Is There Such a Thing as Absolute Liberty? (… Kebebasan?)
Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture by Matthew Petrusek,[1] is a hard book to absorb, nevertheless it is thought provoking and confusing at the same time. Questions like, “What does it mean?” “Wait, what?” This is definitely a coffee table book to discuss with my friend Barry. I re-read some passages twice or even three times, just so I can get the meaning and connect with the content, took me a while. Realistically, it will take me a month to finish this whole book because I want to know it all – many of the words in this book; reading, pronouncing looking for definitions for the first time. Oh well! I do not have that like of time – it is already Thursday!
This book led me into the intersection of faith, politics, and culture. It felt like a roadmap for engaging with secular ideologies while remaining rooted in Catholic principles. Even amidst the complexities of our contemporary world, the book encourages readers like me to share Christ with a delusional world. The book proposes that our overly political society can be an opportunity for evangelization. After deliberating, I chose to write on “Mirror, Mirror.”[2] classical liberalism and libertarianism aim to liberate individuals to define their own good, while acknowledging the arbitrariness inherent in these definitions.
This passage below highlights the tension between individual liberty and the potential fragmentation of society. It warns against extreme subjectivity and the dangers of narcissism, especially when ideologies become absolute and inflexible:
“What is ultimate truth? Anything you want it to be (just as long as you don’t call it “true”) what is the purpose of life? Anything you want it to be (just as long as you don’t think that it’s rational!!). What is the nature of adjust, well ordered society? Beyond making sure no one kills or robs each other and perhaps it’s not desperately poor anything you want it to be! (Just be sure you don’t call it “good”). In short, the flip side of absolute liberty is unmitigated narcissism both individually and socially. Since nothing anybody says or does makes any more sense or any less sense than anything someone else says or does each society can be more than a community of solipsists, each member believing that he saw her own way of life an understanding of reality is the best and no one literally no one can’t say it is a mistake horror such classical liberals and libertarians may still be mortal but they transformed into a epistemic and moral gods each creating the world in his or her own image and likeness.”[3]
I agree with Petrusek argument regarding the following statements he voiced in this chapter:
“In short, the flip side of absolute liberty is unmitigated narcissism, both individually and socially.” I agree that excessive freedom can lead to self-centeredness. When individuals prioritize their desires without considering others, it becomes narcissistic. Socially, this can manifest as a lack of concern for the common good, where everyone pursues their interests without regard for the collective. “Such classical liberals and libertarians may still be mortal, but they transform into epistemic and moral gods, each creating the world in his or her own image and likeness.” Petrusek criticizes classical liberals and libertarians, suggesting that their emphasis on individual freedom can lead to a god-like view of their own perspectives. The phrase “epistemic and moral gods” (“epistemic” another word I had to consult the dictionary) implies that classical liberals and libertarians shape reality based on their subjective beliefs, akin to divine creation.
Thought to Self:
I asked the question, “how does the passage above applies to me, and what am I thinking.” This would be such a great dinner dialog amongst my friends and colleagues:
- The passage suggests that if everyone’s perspective is equally valid (or invalid), society becomes a collection of isolated viewpoints. I think there must be an awareness of the need for social cohesion. While celebrating individuality, there should also be a shared norms and cultural heritage.
- Individualism is a defining feature of democracy, emphasizing personal autonomy and freedom. However, when taken to an extreme, it can lead to narcissism. I think individualism might be balanced with a sense of communal responsibility and shared values. While respecting individual rights, it also recognizes the importance of community and tradition.
- The passage highlights the danger of absolute certainty – where no one can admit mistakes. I believe humility and openness to dialogue are essential. I value diverse perspectives and recognize that no single ideology has all the answers.
My Takeaway:
Petrusek offers tools to engage with secular ideologies while remaining rooted in faith-based principles (in this case Catholic). It encourages effective communication of the Gospel in a distorted environment. While some may advocate avoiding the sociopolitical arena altogether, the book suggests otherwise. The current highly politicized society can be an opportunity for evangelization rather than an obstacle. By understanding the roots of our broken political culture, readers can redirect it back to the transcendent God and the authentic human good.
I will read this book thoroughly again. It is definitely a tool for me engage with my secular friends to share about God and as Petrusek said, “to strengthen the Christians of what is now Turkey.” Turkey, a label coined by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).[4]
[1] Matthew Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture, (Park Ridge, IL: Word on Fire, 2023).
[2] Petrusek, 308.
[3] Petrusek, 309.
[4] “Conservative Democracy,” Wikipedia, accessed April 4th, 2024. https://www.justiceanddevelopmentpatry.com/jdp.
