ICHABOD, THE GLORY HAS DEPARTED - explores the Age of Apostasy, predicted in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, to attack Objective Faithless Justification, Church Growth Clowns, and their ringmasters. The antidote to these poisons is trusting the efficacious Word in the Means of Grace. John 16:8. Isaiah 55:8ff. Romans 10. Most readers are WELS, LCMS, ELS, or ELCA. This blog also covers the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, and the Left-wing, National Council of Churches denominations.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Hat-tip to B-16. Pope Francis Copies McCain's Style.
Release of Pope Francis' first encyclical stresses beauty of faith :: Catholic News Agency (CNA)
Release of Pope Francis' first encyclical stresses beauty of faith :: Catholic News Agency (CNA):
.- The first encyclical of Pope Francis – which had been started by the former Pope, Benedict XVI – has been released today to help strengthen the faith of Catholics worldwide.
“We welcome with great joy and gratitude this integral profession of faith, in the form of catechesis written by four hands of the successors of Peter,” said Cardinal Marc Ouellet at the Vatican's press office on July 5.
“Together they show forth the Church's faith in its beauty, the faith that is confessed within the body of Christ as the concrete communion of believers,” he added.
The encyclical – called “Lumen Fidei” or “The Light of Faith” – was presented at a Holy See press conference with the participation of Cardinal Ouellet, Archbishop Gerhard L. Mueller and Archbishop Rino Fisichella.
During its release in a room packed with journalists, Archbishop Mueller pointed out that the document bears only the signature of Pope Francis and not of the former Pope because “the Church has just one Pope.”
“The Successor of Peter, yesterday, today and tomorrow is always called to strengthen his brothers and sisters in the priceless treasure of that faith which God has given as a light for humanity’s path,” Pope Francis says in the encyclical's introduction.
In it, he stresses that he is “deeply grateful” to his predecessor for having almost completed the first draft of the encyclical, which he says is “meant to supplement what Benedict XVI had written in his encyclical letters on charity and hope.” [GJ - Does it end HT Ben without an embedded link?]
“As his brother in Christ I have taken up his fine work and added a few contributions of my own,” Pope Francis adds in the introduction.
Prior to the release of the encyclical written “by four hands,” Pope Francis went to the Vatican Gardens to bless a new statue of Saint Michael the Archangel alongside Benedict XVI. The statue was blessed “by four hands” to consecrate the Vatican to the Archangel's protection.
The release of the faith encyclical – divided into four chapters, an introduction and a conclusion – coincides with the Church's Year of Faith and the 50th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council.
The first chapter is entitled “We have believed in love” and explains faith as “listening” to the Word of God, particularly his call to see him as a father, not a stranger.
It also highlights Jesus as a “trustworthy witness” and calls us to participate “in his way of seeing” and to open ourselves to a love that transforms us from within.
“Faith is not a private matter, a completely individualistic notion or a personal opinion,” the Pope adds in the first chapter.
The second chapter, entitled “Unless you believe you will not understand,” shows the links between faith and truth and between faith and love.
“One who believes may not be presumptuous, on the contrary, truth leads to humility, since believers know that, rather than ourselves possessing truth, it is truth which embraces and possesses us,” says the Pontiff.
“I delivered to you what I also received” is the title of the third chapter, which focuses solely on the importance of evangelization.
“It is impossible to believe on our own,” says Pope Francis. “Faith is not simply an individual decision.”
The chapter explains that faith is not a private relationship between the divine “thou” and the “I,” but rather between the “we.”
The Pope also writes of the importance of the Sacraments when transmitting the faith, especially baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist.
The final chapter is entitled “God prepares a city for them,” and tells of the link between faith and the common good.
The encyclical reveals that the purpose of faith is not merely to build the afterlife, but to help in edifying society.
The fourth chapter also stresses the importance of marriage, understood between man and woman.
“The 'we' of the family (is) the place par excellence of the transmission of the faith,” said Cardinal Ouellet during the press conference.
'via Blog this'
---
James Jordan has left a new comment on your post "Hat-tip to B-16. Pope Francis Copies McCain's Styl...":
Well I’ve read it — as much as I could. Had to skim a bit. I don’t find anything of interest there. The target audience is clearly Marydolatrous mystics. I don’t think many laymen will be interested in the document at all, and its doubtful that Protestants will pay it much attention. It certainly is not a document that will challenge the beliefs (or lack thereof) of any secular person. In fact, the pope’s moronic statement in paragraph 4 “Faith, received from God as a supernatural gift…” (i.e. in the Calvinist sense that God must give us faith because we’re ‘totally depraved’) will give secular people more fodder to beat the Catholic church with. So faith is not something based on evidence, eh, but something that God zaps you with from outerspace. Epic fail.
Reward for Backing Homosexual Priests and Prelates.
Pope Francis clears John Paul II, John XXIII for sainthood | Fox News
Pope Francis clears John Paul II, John XXIII for sainthood | Fox News:
VATICAN CITY – Pope Francis on Friday cleared Pope John Paul II for sainthood, approving a miracle attributed to his intercession and setting up a remarkable dual canonization along with another beloved pope, John XXIII.
In a major demonstration of his papal authority, Francis decided to make John XXIII a saint even though the Vatican hasn't confirmed a second miracle attributed to his intercession. The Vatican said Francis had the power to "dispense" with the normal saint-making procedures to canonize him on his own merit, without a miracle.
The ceremonies are expected before the end of the year. The date of Dec. 8 has been floated as one possibility, given it's the feast of the Immaculate Conception, a major feast day for the church. Polish media continued to report that October was likely, to mark the anniversary of John Paul's election, but Vatican officials have said that's too soon to organize such a massive event.
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed that the miracle that brought John Paul to the ranks of sainthood concerned a Costa Rican woman.
The Spanish Catholic newspaper La Razon has identified her as Floribeth Mora, and said she suffered from a cerebral aneurism that was inexplicably cured on May 1, 2011 -- the day of John Paul's beatification, when 1.5 million people filled St. Peter's Square to honor the beloved Polish pontiff.
In a series of reports late last month, La Razon reported that Mora awoke with debilitating head pain on April 8 and went to the hospital, where her condition worsened to the point that she was sent home with only a month to live.
Her family prayed to John Paul, and the aneurism disappeared.
La Razon quoted her doctor, Dr. Alejandro Vargas, who said: "It surprised me a lot that the aneurism disappeared, I can't explain it based on science."
The Associated Press has traveled to Mora's home in Costa Rica but has been told that she is bound by secrecy and cannot discuss her case.
Then-Pope Benedict XVI put John Paul, who became pope in 1978, on the fast-track for possible sainthood when he dispensed with the traditional five-year waiting period and allowed the beatification process to begin weeks after his April 2, 2005, death. Benedict was responding to chants of "Santo Subito!" or "Sainthood Immediately" which erupted during John Paul's funeral.
But there remains some concern that the process has been too quick. Some of the Holy See's deep-seated problems — clerical sex abuse, dysfunctional governance and more recently the financial scandals at the Vatican bank — essentially date from shortcomings of his pontificate.
As a result, the decision to canonize John Paul along with John XXIII can be seen as trying to balance out those concerns, by beatifying one pope along with another.
Such was the case in 2000, when John Paul beatified John XXIII (1958-1963) , dubbed the "good pope," alongside Pope Pius IX, who was criticized by Jews for condoning the seizure of a Jewish boy and allegedly referring to Jews as dogs.
By canonizing John Paul II along with John XXIII, the Vatican could be seeking to assuage concerns about John Paul's fast-track sainthood case by tying it together with the 50-year wait since the death of John XXIII.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/05/pope-francis-clears-john-paul-ii-for-sainthood/#ixzz2YBb4vVU1
'via Blog this'
***
 |
| Lutherans have many popes, and most of them worship Holy Mother Synod. |
GJ - Lutherans are not the only ones who do this - rewarding the guilty with special honors.
I explained to Mrs. Ichabod that the fast-track for sainthood is much like the Hollywood Oscars. The
award generates a lot of favorable publicity and additional income. This only prompts unbelievers to be even more disgusted with the visible Church.
The SynCon presidents are PR agents for their ecclesiastical businesses. Their job is not to lead but to manage the image.
Those who want access to the skim need to be hyper-vigilant in not offending those in command, no matter how corrupt, lazy, or greedy they might be.
Here is a simple test. Will the issue or the facts hurt the image of the synod - with possible loss of income? If so, then the Lutherans are no different from the Roman Catholics. If Holy Mother Church is the idol, then all questions are answered easily.
Luther's Sermons on the Sixth Sunday after Trinity.
Matthew 5:20-26
Luther's Sermon. SIXTH SUNDAY AFTER TRINITY.
Matthew 5:20-26
Text. Matthew 5:20-26. For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire. If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, while thou art with him in the way; lest haply the adversary deliver thee to the fudge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou have paid the last farthing.
CONTENTS:
THE EXPLANATION OF THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT.
Works by no means make a person pious. 1-3.
I. THE OCCASION GIVEN TO CHRIST FOR THIS EXPLANATION.
II. THE EXPLANATION ITSELF.
A. The first part. 5-7.
B. The second part. 8.
C. The third part. 9.
There is no person who can keep the fifth commandment. 5-10. How and why no one can be saved by his works. 11.
