Does Righteous Anger Exist?

[applepansy]

Main reason is that anger is a false emotion.

I usually agree with most of your thoughts that you've posted. This one not so much. There is nothing false about anger. It doesn't always cover up anything. It is very real to be angry about something, such as getting cancer, or because your spouse didn't stop at the store to pick up milk on his way home.

Feelings are neither good nor bad. They just ARE! How we act on our feelings is what becomes good or bad.

For example, a person who has an anger against their parents are covering up other emotions in an attempt to not deal with them either out of choice, or out of emotional protection. It most likely stems from the parent(s) being abusive and possibly one passively looking on. So is the victim angry? Does the victim have the right to be angry? And what will that anger do to the victim?

Yes the victim can have the real emotion of anger. I would hope that it triggered the positive healing that can come from resolving the emotion. Forgiveness is the key here.

For us, we are commanded to enlarge our capacity to forgive.

:) I agree! :)

[Backroads]

I also disagree that anger is covering up an emotion. Many times, it probably is! Other times, I think legitimate anger is a true thing. I see injustice in the world. I feel that injustice. It equals anger.

[rex8499]

I agree. Anger can be a primary emotion. If some stranger walks up to me on the street and punches me in the face, I'm going to feel anger. Not hurt, fear, depression or anything else. Just anger. Period. What else would it be covering up? I think it's justified to feel anger in such a situation.

[Guest]

I agree. Anger can be a primary emotion. If some stranger walks up to me on the street and punches me in the face, I'm going to feel anger. Not hurt, fear, depression or anything else. Just anger. Period. What else would it be covering up? I think it's justified to feel anger in such a situation.

I wouldn't use the word "justified" here. I would use "understandable". Justified makes it sound like it is a correct emotion as opposed to incorrect emotion. There's no such thing. It just IS. And adding the word "justified" to the feeling of anger gives the impression that you should remain angry because it is "correct".

[ryanh]

Anger is a God given emotion. We all possess it as human beings. It is useful in many healing processes such as bereavement and is a natural part of that process. We wouldn't heal without it. It is also a protective mechanism. Only when used in a destructive manner does it become unhealthy. It can also be used in a healthy way to show people our indignation, such as Christ overturning the tables in the Temple. And as with all other emotions it can be controlled. Only when it is uncontrollable does it cause problems.

And God also gave us many other weaknesses that if indulged are a sin. God gave us the capability to kill as well as to be angry. Just because there is a capability does not automatically make something "good" and "righteous". Nor is anger a necessary part for healing. When we are angry about being hurt, it is a protective reaction - a reaction that prevents us from fulfilling the higher law expectations of us - to "turn the other cheek". I have mourned without anger. It is not a necessity by any means.

, whose wife, son, and only daughter were killed in 2007 by a drunk teenage driver is a wonderful example of someone finding healing FAR faster by not giving audience to his anger than he possibly could have were his reaction to use anger as a tool for healing.

Righteousness and anger are mutually exclusive. Main reason is that anger is a false emotion. It is always covering up something else that needs to be dealt with, or that is being hidden. For example, a person who has an anger against their parents are covering up other emotions in an attempt to not deal with them either out of choice, or out of emotional protection. It most likely stems from the parent(s) being abusive and possibly one passively looking on. So is the victim angry? Does the victim have the right to be angry? And what will that anger do to the victim?

The victim needs to analyze why they are angry with their parents. Delve into the emotions of being vulnerable with no one to protect them. Confront the pain of being trapped with no way out. Deal with all the trauma that is behind the anger. Once that is all out there and being confronted, the anger will subside because they will no longer give their parents any more power over them. So the anger turns into sadness for what they have lost, then into forgiveness because they have regained enough power and control over themselves that they are able to move past the abuse that held them down. Thus the destructive path of anger is extinguished.

So I propose that there is no such thing as righteous anger. Rather, there is righteous indignation for which we are not permitted to have, only the Lord to who is given the exclusive rights of judgment. For us, we are commanded to enlarge our capacity to forgive.

