Cleanliness is NOT next to Godliness ...

There are many traditions and popular sayings that over time get equated with scripture, or are said to derive directly from scripture, but they don’t.  Being physically clean seems to be sensible, and doing so can preclude or prevent a great many health maladies.  Being clean spiritually, would appear to be our highest aspiration.  So a saying like “cleanliness is next to Godliness” generally attributed to John Wesley a great pastor of the past, would just seem to be a truism.  If this truism is not directly found in scripture, at least the sentiments behind it surely must be.  After all the symbolism of having white robes that have been washed clean by the blood of Christ and given to us, is in our scriptures.  The Old Testament contains many admonitions to purify, or clean one’s self after encountering dirty things.  Before standing in front of God the Israelites spent three days in cleaning and preparation.  So a saying like this one appears to have scriptural backing and almost no scholars attempt to take or defend an opposite position … that is, except Christ.

The issue in question was not so much directly related to cleanliness itself, as it is to the influence of man’s interpretation of scripture that corrupts religion.  Ironic that advocating cleanliness can lead to the pollution of scripture, but then inserting self into religion always has the corrupting influence.  Ultimately it is the ego of men that drives them to want to be influential, or important, even in matters of religion.  This need to be recognized as superior, or a resource others should seek counsel from, has the corrupting influence that allows a saying, to become a truism, to be associated with the Bible.  I would imagine when John Wesley coined this phrase he was not seeking to have it entered into scripture, nor considered on par with scriptural texts, he was simply trying to make a point.  But as it happens, his sentiment was not something new or original, it had authors dating all the way back to before the time of Christ.  The “tradition of the elders” had already been established before Jesus enters the scene.  In addition to ceremonial washings that had become excessive, if not impractical, a number of other modern-ifications, or upgrades to the law, had been implemented as well.

Over time, these “wise” guidelines by the leaders and elders in Israel had become a defacto part of society and the law.  In aggregate, the “enhanced” restrictions made attempts at worshipping God much harder than they ever should have been.  While our temptation is to examine any one of these onerous traditions and decry it based on our common sense, it is much harder to examine our own traditions and decry what we have become accustomed to in the worship of our God.  If you doubt this phenomenon, just try to change the time of day, and order of service perhaps omitting an offering call, or children’s story in your church services and see what happens next J.   

Once tradition becomes generational it becomes so entrenched in our thinking it is nearly heresy to discard it.  The introduction of simple hymns to replace Gregorian chants and classical arias in worship services was at one time considered heresy.  A later introduction of the church organ was tantamount to allowing rock-and-roll in the church.  A more recent transition from hymns to worship music and wider electric instrumentation has not occurred without even further controversy.  Nearly everyone has a concrete opinion about what kind of music is appropriate or not in church services.  None of it is biblically based (though advocates on either side will swear otherwise), rather, ALL of it is based in the values, preferences, and traditions that have influenced us over time.  The simple point being, that our own traditions and values are entrenched in our hearts and minds as much as ceremonial washings were entrenched in the minds of Israelites in the time of Christ.

But Jesus did not come to earth, to affirm the traditions of men, He came to obliterate them.  It is our very thinking that must be changed.  It is “how” we see and interpret scripture itself that must learn to submit to the viewpoint of Christ first, and not our own.  To think differently, to provide us a means to do so, was the ultimate goal of Christ.  It is this kind of redemption Jesus had come to put in place.  A rubber stamp of generational traditions was simply not going to be had by Christ.  No matter how passionately we may feel about the time, order, and content of worship services; Jesus has completely other ideas.  It was uncomfortable to the religious leaders of His day.  It will be no less uncomfortable to us.  It alienated the religious leaders of His day, because their ego would not allow them to submit their collective wisdom to Christ.  Will it alienate us as well, as we realize our wisdom and interpretations have been as corrupted as our spiritual forefathers?

