When is the last time you heard someone on the street use the word "virtue?" The dictionary doesn't note it as an archaic word, but I fear that it is headed in that direction. Society, rather than decrying the death of virtue, is instead hailing its replacement — "values."

Virtues are things of "...intrinsic eminence, moral goodness" (Vines Expository Dictionary). They are things which are in and of themselves important and morally right. Their attainment is therefore considered excellence and worthy of praise (Phil. 4:8). Unfortunately, standards this high and unyielding have fallen on hard times today.

The term "values" seems innocent enough on the surface when viewed only as things of estimated worth. Webster's New World College Dictionary takes it another step further in showing its modern usage: "the social principles, goals, or standards held or accepted by an individual, class, society, etc." Even this may not seem so serious until one realizes that this concept of values recognizes no standard outside of self.

Remember, virtues carry with them the authority of a standard. Individual actions can therefore be compared to an objective standard, not simply weighed by mere feelings, concepts, or philosophies. But values are based on searching your own mind and life in order to find self-fulfillment, inner peace, a sense of acceptance, etc. A value is essentially what you like or love to do. It is not an ought to, but a want to. Actions can then only be judged based on how well they express what is desired or whether they are consistent with a chosen lifestyle.

In school our children are often given exercises designed to "clarify" their values. In other words, they are challenged to search within themselves to find what they feel is of worth. They are learning to emphasize feelings and personal growth from tapping inner power, rather than being taught to look to objective standards and listen to the aged voice of wisdom and reason. This is symptomatic of a society that is developing the inability to distinguish between personal preference and matters of moral obligation.

Of course, values can be virtues, but they don't have to be. Often values are simply opinions, feelings, preferences, even personal quirks and obsessions. It can be anything anyone happens to think is of value at any time, for any reason. This is at the heart of the appeal of the modern virtues concept—all distinctions and differences are therefore either ignored or seen as inconsequential. Everyone has their own values and they are seen to be as good as anyone else's. Therefore a sort of moral equality is seen to exist even when preferences and lifestyles differ—no one is right and no one is wrong, they are simply being true to their personal value system.

While it is true that we make our life's decisions based on what we value, we must base our sense of worth on something greater than fallible inner passion. Paul Earnhart once said, "The inner light is the worst form of illumination—it is based only on self."

We must reach out to what the world rejects and ignores. Lost in modern values is an infallible standard upon which to make moral choices. In turn, moral choice itself seems to disappear along with its consequences, principles, character, and responsibility. Yet we know that Scripture is "...profitable for doctrine, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16). Now that is a standard upon which both values and virtues can stand as moral absolutes.

The worst of mankind still has some sort of values, but the righteous will be satisfied with no less than virtue. We must see the importance of adding virtue to our faith (2 Pet. 1:5), for it is to "glory and virtue" that God calls us (2 Pet. 1:3).