RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION.
We are often asked to explain righteous indignation, and to show
the difference between this and what is commonly called anger or
impatience. This is a difficult question, and we have looked in vain
for some person who has drawn a satisfactory distinction. Some
writers seem to approach an explanation, and then stop short,
leaving us still in the dark. Most of them allow too much, and the
only difference they see between righteous indignation and real,
Simon-pure anger is in degree and not in quality. If any one has
found a good definition and distinction it would be a blessing to
bring it forward; but we mistrust that the real answer can be known
only by experience; it can not be expressed in words. Nevertheless
we may be able to give some light. We will first bring forward a few
authorities and then add some thoughts of our own.
Definition. "Anger: Violent, vindictive passion or emotion aroused
by injury or insult, real or imagined, and directed against the
cause thereof; sudden and strong displeasure; wrath; ire."
"Indignation: The state of being indignant; a feeling involving
anger mingled with contempt or disgust, aroused by injustice,
meanness," etc. (Standard Dictionary).
"We may be angry and sin not; but this disposition may become
sinful, and this in the highest degree. It is so when it is
excessive, when it is rage, and makes us lose control of ourselves.
It is so, and may become a vice, when it leads us to wish evil to
those who have offended us. It is resentment when it prompts us to
meet and repay evil by evil. It is vengeance when it impels us to
crush those who have injured us. It is vindictiveness when it is
seeking out ingeniously and laboriously means and instruments to
give pain to those who have thwarted us. Already sin has entered." (McCosh,
in "Motive Powers").
"Anger is not evil per se. The mind is formed to be angry as well as
love. Both are original susceptibilities of our nature. If anger
were in itself sinful, how could God Himself be angry? How could He,
who was separate from sin and sinners, have looked round upon men
with anger? An essentially immoral character can not attach to it if
it be the mere emotion of displeasure on the infliction of any evil
upon us. Anger may be sinful, when it arises too soon, without
reflection, when the injury which awakens it is only apparent, and
was designed to do good" (McClintock and Strong).
"All anger is by no means sinful; it was designed by the Author of
our nature for self-defense; nor is it altogether a selfish passion,
since it is excited by injuries offered to others as well as
ourselves, and sometimes prompts us to reclaim offenders from sin
and danger, but it becomes sinful when conceived upon trivial
occasions or inadequate provocations; when it breaks forth into
outrageous actions; vents itself in reviling language, or is
concealed in our thoughts to the degree of hatred" (Buck's
Theological Dictionary).
"If ye have a just occasion to be angry at any, time, see that it be
without sin: and therefore take heed of excess in your anger. If we
would be angry, and sin not (says one), we must be angry at nothing
but sin: and we, should be more jealous for the glory of God than
for any interest or reputation of our own. One great and common sin
in anger is to suffer it to burn into wrath, and then to let it
rest. * * * Though anger in itself is not sinful, yet there is the
utmost danger of its becoming so, if it be not carefully watched,
and speedily suppressed (Henry, comment on Eph. 4:26).
"Anger is not always sinful; this passion being found in Him in whom
was no sin. But then it must be noted that anger is not properly
defined by philosophers, a desire of revenge, or causing grief to
him who has provoked, or hath grieved us; for this desire of revenge
is always evil: and though our Savior was angry with the Pharisees
for the hardness of their hearts; yet He had no desire to revenge
this sin upon them, but had a great compassion for them" (Whitby).
"It would be proper to express displeasure at what was wrong, on
many occasions, in the management of families, in reproving sin, and
even in ordering their temporal concerns; so that all anger was not
absolutely prohibited: yet let Christians be very circumspect and
vigilant to restrain that dangerous passion within the bounds of
reason, meekness, piety, and charity; not being angry without cause,
or above cause, or in a proud, selfish, and peevish manner; not
expressing their displeasure by reproaches, or the language of
vehement indignation; or suffering it to settle into resentment and
malice: but always endeavoring to subordinate the exercise of it to
the glory of God, and the benefit of the offender himself, as well
as that of others; and to show stronger disapprobation of the sin
committed against God, than of the injury done to themselves" (Scott,
comment on Eph. 4:26).
