Confusing Faith and Morality

There are better things than stances

If you grew up in an evangelical context, you likely encountered some kind of strict moral code. You also would have heard sermons about the demands of personal morality and the decline of morality in society. In my years as a pastor in an evangelical church, part of what could upset some people about me was that they thought I did not preach enough about morality or the stances that they thought we ought to be taking on various issues.

The relationship between morality and Christian faith can be confusing. It is easy for one to take over the other. That is, faith itself can become subsumed by morality or moralism. I have seen how a kind of rigid morality can be present in other faiths as well. Often, I think that the moralists of different faiths have more in common with one another than they do with those who are less morally rigid in their own religious tradition.

Even today, in 2024, the tension between faith and morality makes it into the public and political sphere. Recalling Pope Francis’ reminder that moral rigidity is always hiding something, the news today includes stories about a politician in the United States (not THAT politician) who has made a career of hollering against what he sees as moral decay. This politician (surprise, surprise) has turned out to be decidedly immoral in ways that are decidedly worse than whatever it was he was warning against.

Jacques Ellul, in a book called The Subversion of Christianity, argues that Christianity as religion, institution, and structure is often, not only unlike Jesus, but opposite to Jesus. One of the key steps, Ellul says, in leading to this circumstance took place when Christian faith became supplanted by the notion of Christian morality,

“Thus, although there is no Christian morality, although the faith is against morality, following Jesus Christ has certain implications for practical life… From the second century on, church leaders begin to focus primarily (emphasis is Ellul’s) on moral conduct. This becomes the criterion of all else. A Christian morality develops in opposition to that of the world, and Christians rapidly try to apply it to every issue. When they achieve power, they want to impose their morality on all society.”

If what Ellul is saying is true, then Christian faith, to be Christian would have to let go in large part of what Christian religion has become.

Ellul continues:

“Christianity has become primarily morality. It is imposed as such. It is a code of conduct. People are not told to love God and do as they like. Faith is no longer the centre from which all else derives. That is too dangerous.”

While Ellul’s description might sound extreme to you, there are red flags that show where what he speaks about has happened. If you were part of a church that regularly presented and insisted upon “the Christian view” or “the Christian stance” on issues, then you were part of something that Ellul describes.

Jesus is not present as a stance.
In faith, Jesus is present as God’s love for humanity, not in ideology or partisan political views.

Currently in Christian culture with evangelical heritage there are many disagreements pertaining to moral stances. I know of a number of professors and pastors who have been dismissed from their positions of leadership because they did not have what the institution deemed as the Christian stance on an issue. Mostly this seems to be about human sexuality. The fact that we are largely used to such things happening demonstrates what Ellul was speaking about. We will determine if you are Christian enough based on your stances on issues of the day. In my own faith, I cannot square this with the Jesus I see in the gospels. Taking moral stances is not something that defines Jesus teaching and presence. More than that, he confounds those who insist upon such stances. That is a regular occurrence in the gospels.

So, on issues of intense controversy, let’s say gender, abortion, or human sexuality, if you were to ask, “How can I be most Christian in regards to these matters?” you will not find a faithful answer in the taking of a stance. You might well take a stance, just don’t confuse that with what it means to be faithful.

Later this fall, the non-profit with which I work is partnering with a couple of local churches in convening a conference on MAID (medical assistance in dying). Parishioners in the churches and members of the community have come to the ministers and asked for some help in how to navigate this new world. In some cases, people have had family members who have chosen MAID for themselves. In other cases, parishioners are considering their own thoughts around the end of their life.
In organizing the conference, we have determined that the best way to help people is not to ignore the real issues and challenges, but at the same time to take a pastoral rather than an ideological (or moral) approach.

One of the presenters, Jason Byassee (pastor, writer, theologian, previously of Duke Divinity and Vancouver School of Theology) once said to a group I was part of, “Christians ought to have something better than a stance.”

As a pastor and sometimes chaplain, I think of what it means to be present with and for people around death. I might well have a view on an issue, but that does not help me to be present with people in actual circumstances. In such situations, I am hoping to be faithful, seeking to be aware of the presence of Jesus.

It is hard to discuss something like MAID in the Canadian context without addressing the real, and sometimes disturbing, questions and implications. We ought to have such conversations and morality does matter. It is just that Christian faith is not primarily expressed by way of morality and stances.

You don’t live your actual life in the world of stances. If you try doing this you will find yourself further and further alienated from actual relationships. Eventually, you will be alone with your own convictions. In your own sense of self, in your familial relationships, you may see this. The most meaningful human experiences, those of mutual change and blessing, take place past the limits of stances and positions on particular issues. This is hard to take at times, but it is a gift. Perhaps, our humanity matters more to God than our worldview.

In regards to MAID, I personally see validity in some of the warnings against it. Given the stakes involved, it makes sense to feel unease. I have also seen circumstances where individuals and families were grateful for MAID being an option and where it provided a chance for the family to be together and to let go in hope and trust.

Perhaps no one likes to think about MAID, but a faithful approach helps us to see that those inside the church and those outside the church are asking the same questions. We are brought together in our common humanity. From this starting place, we can consider implications of faith in Jesus. This is much better, and more faithful, than a stance.