Introduction

It ought to be striking to the reader that an article written under the rubric of ethics is about fear and anger. Then one might suppose that the article would judge that fear and anger are unethical. Certainly the fear and anger discussed in this article are sinful and born out of unbelief. But the point is the role of fear and anger in ethics. Fear and anger can dominate and radically alter an ethical system. They can skew and bend ethics. Fear will prevent objective judgment. Anger distorts ethics. Something that brings an angry response is considered evil regardless of whether it truly is evil. Persons cannot make proper judgments between right and wrong because they are dominated and gripped by fear. And when fear is confronted by an objective standard, anger is the result.

The subject of this article is sinful fear and sinful anger, not holy fear and righteous anger. The distinction between sinful fear and anger and holy fear and righteous anger is the antithesis. Holy fear is God-centered, recognizing the littleness of the believer before the greatness of his God. Holy fear is also love and devotion, a delight to be near this great and glorious God, and knowledge of the greatness of the God who has graciously become the refuge of the small, helpless believer. Thus the believer, who has this fear in his heart by the grace of God, has the only deliverance from all other fears, fear of evil and fear of men. He is the party of the living God. What has the believer to fear with God as his God? The same characterizes righteous anger. It is anger not born of self but is centered on God and his glory. It is anger that springs out of devotion to God and is jealous for his honor and glory. It is selfless anger, independent of any wrong or injury done to the believer himself.

The fear and anger this article addresses are the opposite. This fear and anger are rooted in selfish pride and centered upon man. For this reason this fear is unholy, and this anger is unrighteous. There is no strength to them but only weakness. There is no virtue in them. They are characteristic of an unacknowledged and denied terror: the terror that man by himself, despite all his bravado and boasting, is nothing at all.

The concern of this article is present ethical systems that are not only skewed by sinful fear and anger but also controlled by them, and controlled to such a degree that their fear and anger become righteous, holy, and virtuous. This is what is truly horrific about these present ethical systems: they justify their own fear and anger. In other words, the ethical systems dominated by sinful fear and anger are upside down. The fear and anger that are usually understood to be subversive of ethics and morality now become ethical and moral.

Fear and COVID-19

The present circumstances in the world due to the sickness called COVID-19 are powerful examples of this dominating and controlling fear and anger. These circumstances are examples of how fear builds on itself to become the power that it is. They are also examples of how anger based on fear becomes self-justified. And these circumstances are examples not only of how fear leads to inordinate control by outside forces, but also how fear is so easily manipulated and abused for evil purposes.

The world, in facing and dealing with this so-called pandemic, is truly experiencing a revolution of fear. Most fundamental is fear of the disease itself. The lies of the medical community developed this fear. Doctors who were so-called experts in the field of infectious diseases reported that this disease was comparable to the Spanish influenza of the early 1900s. These experts led nearly every individual in the world to believe that he would very likely die of COVID-19 should he contract the virus. Fear of death was followed by fear of contagion, which fear projected itself upon others. A healthy individual, free of COVID-19, might feel a certain sense of safety in his home, but he regarded going out in public as risky and gathering in groups as especially dangerous. All of the individual’s broader social acquaintances—extended family, classmates, coworkers, and church members—were assumed to be dangerous, potential carriers of this deadly virus. Nearly every person was led to believe that contact with others would likely mean his certain death. So we were led to fear one another.

The reaction of governments around the world led to an entirely different and greater realm of fear. Shutdowns of every kind became the order of the day, especially at the beginning of the pandemic. Factories were shut down. Shops and businesses were closed. The economy was going to sink. Two new fears were thus introduced. There was the magnified fear of how bad the sickness must be, if countries were willing to endure crippled and perhaps collapsing economies for the sake of keeping their citizenries safe. This fear was doubled with the fear of losing jobs, careers, and livelihoods because of this sickness. The fear intensified when citizens’ lives suffered all kinds of disruptions caused by imposed requirements of masks and social distancing and the shutdown of social gatherings, including the gatherings of congregations for worship. Bare faces, proximity of friendship and fellowship, and gatherings became matters of fear. There was fear of getting sick and dying. There was fear of making others sick and killing them.

New habits were instilled out of fear of this disease. Packages had to be washed, whether of groceries purchased at the local grocery or received from the hands of delivery men. Masks were required everywhere, and after one use masks were considered so contaminated by the virus that special precautions had to be taken when disposing of them. But these instilled habits also reinforced the fears that led to them.

