The Comfort of Conservatism

Mark 7:1-13

The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were “unclean,” that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)

So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?”

He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

”‘These people honour me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me.

They worship me in vain;

their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.”

And he said to them: “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honour your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

S

hortly before I moved from Coquitlam a new family moved into our neighbourhood. The family, living across the street from my house, had been in Canada for only twelve days when they introduced themselves. They had learned from another neighbour that I was a minister of the Gospel and they asked about church services in the area. They mentioned that they had attended the services of a large, well-known evangelical congregation in the area the previous Sunday, but that they had no intention of again attending services there. Their reason for not returning to that congregation was not what I might have expected. They had waited at the conclusion of the service for a blessing, but none had been pronounced. Their expectations were not met and they were quite offended at what they saw as a serious breach of evangelical etiquette or a grave doctrinal deviation.

A tradition among the evangelical churches in Europe is the inclusion of a benedictory pronouncement, a blessing of the congregation at the conclusion of the service (European evangelical worship being somewhat more structured then that of Canadian congregations). Consequently, this family anticipated certain traditions to authenticate a congregation. Confronted by unmet expectations they drew a conclusion which though probably invalid will forever preclude their return to that congregation. Consequently, they continued to look for a church which would outwardly fulfil their expectation of what an evangelical church should be.

Before you leap to a conclusion concerning the piety of my former neighbours, consider that each of us to greater or lesser degree make judgements about the piety of fellow Christians and concerning the doctrinal integrity of churches based upon dearly loved traditions (some of which are of more recent vintage than we might think). Christians, and especially ministers, do not smoke since smoking is a sign of a sinful heart. I have always held Charles Spurgeon in high esteem, yet Spurgeon smoked cigars until rather late in his ministry. Likewise, I have greatly benefited from the writing ministry of G. Campbell Morgan. Like Spurgeon, Morgan smoked throughout the entirety of his ministry, the difference being that he smoked cigarettes. I still remember the shock registered when a saintly minister from South Carolina stepped off the tour bus on which we were all riding and lit a pipe. Is smoking clearly condemned in the Word of God, or is avoidance of smoking a tradition of more recent vintage? Jesse Mercer, noted Baptist divine from the nineteenth century was frequently supported with gifts of corn liquor by the parishioners of his churches.

We judge commitment to Christ by a variety of means – individual actions, appearance or dress, which version of the Bible is used in the pulpit, the congregational hymnody, instrumentation in the church, or the manner of worship. Such judgements may or may not inform us of individual piety and devotion to God, and such judgements may or may not inform us of congregation piety, however the possibility of misjudgement does not deter us. Such judgements have guided religious devotees for centuries, even during the days of Christ. An example of such judgement, rendered against Christ Himself, is given in our text. Join me in examining the kitchen debate as the Pharisees judged Jesus’ disciples.

The Incident In Perspective — The text records yet another of the long-standing and ongoing conflicts between Jewish religious leaders and Jesus. Many of the incidents in the Gospels are explained by this war which could only result in the utter defeat for one side or the other. Either Jesus must die or the Pharisees and teachers of the law must yield to His teaching. Throughout the whole of His earthly ministry, Jesus was beset by men bitterly opposed to His teaching.

An old saying which is commonly heard throughout the southern United States instructs: if you don’t want trouble, don’t say anything, don’t do anything, don’t be anything. Jesus had constant conflict with the religious leaders of that day which leads us to believe that He ignored the advice of that old saw. Mark begins his gospel with a review of Jesus’ ministry in the words: after John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God [Mark 1:14]. From that moment the religious leaders engaged in a form of religious guerrilla warfare against Jesus, constantly trying to trap Him in His words [Matthew 22:15]. A truth squad seems to have followed Jesus in an attempt to correct His teaching with the people.

On one occasion, one of these truth squads was present when Jesus’ disciples paused to eat (whether a full meal or a snack we are not told). Pharisaic tradition demanded that a person could not eat until he had washed. Frankly, I am in favour of washing before meals, especially if you have engaged in certain activities such as baiting hooks, spreading fertiliser, gardening, or other such activities. However, I view such precautions as a health issue. For these religious leaders, however, such washing had nothing to do with health but everything to do with religion. The mundane activity of washing was elevated to a religious ritual … a purification rite!