D. The fourth and fifth parts.
1. The sense and understanding of these parts. 12-14.
2. How and why God desires these parts to be observed. 14-15.
3. How the Papacy cared very little about them.
4. The motives why this part was added. 17f.
Works develop hypocrites, and the law develops despair.
18. How the conscience should act when terrified by the law. 19.
III. AN OBJECTION RAISED BY THIS INTERPRETATION AND THE ANSWER.
Concerning the civil sword.
1. Among what persons should the civil sword be exercised, and where not.
2. The way It is to be used is indicated: a . By examples. b. On the coat of arms and shield of the Elector of Saxony. (1) The first part of this coat of arms and shield. 23-24. (2) The second part. 25-27.
THE SUMMARY OF THIS GOSPEL:
1. The righteousness of God is through faith and that is the righteousness of the heart. The outward righteousness, however holy and beautiful it may appear, is hypocritical, deceptive righteousness.
2. The Lord wants a good tree, without Which the fruit can not be good.
3. It is a hypocritical, deceptive righteousness, if one does not commit murder with the hand, and yet at the same time cherishes anger in his heart; but the Christian righteousness requires that we be not angry. To do this we must constantly obtain from God grace and forgiveness, and confess ourselves to be sinners, which belongs to Christian righteousness.
4. It is not pleasing to God, if we be not reconciled to our brother. Here we all can learn, what the good works are that God esteems as great.
1. This Gospel teaches us the difference between true piety and dissimulation, or hypocrisy. And it is one of the best Gospels for teaching how our works cannot render us pious; something higher than anything we can do is re-required. For the Pharisees also led a pious life; they did what they should, externally; they did not break any of the commandments of God, abstained from property not their own, went about in fine showy clothes, and hence derived their name, being called Pharisees, meaning those set apart, or the select.
2. In like manner he also attacks the scribes, the flower of the Jews, who were so well versed in the law of God and the Scriptures as to teach other people, lay down rules for the community and render decisions in all matters. To sum up, we here have the best, the most learned and the most pious of the Jews. These Christ attacks, whom of all men he should least have attacked. But he says of them to his disciples: “Unless your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees. ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
3. As though he would say, Behold the Pharisees and scribes lead such a good life that both they and other people believe they will possess the kingdom; but they are wide of the mark. Therefore he reproves them and says: Verily, I say unto you, if you will not be more pious than the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter heaven. Here the question of those is disposed of who ask, What shall we do in order that we may be pious? For here all works that man can do are overthrown and disposed of, and the most holy of the sanctimonious are cast to the’ ground. Hence you cannot do any deed by means of which one may be saved and rescued from sin. If a man now says that, he surely is a heretic.
PART 1 THE OCCASION FOR THIS EXPLANATION.
4. They at that time might have said, Well, you are a heretic; ate you going to reject good deeds? He pays no attention to that, however, but freely concluded that their works are nought. They might now have said, Pray, if works do not make us holy, why have we the law through which we hope to be saved, if we live up to it? This now gives Christ an occasion to introduce the commandments, explaining them, telling us how they are to be understood. He says: “Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shalt say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire.”
PART 2. THE EXPLANATION.
5. These words are too high and too deep for any one fully to put into practice. To this our Lord not only here testifies, but every man’s experience and his very emotions. Four points are here presented, to-wit:
Thoughts, demeanor, words and deeds; which no one can avoid; he must be guilty. As though he would say, You might find persons that do not kill with their hands; but to be without hatred, not to be angry, be of smiling countenance, not to snub persons — of such a nature none is to be found.
Now, experience teaches this.
6. For take a godly man or a godly woman; as long as everybody keeps his distance, peace and harmony prevail, but if one comes along that speaks harshly and possibly intrudes, even to the extent of the smallest word, he cannot keep from becoming angry; and follows this up by irritating and enraging the offender. Our reason can never come to the conclusion that we are to be considerate to the wicked. Peruse all your heathen books, enter into your own experience, and you will find it so, we cannot refrain from becoming angry, if not against our friends, then against our enemies.
Now God is not satisfied with this, nor can my flesh and blood evade the question, for mark the wording closely when he says, “Thou shalt not kill.”
Who is “thou?” Your hand? No. Your tongue? No; but thou, thou and all that is in thee and with thee; thine hand, heart, and thoughts shall not kill.
7. Thus Christ interprets the law saying with authority, “Every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment. “This sentence pertains to the whole world, for I ask, Who is there on this earth that is not a debtor to this commandment? Seeing that we are to comply with it and cannot, what are we to do? For we can never remove the filth. Then despair must be ours, depend on that. So the commandments of God are but a mirror, wherein we behold our filth and wickedness; for they conclude us all under sin, we being unable to work our way out by our own efforts and free will; unless something else comes to our assistance.
This is the first point.
8. The Lord continues: “Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca,” which indicates various manifestations of wrath and hatred. But no one is free from this. For if I am told to be friendly to the person I hate, they can tell it on me that my heart is not in it. For you cannot confine the heart; it will out, and show its presence by signs or words. It does not hide itself, and it cannot be hidden. Hence we conclude that we are found guilty of saying Raca, that is, of not being kind to both friend and foe. Now go to past experiences and see this in other people and in yourselves, namely, that no one can deliver himself out of this condition, from this wicked heart, which is planted so deeply in the nature of man. You may act friendly toward your brother; but for you to give him your heart, this you cannot do though you should rend yourself to pieces. Therefore no man can here help himself.
9. Following this he says, “Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire.” This too makes you appear as nought, without the grace of God, for nobody is so fraught with loving-kindness as never to utter an unseemly word, if not to his friends then to his enemies. Even when you are compelled to speak kindly to your neighbor, your heart is not in it, and whenever you with seeming propriety can do so, you will say, “Thou fool.” That already is contrary to this commandment, embracing, as it does, both friend and foe, since it reads, “Thy brother. “We all, you know, are brethren, descended from one common father, and Scripture brings us so closely together as to call us all one flesh. Isaiah says, 58:7, “When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh. “Here the prophet is speaking of your neighbor; and the word “fool” is to embrace all manner of infamy, cursing, slandering, abuse, judging, maligning and all reviling.
10. It clearly follows that we all are guilty of the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill,” and whoever is not born again of God cannot abstain from murder. Though he desist from the act itself, he cannot banish thoughts and inclinations, for if our enemy meet with death, we will be ready to say, This served him right! And soldiers compose a song on the enemy they have slain or put to flight. But that again conflicts with this commandment, for God does not look at the outward act, but at the heart. Hence much is contained in the words: “Thou shalt not kill,” as much as to say: You must be born again and become a new creature.
11. So the Gospel always reverts to this question, What shall a man do that he may become pious? For, pray as long as you will; fast as long as you will; give alms as long as you will; pay for masses and build churches as many as you will; you are, nevertheless, still a murderer, for you hate your brother; you cannot give him a kind look nor a kind word. It follows that your righteousness is nought; it is of and pertains to perdition.
And now we have two more points that are about as severe as the preceding. We read: “If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there remeberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, while thou art with him in the way; lest haply the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and thou be cast into prison.
Verily, I say unto thee, thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou have paid the last farthing.”
12. Here are two things that go against our nature. The first: When I am angry, my brother is to conciliate me. The other: My feelings being hurt, I am to forgive my brother, though he offer no apology; I am to have a kind heart toward him, so he does not deliver me to the judge, as you have just heard. This last part they formerly severed from this Gospel, and I hold that Augustine did so in writing, as appears from his book, “De spiritu et litera. “ The sense of the passage is as follows: 13. Here are two persons: the one offending is to ask pardon. The other being offended, is to forgive kindly and willingly, even though he be not asked to do so. By nature we can do neither. Our nature may prompt us to go and say, My dear friend, forgive me! but doing this under compulsion, in fear of hell and God’s wrath, hatred still remains in our heart. On the other hand, the one offended cannot forgive from his heart; and as the one acts the hypocrite in asking forgiveness, so does the other in granting it.
But that certainly is of no avail before God, for thus says our text: “If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. And this reconciliation must proceed from the heart; mark well the words of the text.
14. The passage conveys the meaning that God does not want you to come and serve him without having previously been reconciled with your brother; “then come and offer thy gift.” As though he said: “Behold, man, I have created and redeemed thee; recognize this, and shape thine whole life toward serving thy neighbor. If not, do not serve me either. If thou wilt not do the one (serve thy neighbor), seeing that is needed, you had better not do the other (serve me), since that is not needed. “So God would much rather be deprived of his service than of the service you owe your neighbor, and would sooner see you less stringent in your service toward himself, if you are pious at the expense of serving your neighbor. Summing up, God wishes you to see first to your neighbor’s service and interests.
15. Now, there are many ways of harming our neighbor, as for instance, when I do not protect his reputation, being well able to do so; when I am not kind to him, or fail to aid him; I am already his antagonist. So, if I want to be agreeable to God, I must, in the first place, be reconciled to my brother; if not, I cannot be pleasing to him. For God rejects the service rendered him, if the service due our neighbor is not performed.
