Grey zones in Christian morality
From the outside looking in, it would be easy to think that morality at a place like Trinity Western University would be simple. People at TWU are Christians, so they abide by a Christian morality, right? However, the fact that TWU attempts to provide a moral structure based on a single book hardly eliminates diversity and complexity from the moral
beliefs of students.
Illustration by: Olivia de Fleuriot de la Coliniere
One of the most interesting and ironic points of morality at a place like TWU is how certain practices that have often been considered ìviceî by certain Christian traditions end up becoming those that are most talked about, and, in a sense, most loved by students. Free indulgence in the ìgrey areasî becomes a statement of freedom from parental authority and an emergence from dead, legalism-inducing tradition.
Take alcohol for example: Most people will not outright condemn the consumption of alcohol as sinful, seeing as Jesus went so far as to create it miraculously and certainly consumed it himself. But on the other hand, there are many Christians who would say that being drunk is sinful. So where is the magic line that shall not be crossed? Does it exist, or is it a bit of a blur?
Then thereís smoking in its various forms: does the potential damage to oneís own body that can be caused by smoking make the act sinful, as some conservative Christians would say, or can an edifying Christian community be found in a cloud
of smoke?
And besides smoking and drinking, what about poker, clubbing or swearing? What about the age-old battleground of “how far can we go before marriage?” Many an all-night dorm room discussion could be had on these subjects, and Iím sure that no clear conclusion would be reached.
The existence of these grey areas is hard to dispute, and the different stances that young Christians take towards these areas are often a source of much contention.
There are some who, attempting to hold to the traditional morality of their church or family, seek to stay well on the white side of grey, preferring to abstain unquestioningly rather than venture on to unsure moral ground and risk sinning.
But it seems there are just as many who seek to fully explore the boundaries of their ìfreedom in Christ.î Doesnít Paul say we are set free from the law, they ask? Then why are we still abiding by it? ìLetís explore,î they conclude; “Letís experience all there is to be experienced!”
And thus ìclassy Christian viceî is born, and rather than being a sign of apathy or backsliding, a moderate indulgence in tobacco, alcohol, or stylistically placed crudities becomes a surefire sign of a vibrant faith. It declares, “No longer am I under the bonds of traditionalist moral legalism. I have emerged from those rules and obligations as a freer and fully alive human being.”
So the question must be asked: is this embrace of moral freedom a good thing or a bad thing?
Much can be said in favour of this urge for moral exploration. Often, it finds its origins in a desire to understand the Bible and the world on a deeper level. It intends to move past simplistic rules and traditions as established by man, and into a more complete and realistic way of living.
But there are dangers as well. Besides the obvious risks involved in activities like smoking or drinking, there are also dangers to the Christian community. The most significant of these is the divisive effect that can result when indulgence in these grey areas becomes something of a status symbol — when knowing how to blow a smoke-ring, or knowing a good beer from a bad one becomes a prerequisite for entrance into certain social groups, or at the very least a mark of superiority.
And in response to these very real dangers to Christian community, I think it is vital to keep in mind the biblical principle that the morality of an action depends not only the action itself, but also on the heart
of the doer.
What I mean is that for some, certain indulgences may be done with a clear conscience, while for others, this would be a breach of what they believe, and thus they would not be acting in faith.
Thus as we navigate the complexities of Christian morality it is necessary that we are careful with our judgments and exclusions.
Making wise choices regarding oneís own moral stance should be more than enough of a task to keep us occupied without having to make the same choice for others.
I think Paul said it best: “‘Everything is permissable,” but not everything is beneficial.” Christ never condoned sinful actions, and neither should we. Maybe our first reaction shouldn’t be to wag our finger, but that doesn’t mean we can just do whatever we want. You’re right that the heart of the “doer” matters, but that doesn’t necessarily always make the action OK. Eg. Just because you don’t feel guilty about having sex with your girlfriend doesn’t mean you should have sex with your girlfriend. If we want to reflect the heart of God, we should probably pay attention to what he says, ei. read the Bible and trust that what it says is true. I’ll leave off on another great quote; “Lean not on your own understanding.”