LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
BOOK REVIEW:
REVIVING EVANGELICAL ETHICS
A REVIEW PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. MALCOLM HESTER
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE COURSE THEO 650-B02 LUO
LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BY
UBONG JONAH
LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA
June 21, 2019
2
Reviving Evangelical Ethics is written by Wyndy Corbin Reuschling, an associate
professor of ethics and theology at Ashland Theological Seminary. In her book she unfolds the
pitfalls and promises attempt of Classic Models of Morality to address misconceptions on ethics
as a whole and more especially Christian ethics. In Reuschling attempt she examine three classic
theorist – Immanuel Kant’s Deontology [Duty], Mill’s principle of “Utility,” and Aristotle’s view
of “Virtue.” Reuschling also presented her criticisms and substantial suggestion of reasons why
Christian ethics need revival.
Reviewing “Reviving Evangelical Ethics,” the author, Wyndy Corbin Reuschling
analyses three conventional models of rational around ethics and morality, particularly as those
models have found their way into the ethical thinking of the 21st century American evangelical
church.
The first chapter, the author provides descriptions of model. The first being the Immanuel
Kant’s “Deontology,” which focuses exclusively on duty, obligation, and rules that can be
ascertained by rational reasoning alone - “I ought to obey the rules or prescriptions that tell me
what I ought to do” (Reuschling, 2008, 29). The second model being the “Teleological” – the
John Stuart Mill’s approach. This model focuses exclusively on utilitarianism, ends, and
outcomes. Teleology stresses the outcome of decisions, and it attempts to answer, “What kinds of
outcome will this decision produce, or what desired end will this achieve?” (Reuschling, 2008,
29). The third model that she considers is Aristotle’s virtue ethics [“Virtue can be understood as a
possession, a trait, a characteristic that is valued and revered as good] (Reuschling, 2008, 29),
which focuses exclusively on habits, behaviors, and decisions – “What kind of moral character is
needed, and what kind of moral character will be shaped by my actions and behaviors?”
3
(Reuschling, 2008, 29). This chapter is basic. The information is meant to alert the fact that
various schools exist and is perhaps closer to Christian that we realize.
Next, in chapter two, the other side of the work of Reuschling is so remarkably written in
that she took pain in pointing out the idiosyncrasies of how the evangelical church often
approaches ethical issues, in light of the largely unacknowledged influence of Kant, Mill, and
Aristotle. The most important element is how her research on those views is sensible to
acknowledge that her call to “revival” of evangelical ethics is not focused on eliminating the
church’s concern for rules or outcomes or virtues. In fact, she was especially clear to reiterate
that the Bible can function as a source of rules of morality. Sometimes. The fear of not getting or
trying to gain another’s approval while taking a stand can become a hindrance or may even
paralyze the effort of taking a stand. Yet, it is not so with Corbin. Her point is that, there is
another way [the absolute] to think or interpret ethic and morality. Ms. Corbin pointedly clarified
that spiritual disciplines are not just good for Christian conduct but are essential part of aligning
the Christian life with right ethical thinking as well.
Nevertheless, in chapter four, where Reuschling took on the challenge to explain
Aristotle’s view on “virtue” ethic, before she proceeds, she realizes that inevitably, someone will
minister to those who embrace Immanuel Kant dispositions on ethic and morality. Reuschling
infer that sometimes, a person moral defense system is numb and can create a diminished interest
in all areas of life, where he or she feel detached from ethical and moral reasoning and from
others around them even their love ones. But images that grow within the soul have life but is
unsatisfactory. From this assertion, it seemed Reuschling completely discard the impact of
utilitarianism within the church – “A perspective that may foster an understanding of the church
as functional, not for the purposes of helping people in their utility and calling to live out a
4
Christian narrative, but for the purposes of meeting individual needs in the pursuit of their own
happiness” (Reuschling, 2008, 89).
