Complications That Demand Wisdom
In making moral decisions we try to line up three spectrums (good and evil, moral and immoral, legal and illegal) and ideally, we try to do what is good, moral, and legal. When those three things line up, the decision is easy. When they don’t line up—and often they don’t—moral decision-making gets complicated.
For example, sometimes actions are good, but illegal: hiding Jews in Nazi-occupied lands during WWII; protecting slaves through the underground railroad prior to the American Civil war; and churches continuing to meet in a country that restricts house-church gatherings.
Sometimes things are legal but evil—abortion where it is lawful, for example.
Some things can be socially approved (seen as moral) but evil. Eugenics—the belief that science could decide which individuals, races, or groups were superior and had a right to procreate and which shouldn’t—was a respectable progressive opinion in the early 20th century. Racial segregation was a settled moral consensus for generations but was a social evil. People today believe that affirming someone’s evil choices is moral kindness and confronting certain evil choices is unacceptable.
A thing can be morally acceptable (and perhaps even true good) in some circles but condemned as immoral (and even evil) by others: before the Civil War abolitionists were dismissed as social fanatics and troublemakers who were disturbing the peace; the Christian baker who declines to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding and is treated by neighbors and the court of public opinion as the evildoer; the employer or teacher who won’t use preferred pronouns and is labeled as unkind rather than principled.
There are also the very difficult cases in which things can be legal and even commonly socially approved (i.e. considered moral)—even in churches—but may still very well be evils in God’s sight. No-fault divorce is one example. Sports betting, legalized nationwide since 2018, is now mainstream entertainment that can quietly destroy households while carrying no social stigma at all. Multi-level marketing schemes are often praised for entrepreneurship that creates flexibility for stay-at-home moms while running on a business model that mathematically guarantees that most participants will lose money.
These are all cases where the three spectrums don’t necessarily line up, making a moral decision difficult.
There are other factors complicating moral decision-making as well. Timing, not just content, comes into play for actions and words. Jokes and humor are wonderful fun, but we generally find them inappropriate at the site of an accident or a funeral. In a similar vein, what’s acceptable for a congregational member to say in public may not be acceptable if spoken by a pastor or church leader who is often held to higher standards by the congregation. There are also things a pastor can say publicly because of his office that a congregational member could not say.
Sometimes we are forced to decide based on incomplete information and before a reasonable level of certainty is achieved. Waiting for certainty may be prudence; it may also be judged as cowardice.
Sometimes we are faced with competing claims on our time and loyalty. How, for example, does a pastor juggle the needs of a sick church member, the request of a struggling marriage for counsel, the needs of his own marriage and family, and the other duties required by his job (and/or his second job) when all the claims hit at once? All the claims are legitimate, but there is only so much time and so much of himself to go around. Choosing one means choosing against the others.
With nearly every decision there are unavoidable unintended consequences. Church discipline meant to restore someone may permanently drive them away from the faith. A benevolence policy meant to help can create dependency. A choice for good today can become an evil tomorrow for reasons no one could have foreseen. Even when potential error can be foreseen, the choice between the difficulties isn’t always easy. One can err toward too much severity or too much mercy, each with troublesome results. Which option do you choose?
Though some decisions are straightforward, most moral decisions have many moving parts, some of which we may not even be aware when we have to make our moral choice. These complications throw moral decisions into a final spectrum, perhaps the most difficult and complicated of all: wise and foolish.
And perhaps we’ll talk more about the spectrum in another installment…
For example, sometimes actions are good, but illegal: hiding Jews in Nazi-occupied lands during WWII; protecting slaves through the underground railroad prior to the American Civil war; and churches continuing to meet in a country that restricts house-church gatherings.
Sometimes things are legal but evil—abortion where it is lawful, for example.
Some things can be socially approved (seen as moral) but evil. Eugenics—the belief that science could decide which individuals, races, or groups were superior and had a right to procreate and which shouldn’t—was a respectable progressive opinion in the early 20th century. Racial segregation was a settled moral consensus for generations but was a social evil. People today believe that affirming someone’s evil choices is moral kindness and confronting certain evil choices is unacceptable.
A thing can be morally acceptable (and perhaps even true good) in some circles but condemned as immoral (and even evil) by others: before the Civil War abolitionists were dismissed as social fanatics and troublemakers who were disturbing the peace; the Christian baker who declines to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding and is treated by neighbors and the court of public opinion as the evildoer; the employer or teacher who won’t use preferred pronouns and is labeled as unkind rather than principled.
There are also the very difficult cases in which things can be legal and even commonly socially approved (i.e. considered moral)—even in churches—but may still very well be evils in God’s sight. No-fault divorce is one example. Sports betting, legalized nationwide since 2018, is now mainstream entertainment that can quietly destroy households while carrying no social stigma at all. Multi-level marketing schemes are often praised for entrepreneurship that creates flexibility for stay-at-home moms while running on a business model that mathematically guarantees that most participants will lose money.
These are all cases where the three spectrums don’t necessarily line up, making a moral decision difficult.
There are other factors complicating moral decision-making as well. Timing, not just content, comes into play for actions and words. Jokes and humor are wonderful fun, but we generally find them inappropriate at the site of an accident or a funeral. In a similar vein, what’s acceptable for a congregational member to say in public may not be acceptable if spoken by a pastor or church leader who is often held to higher standards by the congregation. There are also things a pastor can say publicly because of his office that a congregational member could not say.
Sometimes we are forced to decide based on incomplete information and before a reasonable level of certainty is achieved. Waiting for certainty may be prudence; it may also be judged as cowardice.
Sometimes we are faced with competing claims on our time and loyalty. How, for example, does a pastor juggle the needs of a sick church member, the request of a struggling marriage for counsel, the needs of his own marriage and family, and the other duties required by his job (and/or his second job) when all the claims hit at once? All the claims are legitimate, but there is only so much time and so much of himself to go around. Choosing one means choosing against the others.
With nearly every decision there are unavoidable unintended consequences. Church discipline meant to restore someone may permanently drive them away from the faith. A benevolence policy meant to help can create dependency. A choice for good today can become an evil tomorrow for reasons no one could have foreseen. Even when potential error can be foreseen, the choice between the difficulties isn’t always easy. One can err toward too much severity or too much mercy, each with troublesome results. Which option do you choose?
Though some decisions are straightforward, most moral decisions have many moving parts, some of which we may not even be aware when we have to make our moral choice. These complications throw moral decisions into a final spectrum, perhaps the most difficult and complicated of all: wise and foolish.
And perhaps we’ll talk more about the spectrum in another installment…