Rebecca has been widely known for her continuous insistence on sexual purity (ref. her song and book Wait For Me). As all insiders will know, this goes further than just maintaining a 'conservative viewpoint' on sex. First of all because sexual purity is also a purity of mind - as the words of Christ already sounded 2000 years ago, yet we tend to forget them all too easily. Furthermore, even in our mind is not only about sexual purity. It is about developing a common sense for purity, setting our hearts on being pure before God. The main reason why sexual purity gets explicit attention is because sexual impurity gets so much explicit attention in our world full of derailed freedoms. Which is another way of saying that sexual purity needs that much attention because it is the reason why we don't understand the entire concept of purity anymore. Sexual purity and virtue were always much connected in the past, and that is for a reason.
It is also tightly related to the subject of Christian authenticity: showing Christian character, and more particularly the character of Christ. All of this does not mean that Christian life cannot be fun. It is a matter of balance. But all in all, this message of purity is an ethical standpoint in the first place. The domain of ethics is basically about the definition of the good (life).
Although Rebecca is not a professional ethicist, we are all using ethical arguments on an almost daily basis. Human beings live in this ethical dimension - even while we tend reject certain ethical norms. In that sense we're all trainees in ethics. But we also know that a novice may become very influential, hopefully in a positive way. This happens for instance when someone demonstrates perseverance in a particular domain - in other words when he or she becomes a role model. Contrary to the professional ethicist who may be a good knowledge gatherer but who usually isn't a role model showing what the right conduct or the good life means, a role model is someone who takes a stand, and demonstrates how the good life works, how it looks like.
Besides: ethics is often considered as theory, while morals would be theory put into practice. So Rebecca would rather be a moralist then. But words such as 'moralizing' quickly come to mind, and often in a negative sense - as if moralists are always moral crusaders who do not really make true their claims. This can hardly be said about Rebecca, so 'moralist' would be fine. On the other hand: someone who consciously acts according to moral insights, always acts according to certain moral principles, some standard. Rebecca is living up to this standard for over a decade now, so she is more than just 'a flash in the pan', and she is considered absolutely authentic in what she says and does, by numerous Christians all over the globe. She is unyielding, which all the more reveals a standard, or set of standards, behind the action. So I stay with the word ethicist - for the purpose of this article at least.
But what kind of ethicist? In fact, 'role model' seems like a perfect description to me. But it could be nice if we can obtain a more accurate definition of what that means. In order to say something significant about an ethicist, and certainly a role model, it seems to me that we should discern a few different meanings of ethics.
Laws and Norms
Consequentialism is the conventional name for an ethical approach that considers an action right or wrong based on its consequences. Although this viewpoint gets easily associated with utilitarian and hedonistic viewpoints (because it is about feeling pleasure, avoiding pain), it is not by definition completely in contrast to Christian ethics. For instance: to tell lies is a bad idea also because it leads to common mistrust among people, and many other damages to our common (social) lives. Rebecca has been using this type of argument, for instance when arguing that if you live a pure life, you don't have to worry about sexually transmittable diseases, premarital pregnancy and so on. Consequentialism may be the 'lowest' of all ethical approaches, it is nevertheless necessary to point people to the consequences of their acts. In Christian ethics, the reason for doing so is by no means encouraged by any 'ethics' as a modern(scientific) discipline: it is a common sense of responsibility for our acts, which is something that came with Abrahamic religion long before.
It must be admitted that consequentialism in a Christian context has often led to rather crooked forms of fear-mongering. I have not heard Rebecca talking too much about hellfire so far, though. I guess that is not a matter of carefully avoiding this terminology, but rather because of a policy of insisting on consequences already today - such as living a derailed life, without God. This is a more or less 'postmodern' approach, as many evangelicals practice, and is a good thing in today's culture, where we are all more familiar with the 'here and now' than with future which seems on the move all the time. Aside from that, there is also more insistence on the good consequences - if you are eager to live a good life; that too fits well with our common understanding in a postmodern era, where good examples say more than a threatening hellfire.
