INTRODUCTION TO

THEOLOGICAL ETHICS
 • Theology comes from the greek words theos
INTRODUCTION
(deity/ God) and logos (discourse or speech).
• Narrowly considered, is about the existence
Theolog
and nature of the divine.
• Broadly considered, it covers the entire range
of issues concerning humanity’s relationship
to god
• “Theology” would be “the science of divine
things”.
y

• The world (latin: saeculum); all secular studies

begin with reason and experience while
theology begins with faith.
• The starting point for theology is the word of
God.
• So, theology is the study of God, and is the
science that rationally pursues the
understanding of the self-revelation of God in
the scriptures.
 THEOLOGY …..

Theology is simply a tool that is lifeless when not combined with

practical faith and proper application. Even the devil has lot of
theological information, but he can’t have faith in the truth;
theology devoid of faith is diabolical.
So, theology is a practical discipline, not merely theoretical.

Theology takes place in children’s sunday school classes,

evangelistic meetings, preaching, and discipleship seminars.

Theology is the application of the word to all areas of life. both

theory and practice enrich one another when they are biblical.
Christian theology is a peculiar synthesis of Hebraism and the
Greek. The special concentration on the ethical implications of
theology is called “moral theology” in the more Catholic churches
or “Christian ethics” in Protestant communions.
Theology is concerned primarily with how persons should think,
while ethics is concerned with how persons should live.
ETHICS
The term ethics derives from the Greek word ethos
meaning character, conduct, and/or customs.
Ethics is about how we decide what is right and good
or wrong and bad in any given situation.
“Ethics is the study of everyday behavior” and so
involves every aspect of our lives.
The discipline dealing with the principles or conduct
governing an individual or group Consideration of moral
principles or values of what is good or right to do.
It is about what morals and values are found appropriate by
members of society and individuals themselves.
Ethics is a brunch of philosophy that studies the rightness or
wrongness of human action and concerned with questions of
how human person ought to act. . (Albert, Denis & peterfreud 1984, p1-2)
 ETHICS AND MORALITY
 The difference between ethics and morality is not significant. In fact the former is essentially
synonymous with the latter.
 Etymologically speaking Ethics comes from the Greek word “Ethos” while morality from the
Latin word ‘Mos’ (or mores, if it’s used in a plural form), both words referring to customary
behavior.
 we may use the word “immoral” in lieu of the word “unethical”, or we may use the word
“moral” instead of the word “ethical”. we also say that a “moral person” or “ethical person” is
one who is good and does the right thing, and an “immoral person” or “unethical person” is one
who is bad and does what is wrong. we can use both terms interchangeably.
 However, there is a fine line that divides the two. In other words, we can distinguish one from
the other in some respects. Ethics generally refers to the systematic study of the rightness and
wrongness of a human action, while Morality is generally understood as the rightness or
wrongness of a human action. In this way, we can say that ethics is the specific branch of
philosophy that studies the morality (that is, the rightness or wrongness) of human act. With
this, we may initially conclude that ethics is the science of “morals”, morality is the practice of
ethics.
 Morality is used to describe our principles or convictions about what is right and wrong and
our ultimate values.
 Ethics or Moral Philosophy refers to the study of those principles and values, analyzing them
critically and working out how we make decisions. Christian ethics often begins with the
specific situation and asks what principles should apply in this case.
 ETHICS
Ethics is theology, viewed as a means of determining which human persons, acts,
and attitudes receive God’s blessing and which do not.

Ethics is not a branch of theology, but theology itself, the whole of theology,
viewed in a certain way. All theology answers ethical questions. When we ask
what we ought to believe about, say, the order of the divine decrees, we are
asking an ethical question.
All theology, then, is ethical. We could discuss the creation ordinances, the moral
laws given to Adam and Eve before the Fall, in the course of describing the prefall
condition of the human race. Then we could teach the Decalogue in connection
with the Mosaic Covenant, ethical methodology in connection with theological
thoughts, and so on.

