Heresy!
Eco-Justice Notes, dated 3/15/02; posted here 3-16-02
from Peter Sawtell, Executive Director, Eco-Justice
Ministries
+ + + + +
Heresy is not a popular idea in our pluralistic
society. However strongly we might disagree with the ideas of others, we
seldom brand those ideas as heretical.
I'm starting to think, though, that we need to name
and address a heresy that is becoming common in our society.
My understanding of heresy was illuminated by my
church history professor in a seminary course on the middle ages. She
pointed out that most of the "great" heresies are not grounded
in problems of a totally false doctrine. Heresy crops up, she said, when
partial truths are elevated to the status of absolute truths.
Was Jesus human? Yes. But that statement becomes
heretical when it denies the divinity of Jesus. And there's a
corresponding heresy that denies the Jesus' humanity.
God is love. Amen! But if an absolute insistence on
love leads to a rejection of all notions of judgement, then the
otherwise orthodox truth of a loving God becomes heretical by its
incompleteness.
So, what is the dangerous heresy of today? Where is
there a pressing problem with a partial truth lifted to the status of
absolute truth?
The problem is the idea of personal freedom. I am
stirred to the label of "heresy" by the rhetoric that has come
out of the US Senate this week.
The Senate was considering requirements for increased
fuel economy (CAFE standards), including more stringent requirements for
vans and SUVs. Those proposals went down in flames, 62-38, with the
Senate calling only for a new study. [Check out a recent UCC
message on the Senate debate.]
CAFE standards are a complex and politically divisive
issue. There are legitimate points of difference and honest policy
disagreements. Spirited debate and strong statements should be expected
when a political body deals with such a matter.
The heresy is visible, though, in one of the recurring
arguments voiced on the Senate floor. As a NY Times article
reported on Thursday, the push for toughening the standards was
"overwhelmed by senators from rural states and states with
automobile factories -- backed by an expensive advertising campaign by
automakers and the autoworkers union -- who argued that Congress had no
right to tell Americans what kind of car they should drive."
Freedom is one of the core values for the United
States. But we have encountered heresy when that value is lifted up as
an absolute truth.
The Pilgrims of the Massachusetts Bay Colony are
important forbears of both a distinctive Protestant heritage and of our
national values. They had a saying about "covenant and
autonomy" that has carried through as a central phrase in some of
their ecclesiastical descendants. In a church often characterized as
"feisty Congregationalists" -- folk who are adamant about
their polity of local control and institutional autonomy -- the
principle of covenant has always been held up as a critical balance. The
Pilgrims knew that freedom and autonomy are glorious truths, but they
are not absolute.
That balancing of covenant and autonomy, freedom and
relationship, is part of the Pilgrim legacy in our civil society. Our
legal system balances a general assertion of freedom with the legitimate
need for limits. We accept those limits in traffic laws, interest
charges by banks and restrictions on gun ownership. Zoning codes and
slander laws put brackets around our freedoms of property rights and
speech. In our mutual covenant, government does have the right, even the
responsibility, to place restriction on individual and corporate
behaviors that harm the common good.
The proponents of stronger CAFE standards lifted up
appropriate reasons why fuel economy is a valid area for regulation.
Those include matters of national security, public health, and
environmental sustainability. With the fact of global climate change,
the case for regulation is stronger now than it was when standards were
first imposed in the 1970s.
The assertion that the US government does not have the
right to put conditions on specific elements of automobile design is
heretical. The claim that consumer choice is sacrosanct elevates a
partial truth to the status of an absolute truth.
This is not just a problem for one piece of energy
legislation. Demands for unlimited personal freedom, or for total local
control of public resources, are becoming more common and more strident.
Powerful forces are seeking an end to long-established and legitimate
forms of governmental management, regulation and control.
This heresy, like so many others, is attractive and
hard to deny because it is grounded in a truth. Freedom is important.
But autonomy must always be balanced with covenant, freedom with the
needs of the whole.
Unlimited freedom is a heresy -- both theologically
and within our civic heritage. Let us name it and fight it.
+ + + + +
A few months ago, political scientist Benjamin R.
Barber wrote: "Consumer choice is always and necessarily private
and personal choice. ... Democratic governance is not just about
choosing; rather, it is about public choosing, about dealing with the
social consequences of private choices and behavior. In the global
sector, this is crucial, because only public and democratic decisions
can establish social justice and equity."
Shalom!
Peter Sawtell
Executive Director
Eco-Justice Ministries
ministry@eco-justice.org
www.eco-justice.org
