Edward
Le Roy Long, Jr. retired as the James W. Pearsall Professor of Christian Ethics
and Theology of Culture at Drew University after a long academic career that
included Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Oberlin, Purdue University, and Union.
A
prestigious lecturer , he served numerous academic Societies, joining Drew
University in 1976. In 1984 he was awarded the James W. Pearsall Professor of
Christian Ethics and Theology of Culture. In 1981, he received the Will Herberg
Distinguished Professor Award for his contributions to Drew University. He
retired from Drew in 1985, but continued to teach a variety of courses
including: Christian Ethics, Historical Figures in Christian Ethics, Religion
and Law, Theological and Related Diagnoses of Culture, The Reformed Tradition,
Personhood, Community & Institutions, the Church's Role in Peacemaking.
Between
1945 and 1993 he authored 60 articles and numerous books on The
Christian Response to the Atomic Crisis (1950) ,
Science and Christian Faith (1950) ,
Religious Beliefs of American Scientists (1952) ,
Conscience and Compromise (1954) ,
A Survey of Christian Ethics (1967), War
and Conscience in America (1968), Peace
Thinking in a Warring World (1983), Academic
Bonding and Social Concern: The History of the Society of Christian Ethics:
1959-1983 (1984), and Higher
Education as a Moral Enterprise (1992). To
Liberate and Redeem: Moral Reflections on the Biblical Narrative (1997), Patterns
of Polity: Varieties of Church Governance (2001), Facing
Terrorism: Responding as Christians (2004).
His
book, Conscience and Compromise, rested
in my library quietly undiscovered for many years. I just now read his book,
liked it enough that I had to know his pedigree. Now I know that he published
in 1954 with Westminister Press and offers an approach to Protestant Casuistry
that he defines as the “process of relating
the high demands of faith to the perplexing moral dilemmas that appear in daily
life” (9).
He was a heavy weight in his academic world of Christian ethics and the culture. From chapter 13 I have excerpted several quotes of his relating to the limits and
dangers of casuistry (I have italicized his quotes).
“Casuistry must be undertaken in the framework of faithful
reliance upon God. It must be chastised and corrected by a power beyond itself.
This power must keep ethical devotion true to Christian love and recall men
when they stray from allegiance to it. To argue this way makes little sense to
the advocate of a non-“Christian ethic. It makes little sense to the
pragmatists and humanists who, having no resources beyond their own strategies
for dealing with human problems, are forced to rely upon the self-sufficiency
of their ethic and the self-correctiveness of its equivalent to casuistry. Whereas the
secularist, who believes in no power beyond that of human skill and wisdom, must
calculate and scheme with only human resource, the Christian may work as in
devotion to God. This devotion may include calculation but can never be reduced
to it alone.
“The
casuist must recheck each ethical decision against the norm of love and not merely
judge it by its practical fruits or short-range results. To this end he must
know the master plan. A man who builds a house must cut and fit each individual
piece, but if he does so without checking the whole building against the larger
guides of square and plumb line, the building will be lopsided and out of true.
Likewise, the cutting and fitting process of casuistry will build properly only
when checked against the standards of the gospel.
“The
gospel ethic never lets us go; it calls for a continual striving after a goal
that admittedly will never of itself be attained. We hear much these days from
the theologians about the scandal of the gospel in the metaphysical realm, but
there is also a scandal in the ethical realm. It is the demand for a total
abandon to the unconditional claim of love in order that its conditional claims
may be properly managed. An element of intense ethical devotion that lies
beyond casuistry is the only power that can preserve casuistry from its errors
... The final word by which men are saved comes from God in his justification
of men by faith. This word emphasizes that men are saved by God’s own power and
love and not by casuistry or ethical devotion, however strong and valid they
may be.
. .” 147-150).
As Christians we may
enter into the problems of our culture. We need, however, to be aware that the
culture may accept our intentions and assistance but call us to compromise by rejecting
or reducing what for us is the ultimate demand of our faith—radical commitment
to God’s call upon our lives.
Some unwittingly
downsize their solutions to cultural problems by accepting the cultural
rationale and minimizing, ignoring, or deleting God’s call upon their life. They flirt with a humanistic approach, which is ultimately a-theistic in ignoring, minimizing, or scaling down God’s radical demand of love and
grace.
I will end with this
quote, which I like: “The meaning of
Christian experience is found in the relationship of obedience as undertaken in
response to the forgiving love that has been made known to us in Christ.
Without the love of Christ to ennoble and redeem it the whole enterprise of
Christian ethics is frustrating” and I might add futile.
As Long concludes, “The last word of the gospel does not concern the ambiguity of ethical
choice but proclaims God’s choice in Christ” (164). From Warner’s World
this is walkingwithwarner.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment