Don’t Tread on Me! (RJS)

Last updated on: November 22, 2016 at 6:05 am by RJS

Don’t Tread on Me! (RJS) 2016-11-19T13:31:26-06:00 RJS

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Human freedom, constrained only loosely by the caveat “do no harm,” seems the rallying cry of much of Western (especially North American) civilization. Tim Keller, in his new book Making Sense of God: An Invitation to the Skeptical, tackles the issue of freedom. The Western ideal of individual freedom has brought both gain and loss. Keller notes: “the ideal of individual freedom in Western society has done incalculable good. It has led to a far more just and fair society for minorities and women. Indeed, there is a danger that a critique of the ideal of freedom could be used to weaken or roll back these gains.” (pp. 100-101)

I’d go even a step further than Keller, the Western ideal of individual freedom has also done incalculable good for the poor of all races, both male and female. The oppression of the poor for the good of the wealthy has been quite real. The labor movement of the early 20th century was a response to this situation. Voting laws help us track the developments. In 1790 in the US only adult white male property owners of the correct religion (defined at the State level, I believe) had the right to vote. In 1810 the last religious prerequisite was eliminated. By 1850 the elimination of property ownership and tax requirements gave most white males the right to vote. Literacy laws were devised to discriminate against certain immigrant populations. In 1870 the 15th amendment gave most adult males the right to vote regardless of race or creed. Some States responded with poll taxes and literacy tests (often with poor and illiterate whites “grandfathered” because they could vote before the 15th amendment passed). In 1920 women were granted the right to vote and in 1924 Native Americans were granted the rights of citizenship. Threats to voting rights remain, but they are not quite as blatant.

The losses precipitated by emphasis on individual freedom have come from a weakening of connections in families and societies, and from a weakened sense of the divine. This needs more elaboration. Freedom defined as an absence of constraints is “unworkable because it is an impossibility.” (p. 101) We all experience constraints – some are simple facts of biology. Certain behaviors conflict with health.

Keller suggests as well, that even the claim that we should be free to live as we desire as long as it does not harm another is unworkable. We don’t all agree on what constitutes “harm.” Any notion of harm reflects a set of beliefs on which we would need to agree. Keller doesn’t give this illustration, but it strikes me as particularly relevant: Some will suggest that “harm” comes from knowingly giving birth to (or raising) a child with Down Syndrome; others see this individual as having intrinsic worth as human. [Richard Dawkins once suggested that it was immoral to not abort such a fetus (here) and a large number of Americans would abort on receiving a Down syndrome diagnosis.] Keller notes:

Of course we must avoid harming others, but any decision about what harms others will be rooted in (generally unacknowledged) views of human nature and purpose. These are beliefs – they are not self-evident, nor can they be proven empirically. That means that ultimately freedom of choice is not the “magic bullet” for society. Even in our supposedly relativistic culture, value judgments are made constantly, people and groups are lifted up in order to shame them, public moral umbrage is taken as much as ever. It is hypocritical to claim that today we grant people so much more more freedom when we are actually fighting to press our moral beliefs about harm on everyone. (p. 105)

Abortion is such an issue in our society. Some feel that any curtailment on abortion rights does harm to women, while others feel that terminating a pregnancy beyond a certain point harms a young human being. But no rational discussion of the issues involved seems possible. We do not agree in our beliefs about harm. (I could bring up more inflammatory issues – but don’t want us to get sidetracked.)

640px-Benjamin_Franklin_-_Join_or_Die We are a social species. Human beings are shaped by interactions with other humans. The very structure of the brain can change. Complete individual autonomy is not for our own good. Love and family are great examples. Love requires sacrifice of freedom and autonomy. Both parties to put the needs of the other first.

We should hasten to say that both persons must be mutually giving up their independence or the relationship will be exploitative. If one or both parties say, “Me first, My needs before yours,” then the relationship will struggle and die. If, however, both parties habitually say and think, “You first. I will adjust for you. I will sacrifice my needs to meet yours,” then there will be no exploitation and a relationship of great richness is in store. This mutual sacrifice of autonomy leads to the variegated, wonderful kind of liberation that only love can bring.

The parent-child relationship is a little different, but follows the same pattern of self-sacrifice. A parent sacrifices self to raise their children and often as age advances a child sacrifices self to care for their parent.

Celtic Cross Crop2 (2) Keller explores a little deeper – we must be free for a purpose, not merely free from constraints. “Freedom cannot be the highest or only value. We must use our freedom of choice to do something – but our culture is mortally afraid of saying what that should be or where we should land.” (p. 109) Although religion is seen by many as an enemy of freedom, this is the wrong perspective. One of Keller’s running points is that everybody worships something – and we are slaves to what we worship. We take on constraints for a purpose all the time – career goals, athletic achievement, health maintenance, and so forth. Are the constraints of Christian faith “liberating, right constraints” or “restraints that will crush and abuse us?” (p. 113) Keller argues that Christian constraints are liberating because they involve living into the giveness for which we were formed.

Here is the kicker though … Christianity faith doesn’t involve sacrificing freedom in allegiance to a divine despot. “Jesus Christ lost his glory and became mortal and died for us. In Jesus God says, “I will adjust to you. I will sacrifice for you. First I will give up my glory and immortality in becoming human in the Incarnation. Then I will give up all light and joy and my very life in the Atonement.” (p. 117) While I agree with Keller here, I think it goes even deeper than this – the entire Bible, Old Testament and New Testament, is the story of God loving his people. It didn’t start in the first century. This was, rather, when the time was right for the watershed act of love. Yes there are demands and constraints, and failures, but we love God because he first loved us. This isn’t a one way relationship. The problem I have with some philosophical theology is that it defies this reading of Scripture and God as love. And as for freedom, Keller concludes: “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed” (John 8:36).

Is individual freedom the rallying cry in our society?

How would you respond to Keller’s argument that love is the defining feature of Christian faith?

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net

If interested you can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

November 22, 2016

Revolution of the Open Door and Table

Next Post

November 22, 2016 Christ the King

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who had a coat of many colors?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Moses Joseph Jacob Saul