There are two kinds of people in the world: those who think there are two kinds of people, and those who think it's not that simple. When it comes to ethics and morality I am one of those who think it is that simple and that the world can be divided between Christians and everyone else.
This is not to say that the group labeled "Christians" consists of people who are inherently more moral or ethical than those "everyone else." Because of God's common grace, both groups have access to the "law written on the heart" and have the ability to act in accordance with the natural law. Where we differ is that Christians also have the special revelation of Scripture and the Incarnation. The ultimate source for Christian ethics, therefore, must be founded on God and the work of His son, Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, this is often not the case and our ethical theories tend to be as indistinguishable from non-believers as are our moral actions.
Without digressing into an extended critique of the ethical theories typically embraced by Christians (deontological, Divine Command, natural law, etc.) I want to point out that they tend to share a common trait. Almost all of these theories focus on epistemological questions such as how we can know the good or how we can discern "ought" from "is". As essential as these questions are to moral philosophy they tend to distract us from the more pressing issue of how we are able to do what is moral.
There is an underlying assumption that once questions about right and wrong are answered then the ethical questions are settled. But in real world situations, most moral quandaries exist not because we fail to distinguish between good and evil but that we fail to do that which is good.
The appeal of virtue ethics is that it places a greater emphasis on being rather than doing. While not without its own problems, this focus on the kind of moral being a person is rather than on goals or rules that must be followed make virtue ethics a particularly appealing option for Christians. As theologian Paul Lewis explains, the task of the Christian virtue ethicist is to become the sort of person who has certain dispositions to respond to certain situations in characteristic ways which illustrate the essence of true humanity, which is "true" only when in relation to God.
What is often missing from virtue ethics, though, is the work and role of the Holy Spirit. Within some Christian circles the fear of being viewed as charismatic or "Pentecostal" leads people to avoid or downplay pneumatology (doctrines about the Holy Spirit). This is unfortunate, for the Spirit has an essential role, not only in the general life of the Christian, but in Christian ethics in particular.
There is much that non-charismatic evangelicals like me can learn from those who approach ethics from a holiness tradition. Pentecostal theologian Paul Lewis, for instance, provides an excellent introduction to the Spirit's role in his essay A Pneumatological Approach to Virtue Ethics.
A pneumatological approach, says Lewis, finds the origins of the virtues in God. The Spirit guides us from the lack of virtue to the source of all virtues, producing in us by this relationship the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:22-23). Because God is the origin, there is a coherence of the virtues in God himself: If God is the unifying element of the virtues then none of the virtues are secondary. Just as the Sprit distributes the different virtues to each individual and resolves any apparent dilemmas between specific virtues.
The Holy Spirit also plays a role in developing the virtues by mediating them through the community of faith (the church), the Word of God (the Bible), and the individual self (the believer's conscience). The Spirit works through these three means to both develop our ethical understanding (i.e., illuminating the moral requirements outlined in Scripture) and to help us live and act virtuously.
"But as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; since it is written, 'You shall be holy, for I am holy.'" (1 Peter 15-16) This task of making us holy--the process of sanctification-- is reserved for the Holy Spirit who helps us conform to the image of Christ. Sanctification, though, is a cooperative work that involves both the Spirit and the individual Christian. Unlike regeneration, we have an active role to play in the process. Every ethical and moral action is a step either forward or backward on the road to becoming sanctified.
The term sanctification is derived from a Greek word meaning "to be made holy", to set apart. In order for Christians to be sanctified, to be set apart from "everyone else", we must embrace an ethical theory allows us not only to do the good but to be like Christ. In order to do that, we should acknowledge the role in our moral philosophy for the Sanctifier.
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/mt/mt-trackback.cgi/3671
1
Nicely said, Joe. I have only two small points to make.
We need not think that a virtue ethic can't exist peaceably alongside one or another account of the nature of the good or right (Divine Command, deontology, consequentialism, etc.) For every account of the nature of the good/right would have us act in such a way we conform to that nature; indeed it would have us come to possess deeply engrained patterns of thought and action that lead us naturally to act in a way that conforms to the good/right. Such patterns are the virtues. A virtue ethic is, as it were, the practical side of one's ethical theory.
You say: "Sanctification, though, is a cooperative work that involves both the Spirit and the individual Christian. Unlike regeneration, we have an active role to play in the process."
I would have thought that such a sharp distinction between the two could not be maintained. Regeneration - the initial loosening of the bonds of sin - is but the first step in sanctification. Both we and the Spirit are involved all along the way.
posted on 06.14.2007 8:32 AM2
Joe said:
The ultimate source for Christian ethics, therefore, must be founded on God and the work of His son, Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, this is often not the case and our ethical theories tend to be as indistinguishable from non-believers as are our moral actions.
Joe, we have been warned about this:
Luke 6:46 “Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord’ and do not do what I say?”
Part of the problem is the Western/American approach to Christianity. Too many people believe in some magical solution in that we just believe in Christ and call him Lord, then we are saved and life on earth is wonderful.
The truth is that we need to live a life to the fact that Jesus is Lord. Listening is not enough; we have to do what it says. Saying that Jesus Christ is Lord is irrelevant if not followed by the action of trusting in him and following what he states to follow.
