Moving from Theology to Meology

There was an excellent homily Sunday morning at church.  The priest spoke about a sign he had seen on another church.  It said we were replacing theology with meology, and he wanted to talk about that.  It got me thinking about it, which is what a good sermon, or homily, should do.

What is Meology?  The simple definition suggests it is placing your individual desires above all else.  If theology is the study of faith, God, and God’s relationship with the world, then meology would be the study of self and how one relates to the world.  The distinction replaces a supreme being with the individual, in effect making the individual the supreme being accountable only to oneself.

This theory, along with the principle of Stare Decisis[i] form the basis for the Supreme Court of the United States decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania vs. Casey[ii], when Justices O’Conn0r, Kennedy and Souter writing for the court said, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

In its support and modification of Roe vs. Wade,[iii] the court sided with the right of the individual woman over the right of the fetus (and the state).  What they did not, and could not, address was the long-term affect those decisions would have on society.

As we moved from a belief in the value of life, to a belief that a woman’s right to end life if she chooses is more important, what other unifying principles are discarded?

I believe Justice O’Connor, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Souter err in their statement that at the heart of liberty is self-definition.  I believe acceptance of self-responsibility is a more critical basis upon which individual and collective liberty must rest.  For if we are not responsible for our actions, how long does it take to move from freedom to anarchy? 

Since the court took it upon itself to establish a woman’s right to abortion as a guaranteed freedom, reinforcing that position in PPSEP v Casey, we see in our politics a clearly growing polarization of opinion as those with agendas, both obvious and hidden, maneuver to pull the nation apart.  What within our moral framework calls for us to find common purpose and basis for agreement, if we are focused solely on me rather than us?

---

[i] Latin – Let Stand

[ii] 505 U.S. 833 (1992), page 851

[iii]410 U.S. 113 (1973)