A Comparative Study of Anger in Antiquity and Christian Thought

Abstract

Among the ancient philosophers and the early Christians, anger was understood along a continuum. Aristotle and Philodemus believed that anger, under the right conditions, could be useful and even advantageous. Some such as Seneca andClement, refused the possibility of any sort of anger among the most enlightened, whereas Evagrius and Cassian permit angerthat is expressed toward oneself for any perceived vices. Gregory of Nyssa believed that with ascetic training, anger could betransformed into the virtue of courage. Similar to Plutarch, John Chrysostom believed that anger is an expression of socialtyranny and must be curbed for virtue to thrive. Tertullian is distinct for understanding anger in the context of the faith andthe patience that the advent of Christ made come alive. Left uncontrolled, anger is a spiritual deception that negates the newlaw of Christ. Plutarch, Lactantius, and Augustine, in contrast, admit a righteous form of anger under certain conditions.