TRANS-AFRICA THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE

CHRISTIAN ETHICS

BY

Victor Chanda

APRIL 2011

1
1.1 Introduction

The word “ethics” is derived from the Greek ethos meaning habits or something to which
one is accustomed. In other words the word ethos refers to normal or customary conduct.
However, the word ethics means more than merely normal or customary conduct, it
implies good conduct.

Morals or morality is derived from the Latin word moralis which carries the idea of being
orderly, legal, and good conduct. Some philosophers distinguish between ethics and
morals. They believe that ethics is reflection on certain types of conduct while morals are
concerned with actual behaviour. In this course, however, we shall use the two terms
(ethics and morals) interchangeably.

1.2 Definition of Ethics

Several Christian scholars define ethics differently. Henlee H. Barnette (1961:3) supplies
us with at least three examples of how different scholars define the term ethics:

He observes that L.S. Keyser, an American Lutheran scholar defines ethics as the science
which treats of sources, principles, and practices of right and wrong in the light of the
Holy Scriptures in addition to the light of reason and nature.

Barnette further points out that Emil Brunner a Swiss theologian declares that Christian
ethics is the science of human conduct as it is determined by Divine conduct.

On the other hand, Barnette notes that George Harkness an American Methodist
theologian defines ethics as a systematic study of the way of life exemplified and taught
by Jesus, applied to the manifold problems and decisions of human existence.

Before we supply a good working definition of ethics let us first of all say something
concerning what ethics is not. Here I am indebted to Professor Louise Kretzschmar of the

2
Dept of Systematic Theology and Theological Ethics at the University of South Africa.
The points that follow are adapted from her module Ethics and Life. She supplies five
misunderstanding regarding ethics.

1. Kretzschmar (1999:13) says, ethics is not simply drawing up two lists, one
telling us what is right and the other what is wrong.”
2. Ethics is not a simple appeal to the Ten Commandments as given in Exodus
20:1-17 and Deuteronomy 5: 1-21). Kretzschmar supplies a well thought out
explanation of what she means here. She writes:

The Ten Commandments must be seen in the context within which they
were devised and recorded. This context was, essentially, that of
the covenant between God and the people of Israel – a context which
differs quite radically from contexts in which we now live.

As Christians we are here called upon to ask very serious questions examining
how our ethical behaviour is dependent upon the Ten Commandments.
Should all our ethical behaviour be determined by the Ten Commandments?
Why is it that there are so many difference among Christians on the issue of
worshipping God on the Sabbath which as we all know was clearly
commanded to the children of Israel to observe (Exodus 20: 8, Deut. 5: 12).
Further, we need to point out that the Ten Commandments have been
influential in the formulation of many western countries’ legal systems. In fact
this is also true for Islam since they accept Moses as a prophet of God.

3 Ethical decisions must not always be taken as final and absolute. Kretzschmar
(1999:15) claims that “there are times when the situation demands that a law
be broken precisely because of a higher ethical value.” Take for example in
an event where someone is killed. The act of killing is not always murder. So
the fact that someone is killed does not always mean it is murder. The
individual involved may have been killed in a war situation, or it may have

3
 been an act of self-defence. These scriptures seem to suggest obedience to a
higher ethical value1.
4 Ethics should not be understood as a purely academic exercise. People make
ethical decisions every day of their lives, even when they may not be
consciously aware that they are doing so. Let us illustrate this by looking at a
government official who uses taxpayers’ money for his own benefit. The
decision made is an ethical decision 2. The decision is that his interests are
more important than the interests of the country. At a personal level this can
also apply. In the area of sexual behaviour for instance, someone may decide
to remain loyal to their marriage vows, while someone else may decide to
have an extra-marital affair. In all these incidences no one sat down to look
up these decisions in an ethical reference book. But decisions were made
nevertheless.
5 Ethics is not simply a personal code of life nor is it restricted to attitudes or
actions of an individual. Some Christians may choose to focus Christian ethics
on vices such as adultery, lying, drinking, and stealing. This perception of
ethics is individualistic in its interpretation of ethics. Other Christians as they
deal with the issue of ethics may include issues like exploitation,
discrimination, xenophobia, and racism. This is what is known as social or
structural understanding of ethics. Ethics goes beyond these two categories.

Having looked at what ethics is not let us now come back to the issues of defining
Christian ethics. Barnette (1961:3) defines Christian ethics as “a systematic explanation
of the moral example and teaching of Jesus applied to the total life of the individual in
society and actualized by the power of the Spirit. Kretzschmar (1999: 17) points out that
“ethics concerns our reflections and analyses, our choices, and the consequences of these
choices.” Ethics becomes an attempt to explain and live out our faith in the society in
which we live. Ethics is our understanding of what “ought” to be. It has to do with how

1
See Joshua 7:1-26; Judges 4:25. You may wish to also consider the case of Rahab found
in Joshua chapter two when she hid the Israelite spies. Did she tell a lie? Is it sometimes
necessary to conceal the truth for the sake of the higher good?
2
E.g. the Financial scandals at Ministry of Health Head quarters

4
we perceive certain actions or attitudes. We perceive certain actions as wrong or bad,
and others as right or good.

