Spiritual Pollution, Part 6: Turning to theology as we examine the tensions between holiness and justice

The last few posts I’ve been mainly dwelling on the psychology of human disgust and intimacy. I’ve concluded, in my last post, that human intimacy and disgust are reciprocally related. Thus, we cannot both loathe a sin and love the sinner engaging in that act. It is psychologically impossible.

I believe this tension is also reflected in the Biblical witness, so today we begin to turn toward theology.

The tension between love and disgust, I believe, is reflected in the fundamental tension between the holiness and justice traditions of the Old Testament. I take my analysis from Walter Brueggemann’s excellent book “Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, dispute, advocacy.” In this book Brueggemann describes the tensions between holiness and justice in the life of Israel. Both impulses are deeply rooted in the Old Testament narrative.

The justice impulse is seen both in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:8-11; Deut. 5:12-15) and the Levitical proscriptions. Overall, the justice impulse finds its fullest expression in Leviticus 25 in the description of the year of Jubilee. During the Jubilee, debts are remitted, slaves are freed, allowances for the poor are made, and the land is allowed to recover.

Similarly, the holiness/purity impulse also begins in the Decalogue and also finds its clearest exposition in Leviticus. In Leviticus, Yahweh outlines procedures for handling a variety of potential contaminants in the life of Israel: food (Leviticus 11), infectious skin diseases (Leviticus 13-14), mildew (Leviticus 13-14), childbirth (Leviticus 12), menstrual blood and bodily discharges (Leviticus 15), hygiene (Leviticus 13-14), and sexual activity (Leviticus 18).

However, in the life of Israel the most severe forms of potential pollution are “sins,” sociomoral infractions. Consequently, in Leviticus, Yahweh outlines purification procedures through sacrifices, washings, and offerings to manage and “clean up” these sociomoral contaminants. As Brueggemann summarizes:

“The focus of this tradition of holiness, which we may find rooted in the first three commands of the Decalogue, is that those zones of life that are inhabited by Yahweh in an intense way must be kept pure and uncontaminated. Thus this material is instructional and has a status not unlike canon law to protect such zones of holiness and, in a more general way, to prevent the disordering power of impurity from disrupting the life of Israel. The great threat to holiness that can jeopardize the presence of Yahweh in the community of Israel is to create a disorder by mixing things in a way that confuse and distort. The antidote to such confusion is to sort out and make distinctions, so that nothing is wrongly mixed that will disturb the order that belongs to the holiness of the Creator…it is the work of priestly instruction to maintain orderly distinctions.” (p. 192)

To summarize, we can clearly see in the Old Testament the tension between sociomoral disgust and love. Specifically, the purity tradition is fueled by sociomoral disgust, where certain persons and behaviors are considered to be spiritual pollutants. The justice tradition, by contrast, breaks down sociological barriers and restores fundamental human dignity. Thus, my conclusion: The tension between sociomoral disgust and love is embedded deep in the fabric of the Judeo-Christian tradition. A final comment from Brueggemann to illustrate this point:

“[The holiness and justice] trajectories of command serve very different sensibilities and live in profound tension with each other. The tradition of justice concerns the political-economic life of the community and urges drastic transformative and rehabilitative activity. The tradition of holiness focuses on the cultic life of the community and seeks a restoration of a lost holiness, whereby the presence of God can again be counted on and enjoyed.” (p. 193)

Given the arguments of my prior posts, I think that one of the sources of this “profound tension” is the psychological dynamic I outlined in my prior post: You cannot, psychologically speaking, both loathe a sin (satisfy the holiness impulse) AND be passionate in seeking justice for the sinner (satisfy the justice impulse).