Moral Relativity

In my time at Denver Seminary, I have sensed a negative disposition towards postmodernism among some faculty and students. I have also met a number of people in the greater Denver area who seem greatly concerned with postmodernism. Postmodernism, in all of these situations, is referenced in regards to moral relativity. You’ve heard it said, “What’s right to you is right to you and what’s right to me is right to me,” or something to that effect. It has made me conclude that postmodernism is the scapegoat on which evangelicals are passing the blame for their failed attempt at moral reform. My first problem with all this is that postmodernism has been defined in very narrow terms and the whole methodological project intended by it has been rendered obsolete. It is greatly oversimplified to use it in a pejorative sense in regards to moral ethics. Everybody just blames the post-moderns for our culture’s moral relativity. But I wonder if this is really the case. Or, if it is a just another way that we place the blame. It’s easy to blame a philosophy for the world’s problems, especially when it’s a worldview that we do not espouse. By doing this, we separate ourselves from the problems of the world. Thus, the problem does not lie in us or our views but in them and their views. This is just a defensive mechanism in us because we don’t like to see ourselves as part of the problem So we shift the blame.

I am wondering though, if consumerism might play a larger role than postmodernism when it comes to moral relativity. I say this for a couple reasons. First, some of postmodernism has been a reaction against the life of generations before. Many post-moderns have rejected the comfortable, wealthy, consumeristic life that their parents lived. Thus, consumerism was present before the current situation of postmodernity. Second, consumerism breeds an instant-satisfaction culture in which are desires can be satisfied at any given moment if we have the money, the time, the connections, etc. Consumerism teaches us to satisfy these needs immediately, rather than to reflect on the decisions we are making. For example, if we have a desire to sleep with a woman who is not our wife, we just do it. We don’t reflect on whether it is right or not. It may cross our mind but only for a fleeting moment. We do it right away and after the fact, we may think about it. Or we may forget about it because we are off satisfying our next desire. What I am seeking to convey is that our decisions are more influenced by consumerism than postmodernism. When faced with an ethical decision, we do not often think about in terms of it being wrong for me but right for you or vice versa. We only think about immediate implications.

Thus, returning to the idea of shifting the blame, by using postmodernism as a scapegoat, we ignore that we are a part of the moral relativity our world faces. Because consumerism is a part of all of us. We all consume. Some more than others. And consumerism in the U.S. has gotten to the point where immediate gratification or results is elevated beyond the moral questions regarding a decision. We are a part of the problem of moral relativity whether we are post-moderns or not because we participate in the religion of consumerism. As much as we try to shift the blame, it does no good in facing moral relativity if we are unwilling to recognize how we have contributed to the problem.

Rob Bell Interview

There was a recent interview in the Boston Globe with Rob Bell, the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids. He has drawn a lot of ire in regards to how he defined evangelical. Give it a read.

Theological Training

Some of my friends here at seminary have started the job search process for churches next year. I always enjoy listening to their experiences of the process and the surprises of what they encounter. Some are set on working in churches in the rural Midwest. Others only are interested in pursuing ministerial positions in urban or suburban settings. Some want to be teaching pastors, some executive pastors, some youth pastors, some worship pastors. But through some of these dialogues, two common themes have arisen. First, all but maybe one have expressed that they did not want to be a senior pastor right out of seminary. They all preferred to be apprentices under long-standing pastors for a few more years as an associate before being promoted to a senior pastor position. The second common strand is that most people want to be pastors at thriving, growing churches.

In response to the first theme, I asked why they didn’t want to be a senior pastor yet. All of them replied that they were not ready yet. One of these people has even had 4 or so years experience as a youth pastor in a church before returning to seminary. He doesn’t think he’s ready. I’m about 7 years his younger and although I do not feel prepared to tackle everything thrown my direction, I do feel prepared to be a senior pastor. A few more years of training will not prepare me for every little thing that could happen. The underlying question to all this is why don’t they feel prepared? Most of them have had ministry experience of some sort. All of them will graduate from a very good theological school with a masters of divinity. Sometimes you just have to go get your hands dirty. In high school I ran track. Before important meets, I remember my father always telling me to trust my legs and more importantly, to trust my training. All those long hours I put in on the track earlier in the spring was always ample preparation come time for the regional and state track meets. Somehow though, I had to be reminded of the confidence I should have possessed because I had prepared the best I could. All there was left to do was to go run the race. Training for a few more months might help a second or two or three, but I needed to test my training thus far. Trust your training. I wonder if seminarians would change perspectives in regards to being senior pastor’s fresh out of seminary if they trusted their training. And all their long hours studying in the library and counseling in their church office.

The second common theme was the desire to pastor “successful” churches. Will Willimon noted this in his own denomination earlier this year (I couldn’t find his blog post on it . . . sorry). He thought it was because we hadn’t trained pastors to be visionaries or true leaders. Instead we had trained pastors to be shopkeepers, to maintain the status quo, to build on a foundation already laid. Although I think this is true a large part of the time, I also think we must discern where seminarians will best fit in a church setting. Some may do excellent with already well-established congregations. For others, this may seem choking and crippling, with all their creative capacities being neglected. This may be one of the most important parts of discerning pastoral ministry as seminarian students – trying to decide what kind of setting your pastoral skills could be utilized in.