1.3 The Scope of Christian Ethics

What is the scope of Christian ethics? This is the concern of this section. Christian ethics
covers individual, family, social, national, and global social problems. Ethics is
concerned with defining the “Highest Good.” Barnette (1961:3-4) demonstrates what we
are saying effectively. He observes that “ethics has a two-fold function, first, to define the
“Highest Good,” and second, to declare the principles of human action necessary to
achieve this goal.” Barnette (1961: 4) further points out that in Christian ethics “biblical
revelation sets forth the will of God as the ethical goal of man.”

As we proceed with this study, we need to bear in mind that differences of opinion
prevail among evangelical Christians. Some people have a tendency of narrowing
Christian ethics to the individual, paying very little attention to society in which he lives 3.
Others are concerned with social issues that they tend to neglect the spiritual needs of the
individual. This was the error committed by certain liberal theologians who identified the
kingdom of God with their social programs. If we did our best they thought, the kingdom
of God will be established on earth. Evangelical Christians on the other hand should pay
attention to the insights provided by Barnette. He argues:

There is no such a thing as a “personal” gospel as over against a “social” gospel.

There is but one gospel which is both personal and social. Personal regeneration
and social reconstruction are demanded by the gospel.

3
C.M. Mwikamba (2003:83) is very helpful here. He observes that “for Christians, the
Christian ethic is central. For St. Paul, ethical (moral) behaviour is a consequence of a
right relationship with God. Christian behaviour consists of walking in obedience to the
Spirit of God. Therefore, morality and spirituality are interwoven.” Christians have
always insisted that no individual can live a godly life without a transformed heart. From
a wicked heart issues corrupt deeds (See Matthew 15:19).

5
One may further add that redeemed individuals must seek the redemption of the society
in which they live. Jesus admonished his followers to be the salt and light of the earth
(Matt. 5: 13-15). Barnette (1961:4) rightly points out that, “the areas of marriage,
industry, and state are, as is the individual, under the judgment of God.” He (Barnette
1961:4) further observes that “the Christian, therefore, is called not merely to live in these
areas, but to do his part in bringing them in more accord with the will and purpose of
God.” This being the case, it therefore follows, that the scope of Christian ethics should
inter alia include the following aspects.
1. Sexual ethics
This area of study deals with the nature and expression of human sexuality.
Areas which may be studied here include the following aspects:
 The option of singleness or celibacy.
 Premarital and extramarital sexual relations.
 Homosexuality and lesbianism.
 Contraception and family planning.
 Sexual defilement, incest, bestiality, and rape.

2. Social ethics
Here we are concerned with the morality of social relationships, structures, and
institutions. Culture, social relations, politics, and economics all fall within social
ethics. In social ethics we deal with the following aspects.
 Race relations
 Group interests
 The way in which groups obtain, exercise and maintain power
 Violence
 Crime
 Education
 Housing
 Poverty
 Political and legal rights
 Access to land

6
  Control over industrial and mining enterprises

In Christian ethics we try as much as possible to relate these issues to biblical teaching.
The social teachings of most Christian denominations deal with the above issues.

3. Medical ethics, or ethics of health care

Ethics here concentrate on both broad implications of health care and with a
number of specific medical practices. Our focus here is on the following aspects.
 What constitutes proper health care
 Who has access to health care
 Euthanasia
 Genetic engineering
 Malnutrition
 Surrogate motherhood
 Infant mortality
 Abortion
 Sanitation
 And many more

2 CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WORLD

Kretzschmar (1999:28) commenting on the status quo of the world we live in writes:

Gone are the days of isolated, tightly-knit communities consisting of people who
had known each other since birth. These days, virtually all communities,
including remote communities, are influenced by ideas, events and processes
initiated by people that may live, quite literally, on the other side of the world.

We are living in a very sophisticated society. There are a lot of challenges in today’s
world which are demanding ethical and moral decisions to be made. The moral dilemma

7
we find ourselves in is well illustrated by John Jefferson Davis (1993:1). He describes
well this mood when he says, “Technologically we are making excellent time, morally,
we at times appear to be lost.” In reference to this technologically advanced world,

Davis (1999:1) further writes:

Developments in modern medical technology have been outstripping our ability to

understand adequately their-long range ethical ramifications. Does in-vitro
fertilisation represent a welcome solution to the problem of infertility, or does it
raise the spectre of the further dehumanisation of marriage and human sexuality.

