In Praise of the Pharisee

Underrated or Overrated:  the Pharisee? Underrated, by far! The Pharisee gets a very bad wrap. It is Jesus fault: He was very, very hard on them. My argument is that He was so hard on them because He was SO close to them; that He loved them so much; and if we are close to Jesus we have to love and admire the Pharisee. And that we cannot grant ourselves the license to speak of them as Jesus did.

Let us distinguish: the actual, historical, concrete Pharisee, the contemporary and sometimes adversary (and sometimes ally) of Jesus... from the expression "Pharisee" as a derogatory moral metaphor. Jesus viciously attacked them as arrogant, superior, pride-filled, legalistic, moralistic, hypocritical, selfish and lacking in compassion. It doesn't get much worse than that; and from the Son of God Himself! But I will argue that they were as bad as He said; but no worse than the rest of us. So we can't look down on them and we shouldn't use this word as an insult.

There are three important things about the historical, actual Pharisees: they were a vigorous, wholesome religious movement (in many ways); they were very close to Jesus; and they are the forefathers of the Rabbinic Judaism of the last two millennia.

Good People  The Pharisee Movement was a vigorous, enthusiastic effort to imbue day-to-day life with devotion to God. It was the equivalent of our lay renewal movements. It was "lay" led in contrast to the temple priests, the Sadducees, who maintained sacrificial ritual and were collaborative with the Roman oppressor. Their goal was that of all authentic renewal movements: live ordinary life in communion with God. They were probably outstanding people: on the whole more dedicated, generous, pious that most.

Close to Jesus Jesus was certainly closer to the Pharisees than the competing factions. The Essenes were a radical, counter-cultural monastic community that had retreated to the desert to flee the Roman influence and the temple cult. Jesus doesn't show any awareness of them in the gospel accounts we have received. He was no Essene.

The Zealots were militant, nationalist revolutionaries who planned to overflow the Roman invasion by violent force. Some of Jesus' followers apparently were such; He didn't ban them. But Jesus was no Zealot.

The Sadducees, temple priests and collaborators with Rome, differed dogmatically from the Pharisees: they did not believe in the Resurrection of the Dead and they limited their legal code to the original Mosaic code, without the elaboration that the Pharisees accepted. Jesus was no Sadducee: He (to say the least) believed in the Resurrection (hello! He is the Resurrection and the Life!). He respected the holiness of the Temple, but his cleansing of it made him the temple priests' worst nightmare.

So we can see that dogmatically Jesus favored them; and he shared their primary purpose, communion with God in daily life. Because of this closeness, He is very tough on them. Imagine a football coach whose son plays on the team: it would not be unusual for him to be toughest on his own son. Consider the conflicts that sometimes arise among conservative Catholics: not unusually they are tougher on each other than on the liberal opposition. It is the closeness that makes the argument so fierce. We all know that one might criticize his own family member; but if another said the same thing there would be a fistfight. Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimethia, and Paul of Tarsus were all of this party. So, we see Jesus as very, very close to the Pharisee. You don't say those kind of tough things about someone you don't specially love, especially if you are the Son of God.

Ancestors of Rabbinic Judaism  Within a few decades of Jesus death, the Sadducees, the Zealots and the Essenes were past-tense history. But the Pharisee movement developed into the various expressions of Rabbinic Judaism. So there is a problem here: if we use the word "Pharisee"  as a pejorative for religiosity at its worst (pride, condescension, legalism, etc.) we are disparaging the entire history of Judaism. This is NOT a good idea. Just as we finally renounced the "deicide" charge that our God was murdered by "the Jews" at Vatican II, it is time that we renounce the expression "Pharisee" as anti-Judaic and antisemitic.

Jesus' Charge  Jesus identified a rot at the heart of his friend/enemy, the Pharisee: pride, arrogance, superiority, self-righteousness, exclusiveness, "us-versus-them-ism,"  indifference, legalism, hypocrisy, moral-ism, and lack of compassion. This temptation, I suggest, is at the heart of every vigorous, serious spiritual movement...every single solitary one! It is almost inevitable, a result of original sin. When someone has a powerful religious experience, a life-transforming encounter, there normally follows an extravagant euphoria that comes with a newfound sense of righteousness and superiority. To use just one example: after I experienced the "baptism in the Holy Spirit" in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal I was elated with the ecstasy of speaking in tongues, group praise, inspiration directly from scripture, deliverance from evil spirits, spiritual headship, holy laughter, resting in the Spirit and a litany of overwhelming experiences. I could not help but look down upon ordinary, garden-variety-Catholicism as a lesser species of the faith. My apology to family, friends and the Church in general. Yet, I continue to value the charismatic dimension of my faith. If you experience any breakthrough of grace, you have to be over-excited about it: 12-steps, NeoCatechumenal Way, Focolare, or whatever

Change of Expression If an ordinary person gets serious about God, prayer and spirituality, they are almost certain to become somewhat arrogant. It is a developmental stage. But we have to come up with a different expression. We could call it "purisee" because there is a sense of cultic purity; or "perfectisee" because there is a newfound sense of perfection; or "lawisee" because there is a specific "law" or network of principles and practices that ensures sanctity. I prefer this last: "Lawisee" as it identifies the underlying problem: that there is some practice, endeavor, and initiative that brings holiness. Perhaps I like that term because it rhymes with my name. I have been called "Laracy the Pharisee" (usually in the heat of battle) by people very close to me who know me very well.  My dear friend John, of happy memory, one who called me "Laracy the Pharisee," also taught me, in the face of criticism, to plea "guilty as charged." This brings us to a key point.

We Are All of Us Hypocrites To be a Christian is to be hypocritical: we profess a code of conduct which we blatantly fail to live out. Hypocrisy is intrinsic to Catholicism and Christianity because we are sinful and fail to live up to our standards. Additionally, as noted above, it is very strong in people who become serious about their spirituality but are early in the journey up the mountain. Therefore we do well to "plead guilty as charged."

Danger in Calling Others Hypocrites  There is a particular danger in identifying the hypocrisy, the "lawiseeism" of others. Let me explain. I have noticed that Pope Francis has a bad habit of accusing his theological opponents (conservatives!) of legalism, hypocrisy and arrogance. Well, as noted above, he is probably right. But, on my part, I see his very attacks as arrogant, self-righteous, and legalistic. And I am quite confident I am right. But here is the rub: in my (entirely rational) judgment of him, I myself fall into arrogance and rash judgment! We are caught in an unending spiral of mutual accusation.

What are we to do? All I know is to come, trustingly, before the crucified-Risen Jesus: confess our own arrogance, and pray for our enemies! Let your mercy be upon us as we place our trust in you!