In fact, however, ethics covers the whole range of human life and all the teaching
of Scripture.
 SOURCES FOR CHRISTIAN ETHICS
 The Bible is the “witness to the ‘central events’ of the faith, not to every
element within the faith and to every problem with which the believer may
be concerned” (Jones, p55).
 The Tradition of the Church. Since the church decided what was scripture

and what was not, we can’t divorce the authority of the Bible from the
authority of the Church. In ethics, what past generations thought and said
and did is important but is not the overruling authority for same reasons as
the Bible.
 Reason. To use the authority of reason means that:

 We must consider all the available evidence;

 The conclusion must not be predetermined but follow from the
evidence;
 The argument should be coherent and not illogical.
 Theologian Richard Hooker regarded Scripture, Reason and Tradition as
working in a creative tension with each other.
 CLASSIFICATION OF ETHICS
2.1 Personal and Social ethics
 Traditionally ethics understood as personal ethics. That is taking
some personal issues on the basis of moral behavior. Do’s and don’ts
or what we ought to do and ought not are the examples of this. It is
very much restricted and limited to personal moral behavior.
 The personal duties and codes found in the professional ethics (eg.

The ethical code of a policeman: Nurse: or Doctor) are related to

personal ethics. The manner or etiquette (rules) are also personal in
nature.
 Certain rules are given in a particular society to regulate the behavior

of the person.
 But no ethics is now purely self-regarding. Because, every

individual’s action may affects the community.

 SOCIAL ETHICS
 social ethics is more concerned of structural problems.
 The issues are related to justice or questions of social justice. The

questions are accepting the dignity of a person: and challenging of

structural evils like social exploitation.
 Social ethics is a political ethics. It takes political questions like

colonialism and Globalization seriously.

 Social ethics asserts the right of the people especially the right of

the poor.
 In social ethics the issue of human dignity upheld.

 Personal ethics is so simplistic: and it does not deal with issues

related to human dignity: human rights: or justice. It does not take

up political questions.
 RELIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS
 The other type of classification of ethics is that discuses about Christians and non-
Christians or Religious and philosophical.
RELIGIOUS ETHICS
 A.GENERAL ETHICS:
 Analyses the actions of a person in terms of his/her desire/motive, towards the realization
of his/her goal or aim; to the good of the person and to the welfare of others.
 In short, general ethics thus seems to generalize and relativist activity, such that not only
the goals but the norms as well are particularized.
 B.BIBLICAL ETHICS:
 Defined as the systematic study of standards of right and wrong in Christian character
and conduct. It is an inquiry in to the meaning and purpose of life and has its foundation
the sources, principles and practices of forming and using judgments of right and wrong
based on biblical principles.
 C.CHRISTIAN ETHICS:
 Christian ethics based on the Bible. It emphasizes the dignity and right of persons and is
critical of unjust structures and unequal relationships.
 Also deals with all issues related to life. It demands an attitudinal change in order to
transform the oppressive structure of society and personal moral behavior
 CHARACTERISTICS OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS
A. Christian Ethics Is Based on God’s Will
 Christian ethics is a form of the divine-command position.
 God wills what is right in accordance with his own moral

attributes.
 “Be holy, because I am holy,” the Lord commanded Israel

(Lev. 11:45).
 “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,”

Jesus said to his disciples (Matt. 5:48). “It is impossible for

God to lie” (Heb. 6:18). So we should not lie either.
 “God is love” (1 John 4:16), and so Jesus said, “Love your

neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:39).