Davis (1993: 1) goes on to argue that “If the technology is available to parents for the
pre-conception selection of the gender of their children, is it morally legitimate to use
such methods?”

Having listened to what Davis is saying how do we respond to in-vitro fertilisation as

well as to the pre-conception of the gender of the children? In India the practice of
preconception selection of the gender of children lead to mass abortion of children who
are deemed a wrong sex.

How do we respond as Zambian Christians to this complex situation? The moral malaise
in many African countries is rapidly changing. As a result making moral choices is also
becoming more and more complex. This scenario also affects our country Zambia as
well. Let us look at some areas that are critical to our study of ethics in this new context.

2.1 Family and Personal Contexts

The way in which people grow up, mature and interact with life and other people will
have an impact on their moral beliefs (see Kretzschmar 1999: 30 citing Anderson &
Guernsey 1985:5-82). As we are all aware the family is the most basic institution which

8
plays an important role in the socialization of children. Proverbs 22:6 puts an injunction
on parents concerning the spiritual and moral development of their children. The
following words from Kretzschmar (1999:30-31) deserve serious reflection:

Children who are reared by incompetent or uncaring parents are seriously

disadvantaged as far as their emotional development is concerned. This is
because they lack a sense of personal affirmation and identity and, consequently
find normal social relations difficult, even incomprehensible. Even worse, some
children are reared by what are termed as “toxic” parents, that is, parents who not
only fail to care adequately for their children, but subject their children to abuse,
including emotional, physical and sexual abuse.

Definitely, children who are exposed to such parents have great deficiencies in their
social, emotional, as well moral development.

One’s childhood experiences have a bearing on his or her adult life. Most values are
formed in people at a very tender age. Kretzschmar (1999:31) sums up what we are
saying here. She says, “As adults, we need to become aware of the impact that our
teenage years have had on our moral and religious perceptions.” We can see that families
play a very important role in the moral development of individuals.

2.2 Religious and Church Contexts

The religious context in which we happen to live also plays an important part in
influencing the development of moral perceptions and values. Our neighbours are now
people from different religions. Almost all major restaurants and eating places announce
to their clientele that their meals are halaal. This shows that our cities are becoming more
and more cosmopolitan. When people come from different parts of the world they also
bring along their culture and religion.

9
One may wonder as to the relevance of what we are saying here. What do religions got
to do with Christian ethics? But as you may be aware, there is a very close relationship
between ethics and religion. Laurent Magesa (1997:14) in this regard says, “Morality or
ethics is of the very nature of religion.” He (Magesa 1997:14) goes on to say, “the study
of morality or ethics, therefore, involves the study of religion.” When people from
different religious backgrounds come to this country, they are also bringing along their
ethical systems.

Enough about the religious context let us now deal with the church or ecclesiastical
context. Where ethics are concerned, different church bodies imply differences in ethical
convictions. Most evangelicals for example would argue that drinking beer is ethically
wrong, and therefore sinful. Other protestant Christians as well as Catholics may argue
that there is nothing wrong if alcohol is consumed in moderation. Interestingly all these
Christian groups will appeal to the Bible to justify their position.

Another area where we find differences in ethical convictions is the area of divorce and
remarriage. In Catholic circles marriage is viewed as a sacrament. As such any marriage
which is ceremonised by a priest in the Catholic Church can never be dissolved through
divorce. In the Anglican Church divorce and remarriage is allowed under certain
circumstances. And in fact most Protestants would go along this view point. In
Pentecostal circles divorce is greatly discouraged. But when divorce occurs, the question
of remarriage is left to the direction of the Holy Spirit upon the parties involved.
Another area that deserves our mention is that of contraception as a means of birth
control.

Most Christians are not agreed on contraception as a means of birth control. The official
Roman Catholic position on this matter is that any artificial means of birth control (such
as the use of condoms, loops, diaphragms, pills, or injections) are unethical and
unchristian (Neuner & Dupuis 1982-535 cited in Kretzschmar 1999:34). The only
method allowed by the Catholic Church is the rhythm method. This method is based on
the menstrual cycle of women and restricts sexual activity to the infertile periods of this

10
monthly cycle (See Kretzschmar 1999:34). This calls in question the role of sexual
intercourse in a marriage relationship. In the Roman Catholic tradition sex has been
restricted to procreation only and not for pleasure4. Most Protestants, which includes
evangelicals and Pentecostals, seem to favour certain methods of birth control over
others. But we need to remind ourselves that very few Pentecostal churches, if any, have
official positions on this matter. The issue of birth control is a matter of on going debate
and clarification. In Africa this has been a thorny issue since Africans have often prized
big families.