But pointing to consequences is clearly not the major point of Rebecca. Mentioning it is self-evident, the dangers are real, but it is hardly the Christian motivation for living a pure life.
Deontology (or deontological ethics) is more or less the antipode of consequentialism. To put it simply, it is ethics based on principles, or laws. Or, as the Britannica defines it, the ethical viewpoint that the moral rightness or wrongness of an action depends on its intrinsic qualities. Which means that certain acts are morally wrong in themselves - and most people agree with that when it comes to such acts like lying, breaking a promise, punishing the innocent. Such an ethics of principles is an antipode of consequentialism in the sense that it rejects the thought that some acts would only to be judged morally wrong based on the nature of its consequences.
The problem with deontology is in the question where the principles come from. At this point there is an immediate clash between the monotheistic viewpoint (which is theonomous: derives principles/laws from divine revelation) and a humanistic viewpoint (which is autonomous: man acts according to his own laws, or the right to self-government). Here, religion and humanism seems to collide head-on; although those who are aware of the many distinct tendencies and ideological issues encircling humanism will be well aware that the real clash is rather between religion and rationalism, between religion and 'hard' secularism (and its militant atheist wing).
Any logical arguments about the deontological approach very soon end up in arguments about the existence of God as the highest authority behind theonomous ethics - and these arguments are usually a waste of time in our postmodern climate. You won't hear Rebecca arguing that way. Of course, she refers to the Bible as the basis for real ethics. That is not really a deontology, though. The Bible is the written fundament that ministers to us many very important insights that a deontological code will normally require. However, speaking about God as the main authority behind a desirable behavior is more of a mission, not a moral code in itself. So here too, we must conclude that if Rebecca is a (practical) ethicist, the focus is not on contributing much effort to the build-up of a deontological Christian platform. Or at least: that is not the predominant plan. However, I would say that continuously pointing to the Bible, to God, to Christ, as the reason why you are doing and saying (and singing) things, sure is a means of working hard on the promotion and resurgence of such a platform (as do so many other well known Christians too). But this cannot be done only by a 'The Bible says so' approach. Here, we come to another component of ethics.
Virtues and Values
Virtue ethics comes much closer to the realm of the Rebecca St James mission if you'd ask me. Although virtue ethics are usually traced back to Aristotle (and Plato before him), it is also without doubt that its focus on the inherent character of a person rather than on the specific actions he or she performs, comes very close to Biblical thought as well. It is not by accident that virtue ethics in a Christian context is usually associated with practical wisdom - a theme you will find throughout all of the Old Testament, as the Bible is a historical record, covering real lives of people at a certain time and place, with their family lives and so on.
While virtue ethics may often be linked with thoughts like self-actualization - which may easily be interpreted in utilitarian or hedonist ways or by any other humanistic derivate - nevertheless, such self-realization can also be seen in a Christian context, as does Rebecca when she promotes things like Empowerment for women (her book "SHE" - which stands for Safe - Healthy - Empowered). Here, self-actualization does not start from an autonomous but from a theonomous point of departure.
Virtue ethics is not necessarily a vague, flat idea of realizing your potential, (which could be just an advertising text of a shrewd businessman), but will, in a religious context, be connected with the desire to become this great character, as God wants us to be.
Sure, becoming a virtuous man or woman certainly required some more specific resources. For instance, it will often have started with Christian education, for instance parents raising in us the awareness of this great God wanting to mould our lives to His glory. Of course, such moulding will have happened according to certain rules (compare deontology) and good parents will teach their children not to do X otherwise you will bear consequences X (compare consequentialism). It becomes clear that in religion, all aspects of what we now call ethics, are sort of compiled into a great life story. Decomposing it may help us a little bit to understand how things work, but the great experience itself is completely inherent to the Christian life.
It may be clear that if Rebecca St James is to be considered an ethicist of some kind, it has certainly become visible at this level. It is here that the expression 'role model' makes most sense. Setting a good example means expressing good virtue. Virtue is also (historically) closely connected to terms like integrity and purity. Here, the 'purity speeches' make complete sense. Although one can claim or even show some virtues without being (sexually) pure, most people would see that as hypocrisy. Real virtue is about being consequent, presenting a unified package of virtue. You cannot be good - even while giving away goods to the poor for instance - while you are a thief or a murderer at the same time (although I remember some old novels about a 'noble thief' who stole from the rich men in order to give to the poor - but you won't often see such people in real life - they are romanticized figures).
