Ethically Christian cleansing vs. a life/love down off my soapbox?

Some posts of late have made me just stop and and reflect on the christian response to issues of ethics, HT to John for posting on ethics and  stem cell research; Marc for reflecting on abortion and Alan for making my brain ache raising human 2.0. 

Me on my soap box...

I know what my natural inclination of a response is - an emotive outburst which would label, judge and belittle people for their shallow ethics and questionable morals.  I would I am sure reflect on the arrogant of scientists playing at God and remember that quote from the film Jurassic Park:

"scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."

In fact I would be more than happy to stand on the soap box for a long time, I would be a very hard man to shift, but I think in reading all these posts something has been nagging away at me, am I any less ethical than the people I am condemming? So I'd like in the rest of this post to first challenge my own shoddy ethics and then wonder with you if there is not a much more excellent way?

An unethical christian?

First of all what is this ethics word that I am banding around?  Well, Wiki tells me that ethics is:

"(from the Ancient Greek "ethikos", meaning "arising from habit"), a major branch of philosophy, is the study of value or quality. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right, wrong, good, evil, and responsibility. It is divided into three primary areas: meta-ethics (the study of what ethicality is), normative ethics (the study of what ethical truths there are and how they are known), and applied ethics (the study of the use of ethical knowledge)."

For me as a Christian then my ethics should be informed by the teachings of the bible.  Here I run into my 2 issues in my reflections on my own ethical waywardness:

First - the bible doesn't often address issues of 21st century living in a particularly direct and clear way - it is therefore often easy to use the bible out of its context to support a particular christian position on a subject

Second - rather than try and explore what the principles are that can be applied in this new context I'drather allow this blind spot approach so I can be right/secure/solid that I am not letting God down and letting those who need the truth have it, clear and usually straight between the eyes.  For example:

A christian:  heh you murdering so and so, I know where you are going for your sinful selfish actions, I hope you have no peace, I hope you suffer until you repent...

An observer: heh i thought you christians followed a guy who said something about not judging and aren't you meant to loving or something?

An ethical christian response?

In terms of an ethical approach then what can I change/learn/reflect - it is clear that the bible teaches a lot about right/wrong but in terms of deeds but also in thought and words.  In other words, I would argue, an ethical christian can not resort to a sinful position their thoughts/words in response to a sinful deed.  An alternative way to look at it is that as a Christian I need to respond in a loving manner, it is not just truth but truth that is infused with love.  In exploring what a loving ethical christian response is I would suggest that it maybe involves the following:

1. Talk about what I know and listen to those who do:  HT again to John as he raises this important point that often we know next to nothing about the issue we want to form an ethical judgement about - it's right/wrong, good/bad because my pastor said so, the bible says so, that magazine says so...  Love in this context means research, exploring, maybe even going and forming a relationship with the people you want to disagree with and label wrong.  It might not change my mind but I'll see a different perspective and I am much more likely to see that it is a human being in pain not too dis-similar from me (altho my pain may be more hidden/socially acceptable).

2. Be contextual in applying the bible: as a christian one of the things I want is for my life to line up with God (especially where it doesn't affect me personally).  That means I need to understand the culture and context of the revelation of God, what is the principle here and how should that be applied into my own culture and context?  It may mean that I need to read some Christian thought leaders in these subjects, I might have to unlearn something of what I have always thought/assumed - can I be teachable, humble and prepared to admit that it is likely with my imperfect knowledge of God that I am realy likely to have got this wrong? 

I also need to remember the meta-themes of the the bible - love, justice, mercy, grace - the pharisees had wonderfully formed biblical based ethical view of who was right/wrong, in/out and Jesus criticised/challenged them for forgetting mercy... I feel that Jesus would use same words if not stronger with me!

[As an aside I think it is a mark of respect to point 1. that people who aren't christians but who want to engage christians in these matters will be much more open minded about 2. and studied the bible far more than most christians will have.  If that is the level of respect people show and my faith then I need to treat my faith with the same respect and my enagagement with these people even more so].

3. Be part of the (God) solution not just part of the condemnation: For me a loving response requires this last step of actually wanting to part of the solution.  Often I am prepared to research an issue, even chat with people who don't share my view and search for God but once I have my ethical answer as a Christian that's it, I stop.  I wash my hands of the issue, I am ethically clean, guilt free, it is not my responsibility to do anything futher.  Right?

Maybe not.  I am still standing on my soap box, still have a higher view, still talking down to to the world, well I would be if it was listening.  The thing is no one but another christian or an extremely polite person is likely to care what my ethical answer is.  Why should they?  I may the right to speak but what right have I to be listened too?  I need to step down off my soapbox and into a life/love of action.