In addition, as Reuschling expand on Aristotle’s view, which is the acquisition of specific
ethic, or those qualities that make a person good, I perceived her tone of criticism here to implies
that there is no value in thinking about outcomes. Nevertheless, she is so careful to repeat her
indifference in undervaluing rules or virtues entirely. Reuschling places value on Christian ethic
as the guarantee for clear conscience and morality. The chapter continue espousing conscience
and practical wisdom as vital ingredients to right moral formation and character – “Discerning
what we ought to do is a crucial task for bringing our moral claims to bear on complex issues for
the hope of transformation” (Reuschling, 2008, 143).
Meanwhile, I was dissatisfied by what felt like weakness and or her emotional reaction
against any vestiges of utilitarianism within the church. I found this to be substandard because I
am convinced that there is some value for the church to think about not only the means but also
the ends. If our churches do not produce any discernible fruit as an outcome, then there seems to
be value in considering whether our means are actually what God intends for us.
Nonetheless, I found to be the strength and helpful about Reuschling’s book was her
familiarity with other’s three ethical espoused views depending on theological orientation. And,
because of this she refused to speculate their theories or to allow Christians to settle for
simplistic answers to complex ethical questions. However, I see in the work of Reuschling is the
work of creation made manifest in a great variety of methods which Jesus Christ embodied and
even was encountered when He healed the blind men (John 9).
5
Similarly, when talking about fostering an understanding to live out a Christian narrative,
just as it was not easy for Kant, Aristotle and others to easily grasped, I find this to be one of the
issues with which every Christian have been wrestling for quite some time. As I know, many
Christians are still grabbling, dabbling and are lacking the kind of moral character, and seems to
converge to want quick and easy answers to all of life’s problems. They have made it seem
convinced that if they would just find the right part of the Bible, that such problem would
become understandable and resolvable. Or they insist that if we were right with God through
personal spiritual practices that He would speak these easy answers to us. Whereas, “The moral
dimensions of Christian faith are deeply and inherently social and lived out in the context of
Christian community and the world. Christian faith is not just a one-time decision but a way of
life” (Reuschling, 2008, 89).
Besides, I am increasingly convinced that these notions are unreasonable and do not
reflect the reality of what Christian ethical living is intended to be. Reuschling embraces this idea
and suggests in numerous places throughout the book that what we need is thoughtful reflection,
humble discussion and faithful study of the Scriptures in light of what the Bible is meant to be –
“exegesis,” instead of reading into it thereby altering it to what we think might or prefer it to be –
a list of simple rules that will satisfied one’s personal desire – “My hope and aim are to present
greater possibilities for our appreciation and use of the Bible in evangelical ethics that is, in
practice, actually far more attentive to and serious about the ways scripture can be used as a
source in moral formation and Christian ethics” (Reuschling, 2008, 143).
Hence, for Christian to be seen as a person who practice biblical ethics and is sensitive,
such is require to make an inference that allow people the willingness and even commitment to
sitting in the tension of uncertainty and complexity that is contrary to how one have to lived most
6
of his or her Christian life. It is the sort of thing that many abhor and even are frustrated in their
interactions. But Reuschling has done well to make the case that our interest in seeking a
framework for faithfully understanding Christian ethics requires us to allow for complex things
to remain complex. This is where virtue ethic comes into play – “Virtue ethics concentrates on
the relationship between one’s character and the moral quality of one’s behavior as a product of
one’s character” (Reuschling, 2008, 143).
Overall, Reuschling has done a good job in properly explicating the reasoning of many
on this very important subject. In conclusion, she caution all Christians to be cautious, watching
out for others in all aspects of their lives – “We ought to be concerned about the impact our
actions and decisions have on others, what goods they may produce, and what harms they may
avert or minimize” (Reuschling, 2008, 143).
7
Bibliography
Reuschling, Wyndy Corbin. Reviving Evangelical Ethics (2008). Baker Publishing Group.
Retrieved from https://app.wordsearchbible.com.]
