Christian Ideas Topic I – Right and Wrong
Reading list:
Lewis, Mere Christianity (Book One)
Deuteronomy (Especially chapters 4-6 and 12+)
Matthew (Chapters 5-7)
Aquinas, Treatise on Law (Questions 90-94 – up through Natural Law)
Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals
Darwin, Descent of Man (Chapter 4 – evolution of moral sense)
Christian Ideas successfully completed its first series of reading and discussion, an exploration of fundamental concepts of morality. “Success” can be defined several ways, and there were several ways in which this new small group ministry succeeded.
- It succeeded in keeping a group of a dozen Christians regularly reading, meeting, and discussing ideas that are central to Christianity. The group ranged from college-aged to, let us say, those more advanced in years. It included Catholics and Presbyterians. Some participants had read or studied much of the material previously, while others experienced these classic works for the first time.
- It succeeded in reading works on morality that ranged from the relatively simple to the particularly impenetrable. Each dealt in some way with the question of what defines morality. What makes something right or wrong?
- It succeeded in actively engaging each of the participants in thoughtful discussion about the ideas present in the works and how they relate to each other and to our faith. In some cases, the discussion aimed at simply understanding what the author meant to say. Where the meaning was more clear, the group grappled with the implications of the work and how it reinforces or challenges our notions of Christian morality.
- It succeeded in sustaining sufficient interest to continue on to a new topic, starting in late January. More to follow.
No synopsis will do justice to the classic readings in scripture and philosophy. But to give a bit of the flavor of the Christian Ideas exploration into Right and Wrong:
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (Book 1), published in 1952
This was the warm-up. Lewis’ argument is straightforward. There is a law of correct behavior that we all, to one extent or another, know and accept. We do not, however, follow this law. Further, the law stems not from us, but from some force, being, or power external to mankind, leaving us, in his understatement, with “cause to be uneasy.”
Plato, Meno, written around 350 - 400 B.C.
Can virtue be taught? Socrates responds to Meno’s simple question by saying that neither he, nor anyone he knows, can even say what virtue is. Socrates and Meno search for what defines virtue (or morality). We can all name things that are virtues, but what is virtue in and of itself? Socrates eventually concludes that virtue is “right opinion,” given as a divine gift. Without anchoring this right opinion with actual knowledge, however, it flies away.
Deuteronomy (Chapters 4-6 and 12+) and Matthew (Chapters 5-7)
Old Testament law and the Sermon on the Mount provide scriptural answers to how one should act. The Law of Moses, from Deuteronomy, is most vehement in its condemnation of idolatry, but also prescribes specific rules for living in a community. Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount have a very different tone, but much of the same emphasis. Idolatry extends not simply to worship of other gods, but to worship of other things. Rules for living in a community include not only the specific written law, but the governing principals behind these laws.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Treatise on Law (Questions 90-94), written around 1270
Beginning with a definition of law itself, Aquinas presents a structured hierarchy of law.
Eternal Law – God’s will that governs all creation.
Natural Law – Man’s participation as a rational creature in the eternal law.
Human Law – Particular determinations by man in accordance with the known but indemonstrable general principals of natural law.
Divine Law – Additional law given by God to Man through the scriptures to provide us guidance that cannot err and direct us to our proper end of eternal happiness.
Law of Sin – The inclination to sin that is within us, and that is sinful to the extent that it strays from the order of reason.
For Aquinas, the general principles of morality spring from how, as rational creatures, we participate most harmoniously with God’s will – the concept he terms Natural Law. Aquinas also presents a useful discussion on the relationship between Divine Law of the Old and New Testaments.
Immanuel Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, published in 1785
It doesn’t get any easier after the title. Rather than starting with God (as does Aquinas), Kant develops principles of morality based on reason alone. Picking a few highlights from 80 very dense pages:
- The only criterion by which to judge the morality of an act is the will of the person acting. Consequences and effects have no bearing.
- An act has moral virtue only if it is done purely from a sense of duty. Acts performed to achieve a particular end, or those that follow one’s inclinations, may be proper and amiable, but have no true moral worth.
- One should act in a way that the rule (maxim) one follows could become a universal law (Kant’s categorical imperative).
- Act so as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or another, in every case as an “end” and never only as a “means.”
Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (Chapter 4), published in 1871
The issue is not evolution, but morality. Darwin’s chapter on moral sense argues that human moral sense is an inherited instinct. Many animals have social instincts, of which man is the most evolved. Gratifying these social instincts in man involves acting for the common good, in order to receive the praise of one’s compatriots and avoid the scorn that would result from acting only for one’s own desires. The feeling of pleasure or shame from acting “rightly” or “wrongly” are far more persistent than stronger, but fleeting, motives of hunger or fear, leading man to an instinctive sense of morality. Darwin cites examples in the animal kingdom, says wonderful things about dogs, and compares savage and civilized peoples.
Each of the works responds to Socrates’ search for the knowledge that can anchor our sense of morality. Aquinas and C. S. Lewis find that anchor in God’s will and the unchanging generally principles of natural law. The dictates of Old and New Testament scripture give specific codification of these principles. Kant finds his anchor in human reason and the inherent dignity of rational creatures. His view is not inconsistent with God, and emphasizes (as does Aquinas) the unique dignity and responsibility of rational creatures. Darwin’s view, on the other hand, is not readily reconcilable with a sense of morality springing from God. It presents “right” and “wrong” as transient products of evolution rather than concepts with transcendent significance.
After twelve weeks of reading and discussing, questions and issues remain. Topping the list is God’s command in Deuteronomy to kill the Canaanites. The discussion group pondered various ways in which this can be considered “right,” none of which was fully satisfying. And if that command was “wrong,” by what standard would it be wrong? Second, what is the relationship of morality to Christianity? Do the life and teachings of Jesus provide Christians a unique standard of morality? Does Jesus present the perfect example of moral behavior that applies to Christians and non-Christians alike? Or does Christianity’s unique understanding begin after we accept the notions of Right and Wrong and realize to our chagrin that we do not always do what is Right.
That’s right. We Sin. That also brings us to Topic II – Good and Bad, beginning January 23rd. New participants are enthusiastically welcome.