For me this was bought home powerfully when I reflected on the words of Mother Teresa, who spoke at the American National Prayer Breakfast, about abortion.  As you might expect Mother Teresa as a Christian spoke out against abortion but spoke using the ethic of love, saying:

"I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? How do we persuade a woman not to have an abortion? As always, we must persuade her with love and we remind ourselves that love means to be willing to give until it hurts. Jesus gave even His life to love us. So, the mother who is thinking of abortion, should be helped to love, that is, to give until it hurts her plans, or her free time, to respect the life of her child. The father of that child, whoever he is, must also give until it hurts..."

More than that though, for Mother Teresa it was not enought to just speak out a loving truth, no for her she was putting her life, her actions where her words were:

"...I will tell you something beautiful. We are fighting abortion by adoption — by care of the mother and adoption for her baby. We have saved thousands of lives. We have sent word to the clinics, to the hospitals and police stations: “Please don’t destroy the child; we will take the child.” So we always have someone tell the mothers in trouble: “Come, we will take care of you, we will get a home for your child.” And we have a tremendous demand from couples who cannot have a child — but I never give a child to a couple who have done something not to have a child. Jesus said, “Anyone who receives a child in my name, receives me.” By adopting a child, these couples receive Jesus but, by aborting a child, a couple refuses to receive Jesus.

Please don’t kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child and be loved by the child. From our children’s home in Calcutta alone, we have saved over 3000 children from abortion. These children have brought such love and joy to their adopting parents and have grown up so full of love and joy."

For me this drives home the point that as much as we can sin in word, thought and deed as a Christian I am called to love in word, thought but also deed - I must be prepared to let my ethics inform my actions. 

4. pay the price: ethical actions come at a cost - it will cost me time, it will cost me money, it will cost me inconvienence - what if instead of being happy that I know abortion is wrong I did maybe some of the following:

• gave to a a charity that provides care/counselling for mothers to be or those who have just suffered the trauma of an abortion?
• trained to be one of those counsellors or got involved in some other way?
• opened up my home and my life to be a mentor, adopting young women who desperately need the teaching/love of a mother as they face being a mother? Or a father figure for the fathers of the baby?
• opened up my home/family to adopt or foster, particularly for children with learning difficulties, or problem family children that are a lot less popular/likely to be adopted?

What if I just prayed God help be me part of your solution and then followed where that led me? 

What if I asked /listened to people what help, support, love they would like/need and then added that to my prayers? 

What if I acted on the outcome, let it filter through mercy, through love, through justice,through grace and involved myself, time and treasure in this? 

What if I remembered that Jesus did not just form an ethical statement and give an ethical teachings and lived an ethical life, but turned his ethics into action, his life into serving, his death into liberation, his resurection into hope and calls us as his followers to follow his ethical example and live an ethical life that would transform, turn upside down and revolutionarise our world.

"Father your will be done - in/through/by me - here on earth as it is in heaven..."

Comments

[John Smulo]

Paul,

This is a very helpful well-thought out post. I especially am challenged by what you say about needing to be part of the solution and also pay the price.

It reminds me that I can get into thinking ethics is about words instead of hands and feet.

[Stephen Garner]

Great piece, especially the bit about the cost of ethical engagement. I think ethical engagement scares a lot of people. They don't want to think about these things because they might end up losing something - whether that be a cherished "personal" belief, material goods or respect of peers.

I read Amy Laura Hall's article "For Shame?" in Christianity Today the other day, and it made me stop and think about how my words and actions match up.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/september/35.40.html

[Tim]

Any ethical debate exists witin a climate of societal values. At the moment, the life of an individual is important - a century ago it was duty and respect. Let us not confuse our ethical decisions with personal preference. After all, are not all these things important parts of what we call 'good' human character?.

Ethical angst (in one form or another) will always be with us, so thinking, praying and understanding are really the only things we can do when presented with the daily conundrums all of us face.

For every issue, there will be a multitude of responses - and which one is right - the one that gets the most votes - I think not??

[Paul]

John - thanks very much.

Stephen - thanks for the thoughts and the link will check it out - I think the moral imperative to get involved is a rubicon that I am often reluctant to cross, so this was pretty much a memo to self...

Tim, bro yoo are my guru of angst, lol but you are right, ethical enagement requires heads, hearts and hands...

[DH]

Hey Paul, Hope you don't mind me commenting. What is your take on this. To me it isn't what is said but the attitude and heart of the person pointing out the problems. If we correctly relay the attitude from the Bible and it isn't our attitude than I feel it is appropriate to point out things to help people to the Truth. I feel that many times the Bible IS definitive on things for the 21st century but many times ones predisposition gets in theway before a person actually looks into it. When I discuss issues like abortion, homosexuality and other moral social issues I find those who support these terrible things have presdispositions that make them support these issues irrespective of the Bible. When one reads Romans 1, 1 Cor 6 and all of the many other passages one can see it is difficult to support these issues. I do think that care is needed not to slam stuff over the head. However, if a friend or close person has got a view different from Scripture I think one can lovingly state what the Word of God says from an attitude "have you considered what x,y,z scripture says", etc. I have had friends who happened to be homosexual and without me saying a word they knew I didn't approve of their behavior but I still cared about them like Jesus did and at the same time they knew I cared about them. However, we mustn't remember that that love should never be done in such a way as to condone things that God says is wrong. It is a balance that I hope you and I can appreciate rather than reject the soap-box and/or reject life/love off of my soapbox.

