CHAPTER XI

A SCHOOL OF ETHICAL PHILOSOPHY

I

MORAL teachers may be divided into three classes, which may be respectively termed the empirical, the legal, and the prophetic. The empirical teacher observes life, and from his observations deduces certain moral maxims. He perceives that certain courses of conduct produce happiness, these he calls right; certain other courses of conduct produce pain, these he calls He measures wrong. conduct by its results, and deduces the principles of moral action from his observation of such results. These principles find their most common and popular expression in such maxims as "Honesty is the best policy;" they are based upon experience and observation; they are often, though by no means always, purely prudential; they are more apt to be rules than principles; and they constitute rather a series of practical maxims than a system of theoretical ethics. The legalist is not content with these results. He carries his researches further, or thinks that he does so. From his observation and experience, he deduces certain laws of life, or he accepts such laws as promulgated by some authority, human or divine. These laws of life some

times derive their authority solely from observation of their results; sometimes added authority is given to them by their promulgation by the Church or the State; often it is maintained that they are derived directly or indirectly from God or the gods, in which case the supreme authority of a divine lawgiver is claimed for them. Virtue consists, according to this school, in obedience to law, human or divine; and this obedience is to be rendered regardless of possible or probable results; for virtue consists in doing what is commanded, not in doing merely what appears to be beneficial. The prophetic teacher is not satisfied to stop with the discovery of a law, whether that law is human or divine. He asks, Why has this law been promulgated? why has the Church or the State forbidden or commanded? why has God forbidden or commanded? And his reply to this inquiry is not derived from any observation of the effects of obedience or disobedience. Virtue he regards not as a means to happiness as an end; it is itself the end. It is to be pursued whether it is commanded or forbidden; whether it produces pleasure or pain. The prophetic teacher does not think that certain conduct is righteous because it produces happiness, though he believes that generally happiness follows from virtue; he does not think that it is righteous because it is commanded, but that it is commanded because it is righteous. Law he regards as inherent in the nature: the laws of the material universe are the nature of matter and force; the laws of

health are the nature of the body; the laws of God are the nature of God; and these are also the laws of man because man is made in the image of God. The authority of law is from within; law is inherent, eternal, immutable. God is righteous and his commands are righteous, but righteousness is not created by the commands which define and interpret it; the careful observation of life confirms the practical wisdom of righteousness in all its various applications, but righteousness does not depend on the results which proceed from it. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has given an ancient prophet's utterance of this view in the phrase "it is impossible for God to lie." F. W. Faber has given a modern prophet's utterance of it in the

verse,

"For right is right, since God is God;

And right the day must win:
To doubt would be disloyalty,

To falter would be sin."

The moralists of the eighteenth century and the stoics of the first century may be regarded as a type of the first school; the Puritans of the seventeenth century and the nobler spirits among the Pharisees of the first century may be regarded as a type of the second; the mystics of all ages and the Hebrew prophets of the period before and during the exile may be regarded as a type of the third.

Often these schools are critical of and antagonistic to each other. The empiric condemns the

legalist as dogmatic, and the prophet as vague and mystical; the legalist condemns the empiric as unauthoritative and unscientific, and the prophet as unauthoritative and mystical; and the prophetic teacher condemns the empiric as one who substitutes prudence for virtue, and the legalist as one who substitutes the obedience of fear for the spontaneous life of love. Yet they are not necessarily antagonistic except as they are made mutually exclusive. The religious teacher may believe with the prophet that righteousness is inherent in the nature of God; with the legalist that law is more than a principle, it is also the expression of the righteous will of a righteous God; and with the empiric that the observation and experience of life interpret and confirm the intuitive moral perception of these divine embodiments of this eternal principle. The greatest teachers combine the three methods of ascertaining, interpreting, and confirming moral truth. When in the Sermon on the Mount Christ gives to his disciples the counsel,

66

Agree with thine adversary quickly whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison," he commends the pacific disposition by a purely prudential motive derived from an observation of the facts of life; 1 when he says: "I say

66

1 "Lest the adversary deliver thee to the judge." This part is explained by some in a metaphorical sense, that the Heavenly Judge will act toward us with the utmost rigor, so as to forgive

unto you, "Swear not at all; neither by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is his footstool; neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King," he promulgates a definite law, and bases it not on the experience of life, but on the authority of the conscience and the reason interpreting the laws of God; and when he says, "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven," he enunciates a divine principle of righteousness which inheres in the nature of God, and of man as the child of God, made in God's image, dependent for its authority neither on the results which it produces, nor on the will of the lawgiver who formulates it, but on its own inherent, eternal, absolute rightfulness.

All three of these voices, that of the empiric, that of the legalist, and that of the prophet or intuitionalist, are found in the Old Testament. The Book of Job may be taken as the voice of the prophet. Job will pay no reverence to Jehovah if Jehovah be not righteous. Righteousness of character, that is, conformity to the eternal principles

us nothing, if we do not labor to settle those differences which we have with our neighbors. But I view it more simply, as an admonition that, even among men, it is usually advantageous for us to come to an early agreement with adversaries, because, with quarrelsome persons, their obstinacy often costs them dear." Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, by John Calvin, vol. i. p. 288.