Peter recalls an incident on these topics in splendid detail to John Mark beginning in chapter seven of his transcribed gospel and verse 1 saying … “Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. [verse 2] And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.”  Because Jesus had defied the Sanhedrin and leaders of the faith in “how” He kept the Sabbath, they had already determined as a group to kill Him.  In truth, this intent was less about the law, and more about maintaining authority over the interpretation of the law.  And it points to the irony of how far inserting self can corrupt religion.  Now, a group of Pharisees brought scribes (or lawyers of the day, who spent countless hours transcribing old parchments on to new scrolls and parchments) along with them to see if there was a way to legally trap Christ and prove He was not the Messiah, or the Son of God.  Since His followers had been preaching this message, and been performing miracles in the name of Jesus, they too needed to be discredited.

It would seem to be child’s play to discredit an uneducated fisherman, compared to the wealth, privilege, education, and refinement of a Pharisee.  The mere appearance of a Pharisee was significantly more elevated than any common fisherman.  And the wealth amassed through onerous and systemic offerings taken and further profited by the religious leadership during the temple services, gave the Pharisee the “air” of being blessed of God.  The Old Testament, after all, was replete with promises of blessings to those who obeyed the will of God.  It was also full of “curses” (or consequences, thinking cause and effect) of those who deliberately disobeyed the will of God.  So to be wealthy was supposed to be an indicator of adhering to the will of God; to be poor, was to be sinful.  Of course this thinking completely omits the idea that Satan too can assist one in becoming wealthy.  The Romans in general lived far more wealthy lives than any in Israel, yet they had no interest in the God of Jacob.  Common sense, might reveal the wealth of the Pharisees might be equally based in corruption of religion than of strict adherence to it.  But one never likes to look in the mirror when it comes to judging.

So upon arriving at Christ’s location, it takes only moments to “catch” the disciples doing something that breaks with tradition and “the law”.  Simple logic dictates that God would not break His own laws, therefore neither Jesus nor these dirty followers of His could be truly from God.  That was easy.  Case closed.  All they need to do now, is to publicly alert the people as to the sins these men were obviously committing and it should be game-over for this notion of Christ being the Messiah, let alone the Son of God.  John Mark transcribes the logic and reasons for this fault continuing in verse 3 saying … “For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. [verse 4] And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.” 

It would appear the true authors were the “elders” who had inspired a “tradition”, that cleanliness is next to Godliness.  Ceremonial hand washing had been extended to cover other more practical applications.  The marketplace of the day was not nearly as pristine as a Safeway or Publix.  It was an open-air dirty place without ice, where fresh meat might still have blood on it and not be packaged in cellophane.  Fruit and vegetables were plucked from the earth, unwashed, and suffered from flies and other insects still attempting to make a meal.  So on returning from any kind of grocery run, it would make sense to wash your food, your hands, your cups, your tables, and anywhere you intended to eat.  This has the practical benefit of eliminating bugs, and insuring you carry less germs (though germs are still undiscovered for them), and get sick from eating, less often.  The tradition is sensible, as is the saying it inspires.  But the “wisdom” of men, even if based in practicality, does not equate to a mandate from God.  None the less the leaders brought their accusation to Christ as Mark records in verse 5 saying … “Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?”

This accusation had a clear motive.  It was not so much about cleanliness as it was about discrediting the Disciples of Christ.  It was a public accusation meant to turn the people away from these “sinners”.  It might have elicited a different response from Jesus, if instead of attempting to destroy the reputation of the disciples, the priests had genuinely been concerned for their spiritual wellbeing.  They were wrong about their restrictions regardless, but the motives they had were not about redemption, they were about condemnation.  And are we any different?  How often do we use scriptures, or rather our own interpretation of them, to attempt to condemn others for what they do?  Instead of taking our concerns for the spiritual wellbeing of another to God in secret prayer for them; we publicly address and rebuke them using scriptures to prove our correctness and their error.  Instead of breaking our hearts for what we perceive as a spiritual danger to our brother, such that we would pray without ceasing, we have no time for prayer.  But we have ample time to discuss their error with everyone who will listen.  We gossip incessantly, and attempt to incite others to our point of view.  We condemn them for their refusal to see scriptures as we see them.  We condemn them, because they will not submit to our authority.  And while we have time for only 30 second prayers, if that, on their behalf, we have endless hours to repeat our accusations about them to any who will listen.

