Freedom Isn't Free

Freedom isn't free!
Freedom isn't free!
You gotta pay the price
You gotta sacrifice
For your liberty.

So said the song on my father's Up With People album when I was a kid.

I used to hum that tune all the time, and this year it's come back to me. Maybe it's because my wife and I were in Boston last weekend and did the Freedom Walk, visiting those pre-revolutionary sites and reminding ourselves of that city's great history (before sampling absolutely AWESOME cannoli from Mike's Pastry in the north end).

I am one of those people the polar opposites of politics derides: I'm a moderate. I am as likely to vote my party as not; I'm one of those swing voters presidential candidates love to court. I'm a big fan of the political process, but not a big fan of politics. I vote in nearly every election, and have even when we've lived overseas. I watch political conventions (of both parties) and debates.

I appreciate that part of the strength of our union is also what strains it: the taking of sides, arguing of position, debate of views -- all those help to refine our direction.

I'm grateful for family members, friends and others who serve in our military. I'm grateful for the rule of law.

I have no Mormon pioneers in my genealogy; my parents were converts to the church long after wagon trains headed west. But we have plenty of American pioneers -- some who settled Virginia in the 1600s, some who settled the Pacific Northwest in the 1800s. While many of our immigrants came before this was a nation, others came in the great waves of immigration in the late nineteenth century.

When I was in high school, I spent a summer as an exchange student in Germany. Before I left, my father told me he suspected I'd find a lot of wonderful things in Germany -- and many might even seem much better than the US. He cautioned me, however, not to judge my home country too harshly. His counsel was wise (and maybe not even needed -- I was in the summer before my senior year and probably less aware of the world than he gave me credit for).

I later served my mission in Germany, and then have lived with my family in Latin America and twice in Asia. Each time, as happy as I was to be where I was, I've been happier to come home.

An addendum on agency

I've been reading Prince and Wright’s book David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, and Chapter 12 makes pretty clear that during the strong anti-communist period of the mid-twentieth century, rhetoric in the church, and even from President McKay certainly did equate free agency with some level of political freedom, which seems to contradict my latest post on agency.

In General Conference after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President McKay (then a counselor in the First Presidency) said, “To deprive an intelligent human being of his free agency is to commit the crime of the ages.... So fundamental in man’s eternal progress is his inherent right to choose, that the Lord would defend it even at the price of war” (Conference Report, April 1942, 71-73, quoted in Prince, 280).

That said, I still believe the scriptural reference to agency has little to do with political freedom and more to do with man's innate ability to choose, as in this report about President McKay (then church president) in the Los Angeles Times points out:

"People under Communist domination will some day rise against their rulers, the world leader of the Mormon church predicted today. White-haried Elder David O. McKay, Salt Lake City, said free will – the freedom to choose between right and wrong – is the people’s most valuable possession. ‘No power on earth,’ he said, ‘can take that freedom away’” (“Head of Mormons Predicts Revolt in Red Countries,” Los Angeles Times, April 26, 1954, quoted in Prince, 292). As Prince and Wright observe, President McKay’s prophecy was true.

The second statement suggests that free will, free agency, transcends political constraints as I suggested in my original post.

That said, given the history of that period, it's not hard to see how some members might also make similar arguments to today’s that government policy which is seen to limit political freedoms might also be interpreted as limiting free agency. They can make that argument, but I do not agree with them.

Submitting to God's will

Agency is a key tenet of Mormon belief. We teach that even in the premortal existence we were free to choose the plan advanced by the Savior or the one from Lucifer. The former allowed us to come to this earth, make mistakes, enjoy the blessings of an atoning sacrifice, and potentially return to our Father in Heaven. The latter plan would have forced all to obey (not specified how) and demanded the glory for everyone’s return to our Father be given to the author of the plan, Lucifer.

In that struggle of ideas came the war in heaven described in scripture and in remarkable poetry (See Milton’s Paradise Lost). As actors in that war, we choose sides, and, according to prophetic teachings, are here because we sided with the Lord in that struggle. Those who sided with Lucifer were denied bodies and therefore future progression in the Plan of Salvation.

Now that we are here, we are to learn faith and obedience; we are to submit to our Father in Heaven’s will for us. To some that decision seems a paradox, as we are apparently asked to give up that agency in favor of submitting to God’s authority.

The key is that in so surrendering our will to God’s we act of our own volition. The Book of Mormon teaches we are free to choose (2 Nephi 2:27), but also that the natural man (acting only in our own best interest) is an enemy to God and that overcoming the natural man requires us to yield (my emphasis) to God’s way in order to find true and lasting happiness (Mosiah 3:19).

Some find following the commandments to be restrictive suggesting that freedom should allow us to do whatever we want. Mature thinkers will see spiritual adolescence in this way of thinking. Young drivers may also not see the need to follow speed limits until they’ve paid a fine or two, or, worse yet, have injured themselves or others. Mature spiritual thought suggests the trade off between a life run riot and the blessings of obedience is significant, and that the blessed life is the better choice.

Others wrongly suppose that “I am what I am” (what I call the Popeye defense) and I cannot change. If that’s so, then the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ was for nothing. But the atoning sacrifice of the Savior WAS for something, and that something is the gift that we may change, that we may overcome our natural man, that we may be more driven by instinct, that we may learn a better way, His way, that we may prepare to return home to our loving Father.

My experience is that God’s way works. It brings me more joy, more peace, and ultimately, more of what matters the most. And that is in this life, excluding whatever benefit there may be in the life hereafter.

- Paul