WHEN Jesus gave the command, "Judge not," he presented an obligation which it has taken mankind many ages to begin to understand, and consequently complete obedience thereto has been long delayed. Paul also taught, "Thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things." In spite of the fact that both these great teachers emphasized the need of avoiding personal judgment, men have gone on, with comparatively few exceptions, judging others as freely as though the command, "Judge not," had never been uttered. And all this because of the belief in persons many, with its attendant critical personal sense.
Perhaps no practice claims to be more universal among men than this one of sitting in judgment on each other's thoughts and words and deeds. Indeed, a large share of ordinary human thinking and talking is occupied with this very thing. The harmful results therefrom are apparent even to the most superficial observer. To be sure, Christians have talked much of the wrong of harsh judgment, and kindliness along these lines has been preached for centuries. Nevertheless, none perhaps have indulged in more cruel judgment than some of those who have called themselves Christians,—as witness their persecutions of one another when points of difference in religious doctrine and dogma have arisen.
Although Jesus lived the truth he taught, saying, "I judge no man;" although he even defined the method whereby false judgment was to be avoided, when he declared, "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment," the belief in personality continued to blind men until the ability to refrain from judgment became so nearly a dead letter in the code of the Christian that he apparently came to the conclusion that judgment of another was a very right thing; indeed, that it was an expression of a high degree of intelligence to be able to sit in judgment on others.