On one occasion Lynda and I were present at a Jewish-Christian conference where those wishing to wash before the meal were invited to the platform to perform the ablutions. Of especial interest to me were three observations. I observed that only orthodox Jewish males took advantage of the offer – the Christians and liberal Jews apparently having washed before they came to the dinner. I also noted that the washing could not have been sufficient to cleanse the hands even though water was poured over the hands and onto the forearms; it was strictly a ritual and obviously not a health consideration. My final observation was that the ritual was performed quite openly, on an elevated platform at the front of the building, presumably as an indication to all observers of the care with which the ritual was observed by those participating.

Believing they had something, if not directly against Jesus then at least against His disciples for whom He bore responsibility, the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus: Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with `unclean' hands? [Mark 7:5]. What a shock they must have received when He replied for He did not defend His disciples and their actions, but simply applied pointed prophetic Scripture against them. He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

These people honour me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me.

They worship me in vain;

their teachings are but rules taught by men

[Mark 7:6,7].

He continued in His refutation of their cowardly and calumnious attack by making a specific charge against them, detailing the error of their current fuss with the disciples eating with unwashed hands: You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men [Mark 7:8]. Greater than any violation of the law, though, He charged them with attempting to rewrite the law!

And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, `Honour your father and your mother,' and, `Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: `Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban' (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that." [Mark 7:9-13].

The religious leaders had attempted to trap Jesus, discrediting Him before His public, only to have the tables turned against them. They were powerless, as all frauds are powerless, before the truth. Underscore in your mind several concepts vital to your understanding of the continuing conflict. The Pharisees and teachers of the law were not “bad” people. In fact, the Pharisees and teachers of the law were generally held in high esteem by the people. The Pharisees and teachers of the law held, however, an inflated a sense of their own importance. They were so focused on the external aspects of religious observance that they failed to recognise the foundational, internal aspects of religious ritual. We must always remember that every external practise must be founded upon an internal truth in order to be valid and in order to insure endurance. The Pharisees ignored this great principle of religious practise.

The Assertion Of The Pharisees – Actions Reveal Attitude — The problem of the Pharisees is also the basis for the threat which becomes the calamity of conservatism – the tendency to assume that actions are of greater importance than attitudes. I wish to examine this matter in greater detail, but I must first state my conviction that the Pharisees have received a bum rap in our day. I do not believe the Pharisees were as generally despised as we are sometimes led to believe. In fact, they appear to have been held in considerable esteem. The Pharisees were the conservatives of Jewish religious practise. They were, if you will, the evangelicals of Judaism. Pious people respected the work of the Pharisees and held them in esteem. The shock of Jesus’ condemnation was that it was the Pharisees who were condemned!

When Judah was finally deported from the land and forced into Babylonian captivity, there seemed little hope that the Jewish Faith would survive. Godly men determined that they would insure the survival of the Mosaic faith and out of that determination grew up the concept of the synagogue with local control over the expression of the Faith. It set a minimum number for worship and called the people back to the Word of God. In order to insure greater uniformity of religious expression rabbim, or teachers of the law, arose. In time, these students of the Word grew into the group known as teachers of the law and their allies in the work of preservation of the Faith were the sect we know as the Pharisees. There is no question but that the very survival of the Faith was the result of pharisaic intervention. The Pharisees were not only the repositories of religious knowledge for the nation, but they were the genesis of patriotism.

As people once more kept the Law it became necessary to allow for changing conditions. In order to apply the Law of God to new conditions the teachers of the law tried to apply the teachings of the law so that the common people could understand the intention of God. These explanations and illustrations in time became the basis for the traditions of the Pharisees. The Pharisees embodied the traditions which grew out of the teachings of the teachers of the law. The precepts increased in number to meet the growing complexity of changing conditions until finally there had grown up a great body of traditions – traditions which in the first place were intended to be interpretations of the law and application of the law to local circumstances!

Superficially, the Pharisees were everything one could wish for in religious life. They believed the Word of God, they honoured the teachings of the Word, they were devoted to worship of the true and living God, they were morally pure … anyone would be proud to have a Pharisee for a neighbour. Yet, we know that Jesus often rebuked the Pharisees most severely. In Matthew 23:2-5, Jesus condemned the Pharisees before the people with stunning, biting words: The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. Everything they do is done for men to see.

In this incident which occurred immediately before His passion, Jesus levelled three grave accusations against the Pharisees and teachers of the law. He accused them of being religious phoneys when He said they do not practice what they preach. He showed that they lacked compassion as He pointed out that they tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. He said they were proud when He revealed that everything they do is done for men to see.