Ethics is also influenced by various ecclesiastical traditions. Reformed theologians

emphasise the teachings of Martin Luther and John Calvin. Liberal theologians, on the
other hand, do not submit to any church authority. They have freed ethics from the
supervision of the church. It should not surprise us when people from the liberal
persuasion argue for gay marriages and abortion on demand. Fundamentalists emphasise
the authority and infallibility of the Bible. Fundamentalists are conservative both in
theology and ethics. As we can see ethics are determined by one’s church tradition.

2.3 Pluralism and Relativism

When we speak of pluralism we are talking about a situation where plurality of

viewpoints is propagated. This is usually a result of people from different cultural
backgrounds, lifestyles, and religions living in the same area. This encounter between
people from different cultural and religious backgrounds raises questions such as: what is
moral and what is true? Which religion is the true religion? Are all religions equal?

Naturally, pluralism leads to relativism. By this we mean people begin to challenge the
absolute truth claims of Christianity. For example Jesus Christ is no longer the only way
through which people may be saved. Our moral claims are affected as well. We cannot
freely appeal to the Bible for our moral decisions. This as you may be aware is a recipe
for moral disaster. We need the moral absolutes as presented by the Christian

4
For a detailed treatment of this matter see John Jefferson Davis 1993:30 – 35.

11
claims. There is need for a clear distinction between what is wrong and what is
right.

In a pluralistic society Christians should ask themselves very serious questions. One such
question is, to what extent should Christians in Zambia attempt to have their moral
convictions reflected in their laws and public policy? Is it morally right for Christians to
impose their morality on non believers?

2.4 Secularisation

In secularisation, religion begins to lose its social impact. In our case we may say
secularisation may cause the church to lose the control it once had over the central
dimensions of life such as politics, education, health, morality and the arts. When the
church loses its place in society what happens to the moral fibre of society. I believe that
the church is the moral conscience of any society. If the church loses this role in society,
the moral fibre of that society will break down.

Closely linked to secularisation is the privatisation of the Christian faith. By this we are
talking about that false dualistic thinking about society. According to Kretzschmar (1999:
38), privatisation is the limitation of the Christian faith to the private, spiritual concerns
of the individual. Here reality is divided into two separate spheres; the physical and the
spiritual. Morality is restricted to the individual. Kretzschmar goes on to argue that “the
central doctrines such as sin, salvation and mission are conceived of purely in terms of
their personal and individual dimensions, rather than also being conceived of in terms of
their social dimensions.” As a result many churches preach only against the sins of
individuals and neglect to denounce social sins such discrimination, injustice, and
economic exploitation. Victor Chanda (2008:136 citing John Stott 1978: 480) writes:

For biblical righteousness is more than a private and personal affair; it includes
social righteousness as well. And social righteousness, as we learn from the law
and the prophets, is concerned with seeking man’s liberation from oppression,

12
 together with the promotion of civil rights, justice in the law courts, integrity in
business dealings and honour in home and family affairs. Thus Christians are
committed to hunger for righteousness in the whole human community as some
thing pleasing to a righteous God.

The church of Jesus Christ needs to be reminded that Christian ethics is both personal and
social in outlook. Chanda (2008:137) commenting on a Pentecostal social ethics further
intimates:

The criteria for a Christian social ethics are love, justice, compassion, and
integrity. The Pentecostal pneumatological social ethics lie in the power of the
Holy Spirit to transform both individual Christians and society through the power
of the Holy Spirit. The ultimate goal of transformation, as far as Pentecostal
social ethics is concerned, is the manifestation of the above values.

Therefore, as Christian leaders, we have a moral obligation to call society to moral

uprightness and by this we include both personal and the social dimensions of
righteousness.

3 SELECTED ANCIENT AND MODERN ETHICAL THEORIES

Ethical theories are important because they signify to us that people have always come
across ethical questions and ethical dilemmas. In this section we shall go as far back as
we can possibly go, as we examine some selected ethical theories.

3.1 Plato (427 – 347 BCE)

Plato believed that it was impossible for a person who knew the difference between good
and evil to be disposed to doing evil deeds. In other words, “one who knows what is
good, will be naturally inclined to choose it above what is evil (Motlhabi 2001: 53). As

13
far as Plato was concerned, knowledge played a key role where morality was concerned 5.
Motlhabi (2001:53) further says, “Based on this understanding, Plato developed the thesis
that the life of reason is the happiest and the best.” This happy and best life was based on
the four virtues of wisdom, justice, courage, and strength or temperance. For Plato, it
was these virtues that constituted the life of a morally virtuous person. These virtues
are also known as cardinal virtues.

In relation to how these virtues operated, this length quotation from Motlhabi (2001:53-
54) is helpful here.

