10 for 10: Voting Vision Not Division | Balancing the Rights and Responsibility of Freedom

The Faith Commons team unpacks what freedom means in a society bound by shared values and responsibilities. Reflecting on individual conscience, faith-based values, and the role of community, they discuss how freedom is shaped by both personal and collective responsibility, urging voters to consider the delicate balance between rights and obligations. Together, they explore how true freedom involves respecting others’ autonomy while living by example and fostering a spirit of connection.

What is 10 for 10: Voting Vision not Division? Starting on September 2, 2024 and continuing every Monday for ten weeks through November 4, Faith Commons is offering ten 10-minute reflections on topics related to the upcoming election through the lens of religion. Our premise is that religion should be used to unite people and groups of people rather than to divide them, and that the founders of our country shared our view.

Watch the video, here.

Nancy (00:24):

Hello, I'm Rabbi Nancy Kasten. I'm joined by my partners at Faith Commons, Reverend Dr. George Mason and Mara Richards Bim. We are doing a series called 10 for 10 Voting Vision Not Division, and have been exploring for the past now nine weeks different ways in which our faith values may be affecting how we approach the voting booth. This season. Today, we're going to be talking about the issue of freedom. We know that in order to live together in a society, we need guardrails, but the question is, which of those guardrails protect our freedoms and which of them impede them? So, we're gonna start with George this morning and hear a little bit about that.

George (01:09):

Well, thank you. I think that this, um, topic is, uh, appropriate for the end of October because at the end of October, the Christian Church, uh, celebrates the Protestant side, uh, what's called Reformation Sunday. Uh, and it remembers that on, uh, October 31st, Halloween, of 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the chapel door in Wittenberg in Germany. And this was a protest against, uh, abuses as he understood them, uh, by the Catholic Church, the only church he knew at the time, of course, and that was present in, in Europe. And so, uh, his objection was to, uh, especially many objections, but the corruption of the, the church leadership that, uh, felt as if they held the keys of salvation over, uh, the souls of their people, and were in fact raising money by selling what was known as indulgences, uh, which was effectively forgiveness of sins for those who were living in those who were dead.

George (02:31):

Uh, in order to raise money for a building program, which is, uh, St. Peter's, uh, church, uh, St. Peter's at the Vatican, Luther believed that this was an epitomizing moment of the church's failure to celebrate the freedom of the Christian. And, uh, that freedom, he said in his, uh, defense of his position at, uh, the, what's called the diet of verbs, uh, where he said that he could not change his view because he said, unless it can be proven by scripture , or by sound reason, he could not go against conscience. That to violate conscience was neither safe nor right. So what happens as a result of this is Luther is sounding a bell for individual freedom in a sense. And the Protestant tradition that comes from him tends to focus on the shift from authority of the church to the authority of scripture. Uh, and the enlightenment that grows out of it in a more secular direction tends to focus on conscience.

George (03:55):

And the individual, both of them, have a sense of freedom as it plays out in our time. I think what we see is that those on the religious right, uh, view this as a matter of, of true freedom, being obedience to scripture and the divine law of what God has told us. And any way in which society can be ordered according to God's, uh, revealed truths will make people genuinely free, including forcing them or coercing them by law to, uh, a adopt, uh, and conform to God's word. On the secular side, the idea is that no one should come, uh, between an individual and their conscience. And so protecting individual choice, regardless of what choices those are that are made, is inviable and government needs to protect individual choice. So how do we vote? How do we understand as people of religious values that struggle with this tension, uh, between divine and human authority?

George (05:07):

And, and I would say that, uh, there's truth in both, and there is error in both of these positions, and that what we want to strive for is a kind of freedom that recognizes that no one's life is their own. We all relate to one another, and we all have an obligation to one another. Uh, and we, we all should be pursuing virtuous choices. So we want to protect the right of choice on the one hand, but we also want to advocate for moral virtue at the same time. And this is a debate that has to take place in society and in a democratic society. This is what we are, are working toward. And so when, what we want to do, I think, is advocate for positions that would call us to protect the rights of our neighbor, not just ourselves, to make their own decisions, but also to be bound to our neighbor so that we have this sense of community and we understand that we all have a stake in the common good.

Mara (06:11):

Yeah. Oh gosh. So a lot to respond to. Um, so, um, I think first I, as you know, have, uh, moved from the United Methodist tradition to the Baptist tradition just

George (06:24):

In the course of just of this <laugh> of, of this time. Yes.

Mara (06:27):

And, um, and so I'm learning a lot about the Baptist tradition and, um, I am just, um, so in love with the Baptist tradition of freedom of conscience and, um, and just the separation of church and state in this country. So I wanted to say that in terms of going back to scripture, you know, as a Christian, I look to Jesus and Jesus never forced anybody to do anything <laugh>. Right. It was follow me. . And, um, there is a moment in one of the gospels where he sends the disciples out and he tells them, if you're not welcome dust, you know, knock the dust off your shoes and keep walking. Like there is this, um, there is, there is no effort to force anyone to conform to anything. And so in our present, um, society in what we're dealing with right now, um, you know, I just would echo what you say.

Mara (07:24):

We, we have to have guardrails, but I do think that, um, we have to recognize that our liberties and our rights are, are only, um, preserved until they violate someone else's. And certainly, you know, forcing someone to conform to a faith or a version of the faith. 'cause it is a specific version of the faith that is being articulated in society right now. And, um, and that, you know, that is a violation of, as a Christian, that's a violation of my conscience to have my faith forced on someone else. Mm-Hmm. <affirmative>. Um, but it's also violating t heir rights.

Nancy (08:07):

It's very interesting because, you know, really within Judaism we do not have an idea of individual autonomy. , um, you know, all of our, um, obligations are obligations that are done within community, right? And so it's really important to, uh, recognize that our freedoms are linked to the freedoms of others, even though they may in some instances be linked to other Jews only, they're still linked to others. They're never, you know, individual. Right. Um, freedom to do anything we want to do. Right?

George (08:45):

And I think this is the deep truth of reality, and that is that everyone is connected and everything is connected. So that I really cannot act in such a way that doesn't affect you and you and anyone else, and neither can you without affecting me this sense. This is where we get, I think, public, uh, responsibility. And, and, and why we are calling for people to behave in virtuous manner, but we are doing it by persuading not by coercing through law and dictating their decisions for them. I think that's where democracy comes in and there's a recognition that, you know, whereas in our covenant communities, we can, uh, we can say, but we, we have all agreed to live in a certain way in the larger public, we have to use persuasion

Mara (09:41):

And living by example. Yes. I mean, I think that that is, uh, something that I see in our present moment. Folks standing up who, um, uh, say that they're Christian and are acting in ways that are very antithetical to anything that I would subscribe to.

Nancy (09:58):

Well, I think we're gonna get to that in our next week's, uh, topic, which will be our last week actually, and just before election. Okay. So, thank you for joining us. We again are faith commons. We hope that you, we've helped you in this, uh, season of elections. And, um, go vote, that's the main thing.