Moral Relativism, Nominal Christianity & Moralism? What Are They?
Lately I've been having a lot of individuals ask for clarity on definitions. As a result I put the Lutheran Wiktionary Link on the blog. However, I am realizing more and more that I should compile the definitions from the Lutheran Wiktionary as well as terms from this blog and construct a PM Notes Glossary. Hmm... only if I had tons of time! Anyway, we will see what happens with this. In the mean time enjoy the Q&A below.
Question:
Feel free to answer this via one of your PM notes or whatever- but what is the difference between Moral Relativism, Nominal Christianity and Moralism? How are they similar? How are they different?
Answer:
Moral Relativism:
“Moral relativism is the view that ethical standards, morality, and positions of right or wrong are culturally based and therefore subject to a person's individual choice. We can all decide what is right for ourselves. You decide what's right for you, and I'll decide what's right for me. Moral relativism says, "It's true for me, if I believe it."[1]
Nominalism:
“A nominal Christian is one who says he/she is a Christian but hardly ever goes to church. Or, someone who selects "Christianity" as their religion for any official purpose (e.g. national census), but consider him/herself to be a non-practicing Christian. A nominal Christian may undertake religious activities (especially at Christmas/Easter), and proclaim fellowship with followers of Jesus (for example, through being a "member" of a church), but in their heart they will possess apathy or even unbelief toward the sovereignty of Jesus Christ.”[2]
Moralism:
“The basic structure of moralism comes down to this — the belief that the Gospel can be reduced to improvements in behavior. Moralists can be categorized as both liberal and conservative. In each case, a specific set of moral concerns frames the moral expectation. As a generalization, it is often true that liberals focus on a set of moral expectations related to social ethics while conservatives tend to focus on personal ethics. The essence of moralism is apparent in both — the belief that we can achieve righteousness by means of proper behavior. In our own context, one of the most seductive false gospels is moralism. This false gospel can take many forms and can emerge from any number of political and cultural impulses.”[3]
Each of these are different due to their emphasis, however, there are some overlapping similarities. Both moralism and moral relativism are similar in that they focus on morals and improvement by the means of behavior and attitude. Nominalism and Moral Relativism are similar in that 'self' and personal opinion rules. Furthermore, nominalism and moral relativism both have a mushiness to them; no definite standard nor clear definitions of what constitutes morality or Christianity.
All of these are the same in that they are 'not' the Gospel. Nominalism, moral relativism and moralism are psuedo-gospels; fake gospels; fake assurances. The Gospel is not merely a list of moral improvements, nor is the Gospel found in church attendance. The Gospel is not a man-made concept, based on mankind's opinions, nor found in the actions of mankind. The Gospel is an alien/external message that Christ atoned for the sins of the world on the cross. The Gospel has nothing to do with our actions, abilities, disposition, etc... It has everything to do with what God has done for mankind.
Comments