texts, sacraments and the understanding of eternity. Each group diverges in numerous ways. But if all share a common goal of reducing poverty in developing nations, curtailing the spread of AIDS in Africa, living "greener" and loving others in a sacrificial way, room for discussion exists. But it should be noted that even with good conversation, one may fail in the efforts to persuade the other he or she is right and the other is wrong. When I look around, I notice religion is always focused through this lens: "us" (people who are "in", enlightened, restored, saved, focused) vs. "them" (people who are "infidels", outside the fold, lost, unknown, broken, ignorant, misguided). Does a better thought exist? Does this statement resonate? Everyone is seeking answers. But what is the question? These are the questions: "Why do I exist?" and "For what purpose do I exist?" People find clarity every day in spiritual understanding, truths that transcend the material world. Unsatisfied, many disregard the teaching they once hold to, looking for illumination elsewhere. Most follow the teaching they grow up with, a process termed indoctrination. But a significant moment appears in the late stage of adolescence.

Usually with the completion of high school, responsibility drastically rises for teenagers. Most take the path to college, the military or the workforce. But a crossroads comes into vision too--deciding whether to continue believing the spiritual truths they grow up with. I believe this is why church attendance for twentysomething's is very low. Belief is tested through proof, logic, doubt and suffering. Those who follow through find clarity, understanding. In this journey of self-reflection, religion is discarded and grace consumes the spirit, the revelation spiritual formation is not built on rules, the legalistic do's and don'ts that undermine healing and freedom. Grace is knowing community facilitates strength, three strikes is never the end game, life is full of nectar. In the Scriptures, James, a brother of Jesus, states, "Religion God accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows and keep oneself from being polluted by the world." Watching over the impoverished is self-explanatory, but worth repeating. But how does one avoid "pollution"? The Greek word for "pollute" is koinoo and means "unclean" or "defiled". In context, this refers to purity rituals, but is it wrongly construed by religious minds? Numerous people think "pollution" means complete cutoff from worldly influence. This quest is futile, but looking for evil in the world and exposing it to justice is possible. Discovering the kingdom of God is possible too.

I wish to reference "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005), directed by Ridley Scott, once more. I find deep wisdom in this film, for incidentally, it focuses on two groups, warring with one another: Muslims and followers of Jesus. Each is consumed with capturing Jerusalem. I remember Balian working in his shop. A strong man watches him work and looks to the sign above his head, curious about the Latin inscription. "What does that mean?" he asks. Balian looks down and replies, "What man is a man who does not make the world better?" As I study the world on a daily basis through headlines, BLOGS, elections, images and videos, I wonder whether the world is getting better. I remember the saying: "There's no news like bad news." But I also see the lingering effects of Martin Luther King Jr. and Mother Teresa. I see Muhammad Yunus reshaping economics through microcredit. I see the kingdom of God revealed each week in "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition". Ty Pennington and his team restore the lives of families through new homes. But in the process, tears fall and stories converge, overlap. Healing takes place. I see freedom from religion.

January 15, 2008

"FFR" (part I)

"For what avail the plough or sail, or land or life, if freedom fail?"
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

"While we are free to choose our actions, we are not free to choose the consequences of our actions."
--Stephen Covey

It was not until recently I listened to a phrase for the first time. Captivated, but unsure of the meaning, I promptly asked for the explanation. "Carte Blanche" is the word I'm referring to; it means "unrestricted power" or "unconditional authority". Deep freedom underscores this word too. During my drives, I have a knack for taking the scenery in...the cars surrounding my vehicle, building designs, trees, subdivisions, farmland. Billboards always capture my attention. I study the advertisements and begin to ponder whether clever minds in marketing will create opportunities for my money to become separated from the wallet resting in my pant pocket. And staying aware of the chatter in business, from time to time I notice experts who predict the billboard will become a fading method of communication. But I wish to disagree. With the rise of digital billboards, paper usage declines and additional messages join the queue. One billboard message recently caused me to turn my head twice, a double take if you will. The bold statement is simple and unmistakable: "Imagine no religion". The message is furnished by the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

The FFRF exists for one purpose--to maintain the separation of church and state. They accomplish this vision by filing lawsuits, organizing events and advancing "freethinking". The rise of freethinking (or simply atheism for many) is very clear during this moment in time. The God Delusion (Mariner Books, 2008) by Richard Dawkins and God is Not Great (Twelve Books, 2007) by Christopher Hitchens are both NY Times bestsellers. Numerous scientists believe a belief in God is simply laughable. Turning back to the billboard, how does one define "religion"? This word is sporadically interchanged with "belief" or "spiritual", but I will not hesitate to corral it. This word, in its original meaning, means "a set of beliefs". Unfortunately, people or groups have consistently hijacked it during the course of history. Remember the Crusades, and the quest to crush the "infidels" (Muslims). Remember Salem, and the quest to sift out witchcraft. Remember the Ku Klux Klan, and the quest to intimidate, maim or kill people with unique skin color. Remember September 11th and the quest to instill fear in the United States. Each movement has been guided by a belief in God. Respondents believe it is the will of God, a purpose, a mandate, a divine duty. They are mistaken.

I remember seeing the aforementioned book by Hitchens and studying the cover. I honestly don't know why at the time, but I decided to buy it. Looking back, the title truly captured my attention. And I wished to know why he thinks this way. While criticism is undoubtedly coming, I will acknowledge I enjoyed this book. Hitchens is a compelling writer and outlines the numerous ways people who believe in a higher presence miss the mark. He references the history of violence like I did above, global health, the Scriptures, the Koran, sexual repression and whether religion can be likened to child abuse. He closes his book with a case for a "New Enlightenment" a life pursuing rational inquiry, reason, development. He writes, "'Know yourself,' said the Greeks, gently suggesting the consolations of philosophy. To clear the mind for this project, it has become necessary to know the enemy, and to prepare to fight it." A student of Jesus, what will I do with this argument? First, I am willing to acknowledge the subtitle of his book: religion can poison life. But the poison in society is by no means limited to people who believe in the intelligent presence.

A look into the national news validates this poison. Remember the deceased Georgia hiker, murdered by a vile soul. Remember the Marine currently being sought by police for the death of a fellow Marine, who was poised to testify against him regarding a rape allegation. She was pregnant too--the child did not live. A man is currently in jail in Alabama, denied bond and awaiting trial for throwing his 4 young children over a bridge. 2 have been discovered. The list continues, but my soul weeps with each keystroke. Are the felons listed here "religious"? Do they believe in God? I have no idea, but I know without hesitation these actions are simply evil, a poison in the mind, the eyes, the hands. Emerging research in science points to the interactions of neurons and chemicals in the brain as a precursor for this behavior. I am inclined to agree, for who can commit acts like these and not be "out of mind" when they take place? Does the thread of humanity that runs through society simply vanish in moments like this?

God is not Great is resting by my notebook, and in light of the accounts above, I think the title needs revision: Man is not Great. It is man who kills in the name of God, man who misinterprets the words of God, man who believes wealth is the will of God. I'm sure you have noticed I'm using the word God here. Dawkins, like Hitchens, makes a case for God's absence in his lengthy tome. But what I am discovering is a tired monologue on logic once more. One cannot prove the existence of God scientifically, nor can one disprove him. Yet each try to outdo the other and finally make a case once and for all. Enough already. This argument is becoming boring (like creation vs. evolution). In 1971, John Lennon penned a song for the world, aptly titled "Imagine". With the Vietnam War continuing and protestors clamoring for peace, this anthem moved the adherents concerned with social rebellion and immediate change. The song is the quintessential hope for peace, brotherhood and abandonment of possessions. Lennon also invites listeners to disregard heaven, hell and religion altogether, lines that will continually be met with criticism. But he brings me full circle too: imagine no religion.

I will always give high marks to "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005), directed by Ridley Scott, for it continues to be a highly respected film of mine. Oddly enough, the story revolves around the Crusades and the quest to occupy the city of Jerusalem. In a memorable scene, the blacksmith Balian speaks with one of his father's men, convinced he no longer hears from God and has "lost his religion". The reply is amazing: "I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves." Is holiness the antithesis, the antidote for the poison I believe religion is? Is the antithesis of religion right action, the alignment of the mind and the heart? I think it might be.