There is nothing that speaks so well as one who has really had to grapple with an issue, analyze themselves, and truly get to the root of a weakness. You are wise from your experiences Slam - I really can feel it from that post. I'm saddened that others don't naturally see the true wisdom behind your understanding, but are so quick to dismiss it. Kudos to you for making such copious amounts of lemonade from all the lemons.

I usually agree with most of your thoughts that you've posted. This one not so much. There is nothing false about anger. It doesn't always cover up anything. It is very real to be angry about something, such as getting cancer, or because your spouse didn't stop at the store to pick up milk on his way home.

Feelings are neither good nor bad. They just ARE! How we act on our feelings is what becomes good or bad.

That's precisely the point apple, that anger is the resultant choice of the thought processes. Anger of course isn't "false", it is most definitely real. Grab a couple psychology books, really study where anger comes from (our choice to react to how we perceive and choose to feel about a stimuli). Or, just read the ensign article I linked to above.

Consider how two people respond differently to the same stimuli. It could be anything - let's use getting hurt. Perhaps stubbing one's toe badly - we've all done that. Some people (kids especially who have not learned yet to be angry at hurt) have no anger. Yet others swear, get hopping mad, and kick the offending object with their good foot. What was the difference? The choice of what to do about the stimuli. The choice of how to respond.

, whose wife, son, and only daughter were killed in 2007 by a drunk teenage driver is a prime example that how one responds to a tragedy is a choice.

I vehemently disagree about feelings being neither good or bad!!! Go back to this last general conference and listen to Elder Oak's on Desire. Our choice of what to feel is precisely what leads to actions. It is the seed of act! We will be judged on our thoughts, feelings, and works. For the thoughts and feelings show what is truly in our heart.

A must watch MormonMessages video for all people in regards to dealing with anger and forgiveness:

[slamjet]

To those who disagree that anger is a false emotion and is not, for the most part, covering up other emotions, I give you a mental exercise:

You see injustice in the world, why are you angry? Lack of control?

Cancer, why are you angry? Fear?

Significant other didn't bring home the milk, why are you angry? Your request was ignored or not given a higher status?

You're angry at a former spouse, boy/girl friend who abused you, why are you angry? Loss of control and powerlessness, fear of the other person, fear of any reprisals if you leave, hurt from being abused by someone meant to love and protect you, trepidation at the thought of taking back the power for yourself and fear of making a move?

I'm not saying that anger isn't real. I'm saying that there is always something behind it. And that something is usually a fear or hurt being covered up. Thus being a real emotion, it is, at the same time, false.

Edited April 15, 2011 by slamjet

[Backroads]

To those who disagree that anger is a false emotion and is not, for the most part, covering up other emotions, I give you a mental exercise:

You see injustice in the world, why are you angry? Lack of control?

Cancer, why are you angry? Fear?

Significant other didn't bring home the milk, why are you angry? Your request was ignored or not given a higher status?

You're angry at a former spouse, boy/girl friend who abused you, why are you angry? Loss of control and powerlessness, fear of the other person, fear of any reprisals if you leave, hurt from being abused by someone meant to love and protect you, trepidation at the thought of taking back the power for yourself and fear of making a move?

I'm not saying that anger isn't real. I'm saying that there is always something behind it. And that something is usually a fear or hurt being covered up. Thus being a real emotion, it is, at the same time, false.

Yet it seems all emotions are caused by something. What makes anger any different? Why is it okay to feel sad, lonely, happy, etc, but not angry?

[slamjet]

Yet it seems all emotions are caused by something. What makes anger any different? Why is it okay to feel sad, lonely, happy, etc, but not angry?

Anger is destructive and does not lead to progress, rather powerlessness. Those stuck in the cycle of anger never deal with the underlying issues that is causing not only the anger, but also stunting their emotional progress. Because the nature of anger is to hide or protect a person's emotions, it needs to be heavily analyzed so that the person can really see what is driving this anger, work with it, and take the next level of happiness and take power back from the underlying issue driving the anger. For example, feeling sad and lonely is a driving force behind anger, but why are they feeling sad or lonely and what can be done about it? Once that is analyzed, dealt with, and that sad and/or lonely feeling is alleviated, then the anger is gone.

