What do you think?
Rate this book
Unclean: Meditations on Purity, Hospitality, and Mortality
"I desire mercy, not sacrifice." Echoing Hosea, Jesus defends his embrace of the "unclean" in the Gospel of Matthew, seeming to privilege the prophetic call to justice over the Levitical pursuit of purity. And yet, as missional faith communities are well aware, the tensions and conflicts between holiness and mercy are not so easily resolved. At every turn, it seems that the psychological pull of purity and holiness tempts the church into practices of social exclusion and a Gnostic flight from "the world" into a "too spiritual" spirituality. Moreover, the psychology of purity often lures the church into what psychologists call "The Macbeth Effect," the psychological trap that tempts us into believing that ritual acts of cleansing can replace moral and missional engagement. Finally, time after time, wherever we see churches regulating their common life with the idiom of dirt, disgust, and defilement, we find a predictable wake of dysfunction: ruined self-images, social stigma, and communal conflict. In an unprecedented fusion of psychological science and theological scholarship, Richard Beck describes the pernicious (and largely unnoticed) effects of the psychology of purity upon the life and mission of the church.
212 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 2011
119 people are currently reading
1410 people want to read
About the author
Richard Beck
8 books117 followersDr. Richard Beck is a Professor of Psychology at Abilene Christian University, and he is the author of the popular blog Experimental Theology: The Thoughts, Articles and Essays of Richard Beck and the books The Slavery of Death, Unclean: Meditations on Purity, Hospitality, and Mortality and The Authenticity of Faith: The Varieties and Illusions of Religious Experience. As an experimental psychologist and a practicing Christian, he attempts in his writing "to integrate theology with the experimental social sciences."
Librarian Note:
There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Librarian Note:
There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews
May 31, 2016
This is an extremely helpful book for understanding discussions of morality, both in politics, but more specifically in Christian religious communities.
Beck's framework is Matthew 9, where Jesus asks the Pharisees, 'Go learn what this means: 'I desire mercy not sacrifice.'" Sacrifice and mercy become the two terms that Beck uses to discuss the disgust reactions and the overcoming of disgust reactions, respectively. He says, "Sacrifice—the purity impulse—marks off a zone of holiness, admitting the “clean” and expelling the “unclean.” Mercy, by contrast, crosses those purity boundaries. Mercy blurs the distinction, bringing clean and unclean into contact."
He discusses the psychology of disgust (especially our "core disgust" impulses) and how these impulses are projected onto social organization and morality. His basic argument is that Jesus comes and he trumps this disgust or "sacrificial" impulse with mercy. His ultimate concern is that churches can easily loose this aspect of Jesus' ministry, effectively re-creating the very sacrificial morality that Jesus overcomes.
This is a great book. The only issue I have with this is that the concept of "sacrifice" is very one sided. He takes it to mean a basic perspective of exclusion, except that in ancient Israel (and indeed, the ancient world), sacrifice was a way of creating inclusion - albeit it an hierarchical inclusion. That is, sacrifice was about creating a social structure, and while Jesus certainly modifies this (discarding the "hierarchical" aspect) he doesn't fully reject sacrifice. It's just that mercy becomes the impulse of sacrifice instead of boundary making. It's a small quibble, and it doesn't really affect the book so much.
All in all - a fantastic book.
Beck's framework is Matthew 9, where Jesus asks the Pharisees, 'Go learn what this means: 'I desire mercy not sacrifice.'" Sacrifice and mercy become the two terms that Beck uses to discuss the disgust reactions and the overcoming of disgust reactions, respectively. He says, "Sacrifice—the purity impulse—marks off a zone of holiness, admitting the “clean” and expelling the “unclean.” Mercy, by contrast, crosses those purity boundaries. Mercy blurs the distinction, bringing clean and unclean into contact."
He discusses the psychology of disgust (especially our "core disgust" impulses) and how these impulses are projected onto social organization and morality. His basic argument is that Jesus comes and he trumps this disgust or "sacrificial" impulse with mercy. His ultimate concern is that churches can easily loose this aspect of Jesus' ministry, effectively re-creating the very sacrificial morality that Jesus overcomes.
This is a great book. The only issue I have with this is that the concept of "sacrifice" is very one sided. He takes it to mean a basic perspective of exclusion, except that in ancient Israel (and indeed, the ancient world), sacrifice was a way of creating inclusion - albeit it an hierarchical inclusion. That is, sacrifice was about creating a social structure, and while Jesus certainly modifies this (discarding the "hierarchical" aspect) he doesn't fully reject sacrifice. It's just that mercy becomes the impulse of sacrifice instead of boundary making. It's a small quibble, and it doesn't really affect the book so much.
All in all - a fantastic book.
December 14, 2016
тим, хто вважає, що мова не має над нами влади, варто придивитися, наприклад, до метафор, які структурують людське життя, – хоч би й до метафори чистоти. на перший погляд, про "чисте"/"нечисте" – це звичайні слова (як і про "відхилення", "ненормальність", "хворобу"), що просто полегшують навігацію в полі моральних категорій, але від слів, виявляється, не так уже й далеко до вчинків. а потім люди, які вживали ці слова, роблять великі очі й наполягають на тому, що вони всіма руками за любов до ближнього й у жодному разі не підтримують насильства.
річард бек – спочатку психолог, потім уже теолог – до метафор ставиться серйозно, бо знає, як вони проявляються в повсякденному житті (через ефект макбета, наприклад: якщо дати людині очиститися фізично, нехай навіть зовсім символічно протерти руки вологою серветкою, вона менш перейматиметься про свої погані вчинки). з одного боку, розділення на чисте й нечисте для людини природне, воно виникає з цілковито нормального й корисного в деяких випадках відчуття відрази; а з іншого, з мислення в цих категоріях народжуються всілякі цікаві речі, від стигматизації жіночої сексуальності до різного роду остаточних рішень. і коли воно починає регулювати життя спільноти, зокрема релігійної спільноти, яка начебто має орієнтуватися на милосердя, а не жертву, у нас з'являються проблеми.
звісно, зовсім позбутися категорії чистоти неможливо (і це не було б корисно), але її можна осмислювати й контролювати. книжка бека – хороша спроба такої рефлексії, причому не ідеалістична й беззуба, як більшість теології, яка мені досі траплялася, а твереза щодо недоліків людей і церкви. шкода, що в неї так небагато читачів.
річард бек – спочатку психолог, потім уже теолог – до метафор ставиться серйозно, бо знає, як вони проявляються в повсякденному житті (через ефект макбета, наприклад: якщо дати людині очиститися фізично, нехай навіть зовсім символічно протерти руки вологою серветкою, вона менш перейматиметься про свої погані вчинки). з одного боку, розділення на чисте й нечисте для людини природне, воно виникає з цілковито нормального й корисного в деяких випадках відчуття відрази; а з іншого, з мислення в цих категоріях народжуються всілякі цікаві речі, від стигматизації жіночої сексуальності до різного роду остаточних рішень. і коли воно починає регулювати життя спільноти, зокрема релігійної спільноти, яка начебто має орієнтуватися на милосердя, а не жертву, у нас з'являються проблеми.
звісно, зовсім позбутися категорії чистоти неможливо (і це не було б корисно), але її можна осмислювати й контролювати. книжка бека – хороша спроба такої рефлексії, причому не ідеалістична й беззуба, як більшість теології, яка мені досі траплялася, а твереза щодо недоліків людей і церкви. шкода, що в неї так небагато читачів.
