Q&A Home > N > Natural Law

I would really appreciate your thoughts on this essay title: "The Ethical teaching in the New Testament on Divorce is not compatible with other ethical theories such as Situation Ethics." I am finding it very difficult to pull the two together. Are the two in any way compatible or is Situation Ethics (Joseph Fletcher) too open ended?

Situation Ethics was developed by the Anglican theologian Joseph Fletcher as a result of his critique of Legalism and Antinomianism. Legalism is the idea that there are fixed moral laws which are to be obeyed at all times. Antinomianism is the idea that there are no fixed moral principles but that one's ethics are spontaneous.

Fletcher believes that both Legalism and Antinomianism are unable to provide a sound basis for ethics and so advocates Situationism as a middle ground between the two. Fletcher rejects Legalism because it cannot accommodate 'exceptions to the rule'. If you reject one aspect of the law you surely reject it all. He also rejects Antinomianism because it provides no foundation with which to evaluate one's morality and offers no justification as to why people should live in any other way than they want to. Situation ethics, declares that anything and everything is right or wrong, according to the situation. This does not agree with the teachings of the Holy Bible. Situation Ethics will not limit the reason for divorce to adultery; but will leave it open to situations. This will open the door to justify many things that are contrary to the Holy Bible teachings. To follow this is to consider the 'Ten Commandments' as 'ten suggestions'.