[ryanh]

Yet it seems all emotions are caused by something. What makes anger any different? Why is it okay to feel sad, lonely, happy, etc, but not angry?

Oh come on Backroads! Follow the logical path and result of each emotion. And I don't think you are unaware of the admonitions of the sermon on the mount. Anger is fundamentally different from most other emotions we feel.

Anger is the result of sin

The second bit of evidence against anger is this: Anger between individuals is the result of sin. Let’s analyze for a minute what kinds of thoughts create anger.

In order to get angry at a person, we first have to judge that person. When we judge, we’re doing one of two things—we’re either discerning the nature of our experiences (weighing evidence), or we’re condemning. All of us, hopefully, are continually discerning, but not condemning. In Matthew 7:2 (Joseph Smith Translation) the Savior says, “Judge not unrighteously, that you be not judged, but judge righteous judgment.” [JST, Matt. 7:2] I suggest that discerning between rightness and wrongness, discovering the true nature of a given act under the inspiration of the Spirit, is appropriate or righteous judgment. Condemnation is the unrighteous judgment referred to. In the act of discerning we do not get angry. It’s only when we judge and condemn another that we get angry, when we look at what was done and decide that he or she is bad. Thus we have to have sinned—condemned another—to make ourselves angry.

Another kind of thought that gives rise to anger is selfishness. Selfish thinking includes most of the “shoulds” that we apply to other people—we think a person should or should not do something because we do or don’t want them to, or we demand that they gratify our wishes and desires. We think that a coworker should see things our way, or that a wife should have had dinner ready sooner, or that a husband should help around the house more. As President Kimball stated in one of his general conference addresses, there are three major things we need to do in order to truly become Zion, and one of them is to overcome our selfishness (see Ensign, May 1978, p. 81).

The primary function of anger is to control others. Some people have learned this art very well. They get what they want by becoming loud and angry. The target of such ire tends to do what the angry individual wants in order to placate him. Anger thus has the unrighteous goal of attempting to diminish the freedom of others.

The second characteristic of anger, then, is that anger against others is a result of sin, or unrighteous thinking.

Anger itself is a sin

We have seen that anger against another can only result after we commit sin (think unrighteously), but there is something in the nature of anger itself and its consequences that is also sinful. Anger itself is a sin when sin is defined as anything that retards the growth or progress of an individual. This is the third characteristic of anger that we need to recognize.

All anger will inevitably be expressed some way. It may come out openly; it may be expressed passively with responses such as tardiness or not keeping commitments; it may be entirely suppressed and manifest itself only in deep-seated psychological or psychosomatic problems.

Assume, for example, that the anger is suppressed. John is angry with David, who he feels has misrepresented him to their boss and thus prevented John from getting a promotion. John cannot even bring himself to say “Good morning” to David at work; he avoids him in the hall; he lets little criticisms of David slip in to conversations with others; he is constantly thinking of ways he can “get even” with him. His work begins to suffer; coworkers notice that John is becoming bitter, cynical, unpleasant to be around. John’s anger is thus harmful to himself, to those around him, and to David.

Anger can also be physically destructive to the angry person. Though the exact results of anger are not totally known, we do know that it creates excess acid in the stomach, inflammation of the stomach blood vessels, and increased stomach movement. And most of us know that suppressed anger and rage are often cited as a major cause of ulcers. We do know, too, that anger elevates both the systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Therefore, physicians feel safe in saying that anger is a main cause of hypertension. Some headaches are also associated with anger.

Thus, there seems to be plenty of evidence for this third characteristic of anger; in terms of personal consequences, anger is not only a result of sin, but is also a sin in itself. (We should realize, of course, that we do not usually decide to be angry. Anger is a result of the types of thoughts we have already discussed; often we are angry at something immediately—it is almost a reflex. But we are still responsible for this kind of anger because we have previously established that pattern—we have trained ourselves to react with anger to certain situations.)

