- tiveness, commission his faithful followers to invoke the thunder
on the inhospitable sectaries of the modern Samaritan race? But however this sort of summary justice might suit the wrathful piety of James and his "amiably gentle" brother, it was by Jesus deemed the offspring of a spirit too far from the forgiving benevolence of his gospel, to be passed by, unrebuked. He therefore turned reprovingly to these fierce "Sons of Thunder," with the reply,—"Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." And thus silencing their forward, destructive zeal, he quietly turned aside from the inhospitable sectarians who had refused him admission, and found entertainment in another village, where the inhabitants were free from such notions of religious exclusiveness.
So idolatrous was the reference with which many of the Fathers and ancient theologians
were accustomed to regard the apostles, that they would not allow that these
chosen ones of Christ ever committed any sin whatever; at least, none after their
calling to be disciples. Accordingly, the most ridiculous attempts have been made
to justify or excuse the faults and errors of those apostles, who are mentioned in the
New Testament as having committed any act contrary to the received standards of
right. Among other circumstances, even Peter's perjured denial of his Lord, has
found stubborn defenders and apologists; and among the saintly commentators of
both Papist and Protestant faiths, have been found some to stand up for the immaculate
soundness of James and John, in this act of wicked and foolish zeal. Ambrose of
Milan, in commenting on this passage, must needs maintain that their ferocity was in
accordance with approved instances of a similar character in the Old Testament.
"Nec discipuli peccant," says he, "qui legem sequuntur;" and he then refers to the
instance of extemporaneous vindictive justice in Phineas, as well as to that of Elijah,
which was quoted by the sons of Zebedee themselves. He argues, that, since the apostles
were indued with the same high privileges as the prophets, they were in this instance
abundantly justified in appealing to such authority for similar acts of vengeance.
He observes, moreover, that this presumption was still farther justified in
them, by the name which they had received from Jesus; "being 'sons of thunder,'
they might fairly suppose that fire would come down from heaven at their word."
But Lampe very properly remarks, that the prophets were clearly moved to these
acts of wrathful justice, by the Holy Spirit, and thereby also, were justified in a vindictiveness,
which might otherwise be pronounced cruel and bloody. The evidence
of this spirit-guidance, those old prophets had, in the instantaneous fiery answer from
heaven, to their denunciatory prayer; but on the other hand, in this case, the words of
Jesus in reply to the Sons of Thunder, show that they were not actuated by a holy
spirit, nor by the Holy Spirit, for he says to them, "Ye know not what manner of
spirit ye are of,"—which certainly implies that they were altogether mistaken in supposing
that the spirit and power of Elijah rested on them, to authorize such wide-wasting
and indiscriminate ruin of innocent and guilty,—women and children, as well
as men, inhabiting the village; and he rebukes and condemns their conduct for the
very reason that it was the result of an unholy and sinful spirit.
Yet, not only the Romish Ambrose, but also the Protestant Calvin, has, in his idolatrous reverence for the infallibility of the apostles, (an idolatry hardly less unchristian than the saint-worship against which he strove,) thought it necessary to condemn and rebuke Maldonado, as guilty of a detestable presumption, in declaring the sons of Zebedee to have been lifted up with a foolish arrogance. On the arguments by which Calvin justifies James and John, Lampe well remarks, that the great reformer uses a truly Jesuitical weapon, (propria vineta caedit Loyolita,) when he says that "they desired vengeance not for themselves, but for Christ; and were not led into error by any fault, but merely by ignorance of the spirit of the gospel and of Christ." But was not this ignorance itself a sin, showing itself thus in the very face of all the
