 |
Moral Awareness and Responsibility
One thing I really dislike is when a preacher walks up to the pulpit,
assembles his notes and Bible in a forlorn fashion, and says something
like: “I’m here to deliver a warning.” From my
experience attending Independent Baptist churches my whole life, more
often than not the preacher really means to say: “I’m here
to condemn all of you, exalt myself, and use any excuse to raise my
voice as I speak.” Because people (like me) do not like to hear
that they are lacking in certain areas and need to better themselves.
Whatever proceeds from that preachers mouth will be met with a
disconcerting sigh (whether justified or not), since the thing that
disturbs a comfortable and careless existence most is a feeling that we
are in some way inadequate to qualify as a good person.The maxim that
everybody would rather be indifferent to self-improvement and cold to
the thought of moral inadequacy in themselves is shown in many aspects
of personal life and the overarching cultural society. I will attempt
to outline a few now:
every country there is a set of black and white moral structures,
indicating to the citizens of the country what is right and what is
wrong (not just in the law, but commonly accepted cultural practices
etc.). When enough individual’s morality conflicts with the
states, a reactionary social movement will be formed. This social
movement is made up of people who are doing what is considered
immoral/wrong/strange by the state and society, and in an effort to
change both public perceptions and institutional law they will lobby
the government. There are plenty of contemporary examples of such
movements, such as the Gay Rights movement, radical feminism, gun
rights, pro-abortion, and religious extremism. Now, in all of these
movements, you have people who would prefer to make what they believe
in as accepted (such as that homosexuals deserve equal rights), as
opposed to conforming their own belief and practice to external
authorities. It should be noted that I am not affirming either moral
relativism or objectivity, or saying that any of these movements are
right or wrong. The point is that inherent in the human condition is an
averseness towards moral responsibility, accountability, and
compromise.
In terms of practical living, this is seen in the practice of
blame-shifting. Everybody does this a lot, whether people are conscious
of it or not. Politicians in Australia blame the public service when
they are accused of making an incompetent decision, businessman blame
other factors for poor performance, when we wrong somebody making
excuses will be our natural reaction, and in law criminal acts are
exponentially being explained in terms of antecedent psychological
factors as opposed to the depravity of their moral decisions. People
aren’t willing to take responsibility in affirming their actions
and following them through, rather we attempt to smother
unrighteousness and show a stark disinclination towards finding fault
in our self.
Perhaps an even greater example for Protestant Christians is the
contemporary concept of “salvation” and “eternal
security”, supposedly the centerpieces of our Christian faith. In
them we find almost zero moral accountability once an individual
becomes “born again” and is initiated into the fold. Since
forgiveness is abundant in this saved realm of living, and the church
does little to stop our apathy from exploiting forgiveness, Christians
often have little motivation towards ever listening to the warnings
that Jesus gave and the directives he expected his followers to keep. A
Christian living under this theology could legitimately say: "Well I
don’t live up to Christ’s standard, but I am most likely
better than the unbeliever down the street that is going to hell. And
since I am saved; when I continually fall short I can ask God for
forgiveness and it'll be fine."
Christ’s words are turned from being a mirror and showing our
humane weaknesses (and thereby improving on them), to becoming an
excuse, and thereby the Christian successfully avoids all moral
responsibility, accountability, and self-improvement.
Now that I have (hopefully) convincingly demonstrated the ways in which
indifference and fear trumps a desire for moral righteousness, I will
try and remind the church on something quite important. Christianity
cures a sickness (the sickness of sin, which I attempted to describe in
a few of my past posts), and if we did not have this sickness
Christianity (and religion as a whole) would become irrelevant. If my
self had no spiritual sickness, I would not need Jesus, and I would not
need God. As erroneous as the doctrine of “depravity” is,
it has a small merit in that it gives people an awareness of their
unrighteousness. The danger in Liberal Christianity is that it can so
easily become one where the sickness is disregarded as okay (in the
guise of toleration and non-discrimination), and thereby the cure
becomes played down. Liberal Christianity still needs to keep a solid
understanding of sin and how we need to strive for Christ-like
character. All Christians in general need to take moral responsibility
and accountability, and needs to be aware of themself as a moral agent.
Without this, there will be no growth as a person, and Christ’s
impact in our lives will be minimal.
-- By Timothy Neal |
