Let me tell you a story.
You meet up with an old friend, who wants to tell you some of his life story. He’s been some pretty amazing (and pretty horrible) places in his life, so you’re keen to hear about it.
So, he starts telling you his story. But about two minutes in, he starts using some language that you aren’t really comfortable with. It could be because that’s how he tells stories; it could be because that’s what the characters in his story are like. It doesn’t really matter — the fact is, you’re feel a bit uncomfortable with his language.
Anyway, you decide you can handle a bit of language. But then he starts talking about some stuff that happened while he was living with his girlfriend.
You interrupt. “John,” you say, “I’m sorry, but I’m uncomfortable with the language you’re using. Also, I feel that if I sit here and listen to you talking about lifestyle choices I disagree with, I’m somehow condoning them. I’m really sorry, but I don’t think I can hear this story. Can you talk about something else?”
The problem is this: how much of life — of humanity — are you missing out on because you’re not prepared to take a few moral risks? Of course, this isn’t the only time this issue comes up, and it’s not the only way it can play out either. Movies, music, art, sport, conversations with people, the internet, books — these are all areas with potential benefit, and all areas with potential immorality. The dilemma is a difficult one: the good in something pulls you towards it, while even at the same time the bad can be pushing you away. How do you find balance?
As with so many things, I think we tend towards one of two extremes. Let’s call them the “liberal” and the “conservative.”
The liberal isn’t real strong on personal morality. This isn’t to say he or she isn’t a good person; it’s just that they have higher priorities than “staying morally pure.” They’re the people who’ll hang out in pubs — and maybe have a few drinks; they’re the people who will swear if it helps get a point across.
The conservative, on the other hand, sees personal morality as vital to their Christian life. Where the liberal has a focus on remaining “real” and “human,” the conservative is reaching for the sky, exerting massive effort towards becoming like God.
In fact, this is where I think the split lies: liberals want to be like the more human Jesus (who hung out with tax collectors and prostitutes), while conservatives want to be like the divine Christ, perfect and pure.
One could argue that liberals tend to focus outward, at their own expense, while conservatives focus inward, at the expense of others, but I think you should form your own conclusions.
Footnote: Hah! The story changes the teller. This was way less ambiguous in my head. It was originally a “stop using morality as an excuse to not experience life and humanness” rant.