Anger causes sin

There is one more principle that can help us define anger. Anger usually has harmful interpersonal consequences—it often results in conflicts, contention, injury to the self-esteem and dignity of another, and/or erosion of mutual respect. There are, of course, ways to express anger neutrally and even constructively. An angry person may be motivated to confront another and rationally discuss a problem. An improved relationship may well result.

But there are ways to get to that happy solution without anger. Anger isn’t a necessary prerequisite to a helpful conversation; it usually, in fact, prevents it. My point is that virtually all, if not all, anger between individuals is destructive. The scriptures state, “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice” (Eph. 4:31); “be … slow to wrath: For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God” (James 1:19–20); and “wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous” (Prov. 27:3–4).

Modern prophets have also warned against anger: “Never suffer anger to arise in your bosom; for, if you do, you may be overcome by evil” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 6:290); “The moment a man or woman becomes angry, they show a great weakness” (Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses 4:98); “Anger that leads a man … to condemn his brother is crime” (David O. McKay, Pathways to Happiness, comp. Lewellen R. McKay, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1957, p. 321).

The idea that anger is inevitable is a philosophy of the world, not of the gospel. From a gospel framework, our goal is not just constructive release of anger, but the elimination of anger.

Burton C. Kelly: The Case Against Anger

[Guest]

Anger is destructive and does not lead to progress, rather powerlessness. Those stuck in the cycle of anger never deal with the underlying issues that is causing not only the anger, but also stunting their emotional progress. Because the nature of anger is to hide or protect a person's emotions, it needs to be heavily analyzed so that the person can really see what is driving this anger, work with it, and take the next level of happiness and take power back from the underlying issue driving the anger. For example, feeling sad and lonely is a driving force behind anger, but why are they feeling sad or lonely and what can be done about it? Once that is analyzed, dealt with, and that sad and/or lonely feeling is alleviated, then the anger is gone.

Take it from the person who is dealing with anger management her whole life... you can be angry for no apparent reason. Or - the reason is completely benign as to cause anger. Or whatever.

Anger as a raw emotion is a chemical reaction to stimuli. Yes, of course, all feelings are caused by stimuli! That doesn't make it a false feeling. Unless you state that the chemical reaction was misfiring due to a factor not present at birth... kinda like saying being gay is a false feeling...

If one can say that being gay is not right nor wrong - acting on that emotion is wrong, then so too can you say the same about anger.

Because - you can tell me until your blue that anger is wrong, anger is false, anger is whatever. It goes completely against what I have learned in managing my anger issues. Because, the first thing I learned about anger is that - it is present. Allow yourself to feel it, then you can control it!

[slamjet]

Allow yourself to feel it, then you can control it!

How do you control it?

[Guest]

I vehemently disagree about feelings being neither good or bad!!! Go back to this last general conference and listen to Elder Oak's on Desire. Our choice of what to feel is precisely what leads to actions. It is the seed of act! We will be judged on our thoughts, feelings, and works. For the thoughts and feelings show what is truly in our heart.

There are feelings you choose, there are feelings you have no choice about. It's a product of the natural man. Did I have a choice when I craved banana-splits when I was pregnant? Nope. If I indulged myself as often as I felt the craving, would I have ended up in a coma? Yep. What was truly in my heart? That I wanted banana-splits? Nope. I have no particular fondness for banana-splits. My body wanted it. My OB explained it as - something in the potassium of banana coupled with the calcium in the ice-cream made it very appealing to my body who needed both chemicals... or something to that effect.

If eating banana-splits was against the Word of Wisdom (I wouldn't have eaten a single spoonful) - how do you think God will judge me?

[ryanh]

Take it from the person who is dealing with anger management her whole life... you can be angry for no apparent reason. Or - the reason is completely benign as to cause anger. Or whatever.

Anger as a raw emotion is a chemical reaction to stimuli. Yes, of course, all feelings are caused by stimuli! That doesn't make it a false feeling. Unless you state that the chemical reaction was misfiring due to a factor not present at birth... kinda like saying being gay is a false feeling...

