Christian Ethics

Not an entry in a rule book

People often imagine religious ethics works like a lookup. A situation comes up, you find the rule that covers it, and the rule tells you what to do. Almost nothing works that way, for a simple reason: the situations people actually face are mostly not named anywhere. No teaching mentions the message you received this morning, the job you were offered, or the friend who asked you to keep something quiet. So the real work is never finding the entry. It is deciding which teaching applies at all, and then working out what it implies HERE, in a situation its author never saw. That work is what Christian ethics is, and it is why two people who take the same faith equally seriously can reach different conclusions about the same question. They are not disagreeing about whether to follow their religion. They are disagreeing about which of several sources of authority carries the most weight in this particular case, or about what a teaching implies once it is carried into a new situation. This module is about that process: where Christians look when deciding, how those sources can pull in different directions, and how a teaching gets applied to something it does not mention. How to build an argument out of the result, and how to reach a judgement, is a separate skill with a module of its own on this course.

Five words for deciding

Four of these name places Christians look. The fifth names what they are trying to produce.

Where is each answer coming from?

Which is doing the work?

Someone says: the teaching says nothing about this directly, but it tells us to treat others as we would want to be treated, and applying that here means I should tell her. Which source of authority is doing most of the work?

• Reason, because a general teaching is being carried across to a case it does not name
• Scripture, because a teaching is being quoted
• Conscience, because the speaker feels strongly about it
• Tradition, because this is what Christians usually say

When the sources disagree

Sources of authority usually point the same way. The interesting cases, and the ones examiners ask about, are when they do not.

Work a moral question through

Five steps for a question Christian teaching does not directly answer. Put them in the order that produces reasoning rather than a reflex.

• Say plainly what the situation is and who it affects
• Identify which teachings or principles could bear on it
• Work out what each would imply in this particular case
• Notice where they point in different directions, and name the tension
• Decide which carries most weight here, and be able to say why

What makes an application sound

A teaching is being applied to a situation it does not mention. Which THREE things make that application sound rather than convenient?

• The principle being carried across is actually stated in the teaching, not read into it
• The new case genuinely resembles what the teaching addresses in the way that matters
• It still holds when applied to a case where the answer would be inconvenient
• Most people would agree with the conclusion
• It produces an answer that feels right

Disagreement is not a failure of faith

One of the most useful things to understand about religious ethics, and one of the easiest to get wrong in an answer, is why sincere believers disagree. The weak explanation is that one of them is not taking their religion seriously enough. That is almost never what is happening, and an answer that says it has stopped thinking. Here is what is usually going on instead. Several sources of authority are in play, and they do not always point the same way. A teaching may be clear in what it says and unclear in how far it reaches. Two teachings may both apply and pull in opposite directions, which happens constantly when duties to different people collide. Different Christians give different weight to the same sources: some treat the written teaching as settling almost everything, others give considerable weight to what the community has concluded over time, others to conscience formed by both. And situations change in ways that make old applications need rethinking, which is not abandoning a teaching but asking again what it requires. So when you meet disagreement, do not ask who is the better Christian. Ask which sources each person is leaning on, and where the two accounts actually part company. That question produces an answer with something in it. In an evaluation, naming the specific point of divergence is worth far more than observing that people have different views, and how to build that into a full argument is covered in its own module on this course.

Complete the ethics sentences

Something a believer treats as carrying weight when deciding what is right is _____. The settled teaching and practice of the Christian community over time is _____. The inward sense of right and wrong, which most Christians hold should be formed rather than simply trusted, is _____. Carrying a teaching across to a case it never names is _____.

A promise that became costly

Here is the process run on a situation no teaching mentions, chosen precisely because nothing about it is controversial. Somebody promised months ago to help a friend move house on a particular Saturday. The day approaches and a relative becomes unwell and would value a visit on that same day. Both matter, and the person cannot do both. Start with the situation, plainly: a promise freely given, a friend who has arranged things around it, and a relative who is unwell and would value company. Now which teachings bear on it. Keeping your word matters, and so does caring for those in need, and both are widely held Christian principles that neither side of the dilemma disputes. Apply each. Keeping your word implies going to help with the move, because the friend has relied on it. Caring for those in need implies the visit. Now name the tension honestly: this is not a case of a good choice against a bad one, it is two genuine obligations that cannot both be met on one day. And then decide with a reason. Somebody might conclude that a promise relied upon carries more weight because breaking it harms somebody who arranged their life around it, and that the visit can be made the following day with no comparable loss. Somebody else might weigh the illness more heavily. Both are reasoning, and the difference is where they placed the weight rather than whether they cared.

Find the reasoning

Five sentences from answers about a moral dilemma. Tap the ONE that is actually reasoning rather than asserting.

• Christians would obviously say that helping the friend is the right thing to do.
• It depends entirely on the individual person and what they believe.
• Keeping a promise and caring for somebody unwell both apply here, and they cannot both be met on the same day.
• Anyone who broke the promise would not be a proper Christian.
• The Bible has an answer for every situation like this one.

Name the tension

The strongest move in this topic is naming exactly where two principles part company. Choose the option in each gap.

The ethics run

Five quick questions on Christian ethical reasoning. Three lives.

One question, four decisions

You are answering an exam question about a situation where a Christian has to choose between keeping a confidence and preventing somebody from being hurt by a decision they do not know about. Work through three decisions about HOW to answer.

• How do you open?
• Two principles apply and pull opposite ways. What do you do with that?
• You know other Christians would answer differently. How do you handle that?

Explain how a Christian would decide

Somebody has promised to keep a friend confidence, and then learns that keeping it will let a third person be hurt by a decision they know nothing about. Explain how a Christian might work this through. You are not being asked to say what the right answer is.

• Set out the situation and say who is affected by each option
• Name at least two principles or teachings that bear on it
• Explain what each one implies in this particular case
• State exactly where the two part company, rather than saying only that it is difficult
• Explain why two sincere Christians might still reach different conclusions here