Authentic freedom

July 14, 1789 is historically associated with the dramatic overthrow of political absolutism. The storming of the Bastille, symbol of the Bourbon monarchs’ tyranny, carried out by the Parisian revolutionaries and mutinous troops, brought to an end the centuries-old claim that the governing ruler has the right of exercising absolute power, that is, of not being subject to any legal constraints whatsoever. The final outcome of the revolution was the fateful realisation that man’s freedom is limitless.

Carried away by such an illusion, various philosophers and social theorists of the Enlightenment vehemently proposed an unbalanced view of “equality” and “freedom of the individual”, Writers like Voltaire, Denis Diderot, Turgot etc, said that individual freedom is absolute, not only politically but also morally.

For instance, Voltaire said: “Man is free at the moment he wishes to be”. And Denis Diderot remarked: “No man has received from nature the right to give orders to others. Freedom is a gift from heaven, and every individual of the same species has the right to enjoy it as soon as he is in enjoyment of his reason”.

Appealing and liberating as they might appear, both positions are subjectivist. Their essential nature portrays the individual as the sole criterion and judge of what is morally right and wrong. Nothing and no one extraneous to him/her can ever have the right to guide him/her in his/her journey towards the truth.

When individual freedom becomes unbridled, its effects are catastrophic simply because it becomes a prey of relativism.

Unfortunately, we are painfully living the destructive attitudes that easily flow from such a distorted life vision, particularly the prevalent moral indifference to what is inherently right and wrong.

Values have become transitory. As Bishop Willie Walsh, of Killaloe put it: “The very words have taken on new meanings: words like marriage, family, vision, mission, and the broad Church, so often mean what the user wants them to mean – like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland”.

Can we keep living this existential lie? Is relativism not a grave insult to our God-given human freedom? Can our freedom be restored?

The Christian perspective says that it certainly does, but on one condition, that, as we in “Thy Kingdom Come” Community keep insisting all along, the focus and criterion of freedom is God and not the erring human person. Much on the same lines, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: “As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of ‘choosing between good and evil’, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterises properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach. The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes. There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just. The choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to ‘the slavery of sin’” (§ 1732-1733).

Since “every act directly willed is imputable to its author” (§ 1736), man, because he is free, is morally responsible for his voluntary acts. The fruitful exercise of his freedom demands him not only to avoid evil but to “overcome evil with good” (Rom 12, 21).

Lord, help me to use my freedom responsibly by persevering in what is good and just amid the opposition I face on daily basis. Amen.