16. Now look at the kind of life we have led hitherto. We have been going to St. James, to Aix-la-Chapelle, to Rome, to Jerusalem, have built churches, paid for masses, and withal have forgotten our neighbor; this now is the wrong side up. The Lord, however, here says, Go and take the money with which you were about to build a church and give it to thy neighbor. Look to your neighbor how you may serve him. It is not a matter of moment to God if you never build him a church, as long as you are of service to your neighbor. But all this is now being neglected, and only the contrary is observed. Oh, the miserable, perverted life that we have learned from the Papists! This is why no one wants to enter the married state, for nobody lends him a helping hand, nobody offers him any aid, so that he might support himself and get along. Hence it comes to pass that the one turns monk, the other nun, the third a priest, a thing we could indeed obviate if we would but show works of love. Thus they go along, forgetful of maidservants and manservants, and finally bequeath a legacy and go to perdition with their legacy.
17. It follows that God simply wants you to serve your neighbor, doing your duty to him, so that matters are righted first of all between yourself and him and you be first reconciled to him; or God will neither see nor hear you. Furthermore, if my adversary come to me, I am to forgive him willingly; if he does not come, I am still to be conciliatory and kind to him, while I am on the way with him, in this life, so that he does not deliver me to the judge.
18. How does that come about? He does not take me by the hand and conduct me to the judge; but when I face judgment my conscience realizes that it had been unwilling to forgive the neighbor, entertaining secret but inveterate hate even then. My conscience over against my neighbor delivers me to the judge; he delivers me to the officer; and he, in turn, casts me into prison, that is to say, into hellfire, until I pay the uttermost farthing, which means forever; for there the liquidation of the debt and deliverance are impossible. Here you see the exalted works that no one can attain, neither by work righteousness nor by the law. For works, if alone, will make hypocrites and dissemblers; the law, if alone, brings forth despair.
19. But what am I to do? Do I hear correctly: am I to be damned? Do as follows: Flee to Christ when thus conscious of iniquity, saying: Oh, my God, thy law is now a mirror to me, whence I see how perverted and lost a being I am! Oh God, now save me for thine only begotten Son’s sake.
Thus, by faith God gives you the Spirit, who changes your heart, so that you will be very kind to your neighbor and will argue thus: Behold, if God has acted thus toward me, forgiving me more than I can ever hope to forgive, why should I not be willing to forgive my neighbor a little?
PART 3. AN OBJECTION AND THE ANSWER.
20. Now the sword of the government seems to conflict with this, and the question arises: If I am to forgive, not to hate, not to kill, how then am I to correct and chastise? If I am to wield the sword and with it execute, how can I help being angry? This question is in order, for the Gospel here seemingly subverts the sword of the government. But we are to bear this in mind: Christ is here a spiritual teacher, solely guiding the consciences, showing them how much hatred, envy and wrath they contain, and how to get rid of it. That is his office in which he is engaged; with the worldly sword he has nothing to do, he lets those see to it whose duty it is.
21. Well, this doctrine does not enter all hearts; most of it remains on the surface. But those, into whose heart it falls, prostrate themselves before God and cry to him for help, are at once pious and have no need of the worldly sword, for they are being ruled by words. Now those who do not grasp this but lead an outwardly wicked life, there the worldly sword must be used. Thus you are now to understand that a secular prince or whoever he be that wields the worldly sword, must conform to what is here taught, namely, not to be angry and not to kill.
22. How then are they to conduct themselves who wield the sword in God’s stead? Thus: the fact that they wield the sword is a part of their office. In a sense, the Gospel has claims on them’, and then they are to be very kind in heart; meek and compassionate; then again, when duty calls, they are to be grave, punishing with alacrity, without regard to friend, foe, beauty, riches or learning. We see this in the case of Moses. He was the meekest man that has ever lived, so much so as to fall down and ask to be blotted out of the Book of Life, Exodus 32:32, if only the multitude be saved. Behold, was he not a mild, sweet and kind man, being willing to go to perdition and be condemned in body and soul that the people might be spared? But, when placed as chief in command, he, in questions of government, took energetic measures, executing three and twenty thousand, by which he might appease the wrath of God.
St. Paul acted in like manner. He too was ready to surrender his soul’s salvation for the Jews, as shown by Romans 9:3. But on learning that a man at Corinth “had his father’s wife,” he wrote so stern and severe an epistle as he had never done before, ordering that such a one be delivered unto Satan, “that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus,” 1 Corinthians 5:5. Likewise David and others acted. In fact, we find a number of such in the Old Testament as would, externally, use the sword in full rigor, executing the people as they would kill chickens, and at the same time be very tender and kind at heart.
23. Let us take a bold illustration, that you may see how a person in authority is to conduct himself. Take the coat of arms of the Elector of Saxony. It shows, two swords in a white and black field, so arranged as to have the hilt below on a white background, and the blade above on a black background. These indicate how you are to conduct yourself when in authority: below, holding the sword by the hilt, you are to be clean, white, tender-hearted and gracious, having the best of intentions; above, when on duty, you have the blade in a black field, that is to say, a determined and strict enforcement is called for, in order outwardly to stay transgressors.
And the red color of the swords indicate that blood is to be shed. Moses, David and others have thus beautifully handled the sword by the hilt in the white field, being sober, mild and kind at heart; and have wielded the blade in the black field, being grave and austere in their official duties.
24. Just so should a citizen or civil judge also do. When dealing with a wicked person that will not be controlled by words, his thoughts are to be: “Oh, my God, how gladly I would die for this man, if it could be done! He has a soul that I cannot succor; besides, he leads a wicked life, not being able to bring his flesh and blood under subjection to the spirit. “And then when comparing the two and seeing which outweighs the other, he will find that it is an easy thing for the man to die, but a grave matter for the soul to die, for the soul’s dying is eternal. Hence his thoughts and words should be: “Ah, see how your soul might enter into judgment; see, how you might enter into perdition. For that reason, in order that sin may make no further inroads, I must divest you of your body, and see to the saving of your soul, since I cannot save your body. “And then we must strike hard, resolutely take to the sword, so that we may prevent wrath and stern judgment, as did Moses with the children of Israel. In that event you are carrying your swords in a white and a black field.
25. The design of the two swords crossing each other, as though one would stay the other, is well conceived. This is to teach that a judge should be wise and prudent, and see, where he must temper and modify a harsh sentence, where it is just and right. It is like two sentences clashing when one will annul the other. You are not always to proceed secundum strictum jus, strictly according to law, but see what is just and right, and where a case can be adjusted, there he should also give his attention.
26. Take an example. The disciples of the Lord plucked ears of corn and ate, when passing through the fields. Now the Sabbath was by divine command to be observed under pain of death, Numbers 15:35; but the disciples were hungry, so one law cancelled the other. For that reason the Lord excuses them over against the Pharisees, saying: “The Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day,” Matthew 12:8. Although the observance of the Sabbath was a matter of divine command, the disciples nevertheless were excused, inasmuch as the Sabbath was not to be so strictly observed as to prevent them from eating and thus to cause them to perish because of this very observance. The same holds true of David, who partook of the consecrated bread which no layman was allowed to eat, 1 Samuel 21:6. This was a case of the two swords clashing, it being necessary for one law to give room to the other. For this reason David and also the disciples were excused. For no law has been established by God for the ruin of man, but for his bodily and spiritual welfare.
27. Hence, to sum up all, civil authorities should be severe externally, staying transgressions; but internally, they should harbor a tender, gentle, Christian, amiable spirit; withal they are to be wise and prudent, so that they may know how to temper stern justice, in accord with what is right and proper. This may suffice on this Gospel. Let us pray God for grace.
----
Luther's Second Sermon for the Sixth Sunday after Trinity -
The Fifth Commandment Explained. Matthew 5:20-26
KJV Matthew 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the
scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. 21 Ye have heard that it was
said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the
judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there
rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy
way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. 25 Agree with thine adversary
quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the
judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no
means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
This sermon appeared in tract form twice during 1523 and in “The Thirteen Sermons by Luther, 1523.”
CONTENTS:
THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT EXPLAINED.
I. THIS EXPOSITION IS TO BE VIEWED AS AGREAT BLESSING FROM CHRIST.
II. WHAT MOVED CHRIST TO GIVE THIS EXPOSITION.
III. HOW CHRIST IN THIS EXPOSITION PASSES ATERRIBLE JUDGMENT UPON ALL HYPOCRITES AND WORKRIGHTEOUS CHARACTERS.
A comparison of this exposition of the fifth commandment with that given by the Jews and the Papists. 4.
IV. HOW CHRIST IN THIS EXPOSITION REVEALS THE MISERABLE CONDITION OF THE HUMAN HEART.
All men by nature are murderers. 5.
How one should conduct himself when anger takes possession of his heart. 6.
V. THE SUMMARY CONTENTS OF THIS EXPOSITION.
How a Christian should conduct himself toward an enemy. 7-8.
VI. THE FALSE COMMENT THE PAPISTS MAKE ON THIS EXPOSITION.
VII. HOW CHRIST TEACHES HERE FOUR DEGREES AND STEPS IN ANGER.
A. These degrees and steps in detail.
1. The first degree and step.
2. The second degree and step.
3. The third degree and step.
4. The fourth degree and step. 16.
B. These degrees and steps In general. 17-18.
How a Christian should behave toward one who offends him. 19.
