Pastoral ministry is demanding. It includes not only preaching, evangelism, nurture, administration, liturgy, and mission, but also counseling, social ministry, and fund raising, to name only some of the bases ministers are expected to cover. In all these functions, ethics and ethical issues are unavoidably interspersed with a clergy person's life and ministry.
Ministers are, of course, familiar with theology and its various definitions. In my view, theology basically includes the vertical dimension, which includes study of and reflection upon God, our picture of Him and all His interactions with the created order, particularly human beings. Intersecting with this theological vertical dimension, however, is a horizontal dimension we call Christian ethics. Ethics has to do with what kind of persons we are or should be, and what we ought to do in our relationships with God's creation, animate and inanimate, in any given situation.
It would not be inappropriate to depict the intersection of these two dimensions in terms of the image of the cross, with God and humanity locked in dynamic interface. This article centers on the horizontal bar of the cross; the ethical dimension, and some of its related issues.
From how to relate to the Down syndrome baby to what decisions may be made at the moment of our life's ending; from homosexuality debates to ministerial professional confidentiality, ministers find themselves inevitably involved. From physician-assisted suicide to peace and war, from advising on the use of donated gambling proceeds to accepting tithe from a lottery win, ministers and clergy confront a bewildering array of ethical issues.
Today we find an increasingly sophisticated and educated laity. Church members, who in years past took for granted everything the pastor preached or advised, are now demanding a properly reasoned explanation.
Yet parishioners frequently rely on the minister's input and guidance in addressing their own personal ethical dilemmas. Should one discontinue Mom's feeding tube, when she has been in a coma for the last three months? What should parents do about a diagnosed intrauterine Down syndrome 12- week-old, when they already have a three-year-old with a similar diagnosis? Should an obstetrician-gynecologist, who is a member of your church, participate in an adoption by a gay couple?
May I propose a schematic model for clergy as they grapple with ethical questions such as these? This model is offered only as a help. One has to realize that many thorny ethical dilemmas defy any definitive solution this side of eternity. First a brief survey of what ethics is all about.
What is ethics?
Ethics is a study of goodness (decisions about good and evil), and the study of right action. It has to do with decisions about right and wrong.
Normative ethics is concerned with identifying norms and standards for good and right behavior, decision making, and outcome. The divisions of different branches of ethics are not distinct and the categorical descriptions are relative. The fundamental question in ethics, however, always returns to: What ought one to be and to do in light of the truth as it is perceived?
The term teleological ethics (from the Greek word, telos, meaning "end," and having to do with emphasizing one's orientation to final goals) is often attached to the study of goodness, which together with happiness (eudaimonia) represents to many the goal and highest attainment in one's life.
When the value aspect of the goodness is stressed, such theory is known as axiological. But pursuing goodness can center itself in the egotistical. It can speak of perfectionism (virtue ethics propounded by Aristotle). Confucius, who preceded Aristotle by some 150 years also stressed that becoming a virtuous person is the goal of ethics and morality.
Further, ethical enquiry can also address the issue of consequentialism and utilitarianism —what line of thought or action results in the great est happiness and utility for the great est number of people, with the presumption of a knowledge as to what constitutes the greatest happiness.
Deontological ethics (Greek, deont: that which is binding and due) inquires what constitutes right action and stresses the principles of right and wrong that govern our ethical decision-making and moral choices.
To illustrate, lying is against morality and ethics, not just because it leads to bad consequences in inter personal relationships and to social mistrust (against the good for all concerned), but also because it is morally inexcusable in that it violates higher Christian ethical norms.
For Immanuel Kant, truth telling is a categorical imperative—a set of fundamental ideas in terms of which all other ideas can be expressed. This categorical imperative, or the ethical norm of universal application, is arrived at from the observation that if everyone lied constantly, there would be total disruption of the social fabric, and human social intercourse would grind to a stop.
The uniqueness of Christian ethics
Christian ethics is ethics with a Christian orientation and biblical perspective which addresses the whole person and his or her needs. It is grounded in norms that refer directly to the biblical perspective and particularly to the person of Jesus Christ. It distinguishes itself by the recurrent all-encompassing themes of love, justice, concern for one's neighbor, the disadvantaged; grace and forgiveness (forgiving and even loving the enemy); the sinfulness of human nature; the powerlessness of an unaided human being to do the ethical task; the question of salvation and healing from, not just immoral and unethical choices, but ultimately from sin, evil, and death.