None of this is redemptive, none of this is aligned with Christ.  It is entirely aligned with his enemy of souls.  It is the work of Satan we proudly do in the name of Christ.  Had we actually undergone any kind of transformation, our first and only motive would be love for our brother.  When we see him in error, our first and only priority would be to hit our knees and pray until God fixes in our brother, what we will never be able to fix.  And in the process, we might learn it is our own perceptions that need fixing.  If in humility we never judged our brother, but instead prayed for him and kept our mouths shut, we would accomplish more, and do less damage in the name of Christ. 

The poison of condemnation that might have otherwise infected everyone who listened to our hate, would be restrained, and replaced by a love and deep care for our brother that would never utter a disparaging word against him.  We would guard our brother’s reputation, even though in error, as if it were the reputation of our Lord Himself.  We would protect our brother from the condemnation of others, and instead plead for time for him, so that our God could instill the change in our brother he so desperately needs.  We would solicit his accusers to abandon their methods, and join us in prayer on his behalf, rather than join their cause.  We would not insist on immediate perfection, but instead be patient with the process of submission, as it is in our own spiritual growth.  But alas, the transformed heart in our age, is a more rare thing that it should be.  We are more akin to our spiritual forefathers who care nothing for the redemption of the Disciples or our brothers; instead we remain interested only in their public rebuke, and our comparative “holiness”.

It is this lack of concern for the very ones who need spiritual care that inspires the response of Christ.  Peter recalls the answer of Jesus for John Mark to record in verse 6 saying … “He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. [verse 7] Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. [verse 8] For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.”  Ouch!  The truth of the state of spiritualty of the leaders of the faith was stunning.  Or rather, is stunning.  For the revelation of where the Pharisees are, is the identical revelation of where we are in modern Christianity.  The truth of both of our conditions begins with the revelation of Jesus saying … we honor God with our lips but our hearts are far from Him.  Those who would use scripture and religion as a means to condemn others, reveal a complete lack of understanding of who Jesus is, and what redemption means.  We give lip service about the errors of our brothers, and care NOTHING for their true spiritual state.  Instead we are using their error as a way of making us feel comparatively better about ourselves.  After all, at least we don’t commit the sins we see them committing.  And thus the work of Satan proceeds, and the work of redemption is halted.

The second cutting revelation of Christ to us is … howbeit, in vain, we do worship Him; because we teach for doctrines the commandments of men.  When we dictate preference and tradition and mandate what is appropriate in the worship of our God, instead of freeing the heart to offer gratitude according to the dictates of the Holy Spirit, we are teaching the commandments of men over God.  To repress the culture of others because of the traditions of our own, and teach this as God’s will, is arrogance.  Because I do not understand your music, or appreciate your style, does not make your sincere offering to God any kind of sin.  What is sin, is to restrict you from praising God, until it complies with what I like.  What is sin, is for me to dictate who is fit to be ordained in ministry, rather than submit to who the Holy Spirit would ordain.  What is sin, is to assume that only my culture knows what is best, or could possibly be accepted as “right” in the eyes of God.  What happened at Babel was not the preservation of white culture as holy, and the condemnation of every other culture as inherently sinful.  It was simply the installation of variety across all cultures in the languages and preferences of how people will see, respond, and worship God.  A cornucopia of variety, music, inspiration, and cultures who love and honor God will emerge from every nation, tongue and people.  It is not intended for us to judge any of this, nor any thing.  It is intended for us to enjoy the variety and relax the idea of being the only ones who can possibly be “right”.

The third revelation of Christ to us details what happens when we insert self into religion, and how self becomes the most important thing in religion, even more important than God.  While it is hard to imagine this to be true, it is Jesus who demonstrated to us, that it is true.  For He points out to us that … we have laid aside the commandments of God.  Jesus Christ commanded us to love one another as He loved us.  Regardless of how you keep Sabbath, tithe, or conduct worship services, if we do not love each other this way, we have laid aside the commandment of God Himself.  Christ continues … instead we hold to the traditions of men.  We make our doctrines the condition of baptism, and singular admission to the body of Christ.  Our varied and unique understanding of scripture become the barrier we erect before admittance to the love of Christ is offered.  Forsaking love of each other as our primary way of living, we embrace a unique set of scriptural interpretations that preclude entrance until formal public acceptance is declared.