To paraphrase Romans 10, If I believe in my heart and pledge with my mouth, I am saved, has been wrongly interpreted. We have reduced it to a magical formula. The word used for believe in Romans 10 and other parts of the Bible is pistis which means a covenantal pledge of faith in, and faithfulness to, a covenant partner. This is more than just saying, it is living.. Romans 10 is not a “free get out of jail card”
If we genuinely pledge our life, trust in Jesus wholly then evidence of our change will be evident. We can’t just intellectually believe, even the demons believe that Jesus is Lord, however, the demons don’t pledge to follow and trust Jesus.
posted on 06.14.2007 6:04 PM3
Tim L.
When you quoted Luke 6:46 it was the spark I needed for my sermon next week. This week's is already written and ready for recording at the radio station tomorrow. It's titled "Abba, Father." It is, after all, for broadcast on Father's day.
However I had been hearing this title from God, "The Experimental Jesus" about following what Jesus Christ said here in America and what a radical, experimental thing that would.
And, bam, there it is, in your blog.
Thank you so much. You've been an inspiration for me.
Love
posted on 06.14.2007 10:18 PMDavid
4
From the Westminster Larger Catechism:
Q75: What is sanctification?
A75: Sanctification is a work of God's grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit [1] applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them,[2] renewed in their whole man after the image of God;[3] having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts,[4] and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened,[5] as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.[6]
1. Eph. 1:4; I Cor. 6:11; II Thess. 2:13
2. Rom. 6:4-6
3. Eph. 4:23-24
4. Acts 11:18; I John 3:9
5. Jude 1:20; Heb. 6:11-12; Eph. 3:16-19; Col. 1:10-11
6. Rom. 6:4; 6:14; Gal. 5:24
Q77: Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?
A77: Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification,[1] yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ;[2] in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof;[3] in the former, sin is pardoned;[4] in the other, it is subdued:[5] the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation;[6] the other is neither equal in all,[7] nor in this life perfect in any,[8] but growing up to perfection.[9]
1. I Cor. 1:30; 6:11
2. Rom. 4:6, 8
3. Ezek. 36:27
4. Rom. 3:24-25
5. Rom. 6:6, 14
6. Rom. 8:33-34
7. I John 2:12-14; Heb. 5:12-14
8. I John 1:8, 10
9. II Cor. 7:1; Phil 3:12-14
Q78: Whence ariseth the imperfection of sanctification in believers?
A78: The imperfection of sanctification in believers ariseth from the remnants of sin abiding in every part of them, and the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit; whereby they are often foiled with temptations, and fall into many sins,[1] are hindered in all their spiritual services,[2] and their best works are imperfect and defiled in the sight of God.[3]
1. Rom. 7:18, 23; Mark 14:66-72 ; Gal. 2:11-12
posted on 06.15.2007 2:49 AM2. Heb. 12:1
3. Isa. 64:6; Exod. 28:88
5
From the Westminster Larger Catechism:
Q75: What is sanctification?
A75: Sanctification is a work of God's grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit [1] applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them,[2] renewed in their whole man after the image of God;[3] having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts,[4] and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened,[5] as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.[6]
1. Eph. 1:4; I Cor. 6:11; II Thess. 2:13
2. Rom. 6:4-6
3. Eph. 4:23-24
4. Acts 11:18; I John 3:9
5. Jude 1:20; Heb. 6:11-12; Eph. 3:16-19; Col. 1:10-11
6. Rom. 6:4; 6:14; Gal. 5:24
Q77: Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?
A77: Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification,[1] yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ;[2] in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof;[3] in the former, sin is pardoned;[4] in the other, it is subdued:[5] the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation;[6] the other is neither equal in all,[7] nor in this life perfect in any,[8] but growing up to perfection.[9]
1. I Cor. 1:30; 6:11
2. Rom. 4:6, 8
3. Ezek. 36:27
4. Rom. 3:24-25
5. Rom. 6:6, 14
6. Rom. 8:33-34
7. I John 2:12-14; Heb. 5:12-14
8. I John 1:8, 10
9. II Cor. 7:1; Phil 3:12-14
Q78: Whence ariseth the imperfection of sanctification in believers?
A78: The imperfection of sanctification in believers ariseth from the remnants of sin abiding in every part of them, and the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit; whereby they are often foiled with temptations, and fall into many sins,[1] are hindered in all their spiritual services,[2] and their best works are imperfect and defiled in the sight of God.[3]
1. Rom. 7:18, 23; Mark 14:66-72 ; Gal. 2:11-12
posted on 06.15.2007 2:50 AM2. Heb. 12:1
3. Isa. 64:6; Exod. 28:88
6
Joe,
I'd be curious to know why you think "most moral quandaries exist not because we fail to distinguish between good and evil but that we fail to do that which is good." It seems to think that, you have to presume that the effects of sin primarily corrupt the will, rather than the mind. We all know, though, the inherent problems of that sort of volunteerism. : )
Secondly, many ethical theories do attempt to explain akrasia (knowing what the right thing is without doing it), so it's not clear something like natural law puts all of its eggs in the "just figure out what's right" basket.
Thirdly, have you read Oliver O'Donovan's Resurrection and Moral Order? I just read it a few months ago and I found it the most challenging and stimulating book on ethics I have ever read. O'Donovan is responding to NLT of John Finnis and others and trying to develop an ethics that actually takes the resurrection seriously. It is one of the most stimulating books I've ever read--you may be interested in it (I plan to blog through it a little at Mere O over the summer).
posted on 06.15.2007 12:33 PM7
The etymology of the word "Sanctification" isn't Greek, it's Latin. The Greek word would be hagiasmos.
posted on 06.18.2007 6:40 PM