July 25, 2011
I finished a book! Yay! First one since the twins were born.
Unclean by Richard Beck, to me, was a psychological analysis of why we are so prone to being elite, exclusive, and inhospitable to “others.” Beck gives an academic analysis of “disgust,” a human emotion that at its heart, is meant to protect us from ingesting substances that could be physically harmful. Society conditions us, however, to feel disgust and a variety of things and people that are actually not disgusting (in the sense of harming us physically). To make a long story short, some of these things and people that certain societies teach as disgusting (poor hygiene, certain “moral” offenses, homosexuality, body issues such as gore or deformity) keep us from being hospitable to groups of people (i.e. excluding them) rather than taking care of them (which, ironically, would be the Christ-like thing for Christian Americans to do, but Christian Americans tend to be most vulnerable to this type of hostility).
Just as we would spit out (“expel”) a disgusting substance in our mouths that could physically harm us, we tend to exclude (“expel”) groups of people we label as “disgusting” from the circle of people we deem worthy of our love and hospitality.
Rather than giving in to elitist thinking and excluding groups of people, Beck argues that “Hospitality is about selfhood. It is that space where the dignity of every human person is vouchsafed, embraced, and protected…” implying that the people that we are taught by society that it is ok to avoid, or ok to withhold help from, should actually be given a status of dignity.
The opposite of a “disgusting” substance or person is a “pure” substance or person. Religions (including general American Christianity) place a lot of emphasis on “purity”. In Unclean, Beck argues that the “…flight into purity is often a flight from need into self-sufficiency. And this flight into purity and self-sufficiency has catastrophic effects upon human compassion and empathy…”
Disgust is often linked to people and substances we relate to our animality (sex or other physical acts that remind us our bodies are the same as animal’s bodies), death or to impurity. (For example, for Christians that believe homosexuality is a sin, why are gay couples called impure or disgusting, but someone that is prideful is not called impure or disgusting, even though pride specifically called out by Jesus a sin and homosexuality is not? Beck’s psychology behind this suggests that Christians view sexual sins as “impure” because they remind us we really are physically animals, while pride does not act as such a reminder.)
The heart of the book for me is a call back to hospitality – i.e. community, taking care of each other, being kind and considering others needs, etc – on page 175:
“The repression of death and need is particularly acute in America and other modern, technologically advanced nations. The reason for this is that our material wealth and technological success obscure our need and vulnerability. Never suffering want or poverty, and trusting in modern medicine, Americans can live (and pretend) as if they were immortal. This creates a cultural worldview that is characterized by what Ernest Becker has called “the denial of death,” the refusal to admit the reality of death into our lives and consciousness. Arthur C. McGill gives another cogent analysis of this…[noting] that “Americans like to appear as if they give death hardly any thought at all.” The American ethic is, thus, “for people to create a living world where death seems abnormal and accidental. [Americans] must create a living world where life is so full, so secure, and so rich with possibilities that it gives no hint of death and deprivation.”
What we see in this death repression is a collective and cultural denial of our own vulnerability and need. The American duty, according to McGill, is to be “fine,” to take up “the duty to look well, to seem fine, to exclude from the fabric of [our] normal life any evidence of decay and death and helplessness.” This social pressure to be “fine,” to hide from others our vulnerability and failure, is the dark and pathological side of the American success ethos. It is the drive to become so materially successful as to eliminate all trace of need. It is the quest, as noted above, to be god-like: separate, autonomous, self-contained, and without need.”
The other, shorter, message that really hit me was this:
“True love moves me into need”
True hospitality and charity is not giving to others only when we have excess material things, excess emotional strength, excess time – caring for others out of true love for humanity requires us to give to a point of being in need. Not only when we have “extra,” because there is always someone who has less than us (money, time, emotional and mental health, physical strength) and so there is always someone we can help no matter what our means.
Unclean by Richard Beck, to me, was a psychological analysis of why we are so prone to being elite, exclusive, and inhospitable to “others.” Beck gives an academic analysis of “disgust,” a human emotion that at its heart, is meant to protect us from ingesting substances that could be physically harmful. Society conditions us, however, to feel disgust and a variety of things and people that are actually not disgusting (in the sense of harming us physically). To make a long story short, some of these things and people that certain societies teach as disgusting (poor hygiene, certain “moral” offenses, homosexuality, body issues such as gore or deformity) keep us from being hospitable to groups of people (i.e. excluding them) rather than taking care of them (which, ironically, would be the Christ-like thing for Christian Americans to do, but Christian Americans tend to be most vulnerable to this type of hostility).
Just as we would spit out (“expel”) a disgusting substance in our mouths that could physically harm us, we tend to exclude (“expel”) groups of people we label as “disgusting” from the circle of people we deem worthy of our love and hospitality.
Rather than giving in to elitist thinking and excluding groups of people, Beck argues that “Hospitality is about selfhood. It is that space where the dignity of every human person is vouchsafed, embraced, and protected…” implying that the people that we are taught by society that it is ok to avoid, or ok to withhold help from, should actually be given a status of dignity.
The opposite of a “disgusting” substance or person is a “pure” substance or person. Religions (including general American Christianity) place a lot of emphasis on “purity”. In Unclean, Beck argues that the “…flight into purity is often a flight from need into self-sufficiency. And this flight into purity and self-sufficiency has catastrophic effects upon human compassion and empathy…”
Disgust is often linked to people and substances we relate to our animality (sex or other physical acts that remind us our bodies are the same as animal’s bodies), death or to impurity. (For example, for Christians that believe homosexuality is a sin, why are gay couples called impure or disgusting, but someone that is prideful is not called impure or disgusting, even though pride specifically called out by Jesus a sin and homosexuality is not? Beck’s psychology behind this suggests that Christians view sexual sins as “impure” because they remind us we really are physically animals, while pride does not act as such a reminder.)
The heart of the book for me is a call back to hospitality – i.e. community, taking care of each other, being kind and considering others needs, etc – on page 175:
“The repression of death and need is particularly acute in America and other modern, technologically advanced nations. The reason for this is that our material wealth and technological success obscure our need and vulnerability. Never suffering want or poverty, and trusting in modern medicine, Americans can live (and pretend) as if they were immortal. This creates a cultural worldview that is characterized by what Ernest Becker has called “the denial of death,” the refusal to admit the reality of death into our lives and consciousness. Arthur C. McGill gives another cogent analysis of this…[noting] that “Americans like to appear as if they give death hardly any thought at all.” The American ethic is, thus, “for people to create a living world where death seems abnormal and accidental. [Americans] must create a living world where life is so full, so secure, and so rich with possibilities that it gives no hint of death and deprivation.”
What we see in this death repression is a collective and cultural denial of our own vulnerability and need. The American duty, according to McGill, is to be “fine,” to take up “the duty to look well, to seem fine, to exclude from the fabric of [our] normal life any evidence of decay and death and helplessness.” This social pressure to be “fine,” to hide from others our vulnerability and failure, is the dark and pathological side of the American success ethos. It is the drive to become so materially successful as to eliminate all trace of need. It is the quest, as noted above, to be god-like: separate, autonomous, self-contained, and without need.”