 In brief, Christian ethics is based on God’s will, but God

never wills anything contrary to his unchanging moral

character.
B. CHRISTIAN ETHICS IS ABSOLUTE
 Since God’s moral character does not change (Mal. 3:6; James 1:17), it follows
that moral obligations flowing from his nature are absolute. That is, they are
always binding everywhere on everyone.
 On the other hand, God’s command not to murder (Gen. 9:6) applied before the
law was given to Moses, under the Law of Moses (Exod. 20:13), and also since
the time of Moses (Rom. 13:9). In brief, murder is wrong at all times and all
places and for all people. This is true because humans are created in the “image
of God” (Gen. 1:27; 9:6). This includes a moral likeness to God (Col. 3:10;
James 3:9).
 Whatever is traceable to God’s unchanging moral character is a moral absolute.
This includes such moral obligations as holiness, justice, love, truthfulness, and
mercy.
 Other commands flowing from God’s will, but not necessarily from his nature,
are equally binding on a believer, but they are not absolute. That is, they must
be obeyed because God prescribed them, but he did not prescribe them for all
people, times, and places.
 Absolute moral duties, on the contrary, are binding on all people at all times
and in all places.
 C. CHRISTIAN ETHICS IS BASED ON GOD’S
REVELATION
 Christian ethics is based on God’s commands, the revelation of which is
both general (Rom. 1:19–20; 2:12–15) and special (2:18; 3:2). God has
revealed himself both in nature (Ps. 19:1–6) and in Scripture (19:7–14).
 General revelation contains God’s commands for all people. Special
revelation declares his will for believers. But in either case, the basis of
human ethical responsibility is divine revelation. Failure to recognize God
as the source of moral duty does not exonerate anyone, even an atheist,
from their moral duty.
 For “when Gentiles, who do not have the law [of Moses], do by nature
things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though
they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law
are written on their hearts” (Rom. 2:14–15).
 That is, even if unbelievers do not have the moral law in their minds, they
still have it written on their hearts. Even if they do not know it by way of
cognition, they show it by way of inclination.
 D. CHRISTIAN ETHICS IS PRESCRIPTIVE
 Since moral rightness is prescribed by a moral God, it is
prescriptive. For there is no moral law without a moral Lawgiver;
there is no moral legislation without a moral Legislator.
 Christian ethics by its very nature is prescriptive, not descriptive.

Ethics deals with what ought to be, not with what is.
 Christians do not find their ethical duties in the standard of

Christians but in the standard for Christians—the Bible.

 From a Christian point of view, a purely descriptive ethic is no ethic

at all. Describing human behavior is the task of sociology.

 But prescribing human behavior is the province of morality. What

people actually do is not the basis for what they ought to do. If it
were, then people ought to lie, cheat, steal, and murder, since these
things are done all the time.
 E.CHRISTIAN ETHICS IS DEONTOLOGICAL
 Ethical systems can be broadly divided into two categories,
deontological (dutycentered) and teleological (end-centered).
 Christian ethics is deontological. Utilitarianism is an example of a

teleological ethic.
 Christian ethic is deontological and insists that even some acts that

fail are good. Christians believe, for example, that it is better to

have loved and to have lost than not to have loved at all.
 Christians believe that the cross was not a failure simply because

only some will be saved. It was sufficient for all even if it is

efficient only for those who believe.
 The Christian ethic insists that moral actions that reflect God’s

nature are good whether they are successful or not.

 Good for the Christian is not determined in a lottery. In life the

winner is not always right.

 PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS
 A.RIGHT BASED ETHICS: - It is a family of moral and political
theories that makes use of the idea of a social contract. The social contract
notion is rooted in Hobbes and Kant’s idea.
 B.GOAL BASED ETHICS: - It says that we ought to do whatever
maximizes good consequences. It does not in itself matter what kind of
thing we do, what matters is that we maximize good results. They think
that any rule should be broken when it has better consequences to do so.
 C.HUMAN BASED ETHICS: - According to the human based ethics, all
and only, humans count as having value in themselves. Human beings are
both the actors and the proper subjects of morality.
 D.DUTY BASED ETHICS: - In ethics, deontological ethics or
deontology: is a theory holding that decisions should be made solely or
primarily by considering one’s duties and the rights of others.
 Deontology insists that how people accomplish their goals is usually or
always more important than what people accomplish
 THREE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
 Most people who think about ethics, Christian and non-
Christian alike, are impressed by three principles:
 1. The Teleological Principle: A good act maximizes the

happiness of living creatures. That is to say, a good act

does good.
 Non-Christian ethical writers like Aristotle have also

emphasized that doing good brings happiness, however

that may be defined. The ethical life is the good life, the
blessed life (Psm. 1, Matt. 5:1-11).
 so that good acts have beneficial consequences, to

himself, to the ethical agent, and to other persons.

