By Neev Aradhana Suresh
Wayne Dyer, an American self-help author and motivational speaker, once pontificated, “Freedom means you are unobstructed in living your life as you choose. Anything less is a form of slavery.” Elsewhere, Peter Marshall, a Scottish-American preacher, articulated thus: “May we think of freedom, not as the right to do as we please, but as the opportunity to do what is right.” Through the ages, mankind has battled to reach the quintessential meaning of freedom. Every human wants freedom, but the real problem is finding what freedom is. It is self-evident that the two definitions of freedom aforementioned in the quotes are quite diverse.
Jean Jacques Rousseau wrestled with freedom, just like the men before him. Eventually, he did arrive at the conclusion contained in the opening lines of his book, The Social Contract: “Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.” Rousseau continues to elaborate on this line throughout his book. His general thesis for The Social Contract is that freedom is the natural state of man. People are in chains by the unwanted influences of society, studies, and the government. In contrast, John Bunyan, an English writer and Puritan preacher, concluded on a very different definition of freedom. His book, The Pilgrim’s Progress, had a basic thesis of the following: Man in his natural state is under a heavy load of sin and guilt. When he encounters the work of Jesus Christ, he is set free from sin. The following paper will examine Rousseau’s and Bunyan’s ideas of freedom whilst comparing and contrasting them to arrive at the truth.
Jean Rousseau is often referred to as the Father of Romanticism. This is a sensible title to assign to a philosopher who emphasized individualism and a close bond to nature. Once again, these views can precisely be encapsulated in the quote, “Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains.” A human’s true condition is one of freedom and the ability to do the best for themselves. However, this pure state has been corrupted and chained by authority. In his chapter concerning Civic Society, Rousseau writes thus: “The passing from the state of nature to the civil society produces a remarkable change in man; it puts justice as a rule of conduct in the place of instinct, and gives his actions the moral quality they previously lacked.” Conveyed in this excerpt is once again Rousseau’s idea of freedom. Justice is an instinct inherently possessed by men. Authority in a society to which he has not consented to removes this and moral behavior. Further on in the book, Rousseau distinguishes from amour de soi which is love of self. This love exists in man’s original state and is his instinct to look out for himself. In society, this evolves into amour propre or self-esteem. This self-esteem causes humans to be prejudiced towards one another and leave their former virtues. In conclusion, Rousseau believed that good government, since it is unavoidable in a thickly populated world, must have the freedom of all its citizens as its most fundamental objective concern. If this could be accomplished, then citizens would be able to act on their natural instincts which would be virtuous as is.
John Bunyan is often referred to as the Father of Christian Allegory. This is an apt title for a Godly minister who spent hours of toil on his outstanding work The Pilgrim’s Progress. At the end of the first part of his novel, Bunyan pens the following words : “Put by the curtains, look within my vail, Turn up my metaphors, and do not fail; There, if thou seekest them, such thing thou’lt find, As will be helpful to an honest mind.” The Pilgrim's Progress is a representation of a Christian’s life on earth and journey to Heaven. This is why Bunyan’s main characters are named after what they obviously represent. Bunyan’s view of freedom is laid out bare in two scenarios. Firstly, Bunyan begins in this way: “I dreamed and behold I saw a Man clothed with rags, standing in a certain place, with his face from his own house, a Book in his hand, and a great Burden upon his back.” Voilà! This is the original state of man unfree. He is underneath a great burden and is clothed in filthy rags. Bunyan goes on to see this man tremble violently and weep lamentably, crying, “What shall I do?” Interpreting the allegorical to understand the literal is not a challenge here. Christian, the man, is weighed down by sin, which is the heavy burden. Can anyone with a tremendous burden on his back be free? By no means, the idea is contradictory to freedom in all ways. Secondly, when Christian and Hopeful are walking on the path towards the Celestial City and Christian decides to take a detour and go his own way, things do not go so well for the both of them. Christian followed his instincts and his heart but that did not get him to Heaven. Instead, they both land up in the Doubting Castle of Giant Despair. It is through the key of promise that they are set free. Once again, Bunyan contradicts Rousseau’s definition of freedom. To conclude, man in his natural state is in bondage to sin and shame. When he encounters grace and the work of Jesus Christ at the cross, his burden rolls into the grave and he is set free from the bondage of sin.
“Resolved, never henceforward, till I die, to act as if I were any way my own, but entirely and altogether God’s,” is one of Jonathan Edwards’ resolutions and such should be the heartbeat of true Christians. If we are entirely and altogether God’s, then must we not readily consent to His definition of freedom and observe it as ours? Yes! God has not concealed His definition of freedom, for it lies plainly and repeatedly in the pages of our Bibles. Firstly, in John 8:34, 36, Jesus gives us the impeccable definition, as follows: “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin. [...] So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed [...]” This absolutely repudiates Rousseau’s perceptions of freedom. Jesus incontestably affirms that freedom is relative. The question must always be ‘Freedom from what?’ A sinner is enslaved by sin and He sets them free from it. The freedom from being sin’s captive is a true freedom only Christ can give. Secondly, Paul pens these words down for the Galatian people: “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. [...] For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” Once more, Paul reminds the reader that Christ set them free. They were not originally free. Christians’ freedom was given to them so they could serve one another through love and not let their hearts lead them to use their freedom as they would like. Thirdly and finally, in Romans, often called the Gospel according to Paul, he writes thus : “For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” The entire world, all of creation, is under the weight of futility and sin, but it is groaning and longing for freedom. Jesus Christ’s sacrifice paved the way to this freedom for glory. It not only paid the price for sin, but also bought all creation and called its inhabitants children of God. And so we are!
In conclusion, God’s view of freedom is the ultimate view of freedom. It is applicable to both civil freedom and spiritual freedom. God’s view of freedom is that He set us free from sin’s bondage so we can serve Him joyfully forever. Rousseau’s and the world’s definition of freedom includes doing what the individual’s heart tells them to. This is a very Romantic philosophy and extremely contradictory to the Bible. The Bible tells us in Jeremiah 17: 9 that man’s heart is deceitful above all things! Bunyan’s view of freedom closely aligns with the Bible. Christian is under the bondage of sin until he is at the mount where Jesus died and realizes Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for him. This realization sets him free forever. God’s view of freedom, as shown in, John 8: 34, 36; Galatians 5: 1, 13; and Romans 8: 20-21, is self-evidently that true freedom is through Christ and from sin. Although George Orwell was not a Christian, he put his definition of freedom rather straight-forwardly and in a very interesting manner: “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
By Neev Aradhana Suresh
Comments