For Plato the four virtues follow the operation of the threefold nature of the
human soul or psyche. The human psyche consists of the three faculties of (1)
reason, (2) spirit or passion, and (3) appetite or desire. Each of these three
faculties influences moral behaviour in a particular way and leads to the
manifestation of an appropriate virtue. Thus “governing the soul by reason
constitutes wisdom; rational regulation of desire constitutes temperance; the
support of reason by passions constitutes courage; the harmony of the three
functions constitutes justice, which is the overarching virtue.”

For Plato people were to move from the enjoyment of the sensory and sensual towards
the perfection contained in the eternal world of what he called the “forms” (see
Kretzschmar 1999: 66). These eternal forms 6 were to be seen in virtues like beauty,
justice, and Goodness to which people must Endeavour to aspire.
3.2 Aristotle (384 – 322)
5
Knowledge was important in making moral decisions because it enlightened one to be
able to make good moral decisions. It was only because one knew the difference between
good and evil that they could avoid evil deeds.
6
Plato calls the “form” eternal because he understands them to be ideal and unchanging.
Before one can invent or create a table he already has the idea of it because he or she
already has a form of a table in mind. This is the theory of forms. According to the
theory of forms, we must first have knowledge or an idea since the forms can not be
known directly. An example is the form of the Good or justice. If we are to recognise a
Good and Just person we need to have the form or idea of what Good or Justice is. Thus
the Form or Idea of Goodness is the basis of all our knowledge regarding goodness in
things in behaviour (see Motlhabi 2001: 54).

14
Aristotle was a Greek philosopher as well. He was Plato’s disciple. In his earlier years
he studied at Plato’s academy and he later taught at the same academy. After Plato’s
death Aristotle established his own school of philosophy, known as the Lyceum.

Whereas Plato thought that knowledge sprung from Forms, Aristotle believed that all
knowledge began with experience. According to Aristotle, the Forms which make objects
understandable cannot exist apart from particular objects. Each object is a unity of form
and matter, one of which cannot exist without the other: “No form without matter, no
matter without form” (see Motlhabi 2001:56 citing Albert et al 1984:30). As we can
clearly see Aristotle does not place emphasis on the form. Instead he places stress on
human life itself than on the external existence of the forms. For Aristotle the raw stuff
of appetite and emotions are not in us to be mortified but to be humanized by reason (see
Kretzschmar 1999: 67 citing Macquarrie 1967:116).

When we come to morals Aristotle’s moral principle is to be found in our daily life
activities. For Aristotle if one does just actions that individual will become just. The
goal or aim of life, according to Aristotle, is happiness. By happiness he means aiming
for the good of something. To put it differently, happiness consists in people attempting
to reach their full and moral potential (Kretzschmar 1999: 67). Motlhabi (2001:57)
further observes that:

… Happiness, qualifies as such an end or such a desirable goal … Happiness

represents the highest good because, unlike wealth, honour, pleasure and reason,
it is always sought for its own sake.

He (Motlhabi 2001: 57) concerning happiness further writes:

Happiness is pursued precisely as the highest good because, as Aristotle states,

Every art and every enquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to

15
 aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that
at which all things aim.

What exactly does Aristotle mean by happiness? To Aristotle happiness is an activity of

the soul in accordance with perfect virtue (Motlhabi 2001:57).

At this moment let us examine Aristotle’s understanding of virtues. Here Aristotle makes
reference to two types of Virtues. These are intellectual and moral virtues. Intellectual
virtues involve developing the rational part of the personality. Hence reason governs
both action and theorizing. Moral virtues involve the development of habits that enable
people to find the mean between two extremes. For example, courage is the mean
between cowardice and foolhardiness (See Kretzschmar 1999: 57).7

3.4 Augustine (354 -430)

Augustine of Hippo employed Plato’s philosophy to interpret and formulate his

theological ideas. In the area of ethics, Augustine placed emphasis on the will as the
source of all good and evil. As far as he was concerned, evil in the world is nothing but
the absence of good. Motlhabi (2001:60) supplies us with a summary of Augustine’s
ethical convictions:

A will which is inclined to evil, according to Augustine, is itself evil. It is not the
things to which it is inclined which are evil, but the will itself. “For avarice 8 is
not a fault inherent in gold, but in the man who inordinately loves gold, to the
detriment of justice … neither is luxury the fault of lovely and charming objects,

7
Romans 14:17 reads as follows: “For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and
drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” From this passage we
can see that the goal of the kingdom of God is righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy
Spirit. The goal of Christian ethics is to please God. Anything short of this is disastrous.
8
Some synonyms for avarice are greed, cupidity. An avaricious person is one who has a
strong desire to have wealth.