The other, shorter, message that really hit me was this:
“True love moves me into need”
True hospitality and charity is not giving to others only when we have excess material things, excess emotional strength, excess time – caring for others out of true love for humanity requires us to give to a point of being in need. Not only when we have “extra,” because there is always someone who has less than us (money, time, emotional and mental health, physical strength) and so there is always someone we can help no matter what our means.
October 23, 2012
Excellent. Why isn't psychology integrated with theology more often? It's so illuminating. Unclean is one of the best breakdowns of the subconscious Christian life I've read since Insurrection: To Believe Is Human; To Doubt, Divine. It's essentially a discussion of disgust psychology, and how this universal human impulse regulates nearly every aspect of of our daily lives - affecting how we group and label people in our minds, react to certain behaviors that are alien to us, and become isolated from others without realizing it... all in an effort to protect ourselves from recognizing our own deep needs. The whole book stems from Jesus's words in Matthew 9:13 - "Go and learn what this means: I desire mercy, not sacrifice."
Beck backs up his points with insight from various psychological studies, proving that none of his correlations are as loose as we'd like to think. He makes a startling case for how, as Christians, we even sometimes work to avoid recognizing Jesus as fully human, because to be human is to need things - to love at all is to be vulnerable. And we don't want to be vulnerable. We don't want to be needy. (And we certainly don't want God to be that way.)
He uses this discussion to shed further light on the theological case for God as a trinity; if God were a single solitary being, he couldn't possibly know (or be) love. The relationship at the heart of the trinity involves need on the part of God, giving and receiving - an active relationship. This, in turn, is powerfully illustrated in the Incarnation and crucifixion. That's easy for Christians to confess intellectually, but do we really accept it? Do we live it? Are we Gnostics at heart, or do we embrace God in the mundane, the God who "lowered himself" to become a human being, using spit and dirt to change lives as much as his words?
I was also challenged by the statement: "True love should move us into need." If you help someone because it's no sweat off your back, is that really love? Shouldn't we aim to help people in a way that forces us to move beyond our comfort zone(s)? Like the poor woman in Luke 21:1-4 who gave every penny she had, in contrast to the rich man who dumped his surplus into the treasury; true love should give enough that the lover lacks for it. It should affect or change me in some fundamental way. Otherwise, it is an empty gesture made from behind self-imposed boundaries.
Ouch. I love it when books like this shake up my world.
Beck backs up his points with insight from various psychological studies, proving that none of his correlations are as loose as we'd like to think. He makes a startling case for how, as Christians, we even sometimes work to avoid recognizing Jesus as fully human, because to be human is to need things - to love at all is to be vulnerable. And we don't want to be vulnerable. We don't want to be needy. (And we certainly don't want God to be that way.)
He uses this discussion to shed further light on the theological case for God as a trinity; if God were a single solitary being, he couldn't possibly know (or be) love. The relationship at the heart of the trinity involves need on the part of God, giving and receiving - an active relationship. This, in turn, is powerfully illustrated in the Incarnation and crucifixion. That's easy for Christians to confess intellectually, but do we really accept it? Do we live it? Are we Gnostics at heart, or do we embrace God in the mundane, the God who "lowered himself" to become a human being, using spit and dirt to change lives as much as his words?
I was also challenged by the statement: "True love should move us into need." If you help someone because it's no sweat off your back, is that really love? Shouldn't we aim to help people in a way that forces us to move beyond our comfort zone(s)? Like the poor woman in Luke 21:1-4 who gave every penny she had, in contrast to the rich man who dumped his surplus into the treasury; true love should give enough that the lover lacks for it. It should affect or change me in some fundamental way. Otherwise, it is an empty gesture made from behind self-imposed boundaries.
Ouch. I love it when books like this shake up my world.
March 17, 2018
This was an amazing book, full of fresh insights. It put into words many thoughts that I had been cultivating about hospitality and its relationship to the Eucharist, and then it amplified and clarified them 1,000 times. I will never approach the altar in the same way again. Every Christian who believes they possess a mature faith needs to read and be challenged by this book.
January 3, 2021
This is a book that I want to return to in the future as I think multiple reads of it will be helpful in wrapping my mind around the concepts and implications that Beck outlined in this text.
In the meantime I greatly enjoyed this book and it has given me a new lense to identify how the psychology of disgust influences my own thinking and beliefs.
Things are rarely just as they seem, and Beck does an excellent job of beginning to excavate the walls we erect around our tribes. He leaves a lot for the reader to wrestle through on their own, but I found the conclusion of the book to be very helpful in summarizing and in showing how the Eucharist by nature creates a way forward in the tension of “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.”
In the meantime I greatly enjoyed this book and it has given me a new lense to identify how the psychology of disgust influences my own thinking and beliefs.
Things are rarely just as they seem, and Beck does an excellent job of beginning to excavate the walls we erect around our tribes. He leaves a lot for the reader to wrestle through on their own, but I found the conclusion of the book to be very helpful in summarizing and in showing how the Eucharist by nature creates a way forward in the tension of “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.”
January 9, 2022
Very provocative book on the way disgust regulates our lives and the way Xty's pervasive purity metaphors obstruct mercy and love. Author contends that thinking predominantly in terms of bodily cleanliness (baptism, "washed in the blood of the lamb") inevitably lends to social expulsion/exclusion, there being a "MacBeth Effect." (Individuals perceive slippage between physical and moral contamination, as suggested by Lady M's compulsive hand-washing.) From the author's perspective, it's not a coincidence that the "purity culture" folks hate immigrants. Those who obsess over the borders of the body also obsess over the borders of the nation. This book was written in 2011 and focuses on religious conceits. I would love to read author's take on "wellness" influencers who crusade against toxins in food and, who--surprise, surprise--are increasingly embracing QAnon and other white nationalist conspiracies.
March 5, 2025
Very very goodread, particularly on the first day of Lent:
“The delusional desire to deny the body and flee the Incarnation might simply be a psychological curiosity if it were not for the fact that the pursuit of self-sufficiency [and avoidance of our own neediness] makes the church insensitive and unresponsive in the face of human vulnerability, weakness, and suffering.” 😱
“The delusional desire to deny the body and flee the Incarnation might simply be a psychological curiosity if it were not for the fact that the pursuit of self-sufficiency [and avoidance of our own neediness] makes the church insensitive and unresponsive in the face of human vulnerability, weakness, and suffering.” 😱
February 24, 2014
Would you drink a bottle of wine if there was a drop of urine in it? Why do we tend to assume that a tiny amount of impurity taints a huge amount of purity? Is there a deeper meaning to this "disgust" that we experience? Where does it come from?
These are some of the interesting questions Richard Beck's book touches on. Such questions would be interesting in a book that popularizes psychological research on disgust. Perhaps that could be the idea for Malcolm Gladwell's next book! But it is not Beck's goal simply to educate us on disgust, intriguing as this is. I mean, we've all been disgusted. Cleaning out the food that catches in the kitchen sink drain or cleaning rotten leftovers from the fridge leads to disgust. I never really thought about it, experiencing it for a few brief moments is enough, but apparently psychologists have thought long and studied deeply into the phenomena of disgust.