VIII. AN OBJECTION RAISED BY THIS EXPOSITION AND THE REPLY.
1. In this Gospel the Lord takes in hand the office of extolling and explaining the law of Moses, for it would not have been becoming for him to have insisted in an unfriendly manner to make the people pious. He is not a lawgiver, but a Savior, who never takes aught from anyone, but always gives. So he also in this instance proves his kindness in explaining the law and gently instructing; where there is need and want, he does not sternly insist, as did Moses, who without much ado wished that people were either pious or dead. For this reason Christ’s action on this occasion is to be considered one of great benefit to us, in that he teaches us where we fail and come short. Here he particularly treats of the failings due to wrath, which causes so much havoc among men, as is seen on every side, yea, nearly the whole world is under its sway.
2. Now let us examine the command, “Thou shalt not kill,” in the sense the Jews took it, and how we should take it. The Jews considered those only murderers who committed the act of murder with their hands; while those who abstained from the outward act were considered by them as pious. In like manner they treated Christ. Having delivered him to Pontius Pilate for trial, they remained without, thus fancying to be innocent of his blood, and to have perfectly kept the law, John 18:28. Again, Saul acted the same way toward David; he believed himself to be godly so long as he only did not kill David with his hand, 1 Samuel 19. Thus they have interpreted the law, failing to see that its roots run into the heart. In view of this Christ here says to his Christians: “For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shalt exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shalt in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
3. This is a strong, yea, a dreadful sentence, whereby all false saints and hypocrites, who go about with their own external works, are condemned.
4. But how have we interpreted this commandment? A little better, that is to say, doubly worse is our interpretation. On this wise: it is indeed a matter of the heart that we are to be free from hatred. But a man, according to our conception, may conduct himself friendly and thus banish hatred from his heart. So we have made it a question of free will, going from bad to worse. The Jews have made it a matter of deceptive appearance; we placed the issue with free will. Thus the hypocrisy of the Jews rests in their works; ours in our thoughts. For we argue thus: Well, I will forgive him, will be good to him, and thus lay hold of the doing in the strength of our free will, then it shall be accomplished.
5. Well, how then are we to do? We are to take the fol. lowing position:
There is not a man on earth, unless he be born again, who does not become angry, and give forth evil words and evil deeds; nature cannot do otherwise. For there stands the law and says: Thou shalt be a fine, sweettempered man in heart, in words and in works; and no evil fiber shall be found in thee. Well, where am I to find such a man? My mother does not give him to me; he must come down from heaven. For there is not a man on earth, so far as he is flesh and blood, that can help becoming angry and giving forth evil words and actions. But if I abstain, it certainly is because I fear the sword or I seek a selfish end. If I do not curse, if I do not calumniate, either the sword or hell deters me, the fear of death or of the devil; these I have in my mind and abstain, otherwise, I could not abstain.
Not alone this, but I would actually murder and massacre, wherever and whenever I could. By nature I cannot produce a single kind word or action.
If I do, it certainly is hypocrisy, since the heart at least always remains full of poison. This you now hear from Christ, who so explains the law as to cause you to feel ashamed in your inner heart. He would say: Thou art not sweet in heart, thine heart is full of hatred, full of murder and blood, and so thy hands and eyes would also gladly be full of the same; nor canst thou prevent it, any more than thou canst prevent the fire from burning, for it is its nature to burn.
6. A person might here say, What then am I to do? I feel all that within me, but I cannot change conditions. I reply, Flee to the Lord, thy God, lay thy complaint before him and say: Behold, Lord, my neighbor has injured me a little, has spoken a few words touching my honor, has caused some damage to my property, this I cannot suffer, therefore, I would cheerfully see him killed. Oh my God, how gladly would I be amiable to him, but, alas, I cannot! See how wholly cold, yea, dead I am! O Lord, I cannot help myself, I must stand back. . Make thou me different, then I will be godly; if not, I will remain like I have been. Here you must seek your help and at no other place; if you seek it in yourself, you will never find it. Your heart perpetually bubbles and boils with anger, you cannot prevent it.
7. Now, this is the sum of the law: You are to be kind, amiable and benignant in heart, word and deed; and even though they take your life, still you are to suffer all in love, and render thanks to your Lord. Behold, thus a great deal is included in the short sentence, “Thou shalt not kill.” Christ lived up to this; do the same, and you are a good Christian. When nailed to the cross, his name, which was above every name, and his honor were profaned by the Jews, while they reviled him by words of the following and similar import: Well, what a nice God he has! If he be God’s son, let him come down! Let his God come now, in whom he banked and boasted so much, and help him! Matthew 27:43, Mark 15:32, Luke 23:35.
Such words pierced his very heart, hurting him more than all his other sufferings; still, he suffered all this with patience; he wept over his enemies, because they would have no part in the great benefit to be derived from his death; yea, he prayed for their sin. And in the face of this we are ready to snarl and growl over the least trifle, when asked to yield even a little to our neighbor.
8. Here you see how far we are still from Christ. It is indeed necessary to suffer with Christ, if we would enter with him into glory. He has gone before, so we should follow, as St. Peter says, 1 Peter 2:21f.: “For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps: who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: who when he suffered, threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously. “Now see what kind of an example St. Peter places before us; truly we should emulate it, endeavoring to be and to act like him. But this we cannot do by nature; it follows that we without exception are the devil’s own, there being not a man on earth that is found not guilty. Hence the sentence holds good: You must be likewise skillful, namely, good at heart, or you belong to perdition.
9. What then must we do? You must do as follows: You must acknowledge that you are condemned by the law, and the devil’s own property and that you are unable to rescue yourself by any power of your own. Therefore you must flee to God, pray him to change you, or all is lost and ruined. This was well understood and observed by those highly learned, but they argued thus: If we preach that the whole world is condemned and the devil’s own, what is to become of the sanctimonious priests and monks, for then they too would be condemned? God forbid!
Wait, wait, we will sharpen our tongues, bore a hole into the paper for our God, make a comment and say thus: Why, God never meant it in that sense, for who could keep it? He did not command it, but merely suggested it to such as wished to be perfect. Again, the perfect are not under obligations to be so, it suffices, if they strive after perfection. Many large books, called Formas conscientiarum, treatises to comfort and acquit the consciences, have been written on this subject. Thomas Aquinas was about the leading heretic in this line. Later the same doctrine was confirmed by the Pope, and diffused throughout the world; this explains the later origin of the Orders, which aimed at perfection. Well, God be praised that we have understood the error, so that we can avoid it.
10. We comfort consciences in a manner quite different, namely thus: Dear brother, all this is addressed not to the monks and priests only; Christ is not trifling with his words; it is a direct command, you must conform to it, or you are the devil’s property. This is our way of comforting. Alas! exclaims our nature, Do you call that comforting? It is rather a transfer of souls to the devil. True, friend, but I must first take you down to hell before taking you up to heaven, you must despair in the first place, then come to Christ, behold his example, how he conducted himself toward his enemies, in that he wept over them. But the bare example alone moves you; yet, it does not help you to any extent.
11. In view of this lay hold of his word and promise, that he will change you; this only will help you. Pray thus: Oh my God, thou hast placed Christ, thine only beloved Son, before me as an example, so that I might lead a like life; but I am not able to do this. O my God, change me, grant me thy grace! God then comes and says: Behold, since you know yourself and seek grace from me, I will change you and do as you desire. And though you are not so perfect as Christ, as indeed you should be, I shall nevertheless have my Son’s life and perfection cover your imperfections.
So you see we must always have something to keep us in the right humility and fear.
12. This is true comfort that does not rest on our ability, but on the fact that we have a gracious God, who forgives our sins; on the fact that we believe in Christ and not in our own worthiness, he cleansing us from day to day; on the fact that whenever we fall short, we should always place our hope and trust in Christ. See, this is the main drift of our Gospel. Now let us briefly run over the text and consider the contents.
CONCERNING THE FOUR GRADES OF ANGER.
13. The Lord here notes four grades or degrees of anger or wrath. The first is the anger of the heart; and that is the main grade; it should be so pure that you are not sensible of it. But this cannot be in our present state.
Hence when you are sensible of it, come direct to Christ and ask him graciously to change you; ask him to extinguish the fire where it starts to burn; you cannot work a way out by your own efforts.
14. The other grade is “Raca,” which means an angry, unfriendly expression with the eyes, with the neck and with the whole countenance, and in whatever other way it may be made. This too should by no means be. So you should at all times know when and how to obtain help.
15. The third grade consists in saying, “Thou fool.” This implies the use of all kinds of scolding and profane words, by which our neighbor is degraded. This should also be laid aside; but we should defend and protect our neighbor with the utmost zeal, wherever we can.
16. The fourth grade consists in gross murder with our hands. The meaning is that we are to help our neighbor with our hands, give and advance to him, so that he may be sustained. For if I behold a poor person lying in distress and-fail to help, protect and give, so that he be sustained, I murder him with my own hand.
17. Now if you want to see and know who you are, you must not judge yourselves by those whom you love. Nature teaches that we do not want those we love to meet with any ill. But judge yourself by your enemies, and you will soon see who you are. Do you find that you are not in your heart kindly disposed toward them, nor kind in conduct, but speak evil of them, failing to help them with your hands, you are a murderer.