The writing of John Mark, transcribing the incident Peter recalls, are not intended as a history lesson.  They are intended as a wake-up call to you and I.  Peter continues recording the response of Christ for John Mark in verse 9 saying … “And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. [verse 10] For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: [verse 11] But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. [verse 12] And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; [verse 13] Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.”  At this point Jesus broadens the discussion past mere physical cleanliness, into the law of God itself.  The Pharisees after all cite the law of God given to Moses as their most highly prized and valued tradition.  They bank everything in this.  Even if Jesus can undo the tradition of elders about ceremonial washings that have been taken to excess, He could not possibly undo the 10 Commandments offered to Moses.

So it is in their most prized understanding, that Jesus again reveals how far self has corrupted even the very law of God in their traditions.  The Pharisees needed some tangible examples so Jesus gave them only one of many they were guilty of.  God commanded that children are to honor their parents for the entirety of their lives.  This honor included love, respect, care, and obedience.  It included the beauty, the gift, of seeking wisdom from those who have seen more than ourselves, and have lived the same battles we fight today.  This gift of honor was to be a blessing to those who could grasp it in the keeping.  It is not a burden to love those who loved you enough to bring you in to this world, and then keep you safe within it.  It is a gift to love them so.  But, when our own ego, our own self-love exceeds every other need, we begin to see love for others as a burden.  Children longing to please themselves, discard the wisdom of their parents that would have otherwise kept them from pain.  In short sighted desires for immediate gratification, we want to abandon the guidance of our parents and do what we see fit.  It is a reflection of how we treat God our Father as well.  The tradition of elders had gone as far, as to invent a ceremony that would allow a self-indulgent child to pronounce “It is Corban” upon his parents and abandon them completely.  This pronunciation was meant to even eliminate any guilt in casting parents to the wind, in their older age.  Today we call the pronunciation “Social Security and Medicare”.  We expect the government to care for our parents and feel no remorse as to how they are doing.  Are the words of Christ any less poignant now than they were then?

Perhaps the most stunning result of teaching our doctrines and traditions over Jesus Christ is revealed in His own words … we are making the word of God of none effect.  We are literally killing the transformation of our own hearts into what He intended because we seek our own wisdom, instead of submission to Him.  The Gospel or good news of Jesus, is of none effect, if it does not change how you love others in the here-and-now.  When our focus is on our interpretations and traditions, it is not on Jesus Christ.  When we study doctrine more than submission, we get caught up in the words, but lose all the meaning.  Our first and only priority was ever to love.  It is love that is supposed to be our guiding principle.  It is love for others that would see their redemption as our first and only priority, NOT their condemnation and/or public humiliation.

Servants, representatives, ambassadors for Christ, should reflect the love of Christ.  The Pharisees should have been most concerned for the spiritual wellbeing of the disciples than of their public discrediting.  Had this been their motive, the response of Christ would have been more gentle, as their distance from Him would have been much closer.  But it was not.  Then, like now, comparative holiness was the name of game.  I can feel better about my own level of sins, because I can point to others who have more.  I can feel better about how I continue in sins, because I see others continuing as well, and doing worse things, and they are “Christians” too. 

The transformed heart, on the other hand, sees the love of Christ changing in us what we could not change.  The transformed heart, sees in others, a precious gift that we are to love.  When we see the object of our affection in error and pain, we PRAY for them secretly, keep our recognition of their errors to ourselves and in private.  We care for their reputations ahead of our own, and look for reform for them from the only source who can bring it about in them and in us, through Jesus Christ alone.  In private, and on our knees, we work to effect salvation and redemption and quietly further His cause.  In this way, the mission of the devil to condemn is thwarted, and we are made participants in the plan of redemption from God Himself.

But to know what truly makes us clean was still to come …