Brooks could also have been considered noble for defending one who could not defend themselves; however, his rage seems extreme and was probably motivated by hatred for Sumner’s noble traits.

Staying on track with our noble intentions would keep us out of a lot of trouble.

Galileo had a bad habit. He would debate the philosophers, spending the first half of his argument building up their side, stroking their egos, encouraging them to waste time laughing at him; and then he would bring the hammer down, tearing their arguments to pieces, resulting in their public ridicule. These men had powerful connections and used their influence to bring the church against him. In the end, no debating skill would save him, and his rude treatment of his enemies was his undoing.

I think we engage in these behaviors because we are selfish and arrogant and weak. When we humble ourselves before God, we tend more to seek a way to deliver the noble message, with the abusive, retributive, “justice”-seeking sides stripped away.

I noticed myself engaging in similar behavior. An acquaintance speaks about his sexual partner in very unflattering terms on a regular basis. Rather than confining my remarks to her defense, I find myself knocking his points of pride (and trying to put myself above him.) Clearly, this is not the best, loving response, to help her… and him… and me.

Thanks for the history lesson.