Beck brings these psychological insights to bear on theology. Specifically, he reflects on Jesus' words "I desire mercy, not sacrifice". Humans tend to build up walls, to divide into tribes. From this we in one tribe see ourselves as pure in contrast to other tribes who are impure. This phenomena ends up being a large and scary trait of religion in our society. Throughout the book disgust relates to religion in a variety of ways. One particularly disturbing point was studies on the relationship of physical cleansing with spiritual cleansing. Sin makes us want to take a shower. Conversely, being physically cleansed creates moral purity (the Macbeth Effect). If we think we are cleansed while others are dirty, we are going to keep the tribal walls up, remaning separated from everyone who, if they come in contact with us, could corrupt us. All of this is despite the fact that Jesus calls for inclusivism. Beck shows that it is this disgust psychology creates this boundary making in the church, a fear of contamination from those on the outside and scapegoating (a la Rene Girard).
Jesus' call for mercy is a call to break down boundaries. Yet we are unable to eliminate disgust, we can only hope to regulate it. Beck offers the Eucharist as the practice that can show us the mercy we ought to do but that keeps the sacrifice we desire.
My brief review, these few words, do not do this book justice. It was simply amazing, one of the best books I've read in a while. I've enjoyed reading Beck's blog and I plan to read his other books. I often feel like it is the books I like most that I have the most trouble reviewing. I want to write more, to better explain what I liked. Maybe that is the challenge. The books I like most defy a simple description. Instead they demand a rereading. They defy summary because they demand continued thinking and reflection. I finished this book a week ago but I am still thinking on its themes and trying to figure out how I can bring the lessons to bear in my life and ministry.
These are some of the interesting questions Richard Beck's book touches on. Such questions would be interesting in a book that popularizes psychological research on disgust. Perhaps that could be the idea for Malcolm Gladwell's next book! But it is not Beck's goal simply to educate us on disgust, intriguing as this is. I mean, we've all been disgusted. Cleaning out the food that catches in the kitchen sink drain or cleaning rotten leftovers from the fridge leads to disgust. I never really thought about it, experiencing it for a few brief moments is enough, but apparently psychologists have thought long and studied deeply into the phenomena of disgust.
Beck brings these psychological insights to bear on theology. Specifically, he reflects on Jesus' words "I desire mercy, not sacrifice". Humans tend to build up walls, to divide into tribes. From this we in one tribe see ourselves as pure in contrast to other tribes who are impure. This phenomena ends up being a large and scary trait of religion in our society. Throughout the book disgust relates to religion in a variety of ways. One particularly disturbing point was studies on the relationship of physical cleansing with spiritual cleansing. Sin makes us want to take a shower. Conversely, being physically cleansed creates moral purity (the Macbeth Effect). If we think we are cleansed while others are dirty, we are going to keep the tribal walls up, remaning separated from everyone who, if they come in contact with us, could corrupt us. All of this is despite the fact that Jesus calls for inclusivism. Beck shows that it is this disgust psychology creates this boundary making in the church, a fear of contamination from those on the outside and scapegoating (a la Rene Girard).
Jesus' call for mercy is a call to break down boundaries. Yet we are unable to eliminate disgust, we can only hope to regulate it. Beck offers the Eucharist as the practice that can show us the mercy we ought to do but that keeps the sacrifice we desire.
My brief review, these few words, do not do this book justice. It was simply amazing, one of the best books I've read in a while. I've enjoyed reading Beck's blog and I plan to read his other books. I often feel like it is the books I like most that I have the most trouble reviewing. I want to write more, to better explain what I liked. Maybe that is the challenge. The books I like most defy a simple description. Instead they demand a rereading. They defy summary because they demand continued thinking and reflection. I finished this book a week ago but I am still thinking on its themes and trying to figure out how I can bring the lessons to bear in my life and ministry.
July 7, 2021
There’s an over abundance of worthwhile ideas tumbling around in Unclean, Richard Beck’s exploration of disgust psychology and the church. Many of the ideas are from the usual suspects (Rene Girard, Jonathan Haidt, Ernest Becker, Miroslav Volf) and a few less expected names (Charles Taylor, Charles Darwin). Beck’s project is ultimately synergistic, bringing his disparate sources into discussion together through the framework of disgust psychology.
The ambition and scope of the book is so great that some falling short is understandable, and while several sections felt inadequately developed, or less than persuasive, I thought they were more than balanced on the whole by the sections which worked, like the discussion of purity culture and Beck’s reading of Charles Taylor in light of Jonathan Haidt, which was genuinely insightful.
The book’s largest flaw is raising more questions than it could hope to answer tidily, which is, in my opinion, reflective of one of Beck’s greatest strengths as a thinker — his restless, voracious, always open-minded pursuit of truth. If it leaves Unclean too open-ended to recommend casually or generally, I think the reward it offers readers willing to wrestle with that open-endedness more than surpassed the effort. A solid 3 1/2 stars.
The ambition and scope of the book is so great that some falling short is understandable, and while several sections felt inadequately developed, or less than persuasive, I thought they were more than balanced on the whole by the sections which worked, like the discussion of purity culture and Beck’s reading of Charles Taylor in light of Jonathan Haidt, which was genuinely insightful.
The book’s largest flaw is raising more questions than it could hope to answer tidily, which is, in my opinion, reflective of one of Beck’s greatest strengths as a thinker — his restless, voracious, always open-minded pursuit of truth. If it leaves Unclean too open-ended to recommend casually or generally, I think the reward it offers readers willing to wrestle with that open-endedness more than surpassed the effort. A solid 3 1/2 stars.
July 19, 2019
Oct 2016-A great challenge of a book. I was given this book by my pastor, who knew my love of psychology and living the Christian life. The author explores the ideas of purity, hospitality and mortality within the life of the church, society and the individual. I feel challenged to examine my own life and the way I treat people, not just within the church but in my daily encounters with those in need, those I cross paths with in my work life and those I love and choose to spend time with. I want to hand this book to so many in my life and have the tough discussions of accountability to challenge my self and others to extend more hospitality to those outside my "tribe" or explore the other ways to live out the principles of faith given. If you read this, let me know!
Update- July2019 Just read this again with a friend. Reading it again, I see the struggles of church and society to shove those that are "other" away and create barriers and boundaries in unhealthy harmful ways as he decribes the scapegoats and monsters. I wish there were more practical ways suggested for the church and individuals to bridge the gap and break the painful systems creating divides.
Update- July2019 Just read this again with a friend. Reading it again, I see the struggles of church and society to shove those that are "other" away and create barriers and boundaries in unhealthy harmful ways as he decribes the scapegoats and monsters. I wish there were more practical ways suggested for the church and individuals to bridge the gap and break the painful systems creating divides.
December 3, 2018
There is a dialectical tension between the physical and the spiritual, and Beck gives us a very thoughtful discussion of this tension within the body of Christ. I thought it read like a philosophy textbook at times but I was pulled in to his storytelling and humor. The human sense of disgust, and fear of contamination, has led to denigration and rejection of those deemed unsafe or unclean, and we have spoken and unspoken beliefs around elimination, sexual behavior, sickness, injury, aging, death, and social/cultural/religious areas. Women, immigrants, LGBTQ individuals, and addicts may be avoided or excluded from church roles and we may lose our sense of mission and outreach while focusing on keeping "pure." Jesus directly questioned and confronted those attitudes during His earthly life and presented a mission view of hospitality and inclusion. However, at the end of the book Beck also cautions against becoming too focused on civic duty and fairness, to the point where we lose a divine sense of the holy, sacred and transcendent. We need both.
