THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT
"Honor
thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the
Lord thy God giveth thee."
EXODUS 20:12.
Differences
of opinion have been expressed as to the division of the Decalogue, some
maintaining that the first four commandments were written upon the first table,
and the last six upon the second. Others have held that upon each table five
were written. The first theory maintains that the first division defines the
law that governs man's relationship to God, while the second division defines
the law that governs his relations to his fellow man. Those who hold the second
theory maintain that the fifth commandment is part of the law regulating man's
relation to God. Dean Farrar suggests that the first five were written upon one
table, and may be spoken of as Pietas, while the second five upon the second
table may be spoken of as Probitas. It will be seen, therefore, that the
difficulty is in the placing of the fifth commandment. Dean Chadwick suggests
that it is a bridge connecting the two. This is, perhaps, the most reasonable
explanation. It is, however, so clearly a commandment dealing with the relation
of one human being to another, that here it is considered as the first of the
second half of the Decalogue, that half, namely, which reveals for all time the
Divine thought of human relationship.
This
commandment is most closely linked in thought and intention to those that have
preceded it, for here the parent is viewed as being in the place of God to the
child. In the early days of human life, while as yet the mind is unable to
grasp the most elementary ideas of God, the highest facts concerning Him are to
be impressed upon the child by a revelation of them in its parents. In the
procession of human life the child owes its being to its parents, and one of
the most evident and remarkable facts of human nature is the attitude of the
opening mind and affection of the little one toward them, an attitude
absolutely differing from that entertained toward any other person. What God is
to the adult, parents are to the child-lawgiver and lover, provider and their director.
Upon the child's response to the first facts of relationship will depend its
response to the higher facts to be revealed in the process of the years. Happy
are those children who pass by a natural and beautiful sequence from the
honoring of their parents to the hallowing of the name of their God. Happy are
those parents who so consecrate the name of their God that it becomes easy for
the children entrusted to their care to honor them.
This
conception of the command lifts it at once into the front rank of importance,
and reveals the fact that it has a dual significance. First, of course, it is a
law for children, and none the less certainly it includes an ideal life for
parents, of the most stringent and binding nature. Its importance cannot be
overestimated, as all the subsequent commandments concerning human relationship
will be easy or difficult to obey, according to the measure of obedience
rendered to this. Consider, then, first the command; secondly, the light thrown
upon it by the New Testament ideals and teaching; and, last of all, the
practical application to the conditions of life now obtaining.
It
is too often taken for granted that this is a commandment addressed to young
children only. Nothing can be further from the truth. Assuredly it is, in the
first place, addressed to such, for the simple reason that, in the order of
nature, children are always young first. To imagine, however, that the command
loses its force when the days have gone in which it is possible to speak of
children as young, is to misunderstand at least half of its deep significance.
The word "honor" has a much
larger meaning than that of obedience. The thought of obedience is necessarily
included. In the process of the years, however, all human beings, for the
development of their own possibilities, come to the place of personal
responsibility, when they have to choose for themselves in the great crises and
the minor matters of life. A boy will never be a man if he always must obey his
parents. The training of the years of obedience will affect all the choice of
subsequent years; but beyond the period of control there must come that of
individual responsibility. It is at once evident that this command includes the
whole life of a child, for all men and women are still the children of their
parents; and even though the days have passed when it is necessary or right
that they should obey, the days are never past when it is necessary and right
that they should honor their parents. The command, then, has a twofold
application-first, to the period of childhood, and, secondly, to the period of
adult life.
The
meaning of the word "honor"
is to attach weight to; to put in the place of superiority; to hold in high
opinion; to reverence, in the best sense of that word. To the child who is not
yet of age to think, to plan, to will, honoring of parents consists in
subjection, obedience implicitly and gladly rendered. This, like every law of
God, is for the child a gracious and yet imperative requirement.
It
is gracious in that it frees the child from responsibility and care, until
character is formed and the mind trained to the possibilities of correct
judgment. The Divine thought for the child is always that it should play. The
tides of young life are full of hope and movement and humor. That these should
not be hindered in their development, God has set over the life those who in
the very nature of the relationship they bear to the child will think the best
thoughts, and plan the best programs for it; and the little one, free from
these cares for which it is not prepared, may grow and develop.
The
command is imperative because the very immature condition of child-life
necessitates mature thought and arrangement and training, out of which are to
grow the commands laid upon the child. To refuse to obey is to run the risk, or
indeed, to insure the certainty, of wrecking the life, and making impossible
the realization of all its fairest and highest possibilities. The very
imperative nature, therefore, of the command is also proof of its gracious
intention.
The
exceeding beauty of the commandment is also seen in that God calls the child to
obey those whom, in the very nature of things, he loves. There may be cases
where tutors and schoolmasters may have to be placed in loco parentis, but it
is certain that this is never so without peril to the child. The principle of
obedience rendered to such is almost always that of fear of authority, whereas,
in the Divine intention, the principle of obedience is that of love. This may
hardly be the place in which to discuss the great educational system in vogue
today, yet a passing word may be permitted which is spoken of strong conviction
by one who himself was trained for the teaching profession, and that word may,
perhaps, be most strongly put in a personal form. I would never, under any
consideration, consent to put my boys for the larger portion of any year away
from the influence of their mother's life and my personal interest, no matter
how excellent were the schoolmaster and staff. Obedience to father and mother
is God's safeguard and law of development for child-life.