Christian ethics is also implicit in its affirmation of a Creator-God who is the source of morality, who sets the requirements for ethical compliance for His created beings, and who is also the Forgiver and Enabler in our human striving for obedient conformity to His commands.
In mystery and wonder beyond our comprehension, the moral God, who knows no sin, will gift the sinner with wholeness and perfect restoration in a resurrected body that knows no corruption but reflects only God's ultimate moral nature. This Christian assertion sets it apart from all the relativistic, secular, and other theological ethics, which assign no or little significance to the ultimate moral Being.
Christian-biblical ethics is distinctively and holistically unique in another important aspect. The one who embraces it, speaking ideally, is a Christian who has been or is in the process of being made whole and who—in profound gratitude—realizes his or her ethical obligation and moral mandate. The realization is underscored by one's overpowering sense of having been the recipient of God's grace and forgiveness, which are undeserved and unmerited.
From this stance, the Christian ethicist desires to emulate Christ, the supreme ethical Being, who treats every human being with justice, dignity, and moral transparency. Out of an "ethical" heart, which has been made whole and which seeks to imitate the holistic ethical norm, naturally flows a Christian's ethical conduct.
Christian ethics is person-centered and character-based. It is not just a set of standards to follow, important as standards are; it is more than that. It is not simply deciding what is good or evil, or which is the right or wrong action—critical as such deliberation is for any ethical task. It is that, but it is even more.
It is a way of seeing, a way of reflecting basic beliefs and habits of the heart.
Mere moral knowledge is insufficient to meet the challenge set by the kind of Christian ethical ideals embodied in the life and teaching of Jesus, the personification of God's moral demands. To live ethically in the Christian sense, it takes an inner transformation of the person through a spiritual rebirth—a new creation as described by Paul (2 Cor. 5:17).
Defining Christian ethics
To sum up, when it comes to the Christian ethical person, it is critical that he or she be transformed by the power of God and made whole by His Spirit. This is central to the task of ethical decision making and living in the Christian ethical context. It is more than simply doing or behaving in a Christian ethical way; it is being the Christian—-a holistic, moral person by the grace of God. This stance leads me to define Christian ethics as follows:
Christian ethics is a lifelong discipline in which one seeks not only to analyze and internalize the criteria of good and evil or right and wrong in the systematic study of reflective choices and attainable goals, but also, in the midst of such pursuits, learns to be and thus to do that which glorifies God.
To glorify God is to conform to His revealed will and purpose as it is elaborated in Scripture, nature, history, one's own life, society, the community, and the church. More importantly, it is simply to reflect Christ's character. Reflecting Christ's character includes imitating His attributes of love and forgiveness, His truth and justice, His wisdom and purpose, His humility and obedience, His faith and hope, and His goodness; ethics and concern for the neighbor and the disadvantaged—and to do this in freedom, power, and creativity.
A schema for Christian ethics
On the basis of this, let me propose the following analytical, holistic schema for ethical decisions.
Thus again, Christian ethical being has to do with such realities as biblical commands, principles, and rules; along with love, justice, peace, joy, balance, wholeness, truth-telling, personal virtue, equality, fairness,freedom, creativity, human value, care of and respect for the best interests of another person, prima facie duties, coherence, ecological and financial stewardship, professional oaths, eschataological vision, humility, wisdom, and discernment.
It also radically affects daily situational concerns such as those that come in the context of arenas such as the family, church, law, finance, employment, religious and cultural traditions, confidentiality, human experimentation, consent, emergency, and other contextual factors.
The "ethicist" (broadly defined as you or I or anyone called upon to make or facilitate ethical decisions)— and particularly the Christian ethicist—is called upon to discerningly use the principles and rules described above, and to apply them to the person in need or to the problems related to the person, against the backdrop, or in consideration of, an entire constellation of daily situational concerns.
The ethical-decision-facilitator in this schematic model is one who brings with him or her a particular set of presuppositions or perceptions, along with a belief-system and particular faith-loyalty. This person has been or is in the process of being made whole by God in the multiple dimensions of personhood, especially in the spiritual, moral, and ethical realms.
