A Word Fitly Spoken: A Short Commentary on Proverbs 25:11-12

Introduction

Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, who led the Union to a successful defeat of the rebellious insurrection in the American Civil War, wrote a fragment on the Constitution and Liberty in early 1861, shortly before the start of the Civil War, itself a political commentary on Proverbs 25:11. It reads:

"All this is not the result of accident. It has a philosophical cause. Without the Constitution and the Union, we could not have attained the result; but even these, are not the primary cause of our great prosperity. There is something back of these, entwining itself more closely about the human heart. That something, is the principle of ``Liberty to all'' ---the principle that clears the path for all---gives hope to all --- and, by consequence, enterprize, and industry to all.

The expression of that principle, in our Declaration of Independence, was most happy, and fortunate. Without this, as well as with it, we could have declared our independence of Great Britain; but without it, we could not, I think, have secured our free government, and consequent prosperity. No oppressed, people will fight, and endure, as our fathers did, without the promise of something better, than a mere change of masters.

The assertion of that principle, at that time, was the word, ``fitly spoken'' which has proved an ``apple of gold'' to us. The Union, and the Constitution, are the picture of silver, subsequently framed around it. The picture was made, not to conceal, or destroy the apple; but to adorn, and preserve it. The picture was made for the apple --- not the apple for the picture.

So let us act, that neither picture, or apple shall ever be blurred, or bruised or broken.

That we may so act, we must study, and understand the points of danger." [1]

What was the danger that Abraham Lincoln saw? He saw that some rebellious and unscrupulous people might wish to engage in a fallacious appeal to rights they did not possess that would seek to prevent the national government from having the authority over them so that they may defend their defective and tyrannical culture from the threats of freedom and liberty. He saw that some might seek to claim a constitutional right that was nonexistent in defiance of the goal of the Constitution and Union, to provide for the well being of all citizens. The danger was that some might seek to behave wickedly and rebelliously while cloaking their rebellion in the language of defending the same documents they sought to disobey. Lincoln was wise enough to see this danger, and recognizing the danger, he sought to either prevent it from taking place or to expose and overcome the danger, as he (by the grace of God) was able to do.

In light of the fact that Proverbs 25:11-12 is a very useful text in understanding the power and purpose of words, let us turn to it and examine what it says, as well as shed some light on the relationship between these two verses and other related verses on rebuke. As this is supposed to be a short (meaning, by my standards, short of book length) commentary, it will not include a cross reference to every noteworthy verse, but will hopefully provide a sufficient context to itself be a word fitly spoken in a similar situation to that faced by Lincoln in early 1861.

A Short Commentary On Proverbs 25:11-12

In the New King James Version, Proverbs 25:11-12 reads as follows: "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver. Like an earring of gold and an ornament of fine gold is a wise rebuker to an obedient ear." This verse is one of the more eloquent proverbs on the beauty of appropriate language. However, if one merely quotes the first verse of the passage, one might not be fully aware of what a word fitly spoken is referring to. One might think that such fit words were only flattering or complementary. It is the second verse that provides the important context that fit words include words of instruction and rebuke. It should be noted, that as wise rebuke to an obedient ear is compared to fine gold, that it is even more precious and valuable than fit words in more normal circumstances, just as fine gold is more precious and valuable than silver.

Since rebuke is itself a type of fit word, or proper communication, let us examine the two elements that are particularly praised by Solomon in this passage. What makes rebuke fit communication is that it come from a wise rebuker and that it be heard by an obedient ear. Both elements are necessary in order for the rebuke to have a beautiful result. A wise rebuker will communicate his (or her) rebuke based on the scripture of God, seeking the repentance and restoration of the hearer. The goal will not be personal glory or ambition, but rather the spiritual well-being of the listener. Likewise, an obedient ear will hear in the wise rebuke not an arrogant and prideful self-righteous attitude but an attitude of loving concern and a desire for restoration and peace. An obedient ear will repent if they hear how they have fallen short of the biblical standard of behavior, and will not be hostile towards the messenger who gives them the gracious rebuke from God. To put it bluntly--a wise rebuker will speak as if he is speaking to an obedient ear, and an obedient ear will hear more wisdom in the rebuker than perhaps was present. Both will give each other the benefit of the doubt.

The Context Proverbs 25:11-12 Provides To Other Passages

Indeed, these two short verses provide an excellent context to other verses that similarly speak of rebuke. In order to keep this note to a manageable length, let us examine a few related passages and how these verses shed a light on what is being said. By so doing, we will see what is required of a wise rebuker, and what sort of behavior represents being an obedient ear.

