How does one determine what is good?  Is it discovered, dictated, or determined?  Will it still be good tomorrow?  In another culture?  These and many more ethical questions and possible decision paths are the topic of Nullens and Michener’s book The Matrix of Christian Ethics.  The purpose for the book is to promote “an embrace of responsible postmodern thought with a deep concern for justice and the well-being of the other.  W desire to engage in a deeply Christian ethical reflection that moves beyond a modernist ideal of individual rights due to our sameness as human beings to an acknowledgment of the wonder of our diversity and complexity.” (pg. 45).

The authors take the reader on an historical journey through the development of moral argumentation which includes four basic approaches: consequentialism, principle ethics, virtue ethics, and value ethics.  They unpack the historical roots of each and present some philosophers who represented those approaches and who contributed to their notoriety.  Without apology the authors then turn to the God of the Bible and his relationship to ethics.  They use Micah 6:8 as a key verse delineating what God deems to be ‘good.’  “He has showed you, O man, what is good.  And what does the Lord require of you?  To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.”

I particularly appreciated how the authors related ethics to community and did so by using as a foundation the Trinity.  I agree with them that “Christian Trinitarian ethics, then is social ethics.  There is no individual Christian ethics per se; it is always social.” (Pg. 157).  This is important in western, North American culture where unbridled individualism can neglect societal need in order to satisfy personal preferences or desires.  I cannot think of a decision that impacts only oneself.

Another appreciated topic is that of the Kingdom of God.  The authors made a very important statement relating to Matthew 6:33 regarding the demand to seek his righteousness and his Kingdom.  They write, “Righteousness is a summary of God’s will as it i and will be manifested in his kingdom.”  (pg. 169).  This is an important clarification for the often misused application (in my opinion).  Too often, people expect Kingdom righteousness to be appreciated in this world and even to win benefit.  But, it does not always have this effect and can even be rejected and demeaned.  This is not to say that the follower of Christ should not seek and reflect Kingdom righteousness!  It is to say, however, that one may not escape negative response from this world’s kingdom.

In the last chapter the authors provide a very practical format for thinking through ethical dilemmas one may face.  The format includes the following phases: 1) Collect Relevant Information, 2) Formulate the Particular Ethical Problem(s), 3) Consider the Problem in View of the Matrix of Commandments, Values, Character, and Consequences, 4) Consider Alternate Solutions, 5) Make a Decision, and 6) Evaluate.  I believe this format will be very useful in almost any ethical situation and I plan to use it.  In fact, there is an issue in a church that I am consulting which is a prime candidate for using this format.

How about you?  Are you facing any ethical issues which could be helped using the above format?