The Molko Case: Will Freedom Prevail?

Abstract

There exists in America a tyranny of the that threatens religious liberty. The image of human ful fillment is highly individualistic as well as essentially secular, and this image encourages prejudice against those persons who prefer to use their freedom differently, i.e., in devotion to a de manding religious cause that requires freely willed renunciation of ordinary career pursuits and friendships in the interests of what is perceived as a higher vocation. For those who nar rowly define freedom as independence from any powerful reli gious authority or theologically demanding doctrine, the ties of devotion and loyalty prove irksome, even threatening; nothing is more threatening to secular modernity than the religious de votion that says, in the words of Josiah Royce, I am, even of my own will, thine.1 In the past, Roman Catholics true to pope and dogma, Mormons inspired by their prophet, and the like have struggled for survival. In the context of modern secularism, though, tyr anny of the normal may be even less able to grasp the personal initiative and the deep freedom-in-search-of-truth that animates the life-transforming experiences of those who march to the beat of different drummer. Those who adhere to the main stream will try to explain away the choices of someone who breaks away in order to pursue a significant commitment to de votional life, particularly if this is a life embedded in a new alter native religious group: explanatory platitudes abound—He was just lonely and without direction, or She never had a good family life. Thus, a potent form of self-direction is reduced to