Clinical issues are a whole different realm than is being discussed here. If your anger is chemical based, similar to one's inability to come out of depression is chemical based, then the situation is wholly inapplicable to the discussion.

Or . . . the lack of analyzing the root of what leads to your anger, in the way Slam has begun to touch upon, is precisely why you still struggle with it.

Because - you can tell me until your blue that anger is wrong, anger is false, anger is whatever. It goes completely against what I have learned in managing my anger issues. Because, the first thing I learned about anger is that - it is present. Allow yourself to feel it, then you can control it!

And, then you wonder why you haven't tackled it yet? There have been many ideas over the years in psychology as to what is "right" or "best". Just because there is a thought that has been espoused does not mean it is correct in the light of the gospel, or what truly is best for our health. What do we tell over and over to the people that come one these forums that have masturbation issues? Don't feed the beast, and it will eventually starve. Why continue to "practice" being angry? For most people, that is a poor practice of how to reduce anger in their lives. One that simply redirects the anger to healthy outlets, but does not deal with the root issue. Trying to apply techniques for control of clinical issues to the general population as a basis of understanding is going to produce false conclusions every time. It's a sdrawkcab approach.

[Guest]

How do you control it?

Lots of methods... breathing techniques is one of the simplest ones that has varying effects on me, most times effective when it's not the flash-anger kind.

Have you ever seen Firestarter starring Drew Barrymore? She kinda showed breathing, visualization, and redirection techniques to control her anger so she won't set everything on fire... There's a lot of truth in that.

Edited April 15, 2011 by anatess

[swampgeek]

Maybe this is more along the lines of what is being looked at as not a sin-

Righteous Indignation is typically a reactive emotion of anger over perceived mistreatment, insult, or malice. It is akin to what is called the sense of injustice. In some Christian doctrines, righteous indignation is considered the only form of anger which is not sinful, e.g., when Jesus drove the money lenders out of the temple.--From various sources

That being said, the anger derived from all the other root stimuli or sources would be more likely to result in sin, perpetuate sin, be derivative of sin, or causation of other emotions resulting in sin\anger.

Just a thought and yes, I am pretty sure I have cultivated almost every type of anger possible and wrestle with it far too often.

[rex8499]

How do you control it?

By expressing it appropriately.

A great example that happened to me not long ago. I was having a private email conversation with someone. Lets call her Marie. Several personal things were discussed, by both of us. We had both said that it was important to both of us that this email conversation not be distributed to others, because many of the thoughts and opinions that were expressed, while true, would be hurtful or counter-productive.

But Marie decided a week later to distribute the emails to people because she thought that some of the ideas might be helpful. Of course, she only distributed them to the people that I didn't want to see them, she did not distribute them to the people who she didn't want knowing about her own personal and private issues that she had discussed.

I told her that it made me very angry and upset, and then I told her that I forgive her. But it still leaves me on damage control. That's controlling it. By expressing the anger appropriately to let someone know that it made me upset, I can move on.

[slamjet]

Lots of methods... breathing techniques is one of the simplest ones that has varying effects on me, most times effective when it's not the flash-anger kind.

You are talking about chemical/hormonal imbalance. Without knowing your particular and specific situation, I'll share what's up with me.

I have anger issues myself. It run deep, being a combination of chemical and emotional imbalance and have been a bear to deal with. I have a nice med to help when my anger begins to feed back on itself and is cruising to uncontrollable. However, I've trained myself to ask "why am I getting angry?" Most of the time, once I am able to answer that question, I can use relaxing techniques to calm down. In my case, using these techniques, It has become less and less often I'll need to medicate myself. It has been determined that I'll need these meds my whole life. However, after learning what I learned about the attributes of anger, I've been able to get more control over myself. I've also learned to have a greater capacity to forgive. The main tool I use is the Serenity prayer. Everything else stems from that.