18. But in that our Lord says: “Everyone who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire,” he uses the language in vogue in the civil courts, when the accused is brought before the court, the question of guilty or not guilty is first discussed; afterwards the deliberations are on the penalty to be imposed; and lastly, the culprit is delivered over for punishment. The same holds true with these grades of wrath; that is to say, as they advance, the one is punished more severely than the preceding.
There is indeed but one hell, but there is a variety of penalties and punishments, and of these the one is always nearer infliction than the other: just as he is nearer death concerning whom the question is being debated what death he is to die, than the man just cited before the court.
The Lord himself further explains his words when he says: “If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gilt. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whilst thou art with him in the way; lest haply the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily, I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the last farthing.”
19. Here you see what God demands of us, that he does not want anything done even for himself, unless it be done in love, after the proper relation has been established with one’s neighbor. So you see, anger cancels all good deeds that might be done, for instance, prayers, fastings, selfmortification, giving of alms, and other like deeds. And God in the first place wants those to be reconciled who live in discord, they asking the pardon of the ones they have offended, as indeed is proper. This is the meaning he would convey when he says: “If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother,” that is, ask his forgiveness. Again: “Agree with thine adversary quickly;” and even though he does not come at once to you and beg pardon, be kindly disposed toward him nevertheless and forgive him. See how God has balanced both sides: on the one hand, when offended, we are to be kind and forgiving, on the other hand, the offender is to beg pardon, so all things may go well.
20. Now one might ask: You tell us not to say, “Thou fool,” but how about Christ often calling his disciples “fools” and “unbelievers,” Mark 16:14, a great and strong slander for a Christian? Reply: We must judge according to the condition of the heart: that determines the nature of our actions. Christ and Paul rebuke and reprove harshly, but they have the best of intentions, hence their words are to be counted good deeds. Even as a father ofttimes calls his son a fool, yea, and adds bodily correction, yet he does all this out of love, in that he is always kind in his heart to his son; so Christ and the Apostles and all the faithful act; whatever they do, they do from a paternal and maternal heart, hence they are truly good deeds.
Therefore we must judge such questions according to the heart and the person. This may suffice for the present on this Gospel.
---
Luther's Third Sermon for the Sixth Sunday after Trinity.
Anger and Its Signs
KJV Matthew 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the
scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. 21 Ye have heard that it was
said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the
judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there
rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy
way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. 25 Agree with thine adversary
quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the
judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no
means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
This sermon was first printed in the “Two Sermons on Anger.” A new and unaltered reprint appeared under the title: “One person should not be angry at another, an excellent sermon. — An exhortation to patience and meekness, a second sermon by Dr. Martin Luther, Wittenberg, 1543.” At the end are the words, “Printed at Wittenberg by Joseph Klug.”
CONTENTS:
CONCERNING ANGER AND ITS SIGNS. CONCERNING ANGER.
1. Anger is a very common evil.
2. Anger is a beautiful Satanic sin, which tries to adorn itself with a fine appearance. 2-7.
3. How Christ seeks to fully abolish all anger. 8-10. How we should act when offended. 9-10.
4. The objections raised by this teaching of anger, and the answer. a. The first objection and its answer. 11-13. b . The second objection and its answer. 14f.
5. Anger is always full of hatred and envy to one’s neighbor, and is the fruit of Satan.
6. The different kinds of anger. A. Official anger. a. How it springs from love. 17-19. b. This is not human but divine anger. c. How the Pope misuses this anger. 20.
B. Brotherly anger. a. The nature of this anger. b. Why one should guard against the misuse of this anger. c. The necessity of this anger. 22.
C. Personal anger. a. The nature of this anger. b. How and why this anger should be totally abolished. 23-24. c. How this anger is discerned among the work-righteous. d. How and why this anger is totally condemned. 26.
II. CONCERNING THE SIGNS OF ANGER.
1. The first sign.
2. The second sign. a. Its nature. b. An objection, raised here, and the answer. 29-31.
This text has now been the theme of sermons for more than fifteen hundred years, and will continue to be until the day of judgment, before a person can be found who fully believes and keeps it. It has been copied enough and clearly enough explained, so that we can read and hear it daily and continually. However, it will indeed not be exhausted and still less lived perfectly, although everybody fancies he can hear and learn his fill in one day, so that he will need no more of it. But God knows What fools and dunces we are when we believe ourselves to be the wisest; for that reason he constantly presents one and the same sermon to us, and does not grow tired of drilling and forcing it into us continually, hoping to bring us to the point of seeing our blindness and stupidity, and, like obedient pupils, begin to learn and practice it. [The above is inserted from Luther’s Two Sermons, “Zwo Predigten.”] PART 1. CONCERNING ANGER.
1. This Gospel we have fully and sufficiently explained on other occasions, when treating of the entire sermon of Christ, which Matthew the Evangelist records in three chapters; for today we will take a part of it, where Christ expounds and explains the fifth commandment. For here we observe first, that Christ attacks a sin called anger, which is very common and powerfully rules the world.
And it is not one of the gross, public vices punished also by the world, but one of those fine sins of the devil that do not want to pass for sin. For they sail under false colors, so that no one can rebuke and punish them. For instance, pride will not be called pride, but truth and justice; envy and hatred do not want to be reprimanded, but rather extolled as being true earnestness and godly zeal against wickedness. These are really the two colors the devil carries in his realm, namely, lying and murder, which in the eyes of the world claim the honor and praise of being holiness and righteousness in the highest degree.
2. For this reason our Lord and Savior singles out the Pharisees, who fain would be the holiest and most pious, and be so considered by everybody; he even calls their doings by the beautiful name of righteousness, but he pictures and judges it as one not leading to heaven but into the abyss of perdition, a veritable fruit of satan. And this he does for the reason that they wanted to be called righteous and pious, defying the whole world to prove the contrary, and at the same time were filled with venomous wrath, envy and hate. The world cannot see nor judge in such matters, therefore Christ alone is the judge here who dare and can pass such a sentence of judgment. Even if this righteousness of the Pharisees be ever so beautiful and holy, yet, they shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven; for I do not desire nor will have a righteousness that stamps itself as such, and will not be called sin, but struts about in the fine coat of divine righteousness, so that we must call them Christian, pious people, holy spiritual fathers, etc.
3. Now, on what is this righteousness of the Pharisees based and where does it derive its name? On the fact that God said, “Thou shalt not kill,” etc. On these words they planted themselves and stood. The text says nothing more than “Thou shalt not kill;” hence it follows that whoever does not kill, is righteous. But when my feelings are hurt and I am wronged, I have good grounds and reasons for being wrought up and for resenting the injustice; at the same time my wrath appears doubly justified because it suffers violence and injustice without actually killing. This wrath of mine advances a step by embellishing its cause in proclaiming its innocence and parading its piety before God and the world thus: Have I not good reasons for being angry? This and that my neighbor has done to me in return for my many favors, and I would have gladly given him my life’s blood; this is the thanks, the returns, with which he pays me. Am I to suffer all this and pass such malice by? And at this point a Pharisee boldly proceeds to malign and persecute his neighbor in the highest degree, wherever he can, inflicting harm and injury; and all this is claimed to be done justly, he himself being pious and holy, yea, extolled as a martyr in the sight of God and men.
4. In like manner, when the Pope and his followers condemn. burn and murder all who will not worship their abominations, counting them as disobedient to the Christian Church and obstinate, this of course must be called genuine service of God, and God should feel elated over becoming worthy of such saints. Our great noblemen act much in the same way, who boast so loudly they are friends of God and of the whole world, but enemies to iniquity. Indeed, what a great friendship we here have with God and with mankind! Where shall God stand before such saints in order to raise them high enough heavenward?
5. Behold the excellent, grand and sacred anger of the cavalier or nobleman, who cannot possibly be guilty of a transgression or an injustice; and whoever is not of this opinion is evidently not a godly man. This sermon of Christ seems therefore very peculiar to the world, in fact it is unknown in use and practice, though heard often enough and well known as to its words. For the world does not consider it a sin for a man to resent a wrong, when he is innocent; and it is true that he who has a clear case against his offender can also seek redress in court, all this we must admit.
But in adding his personal wrath to matters and trying to avenge himself, he overdoes it; one law now conflicts with the other, and a small right develops into a great wrong.
6. Hence you must in this instance so tune the organ as to have the pipes sound in harmony, and so as to prevent two from clashing. For what kind of justice would you call it when one offends you by a mere word, or pilfers a penny’s worth, and you go and cut off his arm or burn down his house, crying angrily the while: Well, he did me wrong, and I have good reasons, etc.! In such a case your murderous wrath, that does tenfold more violence and injustice to me, is not to be called a sin, but righteousness and holiness, while I am to be considered unrighteous aria suffer wrong.
7. This now I am not saying for the benefit of strangers, who are without, except merely for an illustration to show how this vice rules in the world; but concerning us, both teachers and scholars, who pride ourselves on being evangelical and still want the liberty of becoming angry and to rage when we please; and not permit ourselves to be punished nor reproved, but rather than that everything may go to pieces, if only we be considered to be in the right, and pious, despite the fact that such a despicable farce of right causes a hundredfold more wrong.
8. Therefore Christ here takes energetic action, and abolishes anger wholly and completely in the entire world, draws it to himself and says: I do not merely say, Thou shalt not kill, nor say Raca to thy brother, but thou shalt in no case be angry; the one is as solemnly and earnestly prohibited as the other.
