Scandal, Tolerance, & King Consistency

Dan Savage, writing an op-ed piece about Ted Haggard for The New York Times, makes a statement that reveals much about our culture's understanding of morality when he writes:

"A callboy can’t expose your secret without exposing his own. There’s still a stigma attached to selling sex.
So why did Mike Jones speak out?
Because today it is arguably more shameful and damaging to be a hypocritical closet case than it is to be a sex worker. Even those delighted by Mr. Haggard’s disgrace — disclosure: I count myself among their number — ache for his five children, all suffering now for the sins of their father. And let me be clear: their father’s sin is not his sexual orientation, but his deceit and hypocrisy. His sin is the closet."

Postmodern thought's influence has been felt most strongly in the public's understanding of morality. As Savage brilliantly illustrates, the only "sin" in postmodern America's psyche is that of inconsistency. When moral codes are merely fabrications based on the individual preferences of autonomous beings, then the only charge we can make against each other is inconsistency. If your personal ethical mores remain consistent in their practical application, then they are beyond the realm of judgment.

Ted Haggard's adultery is the hot-topic of the hour and this legacy will continue to disgrace the message of the cross for years to come. More frightening, and even more harmful, is the worldview that raises consistency and tolerance to the level of infallibility. When put into practice, a person who believes in abortion necessarily must also subscribe to euthanasia of physically disabled and elderly people if they are to be truly consistent. If a baby is not a person simply because he/she is either unwanted, not physically viable without its mother's assistance, or otherwise useful to society as a whole, then the same criteria must also be applied to these other groups. I fear for the day when society realizes this and, in attempt to honor the sacred cow of inconsistency, begins to act upon this worldview.

The world is rightfully attacking Ted Haggard because of his hypocrisy, and I am in no way diminishing or justifying his sin. What I am after is the underlying philosophical implications which Dan Savage brings to light when he observes that it is ethically preferable to be an authentic prostitute than a hypocritical minister.

The Christian worldview avoids both the pitfalls of hypocritical religious moralism and the liberationist view of secularism. Sin, according to the Bible, taints every part of our being, including our minds. Therefore, even our logical arguments and attempts to be morally consistent can and will lead us to sinful conclusions, with the abortion/euthanasia scenario a prime example. What humanity needs, therefore, is an outside perspective. Happily, God has been gracious to shine His perspective into our lives, via the Bible. By seeking what God has to say about a situation, I am freed from dependence upon my own cruel logic. In doing this, I must forfeit my fantasy of being an autonomous being, but it is the only way to find true virtue. It is the only way to be consistently virtuous without becoming a cold-blooded executioner of my logical conclusions. In those gracious words of Scripture being applied to the way I live life, I discover that divine revelation is in itself grace.