Now I'm not a woman (far from it) and don't have that wonderful womanly thing happening every 28 days or so thus I'm unable to talk about those issues. But anger issues, in general, I've found that with myself and others I've traveled this road with, my experience and speaking with a host of counselors, what I have posted holds true. But I also give no malaise to anyone who do not agree with it and/or dismiss it. To each their own. I'll still love ya!

[slamjet]

By expressing it appropriately.

A great example that happened to me not long ago. I was having a private email conversation with someone. Lets call her Marie. Several personal things were discussed, by both of us. We had both said that it was important to both of us that this email conversation not be distributed to others, because many of the thoughts and opinions that were expressed, while true, would be hurtful or counter-productive.

But Marie decided a week later to distribute the emails to people because she thought that some of the ideas might be helpful. Of course, she only distributed them to the people that I didn't want to see them, she did not distribute them to the people who she didn't want knowing about her own personal and private issues that she had discussed.

I told her that it made me very angry and upset, and then I told her that I forgive her. But it still leaves me on damage control. That's controlling it. By expressing the anger appropriately to let someone know that it made me upset, I can move on.

You did exactly as I spoke of. You went to the root of why you got angry, dealt with it and in dealing with it you found a capacity to forgive and continued with life.

[rex8499]

But was it wrong for me to feel angry about it? My wife said that I had no right to feel angry about it. That's not what lead us to the current discussion about anger, but I remember being flabberghasted at the time that she didn't think I should be angry about it. I don't know what else I could have/should have felt in that situation.

[slamjet]

But was it wrong for me to feel angry about it? My wife said that I had no right to feel angry about it. That's not what lead us to the current discussion about anger, but I remember being flabberghasted at the time that she didn't think I should be angry about it. I don't know what else I could have/should have felt in that situation.

You felt it, your human, you have emotions, it happens. What the real question is why are you angry and what are you going to do about it. Right or wrong is irrelevant.

[rex8499]

Right or wrong is irrelevant.

Not if your wife is telling you it's wrong... lol. In which case, it just makes the anger worse because you're trying to express it and she's saying it's wrong to express it.

[applepansy]

You felt it, your human, you have emotions, it happens. What the real question is why are you angry and what are you going to do about it. Right or wrong is irrelevant.

Agree again!

[Guest]

You are talking about chemical/hormonal imbalance. Without knowing your particular and specific situation, I'll share what's up with me.

I have anger issues myself. It run deep, being a combination of chemical and emotional imbalance and have been a bear to deal with. I have a nice med to help when my anger begins to feed back on itself and is cruising to uncontrollable. However, I've trained myself to ask "why am I getting angry?" Most of the time, once I am able to answer that question, I can use relaxing techniques to calm down. In my case, using these techniques, It has become less and less often I'll need to medicate myself. It has been determined that I'll need these meds my whole life. However, after learning what I learned about the attributes of anger, I've been able to get more control over myself. I've also learned to have a greater capacity to forgive. The main tool I use is the Serenity prayer. Everything else stems from that.

Now I'm not a woman (far from it) and don't have that wonderful womanly thing happening every 28 days or so thus I'm unable to talk about those issues. But anger issues, in general, I've found that with myself and others I've traveled this road with, my experience and speaking with a host of counselors, what I have posted holds true. But I also give no malaise to anyone who do not agree with it and/or dismiss it. To each their own. I'll still love ya!

I've been through all that! The only difference is - I refused the meds... I decided to go all naturale!

And no, it's not just hormonal stemming from the "cycle". It definitely aggravates it big time, so that during certain times of the month, it sometimes slip completely out of my control regardless of all the techniques I've learned. This hormonal cycle can sometimes cause flash-point anger - where I do not have enough time to get myself in control before I get to the "point of no return".

It's something I've always had even when I was a baby... somebody mentioned a child stubbing their foot would be hurt not angry... when I was a toddler, I retaliate when I get hurt... I was about 7 years old when I threw a knife at my sister - no, it didn't hit her. I was able to redirect the throw at the last minute. But, this made everybody in my family realize... Houston, We Have a Problem...