About the Author
Shela Sullivan
Born and raised on the vibrant Penang Island in Malaysia, I cherish the Malaysian greeting, “Mari Makan!!” which reflects the warmth of shared meals. Since 1996, I have called Oregon my home enjoying the raindrops and the serenity of its beaches. The ocean connects me to nature and energizes me. I am a Wife - Mentor - Traveling Pastor - Sourcing Manager Construction. Favorite Bible Verse: "Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will give you the desires of your heart." ~ Psalm 37:4~ I reside with my husband, David and our fur-baby Rolo. We share passions for travelling, culture, diverse cuisines, home improvements, classic cars and humor.14 responses to “Is There Such a Thing as Absolute Liberty? (… Kebebasan?)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Shela, I too was looking up a number of definitions this week. I have a running list for the semester. Thank you for your discussion on one of the topics that Petrusek discussed in his book. Even though there were things I did not like about the book there were some good concepts in understanding approaches to experiencing self and the world. I struggled to see where his points brought an opportunity for someone to share the gospel. Was there any point that brought that concept front and center to you?
Hi Diane,
Thank you for reading my post and the question:
“I struggled to see where his points brought an opportunity for someone to share the gospel. Was there any point that brought that concept front and center to you?”
You are right, Petrusek did not directly emphasize about sharing the gospel. Petrusek quoted, “To survive in such a desert, and to bring the life of Gospel of Jesus to our fellow human beings in the midst of it, we need to draw water joyfully from the wells of salvation (IIsa.12:3). We do that through prayer, the reception of the sacraments and the practice of sacrificial love.”
While reading this book, I wasn’t expecting Petrusek to present an opportunity for me to share the gospel. As a Christian, I believe I always have the opportunity to share the gospel, not just by preaching it but also by demonstrating it through my actions.
Shela, thank you for this analysis. I am struggling a bit personally because I know for a fact that I was called to our current church a little over a year and a half ago. But I often feel like I don’t belong. I have some liberal leanings myself, but this church is very theologically liberal, such that a lay member will be “preaching” in a few weeks. As the Music Director I reached out to ask what the topic will be and which scripture passages she will be using. She replied that she’ll be talking about suffering and using some Buddhist passages as the scripture foundation. She had no idea which BIBLE passages to use. And our pastor replied with, “Yay! I’m so excited for this message you’ll be sharing!”
!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have no problem with bringing in all sorts of other readings and authors and writings when it comes to sermons. But… I find it hard to believe it’s not a GIVEN that we start with the Bible. sigh…
Anyway, I’m done venting. I’m curious if you got to the “politically conservative” section of the book, and if so, what stood out to you as untenable or worthy of discussion?
Hi Debbie,
Thank you for reading my post.
“Buddhist passages as a Scripture foundation.” – OMG! If I am in your shoes, I will struggle too. Since she said, she had no idea which BIBLE passages to use, this is your opportunity to show her the passage about suffering in the Bible. Guide her back to the scripture. Here is a passage I have preached before on suffering: 2 Corinthians 1:8-9. Suffering calls us to trust God rather than relying solely on the life-sustaining props of this world. Or you can prepare worship songs based on this passage. Sorry, I am giving you advice here (habit).
Yes, I did come across “politically conservative” section. Petrusek engages too much with secular ideologies. Not that I am close minded, specifically regarding non-theistic conservatism, Petrusek engages with its principles. He recognizes that conservatives often emphasize moral values and tradition – I do not quite agree with this. Yes, to plant a seed about Christ is attainable. This is a great book for discussion.
Shela,
I laughed out loud when I read, “What does it mean?” I had my dictionary open most of the time 🤣. There were some chapters that were pushing some buttons for me, and, like Diane, I shut down and almost walked away from this week altogether, and you know that’s countercultural to my core 😬.
Your post reminded me of a time when I walked into a bible study and the facilitator began with, “how many people are in the room? 40? That means there are 40 different theologies in this room.”
Then add in the layer of people who are not believers of Jesus at all and the conversation becomes more interesting (at least for me). I have worked with non-Christians for awhile and I find that actions speak louder than words.
Since I know you come from a culture of community over individualism, if you were to take some key points from this book and write a counterpoint, what would they be?
Great question Nancy.
I would say, “[Focus on God’s word (Bible)]. Books provide us with wisdom from another person’s perspective on various topics, including our understanding of God. As we seek spiritual growth, let us lean toward Scripture and allow the Holy Spirit to guide us to the right books that will enrich our spiritual lives.
I appreciate Petrusek’s book as a valuable discussion tool. It’s thought-provoking, and one key lesson I’ve learned is the importance of seizing opportunities to share Christ, regardless of our location or the people we encounter. Let me share an experience: I once sat at a table with someone who practiced Witchcraft. Instead of challenging her, I simply shared the miracles I have experienced through Christ. Several months later, someone from that same table informed me that she had returned to church after several years.