16
 but of the heart that inordinately loves sensual pleasures, to the neglect of
temperance, which attaches us to objects more lovely in their spirituality …

Augustine believed that all people were created good. But they can change since they are
not supremely good like their creator. A.G Goss (1995:178) in this regard writes:

God created Adam and Eve good, but through disobedience, they fell. The
consequences of the fall extend to all humankind in the form of original sin.
Before the fall, all humans possessed all that was necessary to be good, but
afterwards sin manifests itself primarily in ignorance and concupiscence.

To put this matter differently, we can say that Augustine believed in all human beings
there was some element of good. In fact Augustine extended this goodness to the entire
created order as well. Goss (1995:178) points out that “Christians now must live in a
world that, though disordered, still retains much that is good.” To Augustine, a being
cannot continue to exist without some good in it. Thus the very being or existence of
something implies the presence of some good in it (Motlhabi 2001:60 citing Albert et al
1984: 89).

Augustine placed a lot of emphasis on love. He particularly emphasised the love for God
and the love for neighbour. The principle of love is a very important ethical principle as
far as Augustine is concerned. By loving God, we are also able to love ourselves; and if
we love ourselves, we are to show the same love to our neighbour according to the
second commandment. In loving our neighbour, we will be able to avoid injury and to do
good to everyone we can reach (Motlhabi 2001: 61).9

9
The words of Augustine are in line with the words of our Lord Jesus Christ in Matthew
22: 37-39. The greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart and with all
your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind. The second commandment
is to love your neighbour as yourself. As far as I am concerned these two
commandments provide a framework for a Christian social ethic. The love for God
without love of neighbour will only be religious fanaticism. And love of neighbour
without love for God is mere humanism.

17
3.5 Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274)

He was a Dominican theologian. He was such a fine theologian. And as a result of his
extensive writings he has greatly impacted Christian theology and ethics.
His famous works include the famous Summa Theologica, the Summa Contra Gentiles,
and his commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. In his defense of the Christian
faith, he combined the teachings of the Bible, the Church and the philosophy of Aristotle
in one whole.

Aquinas saw the final goal of life as the beatific vision (vision beata) or ultimate vision of
God (Motlhabi 2001:62). As for the sources of truth, Aquinas believed that truth may be
attained through our human faculties as reason and the senses and through God’s
revelation.

3.5.1 Natural Law Ethics

In ethics Aquinas integrated his theory of faith and reason in his interpretation of the
natural10 law doctrine (Motlhabi 2001:62). By “natural” law says, Kretzschmar (1999:
69) two specific things are meant. Accordingly, Kretzschmar writes:

The first one is that looking at the world, moral truths can be discerned. The
second one is that moral truth can be ascertained by looking at the nature of
human beings.

Kretzschmar (1999: 69) further points out that:

10
Natural theology is usually studied under general revelation in evangelical circles. The
understanding is that there are two types of revelation: General revelation and special or
specific revelation. General revelation is that revelation of God through nature hence the
idea of natural theology. There are two common passages which are usually used in this
respect: Psalms 19 and Romans 1:18-22. J. Rodman Williams (1988: 36) says, “Natural
theology is the effort to build a doctrine concerning the Knowledge of God without
appeal to the Bible or special revelation by utilizing only the data that may be drawn from
nature, human existence, history, etc.”

18
 According to Aquinas, the inclination to preserve the good, to educate the young
or to desire sexual intimacy are “natural” human inclinations. Human and divine
laws are intended to regulate human behaviour and to discipline people to become
virtuous.

For Aquinas, human laws are inadequate on their own because of human limitations.
Hence divine law is needed to guide humans to their true end, that is, conformity with
God’s will and our true human natures as created by God (See Kretzschmar 1999: 69).
Thus we may deduce that Aquinas adapted the theory of natural law to Christian
morality. According to Aquinas, says Motlhabi (2001:63), “natural law is nothing other
than the sharing in the eternal law by intelligent creatures.” By natural law, Aquinas
makes reference to the law with which God has governed reality in all eternity (Motlhabi
2001:63). Natural law is that law which helps to direct natural inclinations to proper acts
and ends. Homosexuality is therefore, unnatural. The natural thing is that male human
beings should only have sexual relationships with female human beings under proper
conditions11.

3.5.2 Virtue Ethics

The virtue ethical theory is based on the belief that virtue is a moral quality possessed by
persons. Greek philosophers spoke of four cardinal virtues justice, wisdom (prudence),
courage, and temperance12. Aquinas added to these cardinal virtues theological virtues of
Faith, Hope and Love. Kretzschmar (1999:70) exemplifies the importance of these
theological virtues in this manner:

Faith adds to our natural knowledge the truths of God’s revelation, hope makes
our desire for God and the goal of happiness accessible, and love is a passion
stirred by some good.
11
Proper conditions can only be found within a marriage relationship. Sexual
relationships that do not conform o this stand are unnatural. This conviction is I line with
the biblical injunctions against committing sexual immorality and fornication.
12
Incidentally, the book of Proverbs in the Bible seems to place a lot of emphasis on these
virtues.