 We can call this principle the principle of teleology, for it

declares that all our behavior should be goal-oriented,

that it should seek the glory of God and the happiness of
people.
 2. THE DEONTOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE:
 A good act is a response to duty, even at the price of self-sacrifice.
 We admire people who follow their ethical principles, even at great cost. In the

Bible, Abraham obeyed God’s word, even though it meant leaving his home
country, moving to a place where he was a complete stranger to everybody, even
though it meant taking his son Isaac up to a mountain to serve as a human
sacrifice (Gen. 22:1-19).
 To do his Father’s will, the Lord Jesus gave his very life. So God defines duties

for us, absolute norms that take precedence over any other consideration.
 Our duty is what we must do, what we ought to do. So they are necessary. And

they are universal, for they apply to everyone.

 For the ultimate source of human duties is God’s authoritative word. Some

secular thinkers, such as Plato and Kant, also acknowledged the important of
duty. But as we shall see, they had a difficult time determining where our duties
are to be found, and what our duties actually are.
 We can call this principle the principle of deontology, from the Greek verb

translated “owe, ought, or must.” It states that ethics is a matter of duty, of

obligation.
 3. THE EXISTENTIAL PRINCIPLE:
 A good act comes from a good inner character. A good person is not a
hypocrite. He does good works because he loves to do them, because his
heart is good.
 Scripture emphasizes that the only righteousness that is worth anything is
a righteousness of the heart. The Pharisees cleansed the outside of their
cup, their outward acts, but not the inside, their heart-motives (Matt.
23:25).
 Non-Christian writers, such as Aristotle, have also frequently emphasized
the importance of character, of virtue, of inner righteousness. But as we
shall see they have not succeeded in showing what constitutes virtue or
how such virtue may be attained.
 This insight is based on God’s lordship attribute of presence, for it is God
“who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil.
2:12). Without inward regeneration and sanctification, our best works are
hypocritical. We can call this the existential principle, for it says that
morality is personal, inward, a matter of the heart.
 META ETHICS
 Meta Ethics or “analytical ethics” deals with the origin of the ethical
concepts themselves.
 It does not consider whether an action is good or bad, right or wrong.
Rather, it questions – what goodness or rightness or morality itself is?
 It is basically a highly abstract way of thinking about ethics. The key
theories in meta-ethics include naturalism, non-naturalism, emotivism and
prescriptivism.
 Naturalists and non-naturalists believe that moral language is cognitive
and can be known to be true or false.
 Emotivists deny that moral utterances are cognitive, holding that they
consist of emotional expressions of approval or disapproval and that the
nature of moral reasoning and justification must be reinterpreted to take
this essential characteristic of moral utterances into account.
 Prescriptivists take a somewhat similar approach, arguing that moral
judgments are prescriptions or prohibitions of action, rather than
statements of fact about the world.
 APPLIED ETHICS
 Applied ethics deals with the philosophical examination,
from a moral standpoint, of particular issues in private
and public life which are matters of moral judgment.
 This branch of ethics is most important for professionals

in different walks of life including doctors, teachers,

administrators, rulers and so on.
 There are six key domains of applied ethics viz. Decision

ethics (ethical decision making process}, Professional

ethics {for good professionalism}, Clinical Ethics {good
clinical practices), Business Ethics {good business
practices}, Organizational ethics {ethics within and
among organizations} and social ethics.
 It deals with the rightness or wrongness of social,

economical, cultural, religious issues also. For example,

euthanasia, child labour, abortion etc.
 3. CHRISTIAN ETHICAL LIFE AND DISCIPLINES
 3.1 The importance of Ethical life
 The Christian life flows out of faith in Christ and participation in the life of the