These are samples, and the reader will see that while some of the
writers quoted approach the verge of drawing a distinction between
righteous and unrighteous indignation or anger, they all stop short
of the mark, and only make the difference reside in the degree and
not in the character of the passion. But we believe that there is a
vast difference in the character as well as the degree. We will
venture a few suggestions, only inklings of which we can find in any
other place. The reader is at perfect liberty to either accept or
reject what we have to say:
1. There are two kinds of anger, carnal and holy. An example of the
former is found in Cain when he slew his brother, and I fear that
some of the writers quoted above had that sort in mind in their
comments. There are various examples of the latter even in the life
of Jesus: Our Lord's anger was not only not sinful, but it was holy
indignation, a perfectly right state of heart; and the want of it
would have been a sinful defect. It would show a want of filial
respect and affection, for a son to hear, without emotion, his
father's character unjustly aspersed. Would it not be a want of due
reverence for God, to hear His name blasphemed, without feeling and
expressing indignant disapprobation?" (Scott, on Mark 3:5).
2. Carnal anger is not necessarily aroused by a thing which
possesses moral quality, and may be manifested on the most trivial
occasions, as, when a man pounds his thumb, or because of a mosquito
bite. Anger which is not sinful is always manifested towards or on
account of moral evil; as, when your daughter or some other person's
daughter is insulted by a vile man.
3. Carnal anger springs from an unholy principle in the soul.
Righteous indignation does not, and may be, and often is, a result
of holiness itself.
4. Since carnal anger springs from an unholy principle in the soul,
and since the ground work of sin is self (the sinful self-life, or
carnal selfishness), then carnal anger is a selfish emotion, arising
from a feeling of personal injury, or the transgression of one's
rights, or the crossing of one's plans or ideas, or a disturbance of
his pleasures. This might be extended to refer to fancied or real
injuries to others who are more or less connected with us or our
plans. Righteous indignation is free from the principle of
selfishness and is stirred by seeing others maliciously injured, or
when God is insulted, or God's laws and the laws of righteousness
are ignored or abused.
5. Carnal anger is belittling, degrading, and altogether
demoralizing. Righteous anger, since it refers primarily to the
assistance of the weak and the overthrow of wrong, as well as the
glory of God, is elevating and ennobling.
6. The more sinful a man becomes, as a usual thing, the more
terrible his angry passions are stirred. The more holy a saint of
God becomes the more he hates sin. Like his Master he is angry at
sin all the day long.
So-called righteous indignation becomes sinful when it takes on a
self-centered or selfish character.
Adam Clarke seems to take this general view of the question:
Commenting on Eph. 4:26, he says, "Perhaps the sense is, Take heed
that ye be not angry, lest ye sin; for it would be very difficult,
even for an apostle himself, to be angry and not sin. If we consider
anger as implying displeasure simply, then there are a multitude of
cases in which a man may be innocently, yea, laudably angry; for he
should be displeased with everything which is not for the glory of
God and the good of mankind. But, in any other sense, I do not see
how the words can be safely taken."
This same thought is brought out in the explanation of the synonyms
for "anger" in the Standard Dictionary: "Anger is sharp, sudden,
and, like all violent passions, necessarily brief. Anger is personal
and usually selfish, aroused by real or supposed wrong to oneself.
Indignation is impersonal and unselfish displeasure at unworthy
acts, i. e., at wrong as wrong. Pure indignation is not followed by
regret, and needs no repentance; it is also more self-controlled
than anger. Anger is commonly a sin; indignation is often a duty."
The reader will readily see that the above thoughts draw the line in
the character of the passions. One is carnal and is cast out in the
article of holiness, the other is a necessary accompaniment of
holiness, and resides even in the character of God.
One more thing: Some parents are fearful of correcting their
children, lest they themselves should become angry, and as a
consequence the children are softly allowed loose rein. Discipline
is necessary. We need policemen, judges and jails. A policeman,
judge or jailer could be sanctified and yet uphold the requirements
of the law. Some people have a soft idea of holiness. One person
said that if a sanctified army would catch the Kaiser they would hug
him to death! If some sanctified officers, then, would catch a
highwayman, they would love and hug him, or a murderer, or an
adulterer! No, sanctified men would see that such persons were put
where there would be no possibility of them injuring the public,
either in morals or person, and they could do it without the least
vindictiveness, and to the glory of God and for the good of men. |