January 28, 2019
Everyone ought to read this book as a starting point for thinking about the intersection of Haidt's moral foundations work and Christian theology. For Christians the relevance is hopefully obvious; for non-Christians in the western world, this book should still prove to be an invaluable (if often troubling) analysis of what it is that drives Christian behavior and political engagement.
November 16, 2017
"God desires mercy, not sacrifice". These words are deeply impacting the way I consider and think about theology. Our drive towards purity (as a result of disgust) instead of hospitality is harmful, creating boundaries we largely aren't aware of in our homes, the church, the workplace etc. Critical to this kind of hospitality that welcomes, is the ability to understand my own neediness, my inability to save myself. Lots more to think about. Really interesting / relevant read.
February 2, 2015
Excellent! Richard Beck, on my short list of favorite living authors (due largely to his blog "Experimental Theology"), has written a book in the intersection of psychology and Christian practical theology. These sorts of intersections are critical to a circumspect and self-refining Christianity, and Beck does a good job introducing us to a few of the issues involved.
I was pleasantly surprised to find a psychological approach to the liberal-conservative divide in Christianity and the corresponding mercy-purity tension. Beck connects these two dialectics to:
1) the psychological implications of disgust, mortality-denial, exclusion, and purity;
2) the Christian injunctions toward love, hospitality, and mercy; and,
3) the teachings and example of Jesus in such passages as Matthew 9 and one particular Old Testament quotation Jesus seemed to favor in explanation of his own reasoning: "I desire mercy, rather than sacrifice".
The majority of the book is dedicated to working through all of the above, but the last chapter is the real meat, and I will not spoil it here much, except to say that it ends with a brilliant recommendation for the use of the Eucharist meal as a regulating ritual to help Christians maintain "purity in tension with hospitality and an awareness of our biological vulnerability".
One fault: I found the book written too much like a blog series (in which each post must briefly summarize the previous posts), so it is repetitive. But my sense of the book's redundancy may be due in part to my familiarity with Beck's ideas through his blog and his source materials. For some readers, this repetition may be important, and I will not lower my rating for it. The concepts and conclusions found in "Unclean" are so valuable that I would strongly dissuade anyone whose hesitation to read this book is based on this criticism. I recommend it emphatically and affectionately.
I was pleasantly surprised to find a psychological approach to the liberal-conservative divide in Christianity and the corresponding mercy-purity tension. Beck connects these two dialectics to:
1) the psychological implications of disgust, mortality-denial, exclusion, and purity;
2) the Christian injunctions toward love, hospitality, and mercy; and,
3) the teachings and example of Jesus in such passages as Matthew 9 and one particular Old Testament quotation Jesus seemed to favor in explanation of his own reasoning: "I desire mercy, rather than sacrifice".
The majority of the book is dedicated to working through all of the above, but the last chapter is the real meat, and I will not spoil it here much, except to say that it ends with a brilliant recommendation for the use of the Eucharist meal as a regulating ritual to help Christians maintain "purity in tension with hospitality and an awareness of our biological vulnerability".
One fault: I found the book written too much like a blog series (in which each post must briefly summarize the previous posts), so it is repetitive. But my sense of the book's redundancy may be due in part to my familiarity with Beck's ideas through his blog and his source materials. For some readers, this repetition may be important, and I will not lower my rating for it. The concepts and conclusions found in "Unclean" are so valuable that I would strongly dissuade anyone whose hesitation to read this book is based on this criticism. I recommend it emphatically and affectionately.
November 4, 2012
It's been awhile since I've read a psychology book, felt good stretching those particular mental muscles again.
This book put a new lens on the idea of purity, for me. Beck articulated and explained, from a psychological perspective, some of the gut feelings I've had but been unable to rationalize, with regards to church culture and behavior especially. It's fascinating to delve into what disgusts us and why, and to realize that these almost instinctive impulses limit or completely block our ability to love other people, or even our own selves. I appreciate having some ammunition in my trying-to-see-the-best-in-people views on judgmental church-goers; a rationale that could explain that they really aren't consciously being assholes, and are actually just knee-jerk responding in an unhealthy and hurtful fashion. I would like to think that's the case. Trying to protect the sacred in an unholy fashion.
And I fully agree with the author's conclusion that Jesus, for the most part, threw out purity concerns in favor of serving others. He was less concerned with keeping holy things holy, and more concerned with reaching out to the hurting, the broken, the lost. He touched lepers, ate with sinners, and was brutally executed, naked and bleeding, in the company of criminals. And with that death, he tore the veil guarding the sanctity of the Most Holy Place. The sacred came down and live among the profane, touched the profane, and healed the profane. Jesus didn't isolate himself in some fancy building and condemn sinners for their impurity. He went out among them, spoke with them, ate with them, and told them their sins were forgiven. His condemnations were reserved for the religious elite who were more concerned with keeping their hands and holy utensils clean than they were with feeding the poor and loving their fellow man.
Anyways. Good stuff. Stocked up on food-for-thought for awhile now, I think.
This book put a new lens on the idea of purity, for me. Beck articulated and explained, from a psychological perspective, some of the gut feelings I've had but been unable to rationalize, with regards to church culture and behavior especially. It's fascinating to delve into what disgusts us and why, and to realize that these almost instinctive impulses limit or completely block our ability to love other people, or even our own selves. I appreciate having some ammunition in my trying-to-see-the-best-in-people views on judgmental church-goers; a rationale that could explain that they really aren't consciously being assholes, and are actually just knee-jerk responding in an unhealthy and hurtful fashion. I would like to think that's the case. Trying to protect the sacred in an unholy fashion.
And I fully agree with the author's conclusion that Jesus, for the most part, threw out purity concerns in favor of serving others. He was less concerned with keeping holy things holy, and more concerned with reaching out to the hurting, the broken, the lost. He touched lepers, ate with sinners, and was brutally executed, naked and bleeding, in the company of criminals. And with that death, he tore the veil guarding the sanctity of the Most Holy Place. The sacred came down and live among the profane, touched the profane, and healed the profane. Jesus didn't isolate himself in some fancy building and condemn sinners for their impurity. He went out among them, spoke with them, ate with them, and told them their sins were forgiven. His condemnations were reserved for the religious elite who were more concerned with keeping their hands and holy utensils clean than they were with feeding the poor and loving their fellow man.
Anyways. Good stuff. Stocked up on food-for-thought for awhile now, I think.
April 24, 2013
This is one of the most important books I've come across this past year & I've read a lot of books I think are important. The concept of impurity/uncleanness is a major element in religious traditions & so deserves & requires careful examination theologically & psychologically. Mary Douglas' "Purity and Danger" is a classic & Beck discusses some of her ideas, but this book cuts more deeply into how WE experience uncleanness & impurity, so this book is at least as practical as it is helpful with theory. Especially memorable and important was Beck's discussion of how love overcomes disgust. The subject matter of this book would be of interest to anyone inclined to think with René Girard's theory of sacred violence as what Girard calls the exclusionary mechanism ties in with beliefs about impurity. It happens that Beck is conversant with Girard's thought & makes an important advance in our understanding of it. I explore these issues in my blog post "Cleaning Up Our Unclean Acts" at http://bit.ly/11ksVxt
April 6, 2012
This book made a little bit of my brain leak out my ears. In a good way. I bought it at a hyper-inflated internet price because I interact with Dr. Beck's blog on a regular basis, and I both wanted to see what he'd have to say in a longer format and to support him in his writing. I don't regret it.
