In this brief yet comprehensive look at situation ethics, Dr. Chase gives the interested reader an un derstanding of the “cornerstone of situational ethics.”
Does The End Is it better to lie than to tell the truth and hurt a friend? Should you steal food to feed your hungry family? "Yes," say many who accept situational ethics. To them it is not a matter of doing wrong: if the situa tion is right, lying and stealing are wise and noble choices for they may help you accomplish good. At the crux of this philosophy is the familiar phrase, "The end justi fies the means." It simply means that the goal you set (the end) justifies the things you do (the means) to obtain your goal. I believe this phrase is unacceptable to the evangelical Christian. It is being used to justify a pattern of life that frequently cuts across the grain of the New Testament. Lying, stealing, adultery are hardly true options for the earnest Christian. But the phrase is presented powerfully and seems difficult to counter. Hopefully, this brief article, though it looks at only one facet of the problem, will help the Christian under stand and counter this cornerstone of situational ethics. Joseph Fletcher, in both his book, Situational Ethics, and in an earlier work, "The New Look in Christian Ethics," Harvard Divinity Bul letin, October, 1959, is adamant in stating that the end alone justifies the means. In fact, he opens and closes the seventh chapter of Situational Ethics with this stark message in italics, " Only the end justifies the means; nothing else.” The message comes through loud and clear even though he attempts to qualify his use of the phrase by writing, "That not any old end will justify any old means. . . . no situationist would make a uni versal of it!" Nowhere, however, does Fletcher ever alter this basic phrase. He is consistent and adamant in maintaining that this maxim alone provides the basic formula for decision making. Page 4
Made with FlippingBook HTML5