Occasionally when reading Christian ethical statements I have the feeling that they are slightly unrealistic, or that their critique of some secular institution or reality is unfair. I attribute this to the tendency of Christianity to focus on redemption, to look for it, to try to bring it about (all laudable), and to believe in its eventual triumph. What seems to happen as a result of this is that the tragic nature of the world is insufficiently weighted. An example of this may be Graham Ward’s critique of Hobbes’ anthropology. I think that although it may not be true all of the time, it is most of the time. So one must be careful not to deny other ways of being human (which Ward finds in the church), but neither should one pretend that it is straightforward to act this out in all other situations (and even less so for organizations). So, for example, it may well be the case that some local churches operate with an ontology of peace, or without scapegoating, but I suspect they can only do that because they are small and voluntary. Governments and businesses, by contrast, operate in a state of nature, and the state of nature puts massive constraints on your ethical choices. Now governments and business do sometimes, in some ways, answer to the call of ethics beyond their self-interest. This is admirable but it can only be an exception, not a norm, precisely because they are in a state of nature situation. For the church or Christians to criticise them for not behaving according to the church’s standards is therefore unfair, because the church is not constrained by the state of nature. Since governments and business do sometimes act morally such critique and conversation should not be closed off but encouraged, but I think a recognition of aforementioned constraints should be borne in mind by Christian critics who sometimes have what I would regard as slightly utopic views in this regard. This should not be taken as a baptizing of or resignation to the status quo. The gradual emergence of international institutions and standards suggests that some nations are, to a limited extent, beginning to be held morally accountable beyond self-interest. And some capitalists argue that capitalism needs to be reformed in this direction also. And this is surely a result of critique. I think the issue is one of the tone of that critique and the temptation to feelings of self-righteousness: ‘I’ve made my critique, that cannot be acted upon, and now I can relax and feel morally superior.’
Recent Comments