Super-basic breakdown: Beck uses psychology to try to figure out why people in the Christian community are such turdbuckets to people who engage in moral behavior of which they don't approve. It would (will) take a second read-through-and-outline for me to give this book its due, but let me just say that I think that for anybody wanting greater understanding of and empathy for those who engage this sort of turdbucketty behavior, this is a MUST-READ.
Fair warning: if you're going to vomit at an author who quotes another author who refers to Jesus as basically "the God who shits," then you should probably read this book. It will be good for you.
Super-basic breakdown: Beck uses psychology to try to figure out why people in the Christian community are such turdbuckets to people who engage in moral behavior of which they don't approve. It would (will) take a second read-through-and-outline for me to give this book its due, but let me just say that I think that for anybody wanting greater understanding of and empathy for those who engage this sort of turdbucketty behavior, this is a MUST-READ.
Fair warning: if you're going to vomit at an author who quotes another author who refers to Jesus as basically "the God who shits," then you should probably read this book. It will be good for you.
August 9, 2015
This was so disturbing and so good at the same time. Written by a psychologist who tells us plainly how our disgust impacts our ability to love others, this book has great reports on little studies and insightful observations about the church. specifically, we shouldn't just say we need to get out there and love the unlovable, we need to realize what we are asking each other to do and the psychological trouble with it. I just can't recommend it highly enough--really really good. I'm reviewing it for the Spectrummagazine.org website with a bunch of other people, so will just send people there for a better review.
August 6, 2015
A very insightful look at the underlying driving forces behind some of our church-related behaviors of inclusion/exclusion. What we consider unclean is often more driven by our core disgust with things like body fluids and dirty food than with rational reflection. Being aware of the underlying factors can help us be more welcoming and hospitable in our missional lives. It is also fascinating to realize that sex and death are so closely tied together in our psyche, and it is our fear of death that drives our attitudes about sex. A truly enlightening read.
August 7, 2015
This is one of the few "theological" books I can wholeheartedly recommend to nonbelievers. Just revelation after revelation, page after page. I haven't read a book I literally years that has so thoroughly reshaped the way I see politics, theology, psychology, relationships, public discourse...pretty much everything. Don't think that the psychology of disgust affects your life? Well, I've got a book you should probably read.
November 5, 2016
This was really transformational to the way I think about many areas of my life - but in particular parenting and how I relate to people who are different than me. There wasn't much when it comes to solutions at the end but super thought provoking nonetheless.
October 13, 2016
Lot of information. But really gives a perspective on how we view clean and unclean people.
July 18, 2018
Do you remember the green character in the movie "Inside Out?" Unclean is all about her. The author, Richard Beck, delves into the complexities of disgust psychology, specifically how our feelings of disgust affect how we treat those we deem dirty, contaminated or unclean.
His argument focuses on the trouble we find between the priestly and prophetic traditions in the Old Testament. In brief, the priestly tradition was concerned with holiness, purity and sacrifice, while the prophetic tradition centered on mercy, justice, and hospitality. Jesus, when he quotes the prophets, who said, "I desire mercy and not sacrifice," sides with the prophetic tradition. This is vital.
The key for me is to first recognize when our disgust impulse activates, whether that's body odor, the sight of blood or other bodily juices, or the uncomfortable feelings one might have toward homosexuality. Any time this feeling of disgust comes, we want to push away that person, regardless of whether we ought to show hospitality and love to them. Disgust and love run in opposite directions. What is more, our feelings of disgust create dumbfounding - namely we cannot usually express any logical reasoning for our feelings. Therefore, conflicts surrounding disgust are basically impossible to navigate. Beck gave the example of using the word "crap" on Sunday morning from the pulpit at church and the conflict that ensued. Some were offended, saying such a dirty word shouldn't be used in a sacred place, while others said, "It shouldn't bother anyone." Whichever side you lean toward - neither group could give reasons for the argument - it was simply a feeling.
Another aspect of disgust is our desire to deny our mortality. We don't like remembering we are animals that will eventually die. We don't like thinking that Jesus pooped, had sexual urges, and probably stank a bit. Doing so just further separates us from "the other" - those that are sick, dirty, smelly, etc.
Beck's conclusion makes the argument that the Eucharist - the Lord's Supper - is a regulating ritual that keeps purity and holiness in tension with hospitality and biological vulnerability. As we eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood, we are purified, all the while the Lord's Supper is our time to hospitably invite others in.
Overall, the conclusions and implications of Beck's research are things we hear all the time, namely, "be hospitable; practice the Lord's Supper." However, his approach of understanding the psychology behind it was enlightening. Definitely a thought-provoking read. Recommended to all Christians who like thinking. :) I will never think of disgust the same.
One other concluding thought: Beck includes an insightful discussion of salvation metaphors from the New Testament, where he lists over 20. The purity metaphors tend to dominate our discussion of sin and grace. By ignoring others, particularly ones that are communal, cosmic, and developmental, atonement tends to be individualistic and pietistic. We must widen our view to include them all for a fully, healthier view of sin and grace.
His argument focuses on the trouble we find between the priestly and prophetic traditions in the Old Testament. In brief, the priestly tradition was concerned with holiness, purity and sacrifice, while the prophetic tradition centered on mercy, justice, and hospitality. Jesus, when he quotes the prophets, who said, "I desire mercy and not sacrifice," sides with the prophetic tradition. This is vital.
The key for me is to first recognize when our disgust impulse activates, whether that's body odor, the sight of blood or other bodily juices, or the uncomfortable feelings one might have toward homosexuality. Any time this feeling of disgust comes, we want to push away that person, regardless of whether we ought to show hospitality and love to them. Disgust and love run in opposite directions. What is more, our feelings of disgust create dumbfounding - namely we cannot usually express any logical reasoning for our feelings. Therefore, conflicts surrounding disgust are basically impossible to navigate. Beck gave the example of using the word "crap" on Sunday morning from the pulpit at church and the conflict that ensued. Some were offended, saying such a dirty word shouldn't be used in a sacred place, while others said, "It shouldn't bother anyone." Whichever side you lean toward - neither group could give reasons for the argument - it was simply a feeling.
Another aspect of disgust is our desire to deny our mortality. We don't like remembering we are animals that will eventually die. We don't like thinking that Jesus pooped, had sexual urges, and probably stank a bit. Doing so just further separates us from "the other" - those that are sick, dirty, smelly, etc.
Beck's conclusion makes the argument that the Eucharist - the Lord's Supper - is a regulating ritual that keeps purity and holiness in tension with hospitality and biological vulnerability. As we eat Jesus' flesh and drink his blood, we are purified, all the while the Lord's Supper is our time to hospitably invite others in.
Overall, the conclusions and implications of Beck's research are things we hear all the time, namely, "be hospitable; practice the Lord's Supper." However, his approach of understanding the psychology behind it was enlightening. Definitely a thought-provoking read. Recommended to all Christians who like thinking. :) I will never think of disgust the same.
One other concluding thought: Beck includes an insightful discussion of salvation metaphors from the New Testament, where he lists over 20. The purity metaphors tend to dominate our discussion of sin and grace. By ignoring others, particularly ones that are communal, cosmic, and developmental, atonement tends to be individualistic and pietistic. We must widen our view to include them all for a fully, healthier view of sin and grace.