For you are not told to judge or avenge yourself, and even though you are right and have a just cause, still your wrath is of the devil; as St. James in his James 1:20, says: “The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Hence all anger is to be abolished entirely from us and the wrath of God alone is to work; otherwise it will turn out to be the devil’s wrath and it certainly does not cool down without sin. Just as also these three: to judge, to avenge and to glory, have been taken from us, and no person should share in them, though they have ever so good a cause and ever so great holiness. But to God alone belong honor, judgment and vengeance, hence also wrath.
9. Now, I fear, this will not be done by us as long as we are here in this life, and yet it would be grace, if we only became so pious as to make a beginning; for as soon as we suffer an injury, flesh and blood at once act as flesh and blood; they begin to rage and rave in anger and impatience. It is natural for us to feel hurt when suffering injustice and violence, hence it is necessary to check and restrain the feelings of anger and resist them. The feeling that you are injured will pass away; but that you in addition desire to avenge yourself in this or that way, is prohibited. Therefore see to it that one fits well into the other, that one claim does not conflict with the other nor cancel it, but let the two harmonize, so that both may continue. If you cannot secure your rights without doing greater harm, let it go. For it is not good to check or punish one wrong with another, nor is God willing to have universal justice perish because of your petty claims.
10. Now the aim and contents of this sermon by Christ are as follows: You fancy that whoever does not inflict a blow with his arm has not acted contrary to God’s command; but he is at liberty to be angry at his neighbor and to avenge himself; and to take vengeance is so far right, and no sin at all. This would nullify the commandment, leaving it without any force whatever. For it does not ask merely that you refrain from killing with your fist, but also from doing harm or injury with your tongue or your heart. If not, how about the command that we are to do good to our enemy? If that is to hold good, we most certainly must not work against our neighbor.
Otherwise in what respect would we be better than publicans and public sinners, as Christ himself says, Luke 6:32, who are friends to each other, the one not inflicting any harm on the other?
11. But possibly you say’ Well, if wrath is to be so thoroughly rooted out of the heart of man, how is evil to be stayed and punished, which cannot be done without some severity? But if evil is to have free course and left go unpunished, you would soon have no house and no town. I would reply:
We know that God has committed the judiciary to the civil government and to that end established princes and lords, who bear the sword in God’s stead; their sword and its edge is God’s sword and edge. Aside from this they are personally exactly as other people are, having no more right to be angry than anybody else. Now the judge or executioner, in condemning and executing a man that never personally did an injury to either, does so in God’s stead, officiating in God’s place, inasmuch as the malefactor has become liable to God’s sentence and penalty. Assuredly there should be no anger nor bitterness in man’s heart, and yet God’s wrath and sword accomplish their work.
12. The same holds good in war, when you must either defend yourself, or vigorously thrust, beat and burn: then likely wrath and revenge reign supreme, and yet it should not proceed from the heart of man, but emanate from the divine authority and command, so that the wicked be punished and peace be maintained. Even though you thereby meet with damage and harm, you must submit. Thus God suffered his wrath to come over Jerusalem through the king of Babylon; again through the Romans, until not one stone remained upon another.
13. Hence where such wrath exists it is not to be called man’s wrath, but God’s. And when, unhappily, you commingle God’s and man’s wrath, it is the miserable doings of the devil. Wickedness, I say, must be restrained; but this duty must be performed in God’s place and stead. But when a judge and government are not godly, and they mingle their personal wrath with God’s, and grace their actions with the name and shield of the office; when they are secretly hostile to me and can do me harm, they avail themselves of opportunities to do so, and then claim to have done so officially: this I would call diabolical malignity, but they claim to have done the right thing and to be entitled to praise.
14. But you say: Well, the officer has done this and the other thing to me, and I cannot restrain him in any other way; if I should allow it, I would never have peace. I answer: It is indeed not right for persons to harm you, nor are you forbidden to protect yourself in a proper way; but it will never do for you to play double, using the office as a vent for your wrath, so that people will later on say: Mr. John — or Mr. Peter — did not do this, but the mayor or the judge, and you then take credit in saying that you did not do it from motives of anger or hatred, but of duty and justice.
15. Here you see that infamous filth formed by appending human, yea, devilish wrath to divine wrath and making one cake of both, which indeed should be kept asunder farther than heaven and earth. And just as they, contrary to the second commandment, use the name of God in vain by swearing and the like, making that sacred name serve the purpose of a lie, so that it can be on the market under the label of that beautiful and glorious name: so too in this instance the office and law that are God’s must serve the purposes of your envy and hatred giving them a standing so they can achieve all they purpose in the way of harming a neighbor. At the same time you parade about as if you had done the right and proper thing. Yea, you are a two-fold saint; in the first place you have been abused; in the second place, you do not avenge yourself or seek redress personally, but in the capacity of an officer or judge. In this same way our tender saints, the Papists, bishops and priests, now act everywhere, and, following in their wake, great princes and lords illtreat and murder people, as the whim of their raving wrath and hatred may move them. And in the end all this is to be called the service of God and supreme holiness.
16. Thus the wrath of man is at all times full of envy and hatred to his neighbor, being occasioned by the devil and planted in the heart of man, especially in the Pharisaical saints, who sin manifoldly and are more worthy of condemnation than others, since, for one thing, they interfere with God’s office and law, robbing him of his own, and then want to be in the right and be considered pious.
17. On the contrary when God’s wrath is administered according to his command, it does not spring from envy or hatred, but from pure love and a good heart. A heart that deplores the fact that man should suffer any ill, and yet, for his own sake and the sake of his office, God must punish and abolish wickedness.
18. For it is indeed plain that Adam loved his son Cain as being his firstborn flesh and blood, and he moreover wished to be holy and began to serve God with his first offering, etc; and thought his offering was far more acceptable to God than his brother’s. He also insisted that he was right and his brother wrong by virtue of being the first-born, so that he had to be the true priest and the first in God’s sight. On these things he depended, despised his brother, and fancied to have good reasons for being angry and for persecuting and slaying his brother; as if injustice were done him in that Jehovah had no respect unto his offering. Therefore he goes ahead, and because his father did not approve and praise him, he murders his brother.
He follows this up by being insolent, for when Adam in the name and place of God calls him to account he retorts, What do I know of my brother? Am I to be his keeper? Now, dear as he was to Adam as a natural child, and after Abel’s death his only child, still his father pronounces that stern and dreadful sentence, Genesis 4:10: “The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground. And now thou art cursed from the earth.”
Again: “A fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. “Truly these are the words and actions of wrath, for by them he placed him under the gravest ban and direst anathema, expelling him from heaven and earth. And Adam forthwith proceeds to execute this stern wrath, and banished his son, so that he should nowhere have a safe dwelling place. Without doubt he did this very reluctantly, for he would by far have preferred to keep his son; but the wrath of God must take its course, assigning death and the fire of hell.
19. The Christian Church must act on the same principles, when putting a person under the ban and “delivering such a one unto Satan,” as St. Paul did at Corinth, 1 Corinthians 5:5; also when denying him the sacrament and all fellowship, so as not to participate in his sin. This indeed is a dreadful sentence and terrific wrath; still it is not the wrath of man but of God. For the Church would much rather see man converted and be saved; as she shows by her actions, for where one repents and is converted, she gladly receives him back as her dear son and rejoices over him with all the angels, as Christ says of the lost sheep and the prodigal son. Luke 15:6f.
20. Here we must beware not to abuse this power, as the Pope has been guilty of doing against those attacking his person or rule, thus confounding his person with his office, making out that his wrath is God’s wrath, thereby spoiling both and pouring poison into the wine. For thus the Pope has, under the name of divine wrath, threatened and stunned emperors and kings, and yet he accomplished nothing more than to pour out his own wrath and spite. For this reason his church is in Scripture called a church of blasphemies, Revelation 13:5,16, having the marks of blasphemies written on her forehead, in all her words and deeds.
21. This now is the wrath we call the divine or paternal wrath. Then there is another, called the brotherly wrath, of the same nature because it proceeds from love. For instance when I am angry at a person whom I heartily love and to whom I wish all manner of good, and I am grieved because he will not forsake his sins and do better, so that I always distinguish between the person and the sin, to help the person and restrain the sin, doing all I can by exhorting, warning, threatening and correcting, in order to lead him to forsake his sins.
22. But it is well here also to be on one’s guard, lest a rogue be back of this, in the sense of one’s own wrath intermingling. For our wrath should be so wholly absent that not a speck of it be found; but that God’s wrath alone hold sway, which is to flow either from the office assigned, or from brotherly love, which here would mean from the wrath of God. For it is God’s command that we admonish, correct, reform and help one another, so that our neighbor desists from his sins and receives our admonitions gladly and with thanks. This is the “wrath” of that common Christian love of which Christ says, Matthew 18:15: “If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone,” and in Scripture it is called an excellent, godly jealousy. St. Paul in Corinthians 11:2 says’ “I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy.” For a wrath of this nature does not seek your disgrace or disadvantage, but your honor and advantage; it would regret to see you injure the prospects of your soul’s salvation.