There can be no doubt now that governments across the world took advantage of this fear. Citizens of country after country simply obeyed every decree handed down by their governments, even though many of those decrees attacked freedoms constitutionally guaranteed. Without so much as a blink, Christians obeyed government decrees not to gather for worship, and leadership in church after church took the position that love for the brother demanded not gathering at all for worship. Churches that insisted on gathering for worship despite government restrictions were regarded as offensive. The regular public worship of churches was viewed as a threat to public health and well-being: demise was all but guaranteed through the spread of this disease among those who would worship together in such harmful conditions. What these governments have learned about their ability to deprive their people of basic freedoms and rights! How will they apply these lessons in the future?

Yet governments themselves became imbued with fear. The fear that they projected in order to gain compliance with their unconstitutional restrictions doubled back on them. They were accused of not doing enough to manage the damage they were causing to different sectors of the economy. They were accused of being too slow to respond, too slow to handle the grave public emergency, too slow to develop solutions to the problems. Government leaders leveraged comparisons among countries and regions to create fear and to impose even tighter restrictions. Those leaders became fearful that they would be blamed for whatever damage might occur, and political rivalries found much traction through criticism by weaker political opponents who were not in charge of public policies.

But perhaps to an even greater degree this fear became evident in the treatment of those who upheld their freedoms. Fundamental constitutional liberties had been set aside due to the fear of a looming disaster. Governmental intervention into people’s daily lives that restricted their movements and social interactions on every level was alarming to many people, and they refused to follow those laws. Their refusals were met with deep anger by others who not only fell into line with the imposed restrictions but also adopted those restrictions as moral. As it became morally virtuous to follow the restrictions and even to go above and beyond them, considerable anger and hatred was directed against those who refused for whatever reason. Because of fear, not wearing masks became immoral. Voicing disagreement with the public consensus and restrictions became a public threat. Refutation and rejection of cited statistics that drove the popular, fear-driven consensus became as evil as anarchy itself. Belief in government without question became the new godliness. Questioning governmental intrusiveness became the depth of immorality, and proposing any other response to the pandemic than the governmental line was treasonous.

Fear and Doctrinal Controversy

Deeply striking for their similarity are the circumstances of the controversy in the Protestant Reformed Churches. Debate and discussion about controversial issues are considered harmful and evil. Even to assert that there has been and is a controversy, especially a fundamental controversy between works and grace, is regarded as threatening. Even permission to treat controversial matters is regarded as the province of a few. Without this permission any public treatment in writing or speaking is deemed sinful. Indeed, questions may be asked and alternative thoughts may be entertained, but only those that scratch the surface of the controversy. Deeper questions that penetrate to the foundation of the controverted issues are not allowed. Challenges going down to biblical foundations, and thus to distinctions of heresy and orthodoxy, are banned from public discussion. They must be locked away in consistory rooms or in closed sessions of classes and synods, and the agendas and minutes are sealed off from the general membership.

Permeating so much discussion in the controversy is a sense of deep anger. Anger divides. Anger disallows. Anger cuts off. Anger exiles from fellowship. Why the anger? Why angry responses to questions? Why such anger directed against persons that pushes them out of conversations and labels them as criminals? Why are protestants and appellants angrily rejected as troublemakers? Why do certain delegates at deliberative assemblies meet with scorn and their questions and statements with contempt? Why is this the case, though these protestants and appellants are members in good standing and these delegates have been duly appointed by their respective assemblies?

The answer to this anger becomes evident when we look at its occasion. The occasion of this anger is not random but has a consistency to it. This anger consistently arises against probing challenge. What is challenged lies beneath the surface of the anger. The particular challenge is not satisfied with mere human authority. The challenge requires more. It requires the word of God to be the sure answer that will alone bring true peace, especially in controversy.

There are two reasons for this anger, both of which have to do with fear.

The first reason for this anger is protection. Anger protects the authority of man. When human authority is challenged, the defense is anger. The challenge is taken personally, for there is no other place to go with it. “How dare you?” is the angry question asked of any challenge.

That anger is of one kind and one sort in the civil realm when dealing with issues like COVID-19. It certainly has become part and parcel of political discussions, though civility in such discussions is decreasing. That decrease can be traced to the impact of social media and to the post-modern rejection of objective values and principles, chiefly the rejection of scripture in the public forum. However, rejection of scripture is much more heinous in church and religion, where scripture alone is supposed to be the authority. Over time and imperceptibly authority moves from scripture to the institutions of men and their authority. As long as there is no controversy, that authority can shift without notice. But when controversy arises, the authority of men and institutions is tested. Many will be content to rest on the authority that is seen and loudly heard. They are comfortable with it, having put their trust in leadership that they think has guided them safely and will continue to guide them safely. But others are not content with that authority. They seek to be firmly grounded in scripture and cannot be satisfied with the answers of men, no matter their positions. But these dissatisfied persons are viewed as disruptive and troublesome. They are not content to remain with the majority and the implicit trust of the majority in leadership. They meet with anger for daring to question the foundation upon which so many are resting and upon which the churches’ stability rests. How much greater is the anger against those who actually challenge as unbiblical the writings and teachings that others are simply following and maintaining!