The
moment comes when for the perfect development of character the child must act apart
from control. That honor should be rendered to the parents’ does not then cease
to be a Divine intention. It takes a new form, that namely of respect, which
expresses itself in courtesy and kindly deeds, and where necessary, in
provision being made for the comfort of the declining years. Where the first
part of this intention, that of obedience, has been gladly rendered, the second
can hardly, by any possibility, fail to be accorded. Passing from the period of
freedom from care to the strenuous years when will is to be exercised and
choice made alone, the child will appreciate the true value of that love that
thought and planned and commanded in the earliest days; and response will be
made in the reverence and love with which the child will illumine the last days
of father and mother. As the keenness of the conflict of life becomes a
reality, it is impossible to forget how the first years of existence were
sheltered, and coming to understand that while childhood played itself into
maturity it did so at the cost of the anxious thought and incessant toil and
agonized prayer of parents, it becomes the delight of life increasingly to
honor them and to pour upon them so much as may be the love which they created,
and for which in the evening of life they long more, perhaps, than for any
other blessing.
The
promise coupled with this command, in common with almost all the promises made
to the ancient people of God, applies rather to the nation than to the
individual. It is the declaration of the result of accepting and acting upon a
philosophy, rather than the announcement of a personal reward. There can be no
doubt that the personal element is present, for in the majority of cases the
honoring of the parents results in the realization of habits and character that
tend to the lengthening of the days. Character molded in the atmosphere of
honor to parents has within it the element of quiet power which tends to
prolong life. On the other hand, character formed in the atmosphere of non-subjection
has within it the element of recklessness and fever which tends to the
shortening of life. The true application of the promise is, however, to the
nation, and may thus be stated. That people, among whom the sacredness of the
family ideal is maintained, and children render obedience to their parents
during the period of immaturity, and always honor, will be the nation of
strength, retaining its hold upon its own possessions, and abiding long in the
land. (Deut. 5:16; Eph. 6:2-3)
APPLICATION TO PARENTS
Before
turning from the consideration of the command as given in the Hebrew economy,
some word must be said as to its application to parents. This application is
obvious. Nothing is more certain than the fact that, if parents are to be
honored, they must be honorable. If obedience is to be rendered gladly and
implicitly, it must be to a control that is conditioned in love. Love that is
God-like, far-seeing, and comprehensive, love which permits of no present
pleasure at the cost of possible future pain; such love can only be where
character is in harmony with Divine intention. No father or mother can think
right thoughts or plan pure programs for their children unless they, in their
turn, are living the life of subjection to God, and are receiving from him the
ordering of all their ways. If, indeed, the father and mother by their
representation of God to the child are to prepare that child for subjection to
God by choice of will in the days to come, what perpetual responsibility rests
upon them that their fellowship with God should be such as to insure their
correspondence to His character, and, consequently, their correct
representation of the same to their children. In brief, the surest way to
insure that children shall honor parents is for the parents to live the life
before them which reflects the glory and grace of God.
THE LIGHT THROWN BY NEW TESTAMENT IDEALS AND TEACHING
This
is one of the commandments of the old dispensation that no one will be prepared
to say has been abrogated in the new. (Eph.
6:2-3) In common with the rest, it is included and emphasized in a more
explicit revelation of the sacredness of the relation existing between parents
and children, and a more emphatic statement of the Divine purpose and thought.
The example of Christ itself is one of infinite beauty and great
suggestiveness. The fact that God's second Man was sent into the world, not as
was the first, in full possession of the distinguishing glories of humanity,
but a babe having to pass through the period of childhood, is of infinite value
in the light it throws upon the 5th commandment. During those early years the
boy Jesus was under the control of Mary, His mother, and His reputed father
Joseph. He grew and advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and
men, under the developing control of human love and oversight. (Luke 2:52)
When
at the age of twelve they brought Him to the Temple to present Him before the
Lord, a picture of Him in relation to His mother is presented that is full of
suggestiveness. The fact that she sought Him sorrowing proves almost to a
certainty that He had hardly ever been outside the immediate sphere of her
influence. To miss Him, not to find Him immediately at hand, was to her
something new and strange; and the picture of the anxious mother, assisted by
her husband, seeking Him, reveals in vivid light the exquisite relationship
existing between them in that home at Nazareth. When at last she found Him, His
question to her, rightly read, reveals the same fact-that of His honor for her,
His confidence in her. Said He: "Wist
ye not that I must be in My father's house?" (Luke 2:49)
It
seems that the very writing of these words may have robbed them of their music.