He or she comes to the ethical decision scene fully realizing his or her own brokenness and ethical limitation. Such humility tends to deliver one from the trap of ethical arrogance; that is, from believing that one's deliberative conclusion is beyond question, and as such is worthy of being used in an intrusively paternalizing manner when it comes to other people.
Applying the Christian ethical worldview
Let's apply this ethics schema to one of the problems mentioned earlier, even though the scope of discussion is necessarily limited here. Let's return to the question of whether to continue or discontinue Mom's feeding tube.1
Here, the ethicist must look to the biblical norms of valuing life and its sanctity, and the questions of comfort and dignity, and balance these against the futility of nutrition and hydration and what constitutes an ordinary life-sustaining measure versus the use of extraordinary means.
When it comes to the question of norms in this situation, there is the issue of wisdom and discernment, which includes the "slippery slope argument." In other words, the question needs to be faced as to what the long-term impact on society might be if we consistently begin to advocate the practice of withholding basic nutrition to the dying, thus allowing them to die when we could sustain a certain level of life.
Other concerns must also be considered such as, How would "Mom" wish to be attended to under the present circumstances, assuming there is neither an advance directive from Mom nor a definitive decision by a family surrogate? The "ethicist" applies all these and other norms to Mom as a person, who even in her comatose state, retains significance to her family and friends.
The Christian who has been admonished to feed the hungry and quench people's thirst is intuitively reluctant to "starve Mom." If we go back to the triangle, to the left of the base, there are many situational concerns (different from "situational ethics") that must be taken into consideration. Family wishes and the legal precedents2 are just a few of the factors to be individualized.
Every case is different. About the only sure thing a minister wants to do is to let the person, or in this case Mom's immediate family (if available) make the decision. Using the Christian norms and other elements within the above ethical schema, ministers can explore options and counsel and pray with the grieving family. The minister may not make the final decision for the party concerned, even though at times the pressure and temptations are strong. He or she can, however, be a highly helpful aid to the family in making such difficult decisions.
In summary, holistic ethics 3 advances the practice of facilitating the transfer of wholeness from the "ethicist" to the person in the ethical quandary, against a whole panoply of situational factors that have bearing on the subject. The test for the success of such holistic ethics may be the peace and joy that comes to the person and family in need; the satisfactory resolution of their puzzling problem, along with a maturing ethical proficiency that will aid them in future decision making.
1 Here's a case study. How would you apply pastoral ethics to solve the dilemma? Mom Maureen is 79 years old. She has been comatose for six weeks following a stroke, leaving no advance directive as to nutritional care for her, and has been on tubes since the stroke. She has an estate valued at $2 million. She has three children—Bob, Doug, and Fay. You are the pastor of her eldest son Bob, who is also an elder in your church. Bob wants to have the tube discontinued immediately and says the money could instead be better used for your church programs. Doug only comes to your church once in awhile. He has' never been close to Mom and is indecisive. He and his sister Fay are very close. Fay vehemently objects to discontinuing the feeding tube. She has a special bond with Mom, ever since Mom took care of her during her prolonged illness as a teenager. She wants to have everything done for Mom and could not stand to see her "starved to death." Fay, a Christian, is not a member of your church but is familiar with Christian beliefs. She says since Mom has $2 million in assets, they could well afford an intermediate health facility after her discharge from the hospital. Expected cost would be at least $6,000 a month, barring any complications. Doctors have said Mom could linger on for a long, long time since her heart, lungs, and kidneys are in good shape. You have seen Mom Maureen three times now—her condition remains the same. The hospital bills are mounting even though she has Medicare. The family wants to have a conference with you, the pastor, so they can tell the doctor to continue or discontinue the feeding tube, without which Mom would die in a few days. Based on the information given here and assuming that biblical rationale can be marshaled to support either continuance or discontinuance of the feeding tube, what would you do?
2 T. L. Beauchamp and J. F. Childress in Principles of Riomedical Ethics, 5th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 159, 160.
3 John B. Wong, Christian Wholism: Theological and Ethical Implications in the Postmodern World (Lanham, Md.tUniversity Press of America, 2002), 145.