The second reason for anger is fear of being found out. This is fear that what has been believed, preached, and taught will all be found to be vain. The preaching has its content, but sermons can be protested. Consistories, classes, and synods can make decisions, but those decisions can be protested. Protests call into question statements made in sermons, and sermons overall. Protests call into question what has been decided by the churches’ deliberative assemblies. Protests are submitted that bring the word of God to bear on sermons and decisions. If protests are upheld, then it will become evident that the sermons or decisions were not according to the word of God. It will not only become evident that those sermons and decisions were wrong, but it will also become evident that the ministers who preached the sermons were wrong and that those assemblies were wrong. Weakness will be found out. What was thought to be strong and enjoying popular support will be found to be a sham. A dominant fear cannot allow such failures to become evident.

This fear results in bad decisions by the deliberative ecclesiastical assemblies. This fear keeps deliberations and decisions behind closed doors and out of the awareness of the rest of the denomination. This fear cannot allow the word of God its free course in deciding matters, lest consistorial decisions are overturned and sermons are found to be erroneous. Instead, the stability of the churches and the reputations of men on whom that stability rests must first be consulted. Out of a dominant fear that deep flaws may destroy the confidence of God’s people in the churches they have come to trust, the priority becomes maintaining the appearance that all is fundamentally well.

But a deeper and far more gripping fear lies underneath that. What is really so terrifying is not that it might appear that there is something deeply wrong with the denomination and its sermons and decisions. It is rather that there is truly nothing there at all. It is the fear that when everything that was said and done is set before the word of God in all its clear, searching light, it is all nothing but the wisdom and strength of men. It is the fear that faith, grace, and Christ had received so little place in preaching and decision-making that faith, grace, and Christ are now entirely missing. It is the fear that preaching that centered on works; man’s capabilities, power, and goodness; psychology; self-affirmation; and self-esteem—while still attempting to give the gospel, grace, faith, and Christ honorable mention—actually pushed out completely the glorious gospel of Christ crucified for sinners.

How amazing that this very fear, so strong and so fundamental, should be exactly right and very much to the point! Yes, fear greatly and fear very much!

However, instead of having that fear be the deep, fearful secret that must be covered over with a multitude of fearful maneuvers, shameless tactics, and angry responses and attitudes, it must have its blessed, saving use.

What is that use? That use is to show denominations, leaders, pastors, deliberative assemblies, and members what they must repudiate and flee. There is no need to cling to fearful vanity, to try to make something out of nothing. The very point is to be chastened and afflicted in repentance over folly, to find all peace and confidence in one source: the gospel of the cross of Jesus Christ.

Indeed, the antithesis is that stark. Indeed, the wisdom and strength of men are afraid of the cross. All the boasting of the world and of the church that has compromised with the doctrines of the world is born of fear. The world fears the wisdom and power of God that puts all the wisdom and strength of the world to complete shame. It is the reason, according to 1 Corinthians 1, for the scandal of the cross. The wisdom of the cross in the wisdom of God puts to shame the wisdom of men, showing it to be mere folly. The power of the cross in the wisdom of God puts to shame the strength of men, showing it to be mere weakness. But to those who are saved the cross is the glorious wisdom and power of God to salvation, strength, peace, and confidence. It gives to the people of God glorious, everlasting safety and security.

They have nothing to fear.

Article 23 of the Belgic Confession speaks of this great difference between fear and faith:

And therefore we always hold fast this foundation, ascribing all the glory to God, humbling ourselves before Him, and acknowledging ourselves to be such as we really are, without presuming to trust in any thing in ourselves, or in any merit of ours, relying and resting upon the obedience of Christ crucified alone, which becomes ours when we believe in Him. This is sufficient to cover all our iniquities, and to give us confidence in approaching to God; freeing the conscience of fear, terror, and dread, without following the example of our first father, Adam, who, trembling, attempted to cover himself with fig leaves. (Confessions and Church Order, 51–52)

Concerning good works, article 24 speaks in the same fashion:

Though we do good works, we do not found our salvation upon them; for we can do no work but what is polluted by our flesh, and also punishable; and although we could perform such works, still the remembrance of one sin is sufficient to make God reject them. Thus, then, we would always be in doubt, tossed to and fro without any certainty, and our poor consciences continually vexed, if they relied not on the merits of the suffering and death of our Savior. (Confessions and Church Order, 55)

May the power of the gospel, and the gospel alone, free us from the bonds of fear and anger! May it free us to live in the exaltation of the cross and show its power in our confession and walk! May it free us to pursue the blessedness of the kingdom of God and leave far behind everything of man and of his miserable fear and anger!