Long ago I realized that the main thing Christianity had to offer the world was not “values.” That is, Christ did not come to the earth primarily to make us moral people.
Instead, Christ came to reconcile us to God. Nevertheless, he also called us to be disciples, that is, learners. That implies that he had something to teach us. So being a Christian is not a content-free relationship with God. Christ gave us instructions — even what he called commandments — that define the way we live as his followers.
Of course those commandments are not like the commandments in the Old Testament. The commandments Moses gave were accompanied with both blessings and curses. For the Christian there are no curses. The commandments Moses gave prescribe actions: “do this and you will live.” Those of Christ prescribe relationships: “Love one another.”
Now the question is, how to the instructions, commandments and teachings of Christ interact with worldly values?
I think the main difference between Christian “values” and worldly values is that Christianity is “other-centered” while worldly values are self-centered. The worldly person values self-fulfillment and personal autonomy. The Christian sees fulfillment as coming relationally and through giving oneself up.
A really good example of the distinction I’m making can be seen in the following contrast between two moral formulas.
In the Wiccan “rede” or law we see the following: “An ye harm none, do as ye will.”
In the Christian formulation we are told, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
In the Wiccan rede the focus is on what you are allowed to do. Just make sure you aren’t hurting someone else and you can do what you want. The Christian view, on the other hand, seeks connection, trying to (as the story goes) become the neighbor of the other for their good. One view essentially boils down to a kind of will-to-power, and the notion of what harms another can become obscure if it interferes with that will. The other sees the happiness of the other as tied up with one’s own happiness.
So for the Christian, we see values such as self-fulfillment as derivative. By this I mean that one does not pursue self-fulfillment. The abundant life comes as a by-product of relationship, and that relationship can involve self-emptying: “He who seeks his life will lose it, and he who loses it for the Lord’s sake will gain it to eternal life.” This paradox flies in the face of the worldly YOLO view that you must grab for your own because nobody else will look out for you.
Of course Christ is our example, as in all things. He himself did not seek equality — the equality with God that was his by right — but rather gave himself up for our sakes. We are told to have his mind among ourselves — to think his way about things.
I believe this means something like the following:
- Fulfillment can come from pleasing others
- We don’t have to be in charge to have a positive effect
- There is glory in helping someone else shine
- If we care more about being appreciated than about what we’re doing, our focus is in the wrong place. (To put this another way, the accomplishment itself is the best reward.)
- If we can’t give ourselves away, we don’t really own ourselves