September 16, 2007

The Common Good

First Church in Dedham

Rali Weaver

Yesterday afternoon I was sitting on my front steps, enjoying the beautiful afternoon and watching the traffic on the green that sits in front of our church. I saw bicyclists pass and dog walkers go by and I began to imagine what a modern commons would be like.

Over a thousand years, ago the commons or common land was considered to be owned by everyone with little need to exercise control over it, but over time the right to use the commons has become increasingly limited. From about the fifth century on, common land has been shared by “commoners” who needed common pasture for their animals or a common place to fish or to gather wood for fuel or sod for their land.

Even our own beloved state of Massachusetts is called a commonwealth, although the term “commonwealth” has in recent times taken on a more general meaning, something akin to political community.

The English noun "commonwealth" originally dates from the fifteenth century. The original phrase "common wealth" or "the common weal" comes from the old meaning of "wealth," which is "well-being." The term literally meant "common well-being." Therefore "commonwealth" originally meant a state or nation-state governed for the common good, as opposed to an authoritarian state governed for the benefit of a given class of owners.

Massachusetts declares itself as a commonwealth in its constitution, which states that "The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals: it is a social compact, by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common good."

And at its founding, some of the needs of the citizens of Massachusetts were considered preordained. A place to graze livestock being necessary to the colonists’ livelihood, our forefathers encouraged lands to be set aside in populated areas for the common good of all.

The problem became that the unregulated use of land was quickly overpowered by the demand. Take, for instance, the Boston Common, which was set aside as a cow pasture for Boston families, but as more prosperous families bought more cows the common was, in just a few years, over-grazed and no longer useful as a cow pasture.

This overuse of a limited resource, or "tragedy of the commons," is a problem found throughout history and is quite evident in our world today.

The "tragedy of the commons" with its tension between individual interests and the common good is what I hope we can meditate upon today.

Being here together and sharing this sanctuary and buildings, I believe it is a very good time to ponder the tensions that come with population growth. For instance I imagine one or two of you had trouble finding parking this morning and perhaps some of you Dedhamites might not have been able to park in your regular spot.

Resources such as parking, or how much food e should put out at coffee hour, or whether or not we will have enough teachers for Sunday school, are all things that we might sometimes take for granted, and all are taxed by population growth.

Our earth, air, water, forests, oceans, roads, housing, sound, night sky and food are just a few of the common resources that are affected by population growth.

I daresay that how we balance our individual needs against the needs of the collective will be the deciding factor not only for how we get along as two distinctly different parishes in this time of sharing, but also for how our government will end the war in Iraq, how our nation will work to slow global warming, and how our world will address issues of hunger and homelessness.

The opening words of the Declaration of Independence beautifully capture the central ideal of democracy, an ideal which has been all but destroyed by our capitalistic culture.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

How would it be if all our individual and collective decisions were all centered upon this one truth?

The problem of course becomes quickly evident.

What I believe to make me happy and what you believe will make you happy will eventually negate each other.

For instance, what I need to make me happy is loud jazz music which calms me down as I drive.

But this must eventually interfere with some happily napping person with an open window.

Aristotle explained this problem much more articulately than I:

That all persons call the same thing mine in the sense in which each does so may be a fine thing, but it is impracticable; or if the words are taken in the other sense, such a unity in no way conduces to harmony. And there is another objection to the proposal. For that which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it. Every one thinks chiefly of his own, hardly at all of the common interest; and only when he is himself concerned as an individual. For besides other considerations, everybody is more inclined to neglect the duty which he expects another to fulfill....

In a world where individual prosperity and abundance is preached from every street corner, the common good is often lost and forgotten.

Our inter-generational story today about Ezekiel Johnson offers a perfect example of the perception shift I believe needs to take place if we are to overcome the oppressive individualism that conflicts with our common good.

I want to clarify that I don’t hope that every homeless person who receives a windfall gives it all up for others. It is simply that when Ezekiel received the money he did not think only of his own needs, but what would benefit everyone.

It may also be true that the less we own, the easier it is to see what is truly needed.

I know that it is true that being single and childless I can take financial risks that my friends with children and spouses cannot.

I believe that it is equally true that when we are not blinded by our own personal needs and belongings, our eyes are wide open to see what is in the best interest of the collective.

If I am not in a hurry – blinded by my busy life - it is easier to do things as simple as recycling, which in turn means there is a bit less non-biodegradable trash in our dumps and a smaller amount of toxins in our air, which in turn means that my actions are helping to slow global warming.

All of our individual choices affect the greater good in countless immeasurable ways.

This year, as Needham’s buildings are restored, we have an invaluable opportunity to work together, making decisions for the greater good of us all: for our parishes, for our towns, for our faith tradition, and our state, our country, and our world.

While the free and unrestricted demand on finite resources ultimately dooms the resource through over-exploitation, well-planned and creative harvesting of common resources may have unexpected long-term prosperous harvests for us all.

Most scientists agree that we cannot stop the tragedy of the commons through simple scientific and mathematical solutions. What is needed is to deal with the discomforts of this change are new paradigms full of creativity.

As Unitarian Universalists who affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part, we are uniquely poised to address the concerns of the commons.

Let us take this year together to imagine our parishes not only as distinctly different entities with clearly defined borders, but also as new, ever-evolving entities, taking the opening words of Steven Biko to heart: “regarding our living together not as an unfortunate mishap warranting endless competition among us, but as a deliberate act making us a community of brothers and sisters jointly involved in the quest for a composite answer to the varied problems of life."

May it be so.