Last week’s post focused on the conflict and controversy that arose because Jesus’ disciples did not fast. Today’s post continues the series of stories where Jesus was a party and a mediator. It focuses on the complaint of the Pharisees and Scribes to Jesus that his disciples ate without washing their hands before meals. It also falls into the first category of the observable patterns of complaints, where there were complaints to Jesus about the disciples, and he responded. Unlike the omission of fasting, this incident is not controversial because it only concerns a hygienic practice that evolved into a customary ritual rather than a strictly religious ritual. In this case, too, Jesus is not a party because it is unclear if his presence influenced the decision of the disciples not to wash their hands. The conflicting parties are Jesus’ disciples against the Pharisees and Scribes.
Setting
The incident appears only in Matthew 15:1-20 and Mark 7:1-23. In both narratives, the Pharisees and the Scribes came from Jerusalem. Matthew’s account suggests they came specifically from Jerusalem to complain to Jesus (Matt 15:1). Mark’s account says that when Pharisees and Scribes who came from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus, they discovered that some of his disciples were eating with defiled hands, that is, without washing them (Mark 7:1-2).
The ritual washing is the tradition of the elders, and “the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not eat unless they thoroughly wash their hands” (Mark 7:3). Mark further gives examples of this ritual washing, such as not eating anything from the market unless they wash it, the washing of cups, pots, and bronze kettles. Hence, the Pharisees and scribes asked Jesus: “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders?” (Matt 15:2). Mark says: “Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?” (Mark 7:5).
The Response of Jesus
Unlike in other incidents, Jesus’ response was confrontational and extensive. Matthew and Mark’s accounts also vary. In Matthew, Jesus’s first comment was a confrontational question: “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matt 15:3) He then continued with a direct and long criticism. In Mark’s account, Jesus omitted the question and went straight to the criticism. Jesus said:
“Isaiah prophesied rightly about you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honours me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts as doctrines.’ You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.” (Mark 7:6-13).
In both narratives, Jesus, after responding directly to the Pharisees and Scribes, called the crowd and began teaching them that what defiles humans are things that come out of humans and not things that go into them.
Then only Matthew adds that after this, the disciples approached him and said: “Do you know that the Pharisees took offence when they heard what you said?” (Matt 15:12). In response, Jesus doubled down on his sharp criticism saying: “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if one blind person guides another, both will fall into a pit” (Matthew 15:13-14). Mark omits the above and narrates that when Jesus left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about the parable regarding what defiles humans (Mark 7:16). However, Matthew indicates that Peter actually asked the question (Matt 15:15).
In both narratives, Jesus responded exasperatedly: “Are you also still without understanding?” (Matt 15:16); “Then do you also fail to understand?” (Mark 7:18). Next, Jesus clarified the parable. Matthew’s narrative is more detailed:
“Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach, and goes out into the sewer? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile” (Matthew 15:17-20).
Lessons from Jesus
(a) Direct confrontation occasionally serves
Engaging in a direct confrontation with a conflicting party requires extreme caution because it is not always opportune. There are always consequences for such confrontation with a conflicting party. Jesus did so rarely and only on the most important things, such as when he taught about the Eucharist. The emphasis of the Jewish leaders on external washing was utterly counterproductive and a threat to the life of holiness that Jesus preached. Hence, he doubled down, even when they were offended. Of course, incidents such as this contributed towards the grievances the Pharisees and Scribes had with Christ that led them to plot his death.
(b) Clarification remains indispensable to conflict management
Hence, he called the people and explained what actually defiles humans. Of course, the Pharisees and Scribes would have listened to this teaching, except they angrily left. However, the scriptures said that Jesus had left. Jesus went further to explain the parable when the disciples asked.
(c) Conflict management requires emotional intelligence
Conflict management requires dealing with exasperation arising from conflicting parties. This requires high emotional intelligence. Jesus spent some time defending his disciples against the question of not washing their hands. First, he confronted the Pharisees and Scribes with a direct question. Second, he gave a long speech about their hypocrisy. Next, he called the crowds and taught them about what defiles humans. Finally, when the disciples told him the Jewish leaders were offended, he offered more explanation. Yet, after all these, the disciples still asked for clarification when they entered the house. Hence, he asked them, “Are you also still without understanding?” Irrespective of being exasperated, Jesus explained the parable to them.
May God continue to help us🙏🏾
K’ọdị🙋🏾♂️