"My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires."
Somehow I've always missed the second part of this passage. But as we navigate some strange times, this passage seems like something to consider.
First, slow is good. Listen, gather information, and then slow down. So often we feel the need to speak out quickly, rather than to take the time to consider our words. I suspect that there is a connection between speaking quickly and being angry quickly. Whether quick speech leads to quick anger, or quick anger leads to quick speech, I'm not sure. But I am pretty sure that quick is bad and slow is good.
Second, the fact that "human anger doesn't produce righteousness". We sometimes speak of "righteous anger", yet James seems to indicate that (with the exception perhaps of Jesus) that righteous and anger do not go together. I've long believed that anger is addictive. That our anger might start out as righteous but that there is a power or attraction to anger and what it allows us to get away with, that eventually becomes it's own justification. I suspect that way too many Christians take Jesus' angry cleansing of The Temple as more normative that it probably should be and embrace the anger without the righteousness.
Third, YHWH desires "righteousness" and anger does not produce what YHWH desires. Why would we indulge in something that does not produce the "righteousness" that YHWH desires? Why wouldn't we focus on that which does lead to the "righteousness that YHWH desires", instead of that which doesn't?
It's amazing how many times I've read this part of James and skipped over the end of the passage. I think that I blocked it out because I wanted the option of anger. Because I read it's OK to get angry, as long as I don't rush into it. Slowly considering something and building up to anger would justify my angry response as long as I ignore the next line.
Maybe this is something we should be considering.
2 comments:
Of course Jesus' anger was righteous because HE is righteous. Seems a given.
I do believe for us, "righteous indignation" is fine, as tolerating evil is not righteous, nor does honor God to so. To encounter it and be indignant at it's presence before us isn't quite the same as "anger", though it is often defined as such. To become indignant and even angry upon enduring repeated transgressions isn't sinful, and Ephesians 4:26-27 suggests this. I think the main point is, as you say, not to let it be the first response as if one has no self-control.
That was my point. If I didn't make it well, I apologize. Jesus' anger was righteous because He was righteous, and because He was defending the Holiness of His Father and The Temple/
I agree that we are to defend ourselves and others against evil, but that doesn't require anger.
My primary point here is James clearly pointing out that anger is not righteous, and I don't see him leaving any loopholes.
Post a Comment