The morality surrounding the act of reclaiming holiness is one that has been heavily debated for centuries, particularly when it comes to its relationship to purity. In many religious and spiritual communities, there exists a strict set of rules governing what can and cannot be deemed holy, often defined by the boundaries of purity.
This conceptualization of holiness as a state of cleanliness or lack of impurity has come under scrutiny in recent years due to its exclusionary nature.
This paper will explore the potential moral implications of reclaiming holiness as an inclusive, relational virtue rather than a boundary of purity. By redefining holiness as something more expansive and interconnected, individuals may find themselves better equipped to navigate their own personal journey towards spiritual growth and fulfillment. The article will begin by examining the traditional definitions of holiness and how they have been used to uphold hierarchies and power dynamics within religious institutions. Next, it will discuss the problems with these definitions and the ways in which they have led to harmful outcomes.
The author will propose a new definition of holiness as an embodied and relational virtue and explore some of its potential benefits.
Traditionally, holiness has been understood as a state of being that is separate from the world, untainted by sin or impurity. This understanding of holiness was particularly prevalent in the Judeo-Christian tradition, where it was seen as a means of separating believers from non-believers and those who were 'unclean'.
In Leviticus 11:43-45, God declares certain animals unholy because they are not clean enough for sacrifice. Similarly, Jesus' teachings about what is pure and impure are rooted in his distinction between the inner self and external appearance (Matthew 23:25-28). In both cases, there exists a clear separation between those who are holy and those who are not.
This conceptualization of holiness has had significant moral implications throughout history, including the perpetuation of colonialism and racism. White Europeans often used their perceived purity and righteousness as justification for colonizing other lands and cultures, claiming that indigenous peoples were 'savages' due to their lack of morality and spiritual piety. Likewise, Christian missionaries have historically upheld white supremacy through the idea that white people possess a higher level of purity than people of color. These instances demonstrate how holiness can be weaponized to uphold oppressive systems of power.
Many scholars argue that this traditional understanding of holiness is problematic because it reinforces exclusionary practices and hierarchies within religious communities. It creates an 'us vs. them' mentality, dividing individuals based on arbitrary distinctions rather than their actual character or actions. This can lead to feelings of shame, guilt, and alienation among those who do not meet the standards of purity set forth by their community.
LGBTQ+ individuals may feel ostracized from their religious communities if they identify as non-heterosexual or genderqueer, despite having no control over their sexual orientation or gender identity. Similarly, women may face discrimination in some religious communities for not conforming to strict gender roles and expectations.
This narrow definition of holiness can create harmful beliefs about human nature itself. By separating humans into categories of pure and impure, believers may come to see themselves as inherently unworthy or unclean. This can result in feelings of self-loathing, depression, and other mental health issues. It can also lead to harmful behaviors such as body shaming, which reinforces the idea that physical appearance is paramount to spiritual worth.
Reclaiming holiness as an inclusive, relational virtue offers a more expansive and empowering perspective. Rather than viewing holiness as something separate from the world, we should understand it as an embodied state of being that emerges from our relationships with others and ourselves. In this way, holiness becomes a dynamic process of growth and transformation, rather than a static state of perfection or purity. We are called to cultivate holiness through acts of love, compassion, and justice, recognizing that these qualities are not inherent but developed through practice and reflection.
One might define holiness as the ability to recognize the divine within oneself and others, regardless of external appearances. Holiness could be seen as a quality that arises from our interactions with others, wherein we learn to embody love and forgiveness in all aspects of life. This approach allows individuals to find meaning and purpose outside of rigid moral codes, while still holding themselves accountable for their actions and choices.
Reclaiming holiness as an inclusive, relational virtue has significant moral implications for those seeking to navigate their own spiritual journey. By rejecting traditional definitions of holiness as a boundary of purity, believers may free themselves from shame, guilt, and exclusionary practices. Instead, they can focus on developing embodied virtues such as love, compassion, and justice, ultimately leading to greater self-acceptance and fulfillment. While there are certainly challenges associated with redefining holiness in this way, it offers a more expansive and empowering perspective on what it means to live a holy life.
What are the moral implications of reclaiming holiness as an inclusive, relational virtue rather than a boundary of purity?
In recent years, there has been increasing interest in rethinking holiness not simply as a boundary marker but also as a virtue that can be cultivated through communal practices such as worship, prayer, service, and solidarity with those who suffer (Bird 2016). This approach highlights holiness not only as a way of living but also as a way of being in relation to others, emphasizing its social, interpersonal, and embodied dimensions.