Church: Baptism, Eucharist, Sacramental life in general, prayer and Christian

love.
 Yet in the concrete and specific circumstances of the Christian life, that is, the

experience of the Church, neither is the Christian way of life lived and realized
automatically, nor is it unambiguously clear precisely what is appropriate to the
Christian ethos.
 Thus, the earliest Christian teaching also included directives and exhortation on

issues specifically related to the living of the Christian life. An example is St.
Paul’s reaction to the case of a Christian who was cohabitating with his step-
mother as described in the fifth chapter of St. Paul’s first letter to the
Corinthians.
 Such behavior was not to be tolerated, since it was perceived as totally

incompatible with being a follower of Christ as well as with the existence of

the Church of Christ itself.
 Feeding the hungry, taking in the stranger, clothing the naked, visiting the sick
 THE NEED FOR THE DISCIPLINE OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS
 For the Christian ethical life, there is need for reflection, Theological study and
explication of the ethical dimensions of the Orthodox Christian faith.
 However, today, a study of the major resources in Orthodox Christian teaching
as they apply both to the foundational principles of ethics as well as to their
practical application in the life of the Church, is not merely an academic
exercise. It is, as well, an imperative.
 This imperative is not particularly in places and in times when the social milieu
in which the church lives is stable, imbued with Christian spirit and based on a
Christian world view.
 However, it is quite clear that the Orthodox Church does not enjoy such a
status anywhere in the world today.
 In the communist dominated lands the church suffers a sometimes veiled,
sometimes open persecution, coupled with sever and consistent propaganda
attacks.
 In the western capitalist nations the saecularistic spirit flies in the face of the
Christian ethos, a confrontation perhaps even more insidious than the open
opposition of the communistic ideology.
 THE NEED FOR THE DISCIPLINE …..
 Other forces contribute as well to the lack of clarity and sureness about the content of
Christian ethics. Among these are pluralism and rapid scientific advance.
 The isolate closed community is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Pluralism of
culture, religions, and lifestyles is a fact of life in many nations, particularly as they
become more and more urbanized. As Orthodox Christian join in this process, and
contribute to it by their very presence, questions and problems arise which they have
never had to face before.
 Further, rapid scientific advances in our time have given totally new dimensions to some
old issues and, in addition, raised problems for the behavior of orthodox Christians which
have never existed before.
 An example of the former is the influence of the awesome destructiveness of nuclear
weapons on all Christian thinking regarding war. Example of the latter are the many
advances in the sphere of medicine, including procedures such as artificial insemination,
organ transplants, conception control methods, sex-change 0perations and genetic
manipulation.
 All of these factors and others as well, call for a careful examination of the fundamental
principles as well as the specific guidelines for the living of the Orthodox Christian life.
 In other words, the need for Orthodox Christian ethical study and the development of the
discipline is a spiritual imperative and a demand on the part of the church.
 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF
ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN ETHICS
4.1. In the Old Testament period
 In the Old Testament the history of Ethics is presented into four periods:
 (1) Edenic Era:- in the Old Testament primarily ethics is connected with the
category of God's command.
 In the second chapter God tells Adam that he is free to eat from any tree in the
garden, but he must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
When Eve and Adam disobey and eat of that fruit, they are expelled from the
garden.
 God is setting up a kind of covenant by which humans will be blessed if they
obey the commands God gives them.
 There is a turning away from God and from obedience to God that characterizes
this as a ‘fall into sin’. As the story goes on, and Cain kills Abel, evil spreads to
all the people of the earth, and Genesis describes the basic state as a corruption of
the heart (6:9).
 This idea of a basic orientation away from or towards God and God's commands
becomes in the Patristic period of early Christianity the idea of a will.
 4.1. IN THE OLD TESTAMENT …..
 (2) Noahic Era :- the covenant that God makes with Noah after the flood is
applicable to the whole human race, and universal scope is explicit in the
Wisdom books, which make a continual connection between how we should
live and how we were created as human beings.
 Judaism distinguishes seven ‘Noahide’ laws given to Noah before the
covenant with Abraham.
 (3) Patriarchal Era:- In the Pentateuch, the story continues with Abraham,
and God's command to leave his ancestral land and go to the land God
promised to give him and his offspring (Gen. 17:7–8).
 Then there is the command to Abraham to kill his son, a deed prevented at
the last minute by the provision of a ram instead (Gen. 22:11–14).
 (4) Mosaic Era:- Moses receives from God the Ten Commandments, in two
tables or tablets (Exod. 20:1–17, 31:18).
 The surrounding laws in the Pentateuch include prescriptions and
proscriptions about ritual purity and sacrifice and the use of the land that
seem to apply to this particular people in this particular place.
 4.2 DURING NEW TESTAMENT ERA
(1) The Gospel /Jesus/
 New Testament; in any case the Christian doctrine is that we can see which
Jesus did in his life the clearest possible revelation in human terms both of
what God is like and at the same time of what our lives ought to be like.
 In the ‘Sermon on the Mount’ (Matthew 5–7) Jesus issues a number of radical
injunctions. He takes the commandments inside the heart.
 we are required not merely not to murder, but not to be angry, and not merely
not to commit adultery, but not to lust.
 We are told, if someone strikes us on the right cheek, to turn to him also the
left. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and those who hate and persecute us,
and in this way he makes it clear that the love commandment is not based on
reciprocity (Matt 5:43–48; Luke 6:27–36).
 Jesus describes the paradigm of loving our neighbors as the willingness to die
for them. This theme is connected with our relationship to God, which we
violate by disobedience, but which is restored by God's forgiveness through
redemption.
 DURING NEW TESTAMENT ……..
 (2) Acts & Epistles (Apostles) In Paul's letters especially we are given a
three-fold temporal location for the relation of morality to God's work
on our behalf. We are forgiven for our past failures on the basis of
Jesus' sacrifice (Rom. 3:21–26).
 We are reconciled now with God through God's adoption of us in

