Let us consider the following texts:
“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).
“We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves” ( Rom. 15:1).
“Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be” (Jas. 3:10).
“For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you” ( II Thess. 3:7).
“Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip” (Heb. 2:1).
“Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness” ( II Peter 3:11).
“Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren” (I John 3:16).
We must always remember that one of the fundamental features of personality is conscience. Man is not only a person—he is a moral person. Not only is he conscious of personal identity (self-consciousness) but also of the moral background of conscience and moral demand. No animal of the highest development has this quality. It is one distinctive mark of human personality. When a man commits a crime the real moral distress which overtakes him is not just because of external conditions (associational mechanism). This is the event which provokes the distress. He is not so much afraid of the external law. But in moral distress he does fear the inner, spiritual tribunal. Many cases are known where one has freely offered himself up to the outer court and desired a confession of the crime in order to escape, if possible, the awful condemnation within. He would rather suffer most severe external penalty than to endure that searching, impliable sense that says in his soul, “You did wrong; you did wrong.”
This brings us to the question of right and wrong. This notion is a personal intuition and is born in the individual, a part of the fundament of being, the normal equipment of life. He knows that right and wrong are absolutely antagonistic and that he ought to do the right. What is conscience? Here is Webster’s definition: “Sense of right and wrong; a faculty passing judgment on one’s self; the moral sense. Conviction of right and wrong.” Did you ever notice that conscience never tells us what is right or wrong? Did you notice in the definition he does not say, conscience is the monitor in the soul telling us what is right and what is wrong? That is a popular definition which is both misleading and wrong. If you say it is a monitor in the soul telling us we ought to do the right, then you are correct. It is that. The conscience says, “You ought to do right; you ought to do right.” It passes moral judgment, but does not determine the moral question what is right and what is wrong. This may seem a bit strange to one who has never made a study of this subject. The question of the moral content in life, that is, the moral standard accepted by a person is naturally a varying thing. It may be determined by powerful influences belonging to his historic background and environment; at other times determined by long and careful religious searchings and findings, or by practical tests in determining duty. A simple survey of history will disclose the variety of moral standards maintained by different people at different times. The conscience in the case of each one kept saying, “You ought to do right.” And so in the presence of what he held as a moral standard for conscience, he made the various decisions and passed judgment. All were in good conscience and all with most varying results.
Paul, for instance, says concerning his conscience, “I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” “And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward God, and toward man.” And yet he was a murderer and persecuted unto death the early Christians. He did it most conscientiously. He did what his notion of right and wrong held. To his way of thinking, his idea of right was to defend Jehovah and the Jewish faith from the Christian influence. To him this was a noble task. He thought he was doing Jehovah a great favor, by murdering. (He was zealous). Surely his conscience did not tell him to murder. His conscience told him he ought to do right. His standard of what was right and wrong determined the murdering.
A Hindu mother is deeply religious and conscientious. She seeks to do all in her power to meet the standard of what to her is right or wrong. She is loyal to her conscience which says, “Do right.” But you see what a perverse standard she has. It results in her throwing her babe—her own flesh and blood—to the crocodiles or drowns it in the river. Do not say she is not honest or loyal to her conscience—she is. Her conscience—God-given—kept saying, “You ought to do right; you ought to do right.” Her whole historic background of religious teaching, faith and tradition determined what of moral concern was right and she acted accordingly. So a person may be completely mislead if he depends upon the conscience alone to direct him.
The question arises—can conscience itself be improved by education? It is not so much a question of conscience as it is the moral standard upon which conscience is to pass judgment. This chapter will not permit me to get at any teaching concerning that. Only allow me to say by way of answer-No, not directly. History is too clear a discovery to that question. Our country is filled with schools, colleges, libraries, science, inventions, art, literature and all manner of cultural schemes, and yet the country knows only too little of moral concern. Do not deceive yourself in thinking that civilization and morality are by any means interchangeable words. There is no serious question but that the modern man is losing the delicate sense of moral obligation.
The fact that in psychology and psychiatry one is able to analyze, classify and define much that years ago seemed vague is no sign that he has done away with the matter. To be able to describe and analyze the emotional reactions of different people in what is known as conversion does not dismiss the necessity of conversion. Many psychologists who should know better are caught in this deception and glibly toss over to the field of superstition and outmoded Christian thought, many of the most essential elements of the Christian experience. Do not be so easily deceived and think it is a mark of learning and profound understanding.
No one ever knew the fundamental laws, rules and principles of applied psychology or laws of psychiatry better than Christ, the Master Teacher. Yet, with all His knowledge of hidden workings of the human heart and its reactions, He never discarded the fundamental and essential elements of the Christian experience.
One teacher has wittingly said, “Many a man feels himself discharged from responsibility when once he can describe himself.”
In regard to the question of ethics and moral concern, may I help you? The whole idea of ethics and moral concern has been a question of major concern in the study of philosophy as well as religion. I believe we have found in Christ the true basis and fullness of this question safely answered. He dominates in the field of ethics and moral concern. We are safe in restricting our search for light on ethics to the living Word. The sublime and authoritative teachings of Christ are very sure. He is truth. Take any question of moral concern and settle it in His presence. The morality He offers is absolute and not relative. It is grounded in the very nature and character of God.
His revelation concerning morality and ethics is not true just because He said thus and so. He spoke it because it is true and is a part of the moral law governing the universe. A relative moral scale is not adequate. It shifts and is subject to social customs and traditions. Here we find a morality based upon love which is adequate for every department of life. Christ is the center and dominating force.