These three charges constitute the heart of the divine condemnation of conservatism. Before you draw the conclusion that I am opposed to theological conservatism, I am bold to state that I am a fundamentalist in doctrine. I hold to an inerrant Bible and accept a literal understanding of the teachings of that infallible Word. However, my conservatism does not blind me to the dangers inherent in the system. A popular saying of the day reminds us that we must walk the walk if we talk the talk. We can perform the right actions with the wrong motives and fail to please God. If you doubt this, consider the parable of the prodigal son. In this parable Jesus related how a son rebelled against his father, proved to be profligate and a wastrel, until finally forced to tend swine in order to survive. Coming to his senses, this young man determined it was better to live at home even as a servant of his father than to continue in his dissolute condition. Returning home, he was warmly received by the aged, watching father.

The elder brother had remained at home, but when the younger brother came home the elder brother was offended at the reception his brother received. The father left the merriment of welcome to plead with the elder brother to come in. That older son stated: Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him! [Luke 15:29,30]. He was angry with his father because his father welcomed his younger brother home!

This elder brother demonstrates that although he had done all the right things during the years preceding, his motives were at best suspect. Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. He points to multiplied years during which he had slaved for his father. His obedience was grudging and he resented the fact that he had never been fêted … even with a young goat. Through his words, this brother reveals that his motives were utterly self-centred; he obeyed his father and worked primarily so that he could manipulate his father and so that he could ingratiate himself. It mattered not a whit that his father reserved his entire estate for him since he burned with resentment and chafed with indignation at the thought that he had not been recognised.

The Error Of The Pharisees – Attitudes Dictate Actions — Consider what I have just said: attitudes dictate actions which please God. An individual can do the right thing with wrong motives and miss the blessing God longs to confer. Right attitudes will in due time lead to right actions; but right actions cannot create right attitudes. This is a truth which has pinched the feet of the people of God throughout the ages since Pentecost.

While ministering in San Francisco I saw this truth demonstrated many times. The ministry at Calvary Baptist Church was blessed of God to reach out to many people who would be considered outcasts of society. The compassionate outreach of the congregation saw some bad actors saved. Many of those saved were unattractive in the eyes of other saints. Their actions were disturbing and their dress and appearance was frequently unacceptable in church. So very often we would witness a young man or woman confess Christ, follow Him in baptism and begin to attend the services of the congregation. Outwardly, nothing much changed. The young man probably had long hair, a three day growth of beard, ragged jeans and sweatshirt. The young woman wore too much make-up and wore tight clothing which was at best immodest.

One day that same young man would come to church neatly dressed in slacks and dress shirt with a cravat knotted about his neck. His hair and his beard would be neatly trimmed. What happened? “No one takes me seriously when I tell them about Christ. I must look like a Christian if I want my witness to count.” Because that young man was in love with Christ he wanted to be taken seriously and his actions would in time accompany his changed heart. The young woman would appear in the services one day modestly and neatly dressed, looking fresh and attractive. The same story would be repeated … she wanted to be effective in her service.

We co-operated at that time with a number of churches throughout northern California, most of whom had strict dress codes, either written or understood. In various inter-church activities the members of Calvary Baptist were not welcomed … they looked “unchristian” or they were out of step with sister churches. Increasingly as a congregation we found ourselves isolated from sister churches and excluded from fellowship with those assemblies. The situation became so contentious that on one occasion I was singled out during a sermon in which the speaker stated that he would not baptise a man with long hair, and pointing straight at me he shouted, “And I wouldn’t baptise them if they had a beard if only I could find it in the Bible!” Lifting my hands to heaven I shouted back, “Hallelujah! You can’t find it, brother!”

These churches, pastored by good men imbued with a desire to honour God, had become mired in a swamp which demanded superficial uniformity of actions which in turn demanded that they draw hasty and potentially inaccurate conclusions about individuals. Let me put the matter in colloquial language. A pig may be washed, powdered and perfumed and a ribbon tied around its curly tail … but it is still a pig. With the first opportunity that pig will lay down in the slop of a mud hole. A lamb, even though its wool may be soiled and caked with mud from stumbling through muck and mire is yet a lamb. That lamb will make every effort to avoid the next mud hole even though having stumbled into the first. Essential character is determined by what one is and not by what one does. Some of the most spiritually dead individuals I have known were deacons and pastors of evangelical churches.

Is God concerned with our attitudes? You may be assured that He is so concerned. David, addressing Solomon as the transition of rule was soon to be accomplished, instructed the young man to acknowledge the God of your father, and serve him with wholehearted devotion and with a willing mind, for the LORD searches every heart and understands every motive behind the thoughts. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever [1 Chronicles 28:9]. The thoughts are in and of themselves inconclusive, much less the actions one performs, for it is the attitudes … the motives … which God examines and discerns. When Asa, King of Judah, was confronted by Hanani after a great battle in which the king had not fully complied with the commands of God, he was informed that the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him [2 Chronicles 16:9].