As someone who comes from a community-based, multicultural background, I have made it a practice to give Christ a place at the table. Petrusek’s message in his book resonates with this idea—the opportunity to share Christ is crucial. Although he used words that sent many of us to the dictionary, the essence of his message remains powerful.
Shela! I can so identify with your post and the need for a vocabulary review and dictionary. It’s not easy this week. Where did you feel Petrusek could have provided more clarity in making his case?
Hi Daren, thank you for reading my post.
Having read some of the posts from our peers, I believe that Petrusek could have provided more elaboration on the idea of Christ as the center of secular ideologies. While he briefly touched on this topic (page 4), many readers were left disappointed and confused. Given the book’s title, there should have been a dedicated chapter discussing the importance, benefits, and outcomes of Christ-based evangelism. I would have liked to read his experience.
Hi Shela,
I am really struggling with this book. I appreciate your thoughts and your post. You write “The current highly politicized society can be an opportunity for evangelization rather than an obstacle by understanding the roots of our broken political culture, readers can redirect it back to the transcendent God and the authentic human good.” That is where my struggle is. Do you think that is the correct arena (or one of them) for trying to woo people into the arms of God? I am struggling with that thought and would love to know your opinion! thanks
Hi Chris,
Thank you for reading my post and for the question.
The United States has embraced numerous ideologies, often at the expense of forgetting its historical roots or out of fear of offending people to maintain popularity. However, why cannot governmental branches begin proceedings with a prayer? Doing so does not imply disrespect for other religious beliefs; rather, it acknowledges that the United States has Christian foundations.
In my opinion, no one can “woo” another into the arms of God; only the Holy Spirit can accomplish that transformation. Our responsibility is to plant the seed, trusting that the Holy Spirit will do the rest. Interestingly, Petrusek also touched on the topic of prayer in his work for transformation.
Hi Shela, I agree with you. This book was a challenging read. Something I appreciated about Petrusek was his encouragement to readers to re-enter the sociopolitical arena with the gospel message. This takes courage. I enjoyed reading your personal thoughts concerning the book. Could you tell me what methods you used when dialoguing with someone with opposing views or who was hostile to the gospel?
Thanks for your post, Shela. Like many, I, too, can relate to needing to look up words and re-read things this week, 😉
My question builds upon the question from Elysse and one of your previous replies where you spoke to the importance of “not just by preaching it but also by demonstrating it through my actions.” I’d love to know what that looks like — how do you see living your faith come to life in the way you dialogue rather than by what you say in that dialogue?
Hi Akwese, thank you for reading my post and for the question.
” “not just by preaching it but also by demonstrating it through my actions.” I’d love to know what that looks like — how do you see living your faith come to life in the way you dialogue rather than by what you say in that dialogue?”
In the Malaysian culture, respect expected. As someone who values this cultural ethos, I recognize that respect often manifests through listening. Recently, I engaged in a dialogue with one who practices witchcraft. Her questions about Jesus—some of which were annoying, prompted me to respond with respect instead of emotion.
Rather than engaging in argumentative discourse, I invited the Holy Spirit to guide our conversation. Drawing from my own journey, I shared how my Hindu background once embraced sacrificial ceremonies. However, in Christianity, I no longer compelled to perform such rituals; instead, I focus on what Jesus has already done for me, the ultimate sacrifice on the cross.
As our interactions continued, my family friend’s tone shifted. She now asks, “What are you preaching this week?” I gladly share insights from my faith journey. In our last gathering, I extended an invitation to church. The seeds have been planted; now, we entrust their growth to prayer and the Holy Spirit.
Remember, my role is not to force change but to sow seeds of truth and love. I hope my continued conversations bear fruit.
Hi Elysse, thank you for reading my post and for the question.
Growing up in a non-Christian family, I faced the constant need to defend my faith and stand firm in my belief in Christ. Persecution was a reality, especially within my own family. However, cultural norms added an additional layer of complexity. In my culture, challenging elders—whether grandparents, parents, aunties, or uncles—is considered disrespectful. As a result, I learned not to engage in direct confrontation but rather to demonstrate my faith through my actions.
When faced with challenges, I remain steadfast and avoid becoming emotional. For instance, when a family member falls ill, I offer to lay hands on them and pray for their healing. Who wouldn’t want to experience restoration? I boldly pray out loud, invoking the name of Jesus. This practice extends beyond my family circle. During birthday celebrations with my non-Christian friends, I offer blessings in Jesus’s name. I don’t shy away from being a witness for Christ; instead, I embrace the opportunity.
However, there have been moments when family members have called me out during gatherings, often with an alcohol drink in hand (maybe the 10th drink). Rather than arguing with some who is not sober, I respond graciously. I might say, “I would love to discuss Jesus with you. How about we continue this conversation tomorrow around XYZ time?” My role, I believe, is to plant seeds of faith, trusting that the Holy Spirit will nurture and grow them.