does morality have siblings?

I've been reading a book titled Philosophical Issues in Journalism in which an article by Stephen H. Daniel raised some questions in my mind. I've always been an old-school thinker, more inclined to view things in black and white. As a member (though not advocate) of this often morally ambiguous generation, I am often challenged in my committment to right and wrong. But I love this...I'm the first to admit that life is more complex than some of my convictions initially assume, but I feel open-mindedness as well as the ability to listen to others, is far too infrequent among people of my particular moral persuasion. It is my humble desire to be someone who listens, not necessarily because I agree, but because I care enough to gain their perspective and challenge my own ideas. Anything less is arrogant and results in untested convictions; the day we think we're always right no matter what is the day we should cease thinking altogether.

In Daniel's article, Some Conflicting Assumptions of Journalistic Ethics, he distinguishes between "personal and social duties" or "the standards of journalistic excellence and general morality." In other words, Daniel is claiming that because of a journalist's calling to present the public with fact, he is subject to a different set of morals than others. Daniels mentions two moralities, a personal one and a professional one. According to him, these two should not bleed together or affect each other.

I have to question this sort of relativism. In essence Daniel is stating that there are in fact two separate moralities; one that applies to one's personal life, and one that affects one's professional life. But these two moralities which Daniel suggests are at odds with each other.

The problem I see in Daniel's thinking has to do with where he derives his standard of morality. According to his standard, morality is dependent on the situation, and whatever it requires. For instance, since a journalist will more likely find himself in need of invading someone's personal privacy to do his job, it is therefore alright for the journalist to do so. The danger in selective morality is that anyone could find a reason to justify an action, as long as he had a substantial reason.

There has to be a standard of morality outside of ourselves, that leads the way for our corrupt hearts to follow. Otherwise our wicked intentions would crumble us from the inside out.

Morality should be a filter through which our thoughts and actions pass through. Not a chameleon that shifts depending on our environment. Why would we desire one morality for our close friends and family, only to adapt to an entirely different one when we reach the office?

Does morality have countless brothers and sisters running around? I would suggest that it does not.

ignorance and peace

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.

2 Corinthians 10:3-6

I wonder what my life would look life if I stumbled out of bed each morning thinking I'm in a war. It's a sobering thought, especially in the realization that it holds true. As contrary as many of my actions suggest, I'm living and bleeding in a battle. It's a conflict that stretches back to the dawn of humanity, and blood has been spilled ever since.

So how did I get here, to this state of denial, this plateau of complacency? On the shores I tread so carelessly, there exists a dangerous ignorance. I can't deny it's affected me, in fact, much of my reason for writing is to openly confess it. These verses from Corinthians are direct...they speak with a forcefulness and intentionality that can't be overlooked. We have been given power through Him to spread truth, to live in a way that sheds blinding light into the darkness.

So what's the catch? It's that I've layed down my weapons, I've stretched my arms to the sky...not in worship but in surrendur. I've asked myself how I came to this place, and although the road winding behind me is faded and obscurred, my footsteps still resound in the distance with my compromise.

Part of it is how I've been trained. This is a world where truth has been packaged too neatly, it has been watered-down, dimninished, compromised. I've grown up in a world where scripture is digested conveniently with a latte (also conveniently purchased at the on-site church coffee shop). My desire is not to condemn the western church. Sure, we've gone wrong in so many ways. But I'm a part of the community, a member of the team...but we've become a generation thoroughly tangled in distraction. We're the sound/media/lighting generation, and admist the good this has produced, much has been lost and forgotten. I'm simply acknowledging we've strayed from the most important thing possible.

I guess I feel lke I've removed my armor and hung it on the wall. For whatever reason, I feel naively safe. And while my ignorance collects like the dust on my abandoned armor, the enemy overwhelms me.

Like it or not, faith is a struggle. It is an expectation. We don't collect our thoughts casually through intellectual conversation or emotional bliss, but we TAKE THEM CAPTIVE. The implication is that our thoughts and desires are inclined to run from truth. We are called to fight ourselves, to give up what we want and strive for His perfection. This isn't a five-step synopsis for a better marriage or financial future, it's not a potluck on a lawn, it's not our favorite worship song blasting from a sound system. It's sweat and blood, it's making sure we understand the reality and reason behind all those things.

We've become blind and aimless in our pursuit and undersatnding of God. We've been lied to. These aren't peaceful times. There is a war raging.