Read
January 23, 2025I borrowed this book from Beka and was really excited to read it, given I read one of his more recent books, The Slavery of Death, and loved it. Since I follow his blog regularly, I had an idea what the book was going to be about, but of course, there's no substitute for actually reading it. This book is fascinating. It is a crazy blend of psychology research (mostly in the area of disgust), theology, and life in the church. He starts with presenting our basic psychology of disgust - he calls 'core disgust' - biological or culturally enherited feelings of revulsions to certain foods, bodily fluids, etc. Eventually he connects this to disgust of people, and how that affects the way we see people and how the church treats people. He draws his main Sciptural text from Jesus telling the Pharisees that God desires 'mercy, not sacrifice'. He thus draws a motify of mercy vs. sacrifice through the whole book. Mercy is the will to embrace others unlike us. Sacrifice is the urge to purify ourselves and our community, to cleanse, to expel. So many other parallels. The main point he is driving towards is that we should emulate Jesus' radical hospitality. The way that he embraced others and got into people's messes. I felt really really challenged by the main tenets of the book. I have a couple criticisms, though. First, he spends a lot of time talking about how groups tend towards a purity mindset, creating us-and-them boundaries, and all of the awful things that can happen as a result. He is boundary destroying. However, he doesn't well address the criticism, which is, of course, if a group takes down all of the boundaries between itself and the world, what comes of the group? It ceases to be a group. There has to be some kind of tension for the church to have boundaries, because in a sense we are called to be separate from the world, while also loving our neighbor. It bothered me that he doesn't address this more head on. Secondly, I felt a little let down at the end of the book that there weren't more concrete steps offered. To me, the book describes a problem extremely well (the problem of disgust, starting with the lowest levels of our psychology and moving all the way up our social structures), but disappointly doesn't offer great solutions. The only thing he offers is that the Lord Supper can be a great place to start, but it still felt a little abstract. It probably wasn't the intent of the book to have practical solutions, so anyways. This book is, let's say, a bit off the beaten path, but I loved it and felt challenged by it. Its well written, not too academic, and relatively short. I loved reading one chapter at a time and thinking about it all as I went along. Definitely recommend.
October 2, 2022
Richard Beck is one of the best writers on the cusp of Christianity and Psychology. I've said that with my other reviews of his books- Hunting Magic Eels, Stranger God, and The Slavery of Death. If you want to hear how excellent Beck is as well, read those. This book UNCLEAN, I have to talk about on a whole other level. First, let me just say Beck is in conversation with Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind, which if you read my review of that book, you'll know I thought there were some great things in that text (most not original to Haidt) but also a lot I was mehhhhhhh. about. However, if you get turned off by Haidt's book, do not fear Unclean. Beck takes the Moral Foundation Theory and makes it much more useful by creating ana venue for exploration into the psychology of disgust. This volume develops psychology and theology of thinking about disgust, purity, and holiness in a way that elevates social justice and the sanctity and beauty of wonder. Beck manages to always go to the next level of thinking, and I have learned so much from this man and, in particular, this book. I swoon the very name of Richard these days within Christian writing, thanks to BECK and ROHR.
So let me end by saying this: If you struggled and hurt your way growing up in purity culture, especially within the Christian context, this book will massively help. And where I still understood and didn't want to leave all moral identity behind simply, Unclean works through this process beautifully and importantly.
So let me end by saying this: If you struggled and hurt your way growing up in purity culture, especially within the Christian context, this book will massively help. And where I still understood and didn't want to leave all moral identity behind simply, Unclean works through this process beautifully and importantly.
March 4, 2021
Interesting case where, from the moment I first formed the intention to read this book, to the moment where I actually got my hands on it, so much time passed and I had changed so much that it largely didn't speak to me. When I first was reading Beck's blog (not sure how I found him, though it may have been through Fred Clark's Slacktivist blog, an extremely influential guy for me) I was desperate for a perspective on traditional Christian theology that was informed by psychology and a progressive perspective. It was like there were two sides of myself that were having a hard time talking to each other and understanding each other and I was looking for a translator. That was years ago, though. It's wild how my perspective on evangelical Christianity has shifted since 2016. Still, glad to have finally read Beck's book, which functions as a rich and fruitful appendix to Pohl's Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition.
June 11, 2020
An exploration into "uncleanness" and the effects of disgust psychology on faith and the church.
The author defines the nature of uncleanness as first and foremost a disgust mechanism, ostensibly to protect a person from consuming hazardous substances. He then does well at showing how that same impulse is transferred from physical properties to persons based upon conditions and behavior.
He then explores how this disgust mechanism functions and proves corrosive in a Christian/church environment, leading to over-emphasis on holiness/purity against hospitality and service. He connects disgust mechanism to the fear and anxiety surrounding death. He laments how a person feels morally clean by just washing their hands even though no act in faith to minister to others was accomplished.
A really powerful and compelling work, one which all with responsibility in the church would do well to consider.
The author defines the nature of uncleanness as first and foremost a disgust mechanism, ostensibly to protect a person from consuming hazardous substances. He then does well at showing how that same impulse is transferred from physical properties to persons based upon conditions and behavior.
He then explores how this disgust mechanism functions and proves corrosive in a Christian/church environment, leading to over-emphasis on holiness/purity against hospitality and service. He connects disgust mechanism to the fear and anxiety surrounding death. He laments how a person feels morally clean by just washing their hands even though no act in faith to minister to others was accomplished.
A really powerful and compelling work, one which all with responsibility in the church would do well to consider.
May 11, 2014
A friend directed me to a podcast in which Richard Beck summarizes the thesis of his fascinating book: http://www.beyondtheboxpodcast.com/20...
The significance of his thesis struck me as profound. I bought his book the same day. Besides, it's not often I get the opportunity to read a significant theological work by a psychologist.
Beck immediately goes to Matthew 12 and takes the words of Jesus "I desire mercy and not sacrifice" to explain how Jesus deliberately turned the purity metaphor upside down. Fear of the unclean was predominant in Jewish religion. When Jesus touched and healed lepers, he was breaking one of the most significant purity rules that had prevailed for thousands of years. No wonder the religious leaders of his day found it so difficult to accept his teaching, which appeared to contradict so much of OT Scripture.
Despite Jesus' repeated efforts to challenge the purity dogma - that created so many boundaries against the spread of his gospel message of love - his closest followers still didn't get it. Peter was a good Jew who understood purity all too well - so God had to send him the vision of "unclean" animals and then repeat himself twice (Acts 10) before he got the message: "What God has made clean, you must not call profane". Yet even after this lightning bolt from on high, Peter still later got into moral debates with Paul about eating unclean meat offered to idols.
Beck makes a convincing case for the centrality of the purity metaphor in how we arrive at our views on morality. He argues that purity dogma has remained prominent in the church today - despite Jesus' teaching of mercy over sacrificial purity . To understand the reasons for why our moral indignation still often prevails over mercy, Beck turns to "disgust psychology". Simply put, this is the emotional reaction that we all experience when we encounter something that crosses our purity/clean boundary. Beck reviews a number of psychological experiments to show how our disgust psychology is often a more powerful influence over our purity choices than our theology. This becomes a problem for the church when we understand that our moral indignation is not as much based on sound theological doctrine as we might choose to believe.