23. So we assert that Christ here is not preaching on the office which is God’s, nor on love, but on each person’s own and individual wrath, proceeding from our heart and will, and directed against the person of our neighbor: — this wrath is to be wholly done away with and be put to death, no matter if the injury and injustice done to us hurts and pains. To illustrate’ that John the Baptist was so shamefully slain, that Christ was nailed to the cross, that the holy martyrs were so cruelly put to death, all this did not pass without the weeping and lamentation of pious hearts; for we do not have, nor should we have, hearts of iron but of flesh, as St.
Bernhard says: Dolor est, seal contemnitur; it is painful, but must be borne and overcome. And there is quite a difference between enduring pain, weeping and lamenting, and seeking revenge, or entertaining hatred and envy.
24. Now God wants this commandment: Thou shalt not kill, understood to mean so much that no one is to be angry. For by nature we all are liars, born in natural sin and in blindness, not knowing how to be angry, nor seeing how depraved our nature is, to-wit. , that it is not able either to love or be angry aright, since in both it seeks nothing but self and selfish ends.
Since now by nature we are so corrupt, it is forbidden and annulled both to love and be angry as a human being, in which our nature would seek its own ends. On the other hand, divine love that “seeketh not her own” but that of one’s neighbor, is enjoined, and an anger that is zealous not for his own but for God’s sake, whom it behooves either to punish transgressions against his commandments, or out of a spirit of love, and for the good of our neighbor to help him.
25. The Pharisaical holiness, however, does not act thus; but as it has no love for one’s neighbor but only wishes to see self honored and praised and served; so too it cannot’ but rage and rave against the truly pious persons, and still pretends not to have sinned against the commandment in question. ,lust as Christ was treated by the Pharisees and high priests, who delivered him to the judge Pilate to be offered upon the cross, and still they did not want to be accounted guilty, but to eat the pascal lamb and remain holy.
26. Hence the Lord strikes a fresh blow at all the Pharisaic holiness and righteousness, denying them every particle of grace and the kingdom of heaven and condemning them to hell-fire, as having an unrighteousness doubly wrong in God’s sight and corrupt to the very core. Therefore I say, says God: “Whosoever is angry with his brother;” I do not say, He only that slays with his hand, but if you have anger in your heart, then you are already worthy to be condemned by the judgment; for such wrath originates only in man’s inborn malice, which seeks either its own revenge and wantonness, or its own honor and gain. But God does not want you to seek your own honor and right; but let him seek and demand it who should, and to whom he has given authority, namely, the judge and executioner, who are not looking after their own but God’s affairs, for otherwise they would not be permitted to execute or punish anybody. But see to it, says he, that you personally do not grow angry, but so completely control your anger that, be it in official duty or not, it does not proceed from the heart.
PART 2. CONCERNING THE SIGNS OF ANGER.
27. The other part of this text, “Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca,” etc. , we hold to mean all kinds of evil demeanor and bad turns done to a neighbor, which are not done by angry words. Such a man, Christ says, “is in danger of the council;” it has, as yet, not been determined what to do with him, but he has incurred the verdict of guilty; it remains merely to determine the penalty. This means that such a person cannot enter heaven, but has already merited his condemnation, the only difference between him and those in perdition is that he is a little more remote from the final punishment; but nevertheless he also belongs there.
28. The third part is: “Whosoever shall say, Thou fool. “This is also a very common vice, consisting in robbing our neighbor of his honor and reputation, be it done behind his back or to his face, which is called “contumeliam” and “conuitium,” defaming and reviling. Whoever does this, Christ says, “is in danger of hell-fire;” that is to say, there is no need of debating the question, of citing the culprit, indicting and sentencing him; he is already convicted and condemned, it but remains for the executioner to lead him off and do his duty. So God does not want you to avenge yourself out of anger in any form or manner, be it with your heart, with your fist, or with your mouth, and thus do an injury to your neighbor, show him spite, give him unkind words, etc.
29. But I hear you say, Who then can be a preacher or a judge or a plaintiff, if no one’s honor is to be questioned, or be ever called a fool?
Why then preachers, judges, plaintiffs, witnesses, etc. , are all to hold their peace. But here, as I have stated, this difference is to be observed. When I, as a preacher, reprove you publicly from the pulpit, or privately in confession, I do not do so, but God’s Word: therefore you are not to complain that I am speaking against your honor. For a preacher cannot, in keeping with his office, abuse or revile anybody, unless he be a rogue, who mingles his own malice and hatred with his office. And you cannot say to a judge when performing the functions of his office: You are speaking against my honor in calling me a thief and a murderer; for God and not the judge, has spoken thus to you. Therefore it will not do to say it is touching your honor, when being reproved or corrected. True, such words do not promote your honor; however, not man, but God did it; should he not have the right and authority to speak on this subject?
30. But when God through the office has already rendered a verdict, both I and others may speak of that; for anyone may speak of God’s public works and judgments; it is then a matter of history, discussed everywhere.
Therefore we must nevertheless not enjoin silence on everybody to the extent of forbidding him to say, “This man is a thief or a rogue,” after the judge has pronounced him such. For more honor you can neither take from nor give to a man than God has taken or given. Now since God has declared the sentence and published it publicly through the judge or preacher, everyone may with a good conscience speak of it. I recur to this because we are always inclined to go the wrong road. When preaching, there is always an inclination so to turn and twist everything as not to be bound by the Word of God. Likewise, when with Christ we say that no one should be angry or at variance with his brother or speak evil of him, everybody would like to silence the preacher to the extent that he is not to touch upon or punish public sins and vices.
31. Finally this is the sense of our Gospel lesson: When you, as a man, for personal reasons speak against the honor of your neighbor, feeling elated over his sins, this is wicked and wrong. But when it has come so far that God himself makes anything public, then it will not do for me to praise a public, scoundrel, whom God himself has publicly proved to be such; for that would be the same as defending and abetting rascality. So our whole conduct should be guided by this, that we do not contemplate or attempt anything of ourselves; but see what God enjoins, or does through his servants; this then God himself has done and all is good and proper. So it will not do to be silenced in such cases, but to stand on the side of truth and justice, and contribute your influence in upholding and lauding God’s judgment, in order to terrify and warn others. Let this suffice for the present on this Gospel text.
From Rush Limbaugh's Father - Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor
RUSH INTRODUCTION: My father, Rush H. Limbaugh, Jr., delivered this oft-requested address locally a number of times, but it had never before appeared in print until it was published in The Limbaugh Letter. My dad was renowned for his oratory skills and for his original mind; this speech is, I think, a superb demonstration of both. I will always be grateful to him for instilling in me a passion for the ideas and lives of America's Founders, as well as a deep appreciation for the inspirational power of words, which you will see evidenced here:
"Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor"
It was a glorious morning. The sun was shining and the wind was from the Southeast. Up especially early, a tall bony, redheaded young Virginian found time to buy a new thermometer, for which he paid three pounds, fifteen shillings. He also bought gloves for Martha, his wife, who was ill at home.
Thomas Jefferson arrived early at the statehouse. The temperature was 72.5 degrees and the horseflies weren't nearly so bad at that hour. It was a lovely room, very large, with gleaming white walls. The chairs were comfortable. Facing the single door were two brass fireplaces, but they would not be used today.
The moment the door was shut, and it was always kept locked, the room became an oven. The tall windows were shut, so that loud quarreling voices could not be heard by passersby. Small openings atop the windows allowed a slight stir of air, and also a large number of horseflies. Jefferson records that "the horseflies were dexterous in finding necks, and the silk of stockings was nothing to them." All discussing was punctuated by the slap of hands on necks.
On the wall at the back, facing the president's desk, was a panoply -- consisting of a drum, swords, and banners seized from Fort Ticonderoga the previous year. Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold had captured the place, shouting that they were taking it "in the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress!"
Now Congress got to work, promptly taking up an emergency measure about which there was discussion but no dissension. "Resolved: That an application be made to the Committee of Safety of Pennsylvania for a supply of flints for the troops at New York."
Then Congress transformed itself into a committee of the whole. The Declaration of Independence was read aloud once more, and debate resumed. Though Jefferson was the best writer of all of them, he had been somewhat verbose. Congress hacked the excess away. They did a good job, as a side-by-side comparison of the rough draft and the final text shows. They cut the phrase "by a self-assumed power." "Climb" was replaced by "must read," then "must" was eliminated, then the whole sentence, and soon the whole paragraph was cut. Jefferson groaned as they continued what he later called "their depredations." "Inherent and inalienable rights" came out "certain unalienable rights," and to this day no one knows who suggested the elegant change.
A total of 86 alterations were made. Almost 500 words were eliminated, leaving 1,337. At last, after three days of wrangling, the document was put to a vote.
Here in this hall Patrick Henry had once thundered: "I am no longer a Virginian, sir, but an American." But today the loud, sometimes bitter argument stilled, and without fanfare the vote was taken from north to south by colonies, as was the custom. On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was adopted.
There were no trumpets blown. No one stood on his chair and cheered. The afternoon was waning and Congress had no thought of delaying the full calendar of routine business on its hands. For several hours they worked on many other problems before adjourning for the day.
Much To Lose
What kind of men were the 56 signers who adopted the Declaration of Independence and who, by their signing, committed an act of treason against the crown? To each of you, the names Franklin, Adams, Hancock and Jefferson are almost as familiar as household words. Most of us, however, know nothing of the other signers. Who were they? What happened to them?