As it happens, this verse shed some light on a popular passage in the next chapter of Proverbs. In Proverbs 26:4-5, we read: "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes." How are we to determine which fools to answer according to their folly. Part of the answer is given by Proverbs 25:11-12. For one, we must be a wise enough rebuker not to fall into folly ourselves, thus defeating the purpose of our speech, and likely making a bad situation worse. However, judging a fool as an obedient ear, despite their folly, impels us to answer them according to their folly so that they do not become wise in their own eyes and hardened against the wisdom of God. We may misjudge our wisdom, thinking more highly than we ought about our own maturity or intellect. Alternatively, we may mistakenly believe that we are speaking to an obedient ear when we are speaking (as Lincoln was in early 1861) to a foolish heart hardened in rebellion, to whom no godly rebuke could reach because we are dismissed entirely as being too biased to provide any wisdom to them. We must, as Lincoln did, make a good faith effort and appeal to heaven for His will, and not ours, to be done.

When we give a wise rebuke to an obedient heart, the response is like that of David in Psalm 141:5: "Let the righteous strike me; it shall be a kindness. And let him rebuke me; it shall be as excellent oil; let my head not refuse it. For still my prayer is against the deeds of the wicked." David, a man after God's own heart, was rebuked many times in his life (by godly prophets such as Nathan), sometimes for very serious sins. However, this psalm demonstrates that he always maintained an obedient heart, which considered the rebuke of the (comparatively) righteous as an excellent oil, which served to his benefit (even so much as to be seen as a kindness, rather than an attack). An obedient heart will see rebuke as being to its ultimate spiritual benefit, and so will react to it with appreciation, seeing in the rebuke the still small voice of God warning one about falling short before judgment comes. Who would rather reject a rebuke and instead possibly face far worse judgment from God?

Unfortunately, not all hearts are obedient, and not all hearts will accept rebuke. Therefore, in Matthew 7:6, as Jesus is speaking about the even standard of judgment we should apply, he offers the following warning: "Do not give what is holy to the dogs nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces." Again, we must be able to judge what kind of heart we are speaking to. A rebuke to a heart that is hostile and rebellious against God will enrage them and cause them to turn on you and attack you rather than cause them to turn to God in humble repentance. They will see a call to repentance as a request for abject surrender, which they in their pride are unwilling to submit themselves to, because they are not in reality God's people, but rather on the side of Satan. Therefore, those who rebuke those who are hardened in hostility to God's way can expect attacks and hostility for their good deeds of providing to an unwilling audience the pearls of wisdom they possess. Evil will be returned for good by those who have succumbed to presumptuous evil.

A Biblical Application of Wise Rebuke To (Barely) Obedient Ears

In light of the above passages which serve to expand the wisdom and benefit and value of godly rebuke, let us now briefly examine an example in the preaching of the Apostle Paul when he gave the brethren of Corinth a choice between harsh discipline and loving peace, which would be determined by their own response to his visit to them. This situation is presented by 2 Corinthians 13. Indeed, it is easy and pleasant to quote 2 Corinthians 13:11, which states: "Finally, brethren, farewell. Become complete. Be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you."

Nonetheless, while not disregarding this desire for love and peace, we must appreciate the context of this gracious blessing. It is in the context of a promised visit where Paul promises harsh discipline to those who are rebellious against his ordained authority. Indeed, in 2 Corinthians 13:2-3, he states: "I have told you before, and foretell it as if i were present the second time, and now being absent I write to those who have sinned before, and to all the rest, that if I come again I will not spare--since you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me who is not weak towards you, but mighty in you." Shortly thereafter, Paul tells them the following, in verses 5 and 6: "Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourself, that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless indeed you are disqualified. But I trust that you will know that we are not disqualified."

What does this mean? The brethren of Corinth, like some disobedient brethren today, mistook the gentleness of Paul for weakness. In light of this rebellious behavior, Paul promises them that he will not spare if he sees them act rebelliously when he comes, and that their response to him--whether they accept him with hospitality or react in a hostile manner towards him--will show whether they are disqualified for the Kingdom of God or not. This sort of behavior is not a light or laughing matter--the rejection of an emissary of God is tantamount to a rejection of God's authority and leads to disqualification for the Kingdom of God. We have seen such behavior in Latin America--and among others who are unwilling to see the rebelliousness in their own hearts even as they speak evil of godly leaders who seek the good for the people of God as a whole, and who despite their human limitations act in good faith and receive abuse and attacks for their good deeds.

