The Big Question: What About Injustice?

We Do Better Without Anger

It’s fair if you are presently thinking, wait! Are we not supposed to be angry at injustice? Are you crazy?

We’re not. But this does not make me crazy. The fact that I enjoy puppetry when no one else is looking? That makes me crazy. My daily habit of eating an entire loaf of burnt toast every morning for ten years? Yes, that qualifies me. Sure. You got me.

But this? No. It’s not as insane sounding as you think.

Yes, it’s unnatural, completely against our instincts, exceedingly radical, certainly unfashionable, counterintuitive, and in violation of conventional wisdom.

Yes to all that.

But so is “Love your enemy.”

Let’s dispense with one idea at the very start: that anger and action are synonymous. Often, we confuse the two, thinking that if we’re not angry about an unjust situation, we’re simply accepting it. That’s completely false.

Anger and action are two very different things, and confusing the two actually hurts our efforts to set things right.

Check out Twitter sometime. You can see anger all over the place. People upset about this, and “taking a stand” on that. This isn’t surprising.

Of course, we’re all thankful for the right to speak our minds. But here’s what’s odd about this confusion when it comes to injustice, anger, and action: a recent study found that people who join causes online are not more apt to actually do something—they’re less likely to take action.

Let’s face it: we’re positively in love with “taking stands” that cost us absolutely nothing. We even get to be fashionable in the process.

We get to think we’re involved, doing something; and if we’re angry, we get to say, “My anger is righteous anger.” And since it’s “righteous” anger, it stands to reason that we’re actually more righteous than the people who aren’t angry like we are!

The myth of “righteous anger” actually impedes the taking of action, because it lets us congratulate ourselves for a feeling, rather than for doing something.

So often it’s true: one person is angry—but it’s someone else who takes action.

Another unfortunate result, in my experience, of the confusion of anger and action is this: Men, in particular, learn to see anger as masculine. They tend to think being angry, and acting out angrily, is very much part of what it means to be a man. (I could cite a million academic sources on this, but I’m just going to assume you agree with me. Plus, if I get back on the internet right now, I’m going to wind up looking at cat memes again, and I really need to focus.)

When talking about this with people, this idea that the Bible doesn’t ever endorse human anger as a solution for injustice, I get this reaction, particularly from men: “But we’ve got to do something!”

Yes, agreed: Do something. Take action.

“But if we don’t get angry, we won’t do anything.”

Really? Why?

So you can’t just do the right thing, because it’s the right thing?

The Bible gives us ample commands to act, and never, ever, says to do it out of anger. Instead, we’re to be motivated by something very different: love, and obedience born of love.

In fact, Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians, it’s the defining motivation. If we do something good, even, without love, we’re just a bunch of noise (13:1).

Acting out of love, to show mercy, to correct injustices, to set things right . . . is beautiful.

Love should be motivation enough to do the right thing. And not “love” as a fuzzy abstraction, but love as a gutsy, willful decision to seek the best for others.

What the world needs, I think you’ll agree, is not a group of people patting themselves on the back for being angry. We need people who actually act to set things right.

Someone might be motivated by anger to do something that is otherwise good. But a relationship with God is like other relationships; it’s not a moral “Did you do that?” checklist. The condition of our hearts is not a side issue. Why we do what we do matters infinitely.

Again, in 1 Corinthians, Paul said, “Though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor . . . but have not love, it profits me nothing” (13:3 NKJV).

You can recognize injustice, stand up to it, even sacrifice your life fighting it. And you can do it without anger. In fact, you’ll do it better. You won’t be remembered as angry, but as convicted of what’s right, and loving to the very end. This kind of love leaves an impression on one’s enemies that anger simply never will.

The early church dealt with injustice daily and was aware of widespread injustices affecting others. So why were they not told to get angry about it, if human anger toward true injustice is actually righteous?

Why isn’t righteous anger ever listed among the things that a Spirit-filled life will bring us? If it’s righteous, why is it not akin to the “fruit of the Spirit,” like love, joy, peace, and gentleness? Why is anger in Scripture so consistently lumped in the other lists with things like, say, slander and malice, with no exclusions for the “righteous” variety? (See, for example, Colossians 3:8.)

We aren’t to just pretend anger away or feel guilty for the initial emotion of anger. But we are to deal with it, with the goal of eradicating it within us. This, of course, is not easy to do, but it’s not complex to understand, either.

Respond

How do you deal with injustice?

Describe a circumstance where you chose to set things right by acting out of love.

Prayer

Precious Lord, fill me with Your love and help me show it to others in every situation.