Ethics of values is another kind of ethical basis we can discern. This is not the deontological, intrinsic qualities that all people seem to share somehow, although that certainly is the foundation for our values. It is rather the practical, culturally embedded values that are maintained within all the different cultures. When the great Christian apologist C.S. Lewis pointed our attention to universal values that all people and all great religions through all times seem to have in common, he was talking about these deontological values.
Secularism has deviated more different view on these values than it was ever the case before - in other words: there is more difference between (some) secular values and religious values than between the 'traditional' values in the many cultures around the world. Only secularism and radical ideologies have attempted to throw away those values or the religions that developed it - so there is more difference between secularism and religion than between the religions together.
However, in the 'Christian continent', the Land of the Free, Christian values are rapidly declining, or at least they are not cherished anymore as it should. Think such typical cross-cultural values as family life, friendship, solidarity. As a consequence of that, values in the political domain are also declining (freedom is derailing in many ways, and the Christian lead in that is sometimes becoming very arrogant and domineering). In Rebecca's wonderful song America, she is not talking (singing) politics, but ethics:
This land is built on freedom
Life and liberty for all
We've declared our independence
So we will depend on the One who made it all(chorus)
Honor God, America
The land of the free
(...)So let justice flow like water
And let mercy fall like rain
Although America has not been built purely on 'puritan' ground as evangelicals often claim (secularism was an important issue for the Founding Fathers), it certainly was not anti-Christian, as some want to see it nowadays. There was a strong undertone of Jewish and Christian values, as the Declaration of Independence reveals. And the important thing today is not to make Christianism politically dominant, but to make the virtues of Christ dominate our Christian lives. If we want to see 'justice flow like water', we will have to make it flow from our own lives.
So expressing good virtue goes hand in hand with maintaining good values. Today, good values simply cannot be derived anymore from theoretical reasoning about laws and norms. It has to be lived. It has always been like that, but in a postmodern landscape, it is the only option.
Conclusion
So yes, Rebecca is a real postmodern Christian ethicist as far as I see it. Of course, she is also just Rebecca St James. And when a person's (artist) name gets so easily identified with authentic Christian virtue and values, you know that this is ethics at work. Ethics must grow legs or it won't run.
Do we need to know anything more about ethics? Not really - the examples are there to be followed - it has always worked that way: not through theoretical reflections (although that may be supportive) but through 'prayer at night' and making God's word our daily bread. Ethics at work is the result of this mix of ethical principles into this religious artwork - the artwork of the good life. That is what religion is all about in the first place. Religion wants to repair the world, but this repair starts with repairing real lives, starting with our own life. Without purification, no virtues are going to appear (think of the Biblical references to water that needs to flow, to 'spring up'). Sexual purity is only one component of it - but with the amount of dirtiness slipping into our minds, it is an important component. Removing dirtiness from our societies and lives does not happen through bombing the hell out of modernity (style radical Islam) but in the spirit of Christ, letting His life flow through our deserts. If we'd ever to become motivated to repair this world, we need to get our eyes fixed upon the great Motivator of such a repair - and the only one who knows how to do it, the one who made the real plans. Looking upon Him, seeing Him as He really is, already alters the way we see things. Justice starts to flow like water. That is what virtues do. It happens from the inside out. We become a well for this world in stead of being consumers of the world.
Honor God, America
The land of the free
Honor God, America
O land of liberty
Honor God(bridge)
From the mountains to the prairies
From the desert to the cities
From the heartland to the coastland
Let our hearts turn to the Lord's hand
From the mountains to the prairies
From the desert to the cities
From the heartland to the coastland
Let our hearts turn to the Lord
PS. The song America is now also on the newest compilation: Rebecca St James: The Ultimate Collection.
Post a Comment