Certain it is that a popular conception of them is out of harmony with the
beauty of the whole scene and story. That He in any sense rebuked His mother is
not conceivable. Put the emphasis upon the "ye"-"Wist
ye not"-and a revelation is at once obtained of a question coming out
of love and confidence, as though He had said: "Mother, surely you knew Me well enough to know that nothing could
detain Me but the affairs of that Father of Whom you have given Me knowledge
and revelation."
Then,
be it remembered, there was here no breaking away from the restraint of
parental control, for it is distinctly stated, "He went down with them, and came to Nazareth; and He was subject
unto them."
Some
have seemed to imagine that when He spoke of His disciples as being His mother,
His brethren, His sisters, He, in some measure, spoke slightingly of His mother.
Such interpretation is, however, surely to misunderstand His meaning. No slight
was cast upon her, but rather the highest honor upon His disciples.
For
Him, also, the years of obedience ended, but the years of honor never. In the
last and awful hours of His human life, amid the dense darkness of Calvary's
unspeakable woe, He thought still of her whom He had so loved; thought,
moreover, of her present necessity, and commended her to the loving care of the
man who most deeply understood His love and the methods of its manifestation.
Thus in the Person and example of Jesus the 5th commandment has its most
glorious enforcement.
In
His teaching, also, He gave the most forceful interpretation of the 5th
commandment in its application to one of the abuses that He found around Him.
Men were excusing themselves from the duty of providing for the necessity of
their parents, by saying that funds which might have been used in that way were
Corban that is, dedicated to the service of the altar. (Mark 7:11) In the most emphatic terms Jesus declared that to
dedicate funds to the altar which should be used in providing for the
necessities of parents was to make void the law of God. According to this,
then, it is a far more holy thing to use possessions for the care and comfort
of parents in their age, than to present such funds to the altar of God to
their neglect.
This
example and teaching of the Master proves the New Testament position, a
position which is unfolded and emphasized again and again in the writings of
the apostles.
THE PRACTICAL ISSUE
Perhaps
no sign of the present time is sadder than the prevalence of disobedience on
the part of children to parents during the days of childhood, and lack of
reverence and respect when once the restraints of home have been left behind.
This is manifested in very many ways, and, unfortunately, is not peculiar to
people outside the Christian Church. As you look at Christian homes today the
strength and beauty of some of them abide as a perpetual fragrance. Others of
them alas have left the most painful impressions. Children self-willed and
consequently bringing themselves into perpetual unhappiness, and inflicting
discomfort upon all who came in contact with them, have prophesied evil things
for the days to come. Boys who have seemed ashamed to use to their circle of
companions the word father, have substituted flippant and irreverent epithets,
which, if they had but realized it, at once degraded, not their parents, but
themselves in the thought of all right-thinking people. Girls too often seem to
look upon their mother as a household institution, provided in order that they
might be free for all the frivolity of a giddy set. An eagerness to be away
from home, a longing for the day when the forbidding or command of the parents
might be escaped, these signs are on every hand, and they are of the saddest.
In
very many cases the children are not so much to blame as the parents. This
failure to honor father and mother, wherever it is found, is, in large measure,
due to the breakdown of the parental ideal. The father has come to think of
himself as a provider of food and raiment and education, and occasionally as a
species of moral policeman, rather than as a revelation of God to his children.
From the way in which thousands of fathers today treat their children, one
would imagine that the name was a synonym for poor house-master, rather than a
name lent in order that from it men may understand their true relation to their
children, and the tremendous responsibility that rests upon them. The sin of
fathers in the matter of the training of children is far greater than they have
yet appreciated in this country. It is very questionable whether the hymn
beginning-
“When mothers of Salem their children
brought to Jesus,” is a correct interpretation of the Bible
story. The Greek pronoun is masculine, and the old Hebrew ideal was that the
father was responsible for the training of the kids. If fathers think of
themselves as less than God intends them to be, they must not be surprised if
children cease to honor them. Too often, also, today, the mother makes herself
the slave of her own children in all the details that make for material
comfort, and forgets that she should be to them the most radiant revelation of
the beauty of the Divine grace.
It
should be noticed especially that the command is to honor father and mother.
This is so because both are requisite to a true representation of God to the
child, and consequently to the perfect development of the possibilities of the
child's nature. Let there be a return on the part of parents to the high ideals
of their own holy position, and there will assuredly be a return on the part of
children to the pathway of obedience to the command to honor father and mother.
Let
children, however, remember that everything depends for them upon their
obedience to this fifth commandment of the Decalogue. Their relation to the
first four "Words" is
proved by their attitude to this. Infidelity, sacrilege, profanity, rebellion,
is all included in the sin of failing to honor parents. It is equally true that
all the following commands are included in the fifth. Children that honor their
parents will be saved from murder, impurity, theft, slander, and covetousness.
The history of the centuries proves that, under stress of swift and subtle
temptation, young men and maidens have again and again proved invulnerable, by
the memory and conscious influence of a godly father and sainted mother. Let
every boy and girl, every youth and girl, every man and woman, guard from
attack the sacred shrine in which father and mother are held to be beyond the
criticism of the crowd, sacred and holy as the first revelations of God in the
tenderness and strictness of their government.
No comments:
Post a Comment