Conclusion: A Present Application of The Choice of Peace Or Discipline

Just as Paul promised not to spare those who persisted in rebellion, confusing his desire for peace for weakness and a lack of firmness in defending the truth, there have been many who have confused the gentleness of Messrs. Luker and Holliday for weakness, as well as the majority of the Council of Elders. In his excellent opening message to the church, Mr. Luker promised to deal with those who persisted in rebellion, and so he will. He will do no more and no less than the example of the Apostle Paul in Corinth--he will seek peace with those who are willing to accept the authority of God through His servants, and he will not spare (as God will not spare) those who are hardened in rebellion and hostile to the wise rebuke God has provided them through people great and small, important and obscure, elderly and young. Whether any of us is an obedient heart or an unclean pig or dog depends on how we respond to godly rebuke. Since God rebukes and chastens every son He receives, the fact that we receive rebuke is a sign that God is working with us. It is our response to that rebuke that determines whether we are serving Him, or rather seeking to serve ourselves. Let us all therefore examine ourselves continually, to see where we will stand when we must all face our King in judgment.

[1] Lincoln, Abraham. The Collected Words of Abraham Lincoln, Volume 4. (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Digital Library Production Services
2001) 168-169.

On Weddings

Recently I had the chance to attend a pleasant wedding as a guest with no responsibilities (which, strange as it would sound, has not been common for me). It was on the beach, with a beautiful bridal gown and bridesmaids gowns made by the bride's sister, a dashing groom, and about fifty people (including myself) happy to be there and share in the joy. I have long pondered the issue of weddings (and marriage), and would like to comment on some of my ruminations, as June is a traditional month for weddings. I have pondered the organization of this note for some time, though I think it would be useful to organize the thoughts according to the specific questions that I have pondered.

Question #1: What do weddings really mean?

For me, weddings are the triumph of hope and optimism over the gloomy cynicism of statistics and bad personal experience. Being a somewhat gloomy person frequently lacking in hope and optimism, it is perhaps unsurprising that I have never been to a wedding of my own. Nonetheless, I think even for me, if the opportunity was right, I too could see myself saying 'I do' with all the romantic sincerity I have seen many times before. Since nearly 50% of all marriages end in divorce, and since so few people walk down the aisle expecting to fail, it is important to understand as best as possible what expectations we put into marriage, and where things go wrong.

It would seem, from my personal experience, that women tend to be vastly more concerned with weddings than men are. From childhood, or at least adolescence, I have seen young women collect clippings of dresses, collect information on venues to hold weddings, visualize the cake they want, or other details. Sometimes it seems that the last detail to be decided upon is the identity of the groom. Among men I have not noticed the same degree of wedding planning, though weddings are as serious a matter for men as they are for women, and often unrecognized to boot. A woman is a princess on her wedding day (more on that in a bit), but when a man marries, he is making a conscious decision that his days of thinking and acting for himself alone are done, and that he is ready and willing to cherish and provide for (as best as he is able) his wife, and support a family. It is a choice to act with others in mind over a long span of time, even unborn generations to come, rather than simply living selfishly for today. I think men are insufficiently appreciated for the magnitude of the choice they make when they take a woman in marriage.

It would be beyond the scope of a note to deal with the subject of marriage as a whole, but weddings themselves are grand and romantic ceremonies that are the beginning of the day-to-day work of living with someone else who may have annoying habits of behavior that slipped unnoticed through dating. Weddings are to marriages what graduation from high school (or college) is to the working world. We celebrate and cheer, and then realize the task ahead is not quite what we imagined it to be. Any time we step into the unknown we will find things to be different, and more tiresome, than we expected them to be. Our bravery in taking those steps should be matched with the determination to, so far as it depends on ourselves, see the journey through until death. I recognize this isn't always possible, but that is the goal, after all.

Question #2: Why is a bride so beautiful on her wedding day?

There are a few occasions where a young woman looks particularly stunning: prom night, a debutante ball (for those young women who come from high class backgounds), and a wedding. What all of thse events have in common is that a young woman looks like and is supposed to be treated like a princess, and such treatment always seems to bring out the beauty in a young lady. Additionally, especially in a wedding, a young woman feels (or should feel) loved to know that a dashing prince is making a covenant before God to love her and cherish her as long as they both shall live. If that doesn't give someone a glow of happiness, I don't know what can be done.

Why is it that dressing and being treated like a princess makes a young woman so beautiful? Is it because she is dressed in shiny clothing (inside joke)? I'm not sure. Perhaps being treated like a princess and being cherished is one of those nearly universal ways that young women recognize that others see how special they are. Dressing up certainly doesn't make me feel that special, but I suspect that the wedding vows often capture a truth in how husbands and wives feel loved. A husband promises to cherish his wife, to treat her with love and affection, and I suspect many wives feel unhappy when they do not feel cherished by their husbands, but rather neglected instead. Likewise, a wife promises to honor and obey her husband, unless she is so froward as to remove that important promise from the vow. A man feels confident when he is respected and honored, and tends to be unhappy when he feels his wife disrespects him and dishonors him. A wife who is not cherished will probably not honor, and a husband who is not honored and respected will probably not cherish. From such treachery springs disaster. While it may not be possible to always look like a princess or be thought of as a dashing prince, we should at least do what we can to make sure that we appreciate others and help them to feel loved. It's not always easy, but it's worth it.