Why do we find it so difficult to read the Word of God? Is it not because that Word is living and active? Consequently, that Word is discovered to be sharper than any double-edged sword so it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow and judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. As result, nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account [Hebrews 4:12,13]. It is precisely because the Word of God exposes the thoughts and attitudes of the heart that we avoid it.

We know that we can make our actions superficially pleasing to God and to man. Few of us will fall into adultery, but we squirm at the thought that anyone who looks at [another] lustfully has already committed adultery with [that person] in [his/her] heart [Matthew 5:28]. Most of us will avoid overt displays of anger, but the teaching which confronts our underlying attitudes of malice and hatred reveal that we are impure and leave us uncomfortable [cf. Matthew 5:21-24]. The whole of that Sermon on the Mount performs a divine surgery which exposes the soul and reveals that actions are insufficient to please God. We need a new heart and we need a renewed spirit.

The Application For The People Of God – A Call To Love God Supremely From The Heart — Among the people of God is found a plethora of traditions. Even a casual reading of Acts will convince that there were few traditions in the early church. What traditions existed were carried in from Judaism and were quickly challenged by the changing composition of the churches. As Gentiles assumed majority status Jewish traditions were confronted and held up to careful scrutiny to insure that they complied with the Spirit of the Word. Those traditions which failed the test of the Word of God were discarded.

That does not mean that there are no traditions now! Of course we have traditions … and some are dearly loved and passionately held. As was true of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, we of modern evangelical Christendom attempt to respond to changing conditions and the growing complexities of life. We have adopted many local interpretations to permit us to present the Gospel to our world even as we apply biblical truth in our world. Precepts which are made for a particular moment in time are elevated to the level of a hallowed tradition and in time assume the position of divine dicta. The challenge is not that we must discard every tradition, but that we must distinguish between revelation and tradition, between Christ and custom, between commandment and culture. There always exists the subtle, though altogether too real danger that we shall let go of the commands of God and hold[] on to the traditions of men.

Is there a Scripture which states that the church may make decisions only through democratic action? The church is to advance through submission to the Spirit of the Living God! Is there a Scripture which states that only through recitation of a prescribed prayer may an individual be saved? An individual is saved by faith in Christ whether that faith is ever voiced in a particular manner. Is there a Scripture which states that we must read the Bible within a specified period of time? We read the Word because we are in love with the Author and long to know His will. Must we adopt a stated physical position in order to pray? What shall it be? Kneeling? Standing with hands outstretched toward heaven? Hands folded and head bowed? We pray with our hearts seeking the Living God and the position in which we pray is of no consequence. Where is the teaching that only an ordained minister may serve the elements of the Communion Meal? It is a communal meal in which the people of God declare the presence of Christ and commemorate His love and declare their fellowship with Him and with one another. Where is it written that the minister must wear clerical garb? Where is the Scripture that only with organ and piano may we worship the Risen Son of God? Where is that Scripture that says we are not worshipping when we clap our hands, snap our fingers or even stomp our feet in time to the music? The ancient church was a noisy place when the people worshipped and the songs were vibrant and alive!

The inner life is never reached through external ceremony. External observance is only valuable as an expression of an inner life and the expression of inner life cannot be stereotyped. It seems to us so much simpler to live by rule than by principle, so much easier to find human sanction than to discover the will of God, so much easier to take an order from priest, or pope, or council, than to discover the mind of God. The Baptist genius was the insistence upon the priesthood of the believer, the insistence that each believer was competent to enter into the presence of God and to know His will. That principle flows out of the teaching of Jesus to avoid the trap of permitting tradition nullify the Word of God.

The application of the message must culminate in a call for the people of God to determine to know the mind of God as revealed in His Word and knowing the will of God those same people must hold fast to that will. The call is that simple call to challenge every tradition in light of the will of God. Such a call can never be thought easy, though it is simple. Someone has described the seven last words of the church as: we’ve never done it that way before. It is but a restatement of the pharisaic error which elevates tradition to a position of rule. Let us as a congregation determine that we will engage in constant and prayerful review of worship to discover how we might please God. Let us as a congregation determine that we will love God supremely, that we will endeavour to know His mind, and that we will make every effort to implement that mind in our corporate life as a congregation and in our individual lives. May God reign over us to the praise of His Name. Amen.