“Standing up for our Faith and our Ethics”

In his book Fear and Trembling Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard argues for “teleological suspension of the ethical.” By this he means that some situations call for following the will of God, even if such terrible consequences will make that decision normally unethical. Kierkegaard’s example is Abraham’s response to God’s command to “take his son, his only son Isaac, and sacrifice him to me.” Abraham carries out a teleological suspension of the ethical when he decides to kill Isaac. Abraham knows that killing Isaac is unethical. However, Abraham decides to suspend the ethical—to make ethical concern second in priority—because he has faith in the righteousness of the end (or telos) that God will bring about. Abraham’s faith that God will not allow an unethical conclusion allows him to make what seems to be an unethical decision. Abraham prioritizes religious concerns over ethical concerns, proving his faith in God.

In human history there have many instances of “teleological suspension of the ethical,” I am sure. More often, however, there have been instances over and over of “suspension of faith” in view of what the telos (consequences) might bring. What comes to mind here is the willingness to give up your faith in order to save yourself or others.

The latter came to mind in viewing a preview of a movie about Shusako Endo’s novel Silence. The book quoted by Douglas John Hall tells the story of Portugese Catholic missionaries to Japan. Under persecution at one point one of them is asked to put his foot on the fumie stone demonstrating their giving up the Christian faith in order to save Japanese Christians. Not to be a spoiler, in case you get a chance to see this movie, it does seem like it might be the right thing to do.

What about in the modern day? On this day when the electoral college makes its contribution to the 2016 election process, many might think that individual electors should as a matter of conscience not vote for the Republican winner as the next president. What if you believe, as Saturday, December 17’s Saturday Night Live spoofed, you believe “this may be the last Christmas if he becomes president?” Then would you be right to go with the will of the people, or as Alexander Hamilton and the Founding Fathers thought, go with who is right for the future of the country and of humankind?

There are so many ethical questions raised by the advent of this new presidency. What will it mean for all of those who are not powerful or rich? It seems like they will need a lot of protection from God, because they will not have it from our government. There may be questions whether the president-elect is a narcissist or a sociopath, but at least he lives in a regal tower enameled in gold and recently has had everyone coming to visit him in his ivory tower.

Perhaps we will be called to make some hard choices for our faith and not our citizenship. We may need to stand up for those who are truly poor or persecuted because as Pastor Martin Niemoller once wrote “who will stand up for me if I don’t stand up for others?” At the very least our ethics in the four years to come under our new president ought to match our faith. To be sure, we ought to recognize there is one God and it is not our next President.