Introduction
In Matthew 15:1–20, Jesus confronts the Pharisees over the ritual of handwashing, revealing a deeper conflict between external religiosity and inner moral transformation. The Pharisees’ concern for purity, while originating in reverence, had become detached from its purpose: to orient the community toward God. Jesus’ teaching that “what comes out of the mouth defiles” (Matt. 15:18, NIV) reframes purity as a matter of moral integrity rather than ceremonial observance.
This same dynamic appears in modern religious and political life. The United States, with its long history of intertwining public faith and political ritual—from legislative prayers to presidential invocations—often mirrors the Pharisaic dilemma: sincere beginnings distorted by performative repetition. When symbolic gestures of faith replace ethical leadership or communal compassion, ritual becomes rule, and the meal of moral nourishment spoils.
Ritual and the Loss of Purpose
Religious rules, like family traditions at the dinner table, often emerge from good intentions. They structure community life, instill gratitude, and provide order. Yet when “the recipe becomes more important than the meal,” ritual ceases to nourish. Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees points to this displacement: their rules for handwashing, though spiritually motivated, became self-justifying systems of control.
In both first-century Judaism and contemporary Christianity, rituals risk hardening into moral legalism. As theologian Walter Brueggemann (2014) notes, “religious practice becomes idolatrous when it functions to preserve power rather than yield it.” We see this happening when clergy claim that only one political party hears the voice of God.
When religious rules obscure mercy, they betray their intent. In politics, this translates into policy positions or symbolic gestures that privilege appearance over justice—what Reinhold Niebuhr (1952) called “the irony of American history,” where moral language masks self-interest.
Public Prayer and Political Performance
Jesus’ warning against empty ritual resonates in modern American political culture, where public prayer often serves as a performative gesture rather than a transformative act. Legislative prayers, such as those delivered at the opening of congressional sessions, reflect a desire to infuse governance with divine sanction. Yet, as Stanley Hauerwas (2004) argues, “civil religion easily becomes the domestication of the gospel.”
On rare occasions, a member of the clergy dares to be prophetic. Rev. Andy Stanley’s 2022 address to the Georgia Legislature provides a modern parallel to Jesus’ prophetic critique. By urging lawmakers to “wash their hands” of vilifying opponents and to “lead from the middle,” Stanley reoriented political discourse toward empathy and shared humanity (Stanley, 2022). His message challenged legislators to align rhetoric with moral conviction—a call that echoes Jesus’ concern for congruence between faith’s outward expression and inward intent.
However, as in Jesus’ day, prophetic speech in political spaces often provokes discomfort. The polite handwashing of legislative prayer rarely produces repentance. The “religious garnish” of public piety—like the parsley on a dinner plate—decorates the political process without changing its substance.
The Politics of Purity and Power
The Pharisaic impulse—to guard the boundaries of the sacred through ritual—has modern analogues in political polarization. Parties invoke moral purity to distinguish themselves from opponents: “corrupt Democrats” versus “racist Republicans.” Such rhetoric mirrors ancient purity codes, defining insiders and outsiders through moral superiority rather than humility and service.
Christian ethics, however, calls for what Miroslav Volf (1996) terms “embrace”—a radical openness to the other that resists exclusion. When faith communities or political parties define themselves primarily through opposition, they betray the inclusivity of the gospel. Jesus’ insistence that “it is what comes out of the mouth” that defiles (Matt. 15:18) critiques precisely this dynamic. Words—whether legislative or liturgical—reveal the heart’s disposition.
In this sense, the language of politics functions as a theological indicator. James 3:10–12 warns that “out of the same mouth come praise and cursing.” When lawmakers, preachers, or citizens invoke God to bless their cause while denigrating opponents, they take part in the same hypocrisy Jesus condemned.
It is sad that many churches comprise people who believe that the church’s mission is to transform the country through political rhetoric and power wielded by electing all the “right” people. Whatever happened to being authentic disciples of Jesus? What happened to Christians actually denying themselves, taking up a cross, and following Jesus?
Authentic Faith in the Public Square
Authentic faith resists the commodification of religion for political or personal gain. It requires what Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1959) described as “costly grace”—an integrity of heart and action that transcends ritual correctness. In a culture saturated with symbolic religiosity, the church’s task is not to sanctify partisanship but to embody truth and compassion that critique all forms of power.
Jesus’ metaphor of food and speech—what goes in versus what comes out—becomes a parable for public discourse. Faith that nourishes society must emerge from hearts transformed by love, not from institutions obsessed with rule-keeping or ideological purity. The goal is not to abolish ritual but to align it with moral substance: a meal seasoned by justice, mercy, and humility (Micah 6:8).
Conclusion: Changing the Recipe
The challenge for contemporary Christians is to ensure that their public faith reflects the inner reality of grace. When religious rituals—whether legislative prayers, church traditions, or political slogans—become detached from compassion and justice, they spoil the communal meal of faith.
When Christians—Democrat, Republican, or Independent—claim to be compassionate toward the working poor, the hungry, those who cannot pay rent, the denied and dispossessed, or those without access to healthcare, yet their actions reveal indifference, their religion becomes faith in name only.
Jesus’ confrontation with the Pharisees invites believers and leaders alike to revisit the recipes of their moral and political lives. What we serve to the world must not only look holy but taste like love. Authentic discipleship demands that the seasoning of our public witness—our words, prayers, and policies—match the gospel’s flavor.
The machismo marketed today has become the new gospel sold to men. Some of it is nothing more than thinly veiled hate—and sometimes it’s not veiled at all. It is tragic when domination over others is preached, sealed in our rituals of religion, and blessed by someone who is supposed to be close to God. Will someone show me where Jesus modeled this in his life?
Jesus dared to call out the Pharisees who were doing this in his day. They used their rituals to exalt themselves as holy, justify their actions as righteous, and separate themselves from others who did not practice as they did. Jesus saw the incongruity between their rituals, their words, and their lifestyle.
Jesus taught that true defilement was not in unwashed hands but in unloving hearts. The Pharisees kept their rituals, and they had clean hands to show for it—but their hearts were unclean. That’s the part that counted.
If the church is going to reclaim faith’s credibility in public life, the rituals of our faith must not be for show but for service. Our hearts have to change. That recipe has not changed in two thousand years.
References
Bonhoeffer, D. (1959). The cost of discipleship. Macmillan.
Brueggemann, W. (2014). Sabbath as resistance: Saying no to the culture of now. Westminster John Knox Press.
Hauerwas, S. (2004). Performing the faith: Bonhoeffer and the practice of nonviolence. Brazos Press.
Niebuhr, R. (1952). The irony of American history. Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Stanley, A. (2022, March 16). Address to the Georgia State Legislature. Georgia State Capitol, Atlanta, GA.
Volf, M. (1996). Exclusion and embrace: A theological exploration of identity, otherness, and reconciliation. Abingdon Press.