Question #3: How do I see weddings as a single man?

In my short life, so far, I have participated in a variety of (usually behind-the-scenes) roles. I have occasionally been merely a guest to the wedding, but more often I have had some responsibility. The first wedding I remember attending was the wedding of my uncle J.F. and aunt Cheryl, where I was the assistant photographer, whose job was to pass film to another uncle of mine. My brother got to be the ringbearer, while I ended up in exactly 0 wedding photos. This early misjudgment of ideal wedding jobs seemed to prophesy my future wedding roles rather well, unfortunately. I have served as an usher of a wedding, helped in setting up a few wedding halls, and once even translated for a wedding at the Feast of Tabernacles in Argentina, which may have been my most invisible role, hiding in a corner with a giant set of earphones speaking into a microphone. Only once have I served as a groomsman, and that was during the ceremony for my mother and stepfather, which was almost the smallest wedding I have ever taken part in. It has been my experience that second weddings tend to be much less formal than first weddings.

As an unmarried person at a wedding I always feel a bit out of place. As weddings are an entrance into marriage, I feel somewhat outside of the experience, an observer but not really a full participant. I can (and do) give my fond wishes for smooth sailing and a happy journey, but I have no wisdom to provide on how to help the new bride and groom enjoy a happy and fruitful marriage. I can only be on the outside looking in. As this is not an unusual state in my life, it is something I am experienced in dealing with, but that doesn't make it any less unsettling. It is a bit alienating to celebrate an institution which one is not a part of, nor has any visible prospects of being a part of anytime soon. It would be less unsettling if one could find a variety of unattached young ladies to dance with (for, as Henry Tilney said to Catherine Morland in Bath in Northanger Abbey, a dance is a little like a marriage*), but that is often not the case.

However, one cannot go to a wedding, particularly where one knows the bride and the groom, and thinks highly of both, where one does not wish them all the happiness in the world. I can only think of one wedding I have attended, and I was an usher in that one, where I had reservations about the marriage based on the drama that had taken place in the relationship. Unfortunately, that marriage quickly ended in divorce. Even someone like myself, who is often pessimistic, can enjoy a wedding and feel the hope that is all around. Though weddings are often expensive and stressful, they are also one of those ceremonies that remind us that we walk by faith, and not only by sight. This world will last only as long as people are hopeful enough to walk into the unknown and make brave ventures with faith that so long as they act well, things will turn out alright in the end. Why destroy that hope by burdening it with the unnecessary weight of mistrust and cynicism? We need all the hope and optimism we can muster, as they alone make the dark days worth enduring. The world has enough despair as it is.

*Here is the passage in question:

"I consider a country-dance as an emblem of marriage. Fidelity and complaisance are the principal duties of both; and those men who do not choose to dance or marry themselves, have no business with the partners or wives of their neighbours.”

”But they are such very different things!”

” – That you think they cannot be compared together.”

“To be sure not. People that marry can never part, but must go and keep house together. People that dance only stand opposite each other in a long room for half an hour.”

“And such is your definition of matrimony and dancing. Taken in that light certainly, their resemblance is not striking; but I think I could place them in such a view. You will allow, that in both, man has the advantage of choice, woman only the power of refusal; that in both, it is an engagement between man and woman, formed for the advantage of each; and that when once entered into, they belong exclusively to each other till the moment of its dissolution; that it is their duty, each to endeavour to give the other no cause for wishing that he or she had bestowed themselves elsewhere, and their best interest to keep their own imaginations from wandering towards the perfections of their neighbours, or fancying that they should have been better off with anyone else. You will allow all this?”

“Yes, to be sure, as you state it, all this sounds very well; but still they are so very different. I cannot look upon them at all in the same light, nor think the same duties belong to them.”

“In one respect, there certainly is a difference. In marriage, the man is supposed to provide for the support of the woman, the woman to make the home agreeable to the man; he is to purvey, and she is to smile. But in dancing, their duties are exactly changed; the agreeableness, the compliance are expected from him, while she furnishes the fan and the lavender water. That, I suppose, was the difference of duties which struck you, as rendering the conditions incapable of comparison.”

“No, indeed, I never thought of that.” (Chapter 10)