19
To these theological virtues, Aquinas added the intellectual virtues of wisdom,
knowledge and intuition.

The ethical theory of Aquinas is based on what he calls the natural law. In other ways he
wanted to appeal to common sense in determining human morality.

3.6 Immanuel Kant (1724-1803)

Kant is famous for his ethics of duty. His main principle is known as the categorical
imperative: “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to become
universal law.” What Kant is trying to drive at is that “one should only behave in a way
in which one would wish others to behave in relation to oneself.” For instance, when one
is tempted to steal when no one is looking, he or she should first ask himself or herself
whether he or she can subscribe to a law that allows everybody to steal under similar
circumstances. By refraining from stealing, one is indicating that stealing is wrong
whether you yourself do it or other people do it. “Kant believed that this categorical
imperative could be universalised (Kretzschmar 1999:71). For example stealing is wrong
every where. Hence stealing is universally wrong.

Another important element in Kant’s ethical theory is that moral action is carried out in
accordance with duty. According to Kant, says Motlhabi (2001:66), “acting from duty is
rather doing what one would not normally be inclined to do, or what requires one to
sacrifice one’s normal interests.” To put it differently, morality is not based on feelings
or inclinations; it is based on duty. For Kant actions were not to be judged in terms of
their consequences, since it is not possible to predict precisely what the consequences of
our actions would be. The only way to judge moral actions as far as Kant was concerned,
was whether they are in compliance with or for the sake of duty. Kretzschmar (1999:71)
summarises well the views of Kant here. She writes:

20
 Kant’s view was that the essence of morality lies in the fact that it must be
disinterested. This means that actions done to please people or to gain advantages
for ourselves cannot be good actions. According to Kant, the only thing that is
unconditionally good is the “goodwill”. By this he means the will to do our duty
for the simple reason that it is our duty. Kant also believed that duty was more
important than desire. We should therefore carry out our duties, and not our
wishes.

Kant further taught that we are to “act so as to treat humanity never only as a means but
always also as an end.” By this Kant meant that people are not just instruments that can
be used, but should be regarded as beings who are entitled to their own identity and
choices. Thus every employer should therefore, never disregard the wellbeing or dignity
of those whom they employ.

Kant also taught that good actions are in accordance with our consciences. His belief was
that inherent in human beings was the awareness of the moral law.

3.7 John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

Mill’s ethics have usually been termed as utilitarian ethics. He inherited the utilitarian
ethics from Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). Utilitarianism as the name suggests is based
on the usefulness of an act. Every action must be judged on the basis of its usefulness.
Utilitarianism promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. As
such utilitarianism has been correctly labelled as a form of hedonism13. Utilitarianism is
mainly concerned with the happiness of society. Its focus is public utility. Kretzschmar
(1999:73) clearly illustrates this point well when she observes that:

Bentham and Mill sought to use this philosophy in their attempts to achieve social
reforms in England. In their view the laws of a society should promote happiness

13
The philosophy of Hedonism seeks for pleasure and enjoyment.

21
 of the members of that society … the laws of society should seek to create for as
many people as possible the greatest pleasure and the least pain.

Bentham suggested that pleasure can be measured against the following factors:

 Duration – How long it lasts

 Intensity – How intense it is
 Propinquity – How near it is
 Extent – How widely it covers
 Certainly – How sure we are that it will come
 Purity – How free from pain it is
 Fecundity – How much it will lead to more pleasure

3.8 Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

Kierkegaard was a Danish philosopher and theologian. Kierkegaard is usually referred to

as the father of Existentialism. Existentialism as opposed to rationalism (reason)
maintains that the universe cannot be understood by reason alone. Kretzschmar (1999:
74) summarises well existentialist thinking when she writes:

Existentialism is opposed to rationalism in the sense that it denies that the

universe can be understood by reason alone. According to existentialists, the
problem of “being” (that is who we are) is more important than purely rational
philosophical investigation. Knowledge of self does not arise as a result of mental
analysis; it is the result of the way in which people experience themselves and
their situations. Existentialists are not opposed to thinking, but they argue that
thinking must not be separated from hope, fear, desire, and the need to find
purpose in life. Truth is not simply an external reality; it must be “true for me”.
Truth must be something for which the individual can both live and die.

22
Existentialists place a great deal of emphasis on the notions of autonomy and personal
choice. They maintain that responsible actions can only emerge as a result of personal
decisions. Existentialism is however, weak at the point where it places a lot of emphasis
on individualism and fails to take the community where we live seriously. The other
problem with existentialism is that its emphasis on autonomy and personal choice does
not take the problem of sin seriously.

4 How to make Ethical decisions

Let us take for our example the issue of divorce and remarriage. We have chosen this
issue because it is still very fresh in the country. I just hope you are not going to
misunderstand me. But for the sake of this class let us examine this matter14.

In September 2006 we learnt from the media that Dan Pule and his wife of 23 years had
officially gone through a divorce. On 20th January, 2007 he married his second wife
Leah. Due to reasons best known to Pule he as he put it surrendered Leah to her parents.
Of course this was just a clever way of divorcing the young lady just after a few months.
And recently Pule has married his third wife of which he says is the last and final
marriage. Of course as you may all remember his ex-wife Leah said the last wife for Pule
is not yet born. I am very aware that this is a very emotional matter. May be we need to
agree with Dr Nevers Mumba and leave matters in the hands of God. Articles regarding
Bishop Pule appeared in the Sunday Post issue no. 4266SU341 of 22 nd June 2008, The
Post issue no. 4268 of June 24th 2008, and The Post issue no. 4269 of June 25 th 2008.
This is a very complex ethical dilemma. It needs a lot of serious reflection on it before
any decision is made either in favour or against.
What do you think are the moral issues which this matter raises? One may appeal to the
Bible and say that the Bible prohibits divorce (see Matthew 5:31-32, Matthew 19:3-12,
Mark 10:2-12, Luke 16:18). In Mark Jesus states that who ever divorces his wife and
remarries commits adultery. It is clear from these passages that there is a biblical law that
14
I have no wish to discredit or demean Dr Pule. It is not my intention to pass judgment
on his personal life. What I just want to bring out is how Christians can make moral
decisions.

23
does not allow for divorce except where there is marital unfaithfulness (i.e. when one
spouse commits adultery). These ethical decisions are based on commandments or
norms. In other ways such ethics are deontological ethics. In deontological ethics, an
action is judged in terms of whether it is intrinsically right, that is, right or wrong in itself.
The question to consider therefore, would be was it right for Pule to divorce and remarry,
and then divorce and remarry?

The other way of deciding over this matter is that we may approach it from motives and
consequences. In making ethical decisions from this perspective we are actually
employing what is known as teleological ethics. Teleological ethics are concerned with
the goals, motives or consequences of certain actions. Here we ask whether the goals,
motives or consequences of certain actions are good or bad. In the case of Bishop Pule
was his action good or bad? In the Bible certain laws and commandments are not always
applied rigidly. In the case of the woman caught in adultery (John 8:3-4), Jesus did not
apply the commandment of the law (Lev 20:10), where the adulterer was supposed to be
put to death. Instead she was forgiven and told not to sin any more.

Ethical or moral decisions are made every day by people around us and in fact even
ourselves. Take for instance a young girl who falls pregnant. She has no means to
support neither herself nor her baby. Is abortion an option for her? Or are there other
moral or ethical options before her? How do you help her to make a right decision?
Whatever decision she takes will have consequences.

Conclusion

Christian ethics is Bible based. This means that our main text where the study of
Christian ethics is concerned is the Bible. Christian ethics is also Christocentric. This
implies that Christian ethics is patterned at the life and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Christian ethics operate at both the individual level as well as at the social level. As we
have seen the study of ethics is a must for every Christian leader.

24
References

Allen, D.1985. Philosophy for Understanding Theology. Louisville.

London: Westminster JOHN Knox Press
Barnette, H.H. 1961. Introduction to Christian Ethics.

25
 Nashville: Broadman
Chanda, V. 2008. Pentecostal Theology and Social Involvement: A Study of the
Theological and Ethical Significance of a Pentecostal Pneumatology in Dealing
with Social Matters. MTh Dissertation submitted at UNISA.
Pretoria: UNISA
Davis, J.J. 2000. Evangelical Ethics: Issues Facing the Church Today.
New Jersey: P&R Publishing
Geisler, N. Christian Ethics: Options and Issues.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House
Goss, A.G. 1995. In David J. Atkinson &David H. Field. eds.
New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology. Downers Grove, Ill.
Leicester: Inter- Varsity Press.
Kretzschmar, L. 1999. Ethics and Life.
Pretoria: UNISA
Magesa, L.1997. African Religion: The Moral Traditions of Abundant Life.
Nairobi: Pauline Publications
Motlhabi, M.B.G. 2001. Ethics and Moral Decision Making.
Pretoria: UNISA
Mwikamba, C.M. 2003. Changing Morals in Africa. In Mugambi, J.N.K & Nasimuyi-
Wasike A. (eds). Moral Ethical Issues in African Christianity. Nairobi: Acton
Publishers
William, J.R. 1988. Renewal Theology:
Grand Rapids: Zondervan

26