Protestant Ethics Today: The Ninth Commandment
Be sure to check out part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, part 6, part 7, part 8, and part 9 of this series on Protestant Ethics Today.
Many classic Protestant treatments of the Ten Commandments refer to Jesus’ teaching on oaths in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:33–37) when discussing the third commandment. The final phrase of this section is apposite in a discussion of the ninth commandment as well: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil” (Matt 5:37). A basic, foundational commitment to truth-telling in the most comprehensive sense must characterize every Christian. Devious attempts to use words as weapons of self-aggrandizement instead of instruments of goodness and blessing are at the heart of this command. The commandment is stated in terms of a courtroom setting: “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Exod 20:16). It may not be that an explicitly judicial setting is in view, but the legal language of witness-bearing (Exod 23:2; Lev 5:1; Num 35:30; Deut 19:15; etc.) reveals from the outset the solemnity with which a believer must approach telling the truth.
In Philippians 4:8 the apostle Paul writes: “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” The 19th century Presbyterian theologian James Henly Thornwell used this text to ground his exhortation in a book entitled Whatsoever Things Are True that believers must have a basic “love of truth” and that they must recognize “the obligation of truth in general” in all their thoughts. “I was led,” he continues,
to show that we are responsible for our opinions in so far as we are responsible for the motives and influences under which we form them—that the operations of the understanding have a moral character, inasmuch as the impulse of curiosity, like all our other springs of action, is subject to the direction and control of the moral faculty. The love of truth for itself was evinced to be the law in conformity with which all our intellectual processes should be conducted. The end of every inquiry should be knowledge, the aim of every investigation simple and unadulterated truth.
Thornwell did not mean “to imply that all men are bound to know all truth,” which would be impossible, but that “[t]here is a great difference betwixt asserting that nothing should be sought which is not the truth, and that everything which is the truth is the appropriate pursuit of every understanding.” Thornwell, in short, urged a comprehensive understanding of truth, one which made it clear that Christians have a moral obligation to pursue truth in all that they say, think, and do.
Such an understanding of the moral imperative for truthfulness is well-reflected in the Westminster Larger Catechism question and answer on the ninth commandment (144–45). Among the positive duties mandated by the commandment, it lists (in Answer 145)
the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbor, as well as our own: appearing and standing for the truth; and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things whatsoever . . .
Simply not lying is insufficient. Christians must actively stand for truth at all times and in every way. They must also do so from the heart, which requires the spiritual transformation of God’s Spirit that first makes them love truth, since God is truth itself: “Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true” (John 3:33). Truth must be clearly spoken, since obscurity is simply lying under another name. Half-truths are not truths at all, since the aim is to deceive, but perhaps while easing one’s conscience that an “actual” lie hasn’t been told.
The catechism continues (Answer 145) by commending to believers
a charitable esteem of our neighbors; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; sorrowing for, and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, defending their innocency; a ready receiving of good report, and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, concerning them; discouraging tale-bearers, flatterers, and slanderers . . .
This section is particularly difficult. All people, Christians included, find it difficult not to use their words to harm others they don’t care for, perhaps even others who have wronged them. Gossip is an obvious instance of this, but even simply refusing to recognize the good in a person falls under this heading. A basic unwillingness to receive an evil report about others must characterize the believer, though, of course, this does not mean that actual evils of other people must be treated as if they didn’t happen. We are all too prone to quickly receive an evil report of those who are not our friends. Flattery is included as well: speaking untruths to those we think will help us in some way, even speaking truths to them, but only for the purpose of self-advancement.
One of the more interesting phrases in the catechism is when it states that as Christians we must “love and care of our own good name . . . defending it when need requireth . . . .” It is often the case that we should simply overlook an offense, leaving it in the hands of a just God who will not fail to exercise justice. But there are times when Christians, in obedience to the ninth commandment, should defend their own good names. When might that be the case? I would suggest that it is especially the case when a deceptive attack on oneself, left unrefuted, brings dishonor to Christ and his church, or possibly also when it harms other innocent parties (our family, church, etc.).
One of the other more interesting statements in the catechism is its reference (in Answer 145) to “speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful and equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice . . . .” One can say true things in ways that subvert the very purpose of truth-telling. A Christian can say something that is true, but not necessary to be said in a certain context, in order to sinfully hurt someone else. Someone can also say things that are true, but couch these things in language he knows will be misunderstood. A genuine love for the truth, flowing out of a desire to glorify the God of truth, will not use true statements in ways contrary to the purpose of truth, which is always good. “Whatever is true” must always be in service of what is honorable, just, pure, lovely, and commendable.
A love for truth is non-negotiable for the Christian. A world in which truth-telling—comprehensively considered—is not treasured and widespread is a world in which every area of life will collapse.
