Manners
Ronald W. Kirk
June\July 2002
As a social norm, "manners" carry a bad reputation.
When someone mentions the word manners, we may instantly
think of self-absorbed snobs who use their pretentious and formal
manners as a weapon designed to vanquish supposed inferiors. Such
social guerilla warfare has long been the ideal for many to measure
all common social conduct.
In the great Christian novel Ben Hur, the character of the
adult Roman Messala returns to his home in Judea after a period of
education in the Eternal City. In a reunion with his childhood best
friend, Messala sarcastically insults leading character Judah Ben
Hur, according to the rigor of noble Roman etiquette.1
Similarly, in Walter Scott's Christian romantic/historic novel Ivanhoe
the noble Norman hosts made the manners of their Saxon guests
"the subject of sarcastic observation," while "the
untaught Saxons unwittingly transgressed several of the arbitrary
rules established for the regulation of society." Moreover,
"it was well known that a man may with more impunity be guilty
of an actual breach either of real good breeding or of good morals,
than appear ignorant of the most minute point of fashionable
etiquette."2 Such hypocritical pomposity was a
favorite target of Charles Dickens in virtually all of his stories,
and rightly so. Even in these negative literary examples, a better,
clearly superior morality and etiquette are implied to exist.
A Balanced View
In reaction, however, anti-manners have now replaced high manners,
as dictated by the Hollywood, social-trend-setting elite. With these
poor examples, it is now easy to discard manners as superficial or
worse, as against the weightier requirements of Scripture. Yet, we
ought to be careful of drawing rash conclusions, tantamount to
throwing the soup out with the chicken bones. God did not intend His
plumb line for a pendulum. Indeed, manners rightfully seen clearly
reflect the weightier commands of the Scriptures, including the
commandment of Christ to love our neighbors as ourselves.
More pointedly, we observe several examples of good manners in
history and literature. Note how young George Washington produced
his Rules of Civility, which bore on character, and moral and
polite conduct. Washington's character, conduct, and accomplishments
were renowned in his age, such that Americans have long revered him.
The connection between Washington's upbringing in moral manners and
his lasting reputation ought to be obvious. Comments from Rules,
such as "Associate yourself with persons of good character. It
is better to be alone than in bad company," illustrate their
Biblical base (1 Cor.15:33).
In her Little House book series, Laura Ingalls Wilder
presents an elevated example of Christian manners in the home of a
latter nineteenth-century family. For example, five-year-old Laura
in Little House in the Big Woods knows it is wicked to cry
selfishly or to be envious of her sister. Interestingly, the fine
manners of the Ingalls' home are commonly set against the increasing
incivility and roughness of the age in which Laura grew up. These
books form a textbook of manners and morals remarkably approximating
Biblical ideals, though signs of secularization in the home were
also beginning to appear.
As late as the 1940s, manners were not yet entirely divorced from
their Biblical roots. Emily Post opens her opus volume Etiquette
with a discussion of the term's true meaning. Attempting to distance
herself from mere formality and rigid rules in manners, she asks,
"What is the purpose of this rule? Does it help to make life
pleasanter? Does it make the social machinery run more smoothly?
Does it add to beauty? Is it essential to the code of good taste or
to ethics? If it serves any of these purposes, it is a rule to be
cherished."3 Regarding good taste she says,
"Good taste is necessarily helpful! It must be the suitable
thing, the comfortable thing, the useful thing for the occasion, the
place, the time, or it is not in good taste." (Christians would
recognize that the experience of true beauty is a blessing
from God corresponding to a peoples' responding to His gift of grace
[Phil. 4:8].) With respect to men, Miss Post says, "[T]he
code of the gentleman is an immutable law of etiquette. Decency
means not merely propriety of speech and conduct, but honesty and
trustworthiness in every obligation. Integrity includes not only
honesty but a delicacy of motive and of fairness in judging the
motives of others." Finally, "Etiquette is most deeply
concerned with every phase of ethical impulse or judgment and with
every choice or expression of taste, since what one is, is of far
greater importance than what one appears to be."
Love in Action
Rev. Rushdoony declared that love is law in action.4 In
this sense, self-government and ordinary relational practices
manners truly constitute the first sphere of civil government. Where
the individual is constrained to do what is right in his conscience,
and aided by the Holy Spirit by faith, little coercive government is
required and the people are generally free. It is important not to
presume upon one's neighbor in his property or person, particularly
in absence of a previous relationship which might grant some degree
of imposition.
Clearly, as we seek to establish a more Biblical view of human
conduct, we must set priorities. In Christian love, kindness, making
another comfortable, and providing a beautiful setting are all part
of Christian love toward one's neighbor. However, morality and
ethical conduct according to the commands of Christ are
fundamentally far more important. With respect to the higher
expression of the Faith found in Christian liberty (2 Cor. 3:17),
self-restraint in manners is essential. No common liberty is long
possible in an essentially selfish society.
Conversely, a society where people generally do good to each
other is one of the most important foundational elements for a
successful gospel mission. With such salt and light, godly influence
may work to prepare the soil of the people's hearts to receive the
Good Seed of the Word of God.
Modern secular education theory requires peer socialization. This
is the blind leading the blind, where all fall into a pit. Much
better is a home that teaches and practices careful conduct toward
one another in life's ordinary activities. If one can learn to love
his neighbor, in practice, when that neighbor happens to be his
brother or sister, or husband or wife, where it is so terribly easy
to be lax in our social conduct, how much more skillful will be the
practice of love toward one's neighbor outside the home. Indeed, I
have often observed this to be so.
Training our children and ourselves to have good manners, then,
is a worthwhile and even imperative Christian endeavor. In an age
where examples of good Christian manners may be difficult to find,
the traditional manners we practice tends to be the
institutionalized result of our sinful disposition. The combined
benefit of scriptural and Christian historical and literary insight
offer a theoretical and practical set of instructions for a manner
of life able to revive Christian civility, gospel influence, and a
foundation for the free institutions needed to propagate the kingdom
of God.
Notes
1. Lew Wallace, Ben Hur, A Tale of the Christ (New York:
Grosset & Dunlap, 1922), Book Second, Chapter II.
2. Sir Walter Scott, Ivanhoe (New York: A.L. Burt, no date),
p. 174.
3. Emily Post, Etiquette (New York: Funk & Wagnalls,
1945), p. 1.
4. Rousas John Rushdoony, Law and Society (Vallecito, CA:
Ross House Books, 1986), p. x.
Ronald Kirk is engaged in research and development promoting Chalcedon's
work to the Christian education market.
|