Oh... there's a thread here about some kid who got pepper-sprayed. Yeah, that was me at that age - but my parents would have been the ones sticking me with the electro-shock - they would have thought pepper-spray would be too mild.

Anyway, every person have a different "anger meter". Some - like me, and you - have physiological (and sometimes genetic - coz, mine is genetic) imbalance that causes us to either have very low tolerance to anger stimuli or have intense physiological/biological reacton to anger stimuli.

But, the whole point to this is that - anger as a feeling is neither right nor wrong. It just exists. It's part of the natural man that is necessary for our survival - it is a natural, adpative response to threat. It comes with physiological and biological changes - elevated heart rate, blood pressure, adrenalin, energy, etc. that can give us the tools to survive a threat. Instinctively, anger is aggressive. It is this instinctive response that we are trying to put under the control of our Brain and not just our Instinct. What makes it right or wrong, therefore, is not the emotion but our brain's control over this survival instinct. In addition, anger stimuli can also be controlled - that is - just like you said, analyzing what causes the anger and then controlling that. But, not all anger stimuli can be controlled, because, like I said previously, anger is a body's response to threat - and there are real threats out there... physical, psychological, environmental, moral, etc.

Make sense?

[MarginOfError]

slamjet and ryanh, I'm really uncomfortable with some of the things you are saying about anger. And I'll be completely honest in saying that I think Burton Kelly's article is a fair amount of good advice soiled by a fair amount of garbage. Sure, I recognize that it was published in the Ensign, but it was also a psychologist trying to apply his views on anger into doctrine, and I think he missed the mark.

As a counter example, I offer this:

Anger may be justified in some circumstances. The scriptures tell us that Jesus drove the moneychangers from the temple, saying, “My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves” (Matthew 21:13). But even this was spoken more as a rebuke than as an outburst of uncontrolled anger. (Gordon B Hinckley, Slow to Anger)

I also find it interesting that this Sunday School lesson encourages discussion about what causes anger and then puts a lot of emphasis on the fact that we can control our anger. Both President Hinckley's talk and the Sunday School lesson clearly (at least to me) operate on the assumption that people will get angry, but whether or not they sin depends on how they manage that anger.

So I do have a problem with saying that a person who has felt the emotion of anger has sinned. Or at least to say that the sin is the feeling of the anger. You might be able to persuade me that a person who becomes angry because his wife didn't have dinner ready on time has sinned by having set that expectation. Maybe the sin was that level of selfishness. But even then it's so riddled with nuance that it's impossible to evaluate the circumstance generally. For instance, the husband and wife spoke the day before and it was agreed that dinner would be ready at 5:30 so that the husband could eat before having to go to youth meetings at the church. But if the wife fails to hold up her end of the bargain, are we really comfortable saying that any feeling of anger is a sin?

I also disagree with how you are characterizing anatess's argument. She said that anger is a chemical response in the brain to stimuli, both external and internal. You immediately jumped to say that chemical imbalances and mental illnesses are excluded from the discussion. That was way over the top. All emotion can be characterized be chemical responses to stimuli, both external and internal. Why is it that the chemical responses that cause excitement, happiness, or satisfaction is are categorized differently with respect to sin than the chemical response that triggers anger?

For that matter, what of the emotions of disappointment? frustration? irritation? Are these all sins too? Are we not allowed to be disappointed that someone didn't show up to clean the chapel and left us with all the work?

So I assert again the claim I made on the first page of this thread. Emotion happens. Anger happens. But the fact that it happens doesn't justify us in treating others poorly and irrationally. I believe we are charged with taking control of those emotions, evaluating them, and responding to them in constructive ways. I believe we sin when we let our anger (or any emotion, for that matter) cloud our judgment and act in ways that the Savior would disapprove of. But that's a whole lot different than saying that the existence of the emotion in a person is necessary and sufficient to prove sin.

[slamjet]

Not if your wife is telling you it's wrong... lol. In which case, it just makes the anger worse because you're trying to express it and she's saying it's wrong to express it.

Now that is called marriage. No help there, sorry