Evangelicals: “Moral Relativism Is Dead”

Last updated on: June 2, 2017 at 11:15 am by Libby Anne

Evangelicals: “Moral Relativism Is Dead” 2017-06-02T11:15:07-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“Moral Relativism Is Dead,” declared Ted Olson in Christianity Today last March:

Elvis. Tupac. The ivory-billed woodpecker. Sometimes it’s hard to let go and acknowledge when a celebrity or a species has left us. Christians find it particularly hard to come to terms with the passing of the “moral relativist.” Yes, there is the occasional reported sighting in the local university’s philosophy wing or at the late-night dorm room’s impromptu debate club. But compared to this creature’s former range and numbers, they’re all but extinct in the wild.

Many Christian preachers, apologists, evangelists, and writers have taken heed of the declining numbers, but decades of pitting “Christian worldview” against “moral relativism” left habits that are hard to break. You’ll still hear Christians assume that the reason for so much rampant immorality in our culture is because people reject objective right and wrong. Many still assume that discussions over morals are likely to end with, “Well, that’s your truth, but I have mine.” Make no mistake: Disputes over morality are as strong as they have ever been. But if we view these disputes through the lens of “moral relativism,” it’s not only our understanding of our culture that will suffer. Our evangelistic witness will also be severely blunted.

I lived in the evangelical bubble until the mid-oughts. I don’t have personal experience with the world outside of this bubble during the 1980s and 1990s. I do have personal experience being taught to see moral relativism as the antithesis of Christianity, with its supposed moral absolutes, and being taught that moral relativism held sway in the world outside my evangelical bubble. When I left that bubble, what I found bore little resemblance to what I’d expected to find.

I appreciate that Olsen recognizes that the battle he is fighting today is not one of evangelicalism v. moral relativism—but then, I wonder whether it ever truly was.

I’m not saying there is nothing is different about the twenty-first century, compared to the decades that preceded it. Things absolutely have changed in a variety of ways. The Atlantic noted this last year in an article titled “The Death of Moral Relativism” (no, Olson’s piece was clearly not original):

Thoughtful conservatives who are less concerned with waging culture wars have begun to admit that such a shift is occurring. In The New York Times last week, David Brooks argued that while American college campuses were “awash in moral relativism” as late as the 1980s, a “shame culture” has now taken its place. The subjective morality of yesterday has been replaced by an ethical code that, if violated, results in unmerciful moral crusades on social media.

A culture of shame cannot be a culture of total relativism. One must have some moral criteria for which to decide if someone is worth shaming.

“Some sort of moral system is coming into place,” Brooks says. “Some new criteria now exist, which people use to define correct and incorrect action.”

I think we need to make several distinctions here.

First, we need to distinguish between what might be called “spiritual relativism,” on the one hand, and moral relativism on the other. I suspect that when evangelicals have lambasted “moral relativism” over the past fifty and more years, what they’ve frequently meant is spiritual relativism. You’re Hindu? That’s cool. You’re not religious at all? Fine by me. And so forth.

Because evangelicals frequently equate religion and morality, spiritual relativism has often read as moral relativism—even when it’s not. And regardless of what may or may not be happening vis a vis moral relativism, this spiritual relativism has definitely not disappeared—if anything, it has increased.

Second, we need to distinguish between having morals and how we enforce morals. The rise of a “shame culture” today does not mean there were no moral absolutes in the past. I don’t believe young people—and it is typically young people accused of being at the center of “moral relativism”—shrugged their shoulders at rape, or murder, or genocide in 1990.

Moral relativism has often been a slippery term. I would argue that true moral relativism—a belief that there is no right and no wrong—is unsustainable. Of course, moral relativism is often defined as a belief that each culture has its own set of morals—and that morals are rooted in and specific to individual cultures, rather than absolute. And to be sure, there is truth to this. But then, consider the emphasis on stopping genocide, or ending India’s child bride practice.

Olson says moral relativism is dead, but was it ever truly alive? Efforts to end genocide, or child marriage—efforts that stretch back generations and span political affiliations—point to a belief in underlying absolutes. I’m deeply skeptical of evangelicals’ decades-long use of “moral relativism” in their messaging.

As the Atlantic notes:

Four years before he was hoisted to Speaker of the House, a smooth-faced Representative Paul Ryan declared, “If you ask me what the biggest problem in America is, I’m not going to tell you debt, deficits, statistics, economics—I’ll tell you it’s moral relativism.” It was a bold claim given the depth of the economic recession, which began years earlier. But Ryan was echoing the sentiments of his conservative ancestors who’d made similar claims.

For decades, evangelicals have appealed to “moral relativism” to suggest that they stand for morals and values while their opponents don’t. When you think about it, that’s pretty disgusting. It’s also completely inaccurate. For decades, the Left has pushed for programs like the SCHIP, which provides medical care for free children, and poverty-alleviation efforts—affordable housing, subsidized childcare, workers’ comp. One of the underlying moral values of the Left is that a society should take care of its own—and that all people should have access to healthcare, food, and housing.

My intent is not to get into the particular beliefs or values of the Left, but rather to point out that most activists have always believed in absolutes. Oh certainly, there will be differences between cultures, but there is an underlying ethos that isn’t relative. Why else would you see civil rights activism, and efforts to end Apartheid? Why else would you see the women’s movement burgeon into efforts to elevate women’s position worldwide through education and financial uplift?

I think back to what I was taught as a child, growing up in an evangelical home and community. We have moral absolutes, I was told, we believe in right and wrong. Everyone else does what is right in their own eyes—whatever makes them happy. Might makes right, survival of the fittest, etc. Outside of our evangelical bubble, I was taught, morals were relative, not absolute.

Giving me a more accurate view of those outside our bubble might have made me feel less lied to when I ventured out to see it for myself. So yes, we can talk about new directions in our moral culture, but let’s not pretend that evangelical warnings about “moral relativism” were every anything more than a disingenuous scare tactic.

Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism

Previous Post

May 30, 2017

Evangelicals Are the Ones Obsessed with Sex

Next Post

June 1, 2017 House Passes 15 Year Minimum for Teen Sexters

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "I do not know how to speak; I am too young"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Samuel Moses Jeremiah Isaiah