Christ (Rom. 8:14–19). And we are given the hope of future progress in
holiness by the work of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:3–5).
 Faith and works are interdependent in the understanding of Apostle

James (James 2:14-26).

 He argues that faith apart from works is dead. Dead faith is not

dynamic. The manifestation and life of faith is expressed by the good

works.
 Apostle James has created a radical shift in the thinking of the whole

New Testament. For James faith is in vain unless it is practiced

meaningfully through our relationship with others. He realized the
dynamism of faith.
 (3) EARLY CHRISTIAN ERA (1ST CENTURY-A.D. 590),
 The criticisms directed against the Christians by both Jews and pagans
gave opportunity to Christian apologists to respond. Some of these
charges were of an ethical character and the responses which they elicited
from the defenders of the faith argued for the ethical purity of the
members of the church, their high idealism and the example of their
teaching.
 The influx of new converts from paganism meant that the new converts

brought their non-Christian life styles with them which had to be

reformed and corrected. This became the cause for some writings on
Christian ethics.
 Also, the specific ethical failures of Christians caused some legislation by

the church. We have a number of canons by the church throughout the

centuries of this period which deal with primarily ethical questions.
 In addition, we have seen the rise of the confessional on a personal basis,

which required Father confessors to have some idea of moral questions

and how to treat them.
 EARLY CHRISTIAN ERA
 Thus, in addition to the ethical teaching of the New Testament, which as we know
was “occasional” that is, it dealt with specific situations as they arose and was not
systematic – we have early Fathers (the Apostolic Fathers) dealing with ethical
questions, such as Ignatius, in his epistle, Hermas and the Didache, the author of
the Epistle to Diognetos.
 After the apologists reference should be made to Clement of Alexandria (Stromata,
paidagogos, Who is the saved Man?).
 Origen made a contribution to ethics in his on prayer and his Logos Protreptikos
eis Martyrion. Also, of great importance for some parts of Christian ethics are the
writings of Justin, the philosopher, Tertullian and Cyprian
 The Eastern and Western parts of the Christian church split during the period, and
the Eastern church remained more comfortable than the Western with language
about humans being deified (in Greek theosis).
 In the Western church, Augustine (354–430) emphasized the gap between the
world we are in as resident aliens and our citizenship in the heavenly Jerusalem,
and even in our next life the distance between ourselves and God.
 He describes in the Confessions the route by which his heart or will, together with
his understanding, moved from paganism through Neo-Platonism to Christianity