To these questions secular morality has no answer. It refuses to admit the ancient truth of Christianity: there is corruption at the core of human nature. Human nature is, in Christian terms, “fallen:’ I am not making a religious argument here, nor am I appealing to the Adam and Eve story in Genesis. I am simply making an observation about human motivation, derived both from experience and from art. However morality is defined, there seems to be a universal human tendency to fall short of it. So there is a natural propensity in human beings to evil, and that is the significance of the events that transpired in the Garden of Eden. In this sense “original sin” is not a theological proposition but one to which all rational people can give assent. A realistic assessment of human malevolence should convince even secular people that secular morality is based on an inadequate anthropology.
I am not advocating the wholesale repudiation of the new morality, which would be an impractical suggestion in any case. The secular ethic is now deeply rooted in Western society, and there is no easy way to root it out. Sociologist Alan Wolfe points out that even some Christians today use the language of authenticity and self-realization to describe what God accomplishes in their lives. Even so, secular morality in most prevalent forms is irresponsible. It offers no check on those who invoke “self-discovery” as an excuse to engage in behavior traditionally considered improper and immoral. “Love made me do it” provides an ideal banner for anyone who seeks to act self-indulgently without regard to the consequences for others. But the problem is not necessarily with self-fulfillment or authenticity. Those are valid moral ideals, but by themselves they are incomplete. I should pursue my self- fulfillment, but only in ways that are good. I will be happier as a genuine, authenticperson, but only if this authenticity and candor is allied with goodness. Hitler, let us remember, did not lack commitment or authenticity.
The Christian solution to this problem is, oddly enough, not a religious one. It is not to embrace Christ and become a born-again believer. Rather, it is to follow the examined path of the “impartial spectator,” which is to take conscience as your guide. For religious people conscience is the divine taskmaster within us—what John Henry Newman once termed “the connecting principle between the creature and its creator”—but secular people don’t have to believe this in order to recognize that they too have an impartial spectator they can turn to. This impartial spectator frequently directs us to act against our inclination and self-interest. Yes, I know that you feel for this woman, but remember that you have a wife and children. Conscience can be an enemy of love, and a real spoilsport to boot, but conscience is what enables man to rise above being a prisoner of his inclinations. Conscience enables us to go beyond what feels good and to do what is right.