I imagine that many of you are somewhat surprised at the names not there: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry. All were elsewhere.
Ben Franklin was the only really old man. Eighteen were under 40; three were in their 20s. Of the 56 almost half - 24 - were judges and lawyers. Eleven were merchants, nine were landowners and farmers, and the remaining 12 were doctors, ministers, and politicians.
With only a few exceptions, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, these were men of substantial property. All but two had families. The vast majority were men of education and standing in their communities. They had economic security as few men had in the 18th Century.
Each had more to lose from revolution than he had to gain by it. John Hancock, one of the richest men in America, already had a price of 500 pounds on his head. He signed in enormous letters so that his Majesty could now read his name without glasses and could now double the reward. Ben Franklin wryly noted: "Indeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately."
Fat Benjamin Harrison of Virginia told tiny Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts: "With me it will all be over in a minute, but you, you will be dancing on air an hour after I am gone."
These men knew what they risked. The penalty for treason was death by hanging. And remember, a great British fleet was already at anchor in New York Harbor.
They were sober men. There were no dreamy-eyed intellectuals or draft card burners here. They were far from hot-eyed fanatics yammering for an explosion. They simply asked for the status quo. It was change they resisted. It was equality with the mother country they desired. It was taxation with representation they sought. They were all conservatives, yet they rebelled.
It was principle, not property, that had brought these men to Philadelphia. Two of them became presidents of the United States. Seven of them became state governors. One died in office as vice president of the United States. Several would go on to be US Senators. One, the richest man in America, in 1828 founded the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. One, a delegate from Philadelphia, was the only real poet, musician and philosopher of the signers. (It was he, Francis Hopkinson not Betsy Ross who designed the United States flag.)
Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from Virginia, had introduced the resolution to adopt the Declaration of Independence in June of 1776. He was prophetic in his concluding remarks: "Why then sir, why do we longer delay? Why still deliberate? Let this happy day give birth to an American Republic. Let her arise not to devastate and to conquer but to reestablish the reign of peace and law.
"The eyes of Europe are fixed upon us. She demands of us a living example of freedom that may exhibit a contrast in the felicity of the citizen to the ever-increasing tyranny which desolates her polluted shores. She invites us to prepare an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repost.
"If we are not this day wanting in our duty, the names of the American Legislatures of 1776 will be placed by posterity at the side of all of those whose memory has been and ever will be dear to virtuous men and good citizens."
Though the resolution was formally adopted July 4, it was not until July 8 that two of the states authorized their delegates to sign, and it was not until August 2 that the signers met at Philadelphia to actually put their names to the Declaration.
William Ellery, delegate from Rhode Island, was curious to see the signers' faces as they committed this supreme act of personal courage. He saw some men sign quickly, "but in no face was he able to discern real fear." Stephan Hopkins, Ellery's colleague from Rhode Island, was a man past 60. As he signed with a shaking pen, he declared: "My hand trembles, but my heart does not."
"Most Glorious Service"
Even before the list was published, the British marked down every member of Congress suspected of having put his name to treason. All of them became the objects of vicious manhunts. Some were taken. Some, like Jefferson, had narrow escapes. All who had property or families near British strongholds suffered.
· Francis Lewis, New York delegate saw his home plundered -- and his estates in what is now Harlem -- completely destroyed by British Soldiers. Mrs. Lewis was captured and treated with great brutality. Though she was later exchanged for two British prisoners through the efforts of Congress, she died from the effects of her abuse.
· William Floyd, another New York delegate, was able to escape with his wife and children across Long Island Sound to Connecticut, where they lived as refugees without income for seven years. When they came home they found a devastated ruin.
· Philips Livingstone had all his great holdings in New York confiscated and his family driven out of their home. Livingstone died in 1778 still working in Congress for the cause.
· Louis Morris, the fourth New York delegate, saw all his timber, crops, and livestock taken. For seven years he was barred from his home and family.
· John Hart of Trenton, New Jersey, risked his life to return home to see his dying wife. Hessian soldiers rode after him, and he escaped in the woods. While his wife lay on her deathbed, the soldiers ruined his farm and wrecked his homestead. Hart, 65, slept in caves and woods as he was hunted across the countryside. When at long last, emaciated by hardship, he was able to sneak home, he found his wife had already been buried, and his 13 children taken away. He never saw them again. He died a broken man in 1779, without ever finding his family.
· Dr. John Witherspoon, signer, was president of the College of New Jersey, later called Princeton. The British occupied the town of Princeton, and billeted troops in the college. They trampled and burned the finest college library in the country.
· Judge Richard Stockton, another New Jersey delegate signer, had rushed back to his estate in an effort to evacuate his wife and children. The family found refuge with friends, but a Tory sympathizer betrayed them. Judge Stockton was pulled from bed in the night and brutally beaten by the arresting soldiers. Thrown into a common jail, he was deliberately starved. Congress finally arranged for Stockton's parole, but his health was ruined. The judge was released as an invalid, when he could no longer harm the British cause.
He returned home to find his estate looted and did not live to see the triumph of the Revolution. His family was forced to live off charity.
· Robert Morris, merchant prince of Philadelphia, delegate and signer, met Washington's appeals and pleas for money year after year. He made and raised arms and provisions which made it possible for Washington to cross the Delaware at Trenton. In the process he lost 150 ships at sea, bleeding his own fortune and credit almost dry.
· George Clymer, Pennsylvania signer, escaped with his family from their home, but their property was completely destroyed by the British in the Germantown and Brandywine campaigns.
· Dr. Benjamin Rush, also from Pennsylvania, was forced to flee to Maryland. As a heroic surgeon with the army, Rush had several narrow escapes.
· John Martin, a Tory in his views previous to the debate, lived in a strongly loyalist area of Pennsylvania. When he came out for independence, most of his neighbors and even some of his relatives ostracized him. He was a sensitive and troubled man, and many believed this action killed him. When he died in 1777, his last words to his tormentors were: "Tell them that they will live to see the hour when they shall acknowledge it [the signing] to have been the most glorious service that I have ever rendered to my country."
· William Ellery, Rhode Island delegate, saw his property and home burned to the ground.
· Thomas Lynch, Jr., South Carolina delegate, had his health broken from privation and exposures while serving as a company commander in the military. His doctors ordered him to seek a cure in the West Indies and on the voyage, he and his young bride were drowned at sea.
· Edward Rutledge, Arthur Middleton, and Thomas Heyward, Jr., the other three South Carolina signers, were taken by the British in the siege of Charleston. They were carried as prisoners of war to St. Augustine, Florida, where they were singled out for indignities. They were exchanged at the end of the war, the British in the meantime having completely devastated their large landholdings and estates.
· Thomas Nelson, signer of Virginia, was at the front in command of the Virginia military forces. With British General Charles Cornwallis in Yorktown, fire from 70 heavy American guns began to destroy Yorktown piece by piece. Lord Cornwallis and his staff moved their headquarters into Nelson's palatial home. While American cannonballs were making a shambles of the town, the house of Governor Nelson remained untouched. Nelson turned in rage to the American gunners and asked, "Why do you spare my home?"
They replied, "Sir, out of respect to you." Nelson cried, "Give me the cannon!" and fired on his magnificent home himself, smashing it to bits. But Nelson's sacrifice was not quite over. He had raised $2 million for the Revolutionary cause by pledging his own estates. When the loans came due, a newer peacetime Congress refused to honor them, and Nelson's property was forfeited. He was never reimbursed. He died, impoverished, a few years later at the age of 50.
Lives, Fortunes, Honor
Of those 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his 13 children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes. Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Yet not one defected or went back on his pledged word. Their honor, and the nation they sacrificed so much to create is still intact.
And, finally, there is the New Jersey signer, Abraham Clark.
He gave two sons to the officer corps in the Revolutionary Army. They were captured and sent to that infamous British prison hulk afloat in New York Harbor known as the hell ship Jersey, where 11,000 American captives were to die. The younger Clarks were treated with a special brutality because of their father. One was put in solitary and given no food. With the end almost in sight, with the war almost won, no one could have blamed Abraham Clark for acceding to the British request when they offered him his sons' lives if he would recant and come out for the King and Parliament. The utter despair in this man's heart, the anguish in his very soul, must reach out to each one of us down through 200 years with his answer: "No."
The 56 signers of the Declaration Of Independence proved by their every deed that they made no idle boast when they composed the most magnificent curtain line in history. "And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
RUSH EPILOGUE: My friends, I know you have a copy of the Declaration of Independence somewhere around the house - in an old history book (newer ones may well omit it), an encyclopedia, or one of those artificially aged "parchments" we all got in school years ago. I suggest that each of you take the time this month to read through the text of the Declaration, one of the most noble and beautiful political documents in human history.
There is no more profound sentence than this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness..."
These are far more than mere poetic words. The underlying ideas that infuse every sentence of this treatise have sustained this nation for more than two centuries. They were forged in the crucible of great sacrifice. They are living words that spring from and satisfy the deepest cries for liberty in the human spirit.
"Sacred honor" isn't a phrase we use much these days, but every American life is touched by the bounty of this, the Founders' legacy. It is freedom, tested by blood, and watered with tears.
http://
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)