I feel all people can be turned from sin but when a culture says "one can't change a behavior" that is where culture is placing limits unecessarily on God. That "behavior" can be anything but for as an example I used homosexulaity. What do you think Paul? I think one should be totally Emergent and one shouldn't be totally Modern. One must have exactly 50/50 modern and postmodern in their philosophy. Paul, would you consider this post-post modern? :)

DH DH DH

[Paul]

DH, great thoughts bro. Post-post modern is probably a whole new subject, hect i'm still getting my head around just post-modern :)

I think it is all to the good to be self critical and self aware and study the scriptures as well as those who have commented on them - to be that is a wise way of forming ethical views. I think what i was thinking was the Q not just of what is the ethical truth of the issue - in the post modern world that is too easy to say ok that's your tribe great but my tribe do xyz... more I was trying to think about the shift away from the question of what is true to what use is that truth - to that end I think as a christian my ethics involve loving actions as well as loving words/thoughts...

If that makes sense?

[dh]

Paul, great points. However, I feel we need to equally focus on words, actions and thoughts. If we focus overboard on one of the three to the detrimate of the others that is when the observed problems of post-modern takes place. I think to any question made to modern Christians "what use is that truth" you will get clear definitive answers. To say those answers are not definitive I feel is a disservice to what Christ and the Word of God say. That is what I feel is the problem with post-modernity. I think if you see my balanced response in addressing the extremes (our discusions of heaven/hell; Salvation/Sanctification and the clarifications and understandings therein) then we can better address the problems of modern and post-modern Christianity. Hense, that is why I consider myself post-post-modern in that I see the resonsibility to all three of attitude, actions and words to Christ. IMHO, post-modern Christianity fails to address words that clearly go against Scripture but the actions/attitudes seem more often than not go with Scripture. At the same time the words of modern Christianity are right on but the attitude is such that it clouds the clear, perfect, consistent, Truth of Gods Word, personal responsibility, Body of Christ and the members living for Christ in everyway and I mean every way. Does that make sense? If we are honest BOTH seem incorrect. For me the problems of both modern and post-modern Christianity push me away from both to what I would call post-post modern where the correct words of the modern Christian are combined with the correct action of the post-modern Christian (even though I'm a strong conservative Christian that is not to say a Conservative can't be post-modern). I hope you get my point and that it is not confusing. I hope this gives you a little background into the term post-post modern. To me the answer to "what is the use of this truth?" is to help people change to the Glory of Christ and away from things that seperate one from Christ. That goes for actions, words and thoughts equally. Not just words (aka modern) or just actions/attitudes (aka post-modern) but equally both. If we had the correct words of the modern christian and the correct actions/attitudes of the post-modern Christian I think we could see a great outpouring of God's Spirit. Any thoughts? Again another great discussion. :)

[Paul]

Thanks DH, I really do appreciate you taking time out to be so full in your response.

I do find what you say intriguing however my fundamental is that modern christianity's claim on absolute and objective truth is largely overblown. That is not to say there is not a significant body of truth that the modern church has added to the cannon of church history - as there is. Personally I find my evengelical routes for instanec to be a delightful beneficial heritage, I am not anti modern, just that I for some ways have moved beyond it to something else.

You may well be right though, it's better than any theories I have :). Although I do wonder if we can merge modern/post-modern together as you suggest - in part as I think modernity has added to the richness of the tradition rather than as a seperate strand in and of itself. In other words modern will sit along side post-modern as a source of truth and a collection of some truths and the obscuring of others just as any other period of church history as. If you see what I mean?

However, I also agree that we are usually not as far as apart as the language would suggest and that end we enrich each other, well you enrich me anywho, to which I am grateful for the conversation.

[dh]

I guess for me I DO see absolute and objective truth in God's Word and the rejction thereof os what pushes me away from post-modern Christianity. Hesne,I don't see how it is overblown. When one looks at exactly as to what thew Word says, context, Scripture in light of Scripture, etc. then I don't see at all what you are saying. However, I do think the reason why people have "moved away to something else", if people are honest with themselves, is not what is said by modern Christianity but the attitude of the people who are modern Christianity Christians. So for me post-post moder Christianity is so important. The definitive truth of modern Christianity with the proper attitude of the post-modern Christianity (minus the anti-modern prevelent of many post-modern which is not yourself). I have no problem with new thought and ideas relvelation, etc. as long as they are consistent to God's Word. Once they deviate that is when I seperate from the "new ideas". Many times these ideas are not God's ideas but mans. When I see modern Christianity I see consistency and I see the absolute truth of God's Word. That is not to say I don't believein revelation and ALL of the Gifts of theSpirit but all those operate within the consistency of God's Word. When they aren't then I believe they are not of God but of man.