The marvel of His teaching is that He not only discloses to us what is right or what is wrong in human relationships, but He produces the dynamic for its demonstration. Other spiritual leaders and reformers have for ages established codes of ethics and some of them are remarkable in their humane and ethical scope and form. But none have furnished the power for the execution. Here Christ stands unique as a leader. He furnishes the wherewithal for living. In this connection I want to help you with a word used concerning the question of the ideal character on page 38. Let us consider the word “perfect” as given in the text: “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” ( Matt. 5:48 ). Usually the thought of perfection as suggested here is eclipsed by the thought of doing. However, the question is not one of doing but of being. The word perfect as used here comes from the Greek word, teleios, meaning, “ended,” “complete.” Jesus is not placing any special moral content in the word as much as He is giving them the idea of a completeness, or perfectly rounded out thought for their ultimate being. He is speaking of the completeness or the perfection of an ideal character. The same word is used in Matt. 19:21; Rom. 12:2; Eph. 4:13; Col. 1:28; and 4:12; I John 4:18.
Since the thought is that of completeness, carrying through to its proper or desired end, it does not follow that the moral content is eliminated. Not at all. What it is saying is-a completeness or perfection, finishing in all departments-moral issues included.
So here we are again with this rather troublesome word. Christian perfection has been taught as a doctrine for many years. And it has caused much misunderstanding and even divisions in the Church and no end of heartaches and even loss of faith. The trouble with that school is that they make a grave mistake in restricting the idea of perfection to one manifestation and thus limit it to love. A perfection in love as they say, and meaning as a rule, motivation and heart life. But Christ does not do so. He deliberately says, “Be ye perfect.” I think one reason for the difficulty with the doctrine of Christian perfection is that it is limited to this life. Since it is thus limited it hides away in motivation and says, “perfect in love.” They leave little room for conduct in daily life. It is somehow excused from the large range of living by retreating to the idea of ‘1ive in the heart and motives". There are many Christians who claim purity of heart in love, and God has blest the ministry of the Word through such instruments, and yet in conduct and character there has been great imperfection. Christ surely must have meant a perfection that moves on from motivation to conduct and finally to a perfect character.
May I help you? I believe of course, in immortality-the persistence of personality. So at once I see the possibility of ages of growth and development. Why not? We must not confine the “process of becoming” to the limited outlines of the present manifestation of life. Do not restrict the glorious scope of eternity to playing on a harp or walking on golden streets. To do so, I am certain, is wonderful. But to me they are dim compared with the sublime reality and divine truth: I am born from above; I am alive in Christ; I live now in a period of intensive discipline; my days are filled with the conscious presence and love of a living, risen Lord. I shall slip away from the present shadows into a perfect adaptation to a new order and I shall continue the unfolding of potential qualities of life hidden in the inner recesses of my being. “I shall be like Him for I shall see Him as He is.”
Do not be careless in saying that since one cannot attain the fullness of perfection here and now he need not bother with training or discipline. That is foolish. Listen! There are openings in the inner life and crises reached in the spiritual life here and now by personal, conscious decisions, never to be offered in the age to come. It is here and now only that these deeper, spiritual communications are made and cultivated. There are no second chances. It is here and now that we determine the ultimate.
May I relate an incident in my experience to show you how hungry hearts are for truth and for a bit of teaching which gives meaning to life and purpose for living? In one of my teaching meetings I noticed one evening a group of five fine looking young men had come in and had taken seats near the front of the church. They listened most attentively and some took notes. I was lecturing along the line of truth as to possibilities for a soul which would dare to venture upon that which God held out as spiritual reality and destiny. At the close of the service they crowded up around me and began to ask me most intelligent and hopeful questions. They were so surprised that the Bible held out anything more than salvation and serving the church and getting to heaven. They were so refreshing and interesting to deal with and the form of questions most gratifying. They did not ask me where Cain got his wife or why God let lightening strike a Christian’s barn. The next night there were nine of them and they followed me in teaching every night through the week. I found in conversing and dealing with them that they were all Harvard graduates and doing postgraduate work. I was in Boston, so they were near. Some were Episcopalians, some Congregationalists, some Methodists and others from other churches and they knew only the simplest bits of truth, but they were hungry. The opening of truth concerning the Christian life and “process of becoming” fascinated them. We had lunch together three times and had most delightful visits and free discussions. Since then I have been able to send spiritual literature to them and I trust they are moving on with God and building life for Him.
I speak of this incident to show you how truth appeals to young people who are awake to life and desire something to give meaning and objective, purpose and design to life. God has seen good to open the Word and give us glimpses of glorious possibilities which make appeal not only to souls of limited powers but to those of educational range. There are hungry people everywhere-in the slums and in the universities alike. The heart was made for God whether it rests in a tavern or in a class of philosophy. All need Him. Just the simple facts as to what a Christian really is and may become, was like a revelation to those young men. If you are a preacher or teacher, or Christian worker, why not give the hungry sheep some food? Ask God to open to you, yourself, some light as to the potential possibilities in “I am” or “I ought” and let Him stimulate the faith and heart hunger in His people for LIFE and so bring comfort and light to those outside of Christ, and open the way to the Christian’s rightful inheritance.
That is why the Holy Spirit is so patient, careful, and desires to give every soul the opportunity and privilege of entering into the “more abundant life.” He continually desires to arouse the soul (too often slumbering or preoccupied), into a definite consciousness of and awareness to the spiritual significance of life. The new creation is made for the highest and best that God has in spiritual living. Christ has died to open a way for the redeemed soul to move on and into and unto a completeness designed by God. Ample provision has been made; the power of His Spirit is for us. Much light has been given to some and with it mighty responsibility.
In the face of the rich holdings of deeper and more efficient Christian living, one must bring all his faculties to play. Down in the heart is this thing called conscience, saying, “I ought, I ought.” May the grace of God be given to any troubled soul to meet the moral demands laid bare by the faithful Spirit.