Leviticus or Leviathan
Schedule Wayne Holstad for Your Group
Order by credit card ~ Order by check or money order
© Alethos Press LLC
PO Box 600160
St. Paul, MN 55106
A snapshot of modern
American politics clearly shows that it centers entirely upon the promotion
of economics while declaring religion to be only a private, personal matter.
So, it is no coincidence that in just more than 50 years of the Supreme
Court’s 1947 reinterpretation of the separation of church and state, the
most important issues in American politics and culture center on the
question of ethics.
Political leaders regularly and with impunity
commit ethical violations. Yet, when confronted with accusations of ethics
violations, they respond by alleging that their ethical violations are not
legal violations, i.e. “against the law.”
Adding further confusion to the bewildered
American voter is the contention that the problem in politics is not ethical
transgressions that violate the law, but ethical conduct that is not
illegal. And what is needed, so goes the popular perception, are more and
different laws, and less enforcement of current law. This argument is not
surprising when it is understood that in a secular culture, ethics apart
from the law has no meaning.
In modern America, ethics, like religion, is
subjective and relative. Therefore, ethics, as objective theory, is
meaningless. Ethics is not a standard wielded by leaders but a weapon used
against those who would contest the leader’s power.
To have meaning, ethics as a theory needs an
objective standard. So what is ethics and what is the relationship between
ethics and personal virtue; and ethics and the rule of law?
The Relationship of
Ethics and Virtue
In the American political environment, which
generally reflects society at large, there appears to be no ethics. The only
ethical standard appears to be to do whatever it takes to win. From both a
theoretical and practical standpoint, the need for personal virtue becomes
clear. If everyone misbehaved, we would have a societal meltdown. Perhaps
the most difficult question faced today, both individually and collectively,
is the role virtue should play in law and politics. Some virtue is needed.
What virtue can be required? And should virtue always be required or should
we only demand it from our political opponents?
Americans are familiar with the vague platitude
that each person has rights because the nation was founded on principles of
liberty and freedom, but they are not as familiar with the relationship of
“rights” to individual responsibility. Because ethics, as a distinct subject
matter, generally refers to what we “ought” to do rather than to what we are
legally required to do, modern discourse about ethics usually degenerates
into platitudes or psychobabble based on a wistful vision of unachievable
goals. In truth, ethics, as a moral consensus decided by the majority, is
meaningless unless enacted into law. Laws based on ungrounded ethics provide
no moral compass and have no legitimacy.