On Ethics of Anticipation
Glenn Plastina
There is continuity in the midst of seeming discontinuity in Christian ethics. Several philosophies and perspectives have been offered to express the dept and breadth of ethics in that it looks like each of them are a set of propositions and “oughts” without connection to each others. But as long as these ethical explanations are placed within the embrace of Christian ethics, there is one common string that can be seen through it. It is like a thread that runs through their differences. What is it? The uniqueness of Christ by which ethics is perused.
Most of the ethical explanations that were offered by many Christian theologians, ethicists, pastors, and teachers, are ethical perspectives seen through the eyes of the present with careful consideration of the past, as in the notion of case studies and experiences. Supporting arguments and bases were basically found in the scriptural documents. Sometimes, patristic sources were gathered; and to some extent, many utilized institutional--or some would prefer ecclessiastical--and communal, personal, and “transcendental” explanations and point of views to justify ethical stance, concerns, including convictions.
Personally, if there is one thing from the past that is indispensable to Christian ethics, it is the Scripture. The early disciples and church fathers may have placed weight on various ethical stances related to their cultures, it is also evident that they were aware of their practical differences; but the fact that even though there is only one Bible used to justify and guide ethical stance and they remained different in their practical applications. The level of tolerance for differences rose as the context where Christian ethics was applied.
This might be a speculation, but I guess, there is that something in man that desires to perceive something like an absolute ethical stance. It is something universal, unifying, and perfect. The best of man’s powerful arguments were expressed in history--and it will continue to do so--yet, there is a big "yet," mankind is still on the way, on course, on an unfinished journey..on for a look of something “not yet.”
Is this a time to consider the ethics of the future in the "already"? Is this the ethical stance on the way to be fully realized? What is the essence of this ethics of the future? What is there that is not here? What is the "not yet" that is not 'already"? What makes it “special” and different to what is perceived and applied at present?
Maybe, I can call it “ethics of anticipation.” But this anticipation is not mere wishful thinking and whimsical waiting, doing nothing as we wait for the “guava" (for Filipinos) or "stars to fall” (for their contemporaries). This is an ethics that allows the future to impact the present in a very practical way. This ethics seeks to embrace the notion that only the future can reveal the full meaning of the “actions” of today. What really matters is in full view at the future.
The fullness of Christian ethics will be dawned in the fullness of anticipation. Looking at the past, ethical positions were geared from a solid foundation. But time again and again, the expressions of ethics, to some extent, changed as time unfolds. The past and present situation that our predecesors went through shaped also their etchical orientations. This process happened all the time.
May be this time, an ethics of anticipation might open up a new prospective to explain and do justice to what Christians may deem “ethically” right and good in the light of the future. With firm anticipation, as the Kingdom of God unfolds, all ethical acts held these days will be validated and confirmed to its rightful place and rest of quest. Thus, the future matters.
There is continuity in the midst of seeming discontinuity in Christian ethics. Several philosophies and perspectives have been offered to express the dept and breadth of ethics in that it looks like each of them are a set of propositions and “oughts” without connection to each others. But as long as these ethical explanations are placed within the embrace of Christian ethics, there is one common string that can be seen through it. It is like a thread that runs through their differences. What is it? The uniqueness of Christ by which ethics is perused.
Most of the ethical explanations that were offered by many Christian theologians, ethicists, pastors, and teachers, are ethical perspectives seen through the eyes of the present with careful consideration of the past, as in the notion of case studies and experiences. Supporting arguments and bases were basically found in the scriptural documents. Sometimes, patristic sources were gathered; and to some extent, many utilized institutional--or some would prefer ecclessiastical--and communal, personal, and “transcendental” explanations and point of views to justify ethical stance, concerns, including convictions.
Personally, if there is one thing from the past that is indispensable to Christian ethics, it is the Scripture. The early disciples and church fathers may have placed weight on various ethical stances related to their cultures, it is also evident that they were aware of their practical differences; but the fact that even though there is only one Bible used to justify and guide ethical stance and they remained different in their practical applications. The level of tolerance for differences rose as the context where Christian ethics was applied.
This might be a speculation, but I guess, there is that something in man that desires to perceive something like an absolute ethical stance. It is something universal, unifying, and perfect. The best of man’s powerful arguments were expressed in history--and it will continue to do so--yet, there is a big "yet," mankind is still on the way, on course, on an unfinished journey..on for a look of something “not yet.”
Is this a time to consider the ethics of the future in the "already"? Is this the ethical stance on the way to be fully realized? What is the essence of this ethics of the future? What is there that is not here? What is the "not yet" that is not 'already"? What makes it “special” and different to what is perceived and applied at present?
Maybe, I can call it “ethics of anticipation.” But this anticipation is not mere wishful thinking and whimsical waiting, doing nothing as we wait for the “guava" (for Filipinos) or "stars to fall” (for their contemporaries). This is an ethics that allows the future to impact the present in a very practical way. This ethics seeks to embrace the notion that only the future can reveal the full meaning of the “actions” of today. What really matters is in full view at the future.
The fullness of Christian ethics will be dawned in the fullness of anticipation. Looking at the past, ethical positions were geared from a solid foundation. But time again and again, the expressions of ethics, to some extent, changed as time unfolds. The past and present situation that our predecesors went through shaped also their etchical orientations. This process happened all the time.
May be this time, an ethics of anticipation might open up a new prospective to explain and do justice to what Christians may deem “ethically” right and good in the light of the future. With firm anticipation, as the Kingdom of God unfolds, all ethical acts held these days will be validated and confirmed to its rightful place and rest of quest. Thus, the future matters.
posted by GlenPlas @ 12:41 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home