The book is in five parts. Part one is an introduction to disgust psychology. It includes a review of a number of fascinating experiments that reveal the predominance of disgust in human psychological experience.
Part two reviews how moral judgment seems to require an attitude of disgust. He argues that the age-old teaching to "love the sinner and hate the sin" is almost psychologically impossible to achieve because of the extent to which loving the sinner tends to undermine the moral outrage on which our hating the sin seems to depend.
Part three is on hospitality. The social dimensions of disgust are explored. Disgust creates social boundaries and motivates acts of exclusion. Extreme forms of this exclusion can be catastrophic, and include as an example the Nazi genocide of Jews in World War II (lest we forgot that the Bible has been used as a defence for many social acts of exclusion, including genocide and racial segregation leading to slavery and apartheid). Beck reveals how propaganda campaigns of exclusion where genocide has occurred, often involves choosing a metaphor to represent the despised race and thus trigger the sense of disgust which serves as a powerful impetus for genocide. Beck refers to how Nazi propaganda campaigns selected the rat in the sewers of Poland to represent the contamination imposed by Jews. I couldn't help but recall the movie Hotel Rwanda in which the cockroach was selected as the despised metaphor to represent the Tutsi minority that was targeted for genocide. It is sobering to consider how the church today continues to rely on social dimensions of disgust for acts of exclusion, particularly against sexual sin, which religion often targets as the most unclean of all sins.
Part four deals with mortality and the existential domains of disgust. Beck suggests that "We are existentially unsettled by the fact that we have a physical body that bleeds, oozes, and defecates. We are shocked to find that we are vulnerable to injury, illness, and death . . . Such body-related disgust is found to serve an existential function: it enables us to repress our fears of death". Beck also goes into detail to reveal how the denial of these functions of the human body lead to a further denial of the Incarnation - the reality that God crossed the purity boundary by occupying a human body with all of its associated physical functions.
Beck challenges the conclusion that many might reach after reading this book - that disgust psychology serves no useful function in the church and should be challenged and overruled. Instead, he suggests a non-dualistic response - a regulation of the influence of disgust within the church. But you'll have to read the book to discover which religious ritual Beck considers as most likely to serve this regulatory function.
After reading this book, I don't think I will ever take my disgust psychology again for granted. I recall being challenged several years ago by reading Dallas Willard's emphasis on contempt as the human emotion perhaps most opposed to the spread of the kingdom of God in the world. Clearly, there are many parallels between Willard's contempt and Beck's disgust. Both serve as perhaps the most powerful obstacles to fulfilling the great command of love and the new rule of mercy over sacrifice - both repeatedly emphasized in Jesus' teaching.
The significance of his thesis struck me as profound. I bought his book the same day. Besides, it's not often I get the opportunity to read a significant theological work by a psychologist.
Beck immediately goes to Matthew 12 and takes the words of Jesus "I desire mercy and not sacrifice" to explain how Jesus deliberately turned the purity metaphor upside down. Fear of the unclean was predominant in Jewish religion. When Jesus touched and healed lepers, he was breaking one of the most significant purity rules that had prevailed for thousands of years. No wonder the religious leaders of his day found it so difficult to accept his teaching, which appeared to contradict so much of OT Scripture.
Despite Jesus' repeated efforts to challenge the purity dogma - that created so many boundaries against the spread of his gospel message of love - his closest followers still didn't get it. Peter was a good Jew who understood purity all too well - so God had to send him the vision of "unclean" animals and then repeat himself twice (Acts 10) before he got the message: "What God has made clean, you must not call profane". Yet even after this lightning bolt from on high, Peter still later got into moral debates with Paul about eating unclean meat offered to idols.
Beck makes a convincing case for the centrality of the purity metaphor in how we arrive at our views on morality. He argues that purity dogma has remained prominent in the church today - despite Jesus' teaching of mercy over sacrificial purity . To understand the reasons for why our moral indignation still often prevails over mercy, Beck turns to "disgust psychology". Simply put, this is the emotional reaction that we all experience when we encounter something that crosses our purity/clean boundary. Beck reviews a number of psychological experiments to show how our disgust psychology is often a more powerful influence over our purity choices than our theology. This becomes a problem for the church when we understand that our moral indignation is not as much based on sound theological doctrine as we might choose to believe.
The book is in five parts. Part one is an introduction to disgust psychology. It includes a review of a number of fascinating experiments that reveal the predominance of disgust in human psychological experience.
Part two reviews how moral judgment seems to require an attitude of disgust. He argues that the age-old teaching to "love the sinner and hate the sin" is almost psychologically impossible to achieve because of the extent to which loving the sinner tends to undermine the moral outrage on which our hating the sin seems to depend.
Part three is on hospitality. The social dimensions of disgust are explored. Disgust creates social boundaries and motivates acts of exclusion. Extreme forms of this exclusion can be catastrophic, and include as an example the Nazi genocide of Jews in World War II (lest we forgot that the Bible has been used as a defence for many social acts of exclusion, including genocide and racial segregation leading to slavery and apartheid). Beck reveals how propaganda campaigns of exclusion where genocide has occurred, often involves choosing a metaphor to represent the despised race and thus trigger the sense of disgust which serves as a powerful impetus for genocide. Beck refers to how Nazi propaganda campaigns selected the rat in the sewers of Poland to represent the contamination imposed by Jews. I couldn't help but recall the movie Hotel Rwanda in which the cockroach was selected as the despised metaphor to represent the Tutsi minority that was targeted for genocide. It is sobering to consider how the church today continues to rely on social dimensions of disgust for acts of exclusion, particularly against sexual sin, which religion often targets as the most unclean of all sins.
Part four deals with mortality and the existential domains of disgust. Beck suggests that "We are existentially unsettled by the fact that we have a physical body that bleeds, oozes, and defecates. We are shocked to find that we are vulnerable to injury, illness, and death . . . Such body-related disgust is found to serve an existential function: it enables us to repress our fears of death". Beck also goes into detail to reveal how the denial of these functions of the human body lead to a further denial of the Incarnation - the reality that God crossed the purity boundary by occupying a human body with all of its associated physical functions.
Beck challenges the conclusion that many might reach after reading this book - that disgust psychology serves no useful function in the church and should be challenged and overruled. Instead, he suggests a non-dualistic response - a regulation of the influence of disgust within the church. But you'll have to read the book to discover which religious ritual Beck considers as most likely to serve this regulatory function.
After reading this book, I don't think I will ever take my disgust psychology again for granted. I recall being challenged several years ago by reading Dallas Willard's emphasis on contempt as the human emotion perhaps most opposed to the spread of the kingdom of God in the world. Clearly, there are many parallels between Willard's contempt and Beck's disgust. Both serve as perhaps the most powerful obstacles to fulfilling the great command of love and the new rule of mercy over sacrifice - both repeatedly emphasized in Jesus' teaching.
July 21, 2017
Thoughtful and well-written, this book challenged me to think about how my life and relationships are influenced by subconscious feelings of disgust. Beck is a psychologist, yet he handles theological matters with the skill and attention to orthodoxy of a theologian. I now have a new understanding of Jesus' saying in Matthew 9:13, "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." Psychology, not unlike theology, is an inexact science, and not all of the conclusions Beck reaches, I felt, had compelling evidence. Nevertheless, it was an interesting, original, and worthwhile read. It can help the church to think about how we extend hospitality to everyone.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews