Moral Relativism and the Decline of Objective Morality
The concept of objective morality, which posits universal standards of right and wrong, stands in contrast to moral relativism, which suggests that moral principles are culturally or individually determined. Christian theology generally affirms the existence of an objective moral law, often rooted in the nature of God and discernible through conscience and divine revelation [7, 10].
Charles Hodge, in his Systematic Theology, emphasizes that the capacity to perceive moral distinctions is inherent to human nature. If this capacity is lost, responsibility for character or conduct ceases [7]. He further argues that civil governments are bound by a moral law that cannot legalize actions like theft and murder, even if such actions might appear to benefit the state. This obligation arises from the intrinsic nature of right and wrong, not merely from human institution [6]. Hodge distinguishes moral laws as those that bind "from its own nature," expressing obligations arising from our relations to God and to other people, regardless of whether they are formally enacted [10].
The idea of an objective moral standard is also reflected in the understanding of virtues. Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica, discusses moral virtues as habits of the appetitive faculty, with their specific differences determined by the specific differences of their objects [5]. This implies a fixed, rather than fluid, understanding of what constitutes a virtue. Similarly, the concept of charity, while it can increase in its subject, does not decrease in its quantity in comparison to its proper object, suggesting a stable and objective quality to divine love [3].
The decline of belief in objective morality can lead to a diminished sense of sin and guilt. If moral evil is seen merely as a weakness or a product of human nature, responsibility for sin is lessened or even destroyed [8]. The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary on Proverbs 11:10, for instance, highlights the "relative moral worth of good and bad men," implying a standard against which such worth is measured [2]. The Methodist/Wesleyan tradition, as seen in Adam Clarke's commentary on Job 14, also acknowledges "various moral sentiments" and the "antithesis between wisdom and folly," which presupposes a framework for discerning these opposing forces [1].
John Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, acknowledges the feebleness of human nature, which makes it impossible for individuals "in the flesh" to perfectly fulfill the law [4]. This perspective, however, does not negate the existence of the law itself, but rather highlights humanity's fallen state in relation to it. The concept of expiation by vicarious punishment, familiar to the human mind across ages, also suggests an underlying recognition of moral obligation and the need for reconciliation with a just and holy God [9].
Sources
- Job (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on Job 14 (introduction): Various moral sentiments. The antithesis between wisdom and folly, and the different effects of each.”
- Proverbs (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Proverbs 11:10: The last may be a reason for the first. Together, they set forth the relative moral worth of good and bad men.”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part (Secunda Secundae), Of the Subject of Charity, Art. 10: Article: Whether charity can decrease? I answer that, The quantity which charity has in comparison with its proper object, cannot decrease, even as neither can it increase, as stated above (Article [4], ad 2). Since, however, it increases in that quantity which it has in comparison with its subject, here is the place to consider whether it can decrease in this way. Now, if it decrease, this must needs be either through an act, or by the mere cessation from act. It is true that virt”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 43: goodness,” (Augustin. de Spiritu et Litera, towards the end, and elsewhere). So long as we are pilgrims in the world, we see through a glass darkly, and therefore our love is imperfect. Let it therefore be held incontrovertible, that, in consequence of the feebleness of our nature, it is impossible for us, so long as we are in the flesh, to fulfil the law. This will also be proved elsewhere from the writings of Paul ( Rom. 8:3 ). 187 187 Book 2. chap. 12 sec. 4; and Book 3, chap. 4 sec. 27; and chap. 11 sec 23. 6. That the whole ma”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, First Part of the Second Part (Prima Secundae), How the Moral Virtues Differ from One Another, Art. 1: Article: Whether there is only one moral virtue? I answer that, As stated above (Question [58], Articles [1],2,3), the moral virtues are habits of the appetitive faculty. Now habits differ specifically according to the specific differences of their objects, as stated above (Question [54], Article [2]). Again, the species of the object of appetite, as of any thing, depends on its specific form which it receives from the agent. But we must observe that the matter of t”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 46: between right and wrong. It cannot legalize theft and murder. No matter how much it might enrich itself by rapine or by the extermination of other nations, it would deserve and receive universal condemnation and execration, should it thus set at nought the bonds of moral obligation. This necessity of obedience to the moral law on the part of civil governments, does not arise from the fact that they are instituted for the protection of the lives, rights, and property of the people. Why have our own and other Christian nations pronounced th”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 52: conscience, and will, it remains unimpaired so long as these attributes remain. If reason be lost all responsibility for character or conduct ceases. If the consciousness of the difference between right and wrong, the capacity to perceive moral distinctions does not exist in a creature or does not belong to its nature, that creature is not the subject of moral obligation, and in like manner if he is not an agent, is not invested with the faculty of spontaneous activity as a personal being, he ceases, so far as his conscious states are con”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 39: is extinct. 3. This theory tends to lower our sense of sin and guilt. All moral evil becomes mere weakness, the yielding of the feebler powers of the spirit to the stronger forces of the flesh. If sin invariably, and by a law which controls men in their present state of existence, arises from the very constitution of their nature as sentient beings, then the responsibility for sin must be greatly lessened, if not entirely destroyed. 4. If the body be the seat and source of sin, then whatever tends to weaken the body or to reduce the force”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 104: in sacrifice, of one for many; the idea of expiation by vicarious punishment, has been familiar to the human mind in all ages. It has been admitted not only as possible, but as rational, and recognized as indicating the only method by which sinful men can be reconciled to a just and holy God. It is not, therefore, to be admitted that it conflicts with any intuition of the reason or of the conscience; on the contrary it is congenial with both. It is no doubt frequently the case that opposition to this doctrine arises from a misapprehensio”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 46: when the old economy passed away. A moral law is one that binds from its own nature. It expresses an obligation arising either out of our relations to God or out of our permanent relations to our fellow-men. It binds whether formally enacted or not. There are no doubt positive elements in the fourth commandment as it stands in the Bible. It is positive that a seventh, and not a sixth or eighth part of our time should be consecrated to the public service of God. It is positive that the seventh rather than any other day of the week should b”