[Note: this was originally written in March of 2020. This note is being composed in December of 2020. The death toll is at biblical proportions now.]
The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying:
When a person has on the skin of his body a swelling or an eruption or a spot, and it turns into צָרַעַת {tsara`ath} on the skin of his body, he shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons the priests.
The priest shall examine the disease on the skin of his body, and if the hair in the diseased area has turned white and the disease appears to be deeper than the skin of his body, it is צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}; after the priest has examined him he shall pronounce him ceremonially unclean.
But if the spot is white in the skin of his body, and appears no deeper than the skin, and the hair in it has not turned white, the priest shall confine the diseased person for seven days.
~ Leviticus 13:1-4
Leviticus 13 and 14 (you should read it all) spends a stupid amount of time explaining what the priests of Israel should do in response to someone inflicted with צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}, which is most commonly translated as “leprosy.”
As the beginning of these instructions explain above, the infected person is brought to the priest who makes a determination about the health of the individual, decides if they are “clean” or “unclean,” and then quarantines them as needed. The succeeding verses explain that at the end of the quarantine time, the priest makes another determination as to the infected person’s ability to rejoin the community, lifting or extending the quarantine as needed.
(You can probably see where we are going with this... )
As always, let’s first do a quick word study to make sure we are all talking about the same thing, specifically the nature of the aliment that the religious leader is supposed to be addressing.
“Leprosy” and Community
Biblical scholars and medical historian generally agree that whatever צָרַעַת {tsara`ath} means, it was not solely referring to what we think of as leprosy (Hansen’s disease, mycobacterium leprae) today.
The Biblical description, both here in Leviticus and elsewhere in the Bible for צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}, varies in its appearance, symptoms, and duration. As a result, צָרַעַת {tsara`ath} has largely been taken to mean any number of aliments that impact the skin, including psoriasis vulgaris, vitiligo, favus, pityriasis rosea, and crusted scabies (we will let you do an image search for those on your own), as well as mold and mildew infecting household goods and fabric (c.f. Lev 13:47-51).
This medical distinction is important because if the aliment is not curable outside of a sudden miracle (c.f. Miriam, Namaan, and the multiple leapers Jesus healed), then the infected would never been “clean” and able to return to the community. And that is the crux of this passage: the impact on community.
In regards to צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}, the priest is making both a medical determination and a religious one.
He is both diagnosing a threat to the physical and spiritual health of the community.
On “Clean” and “Unclean”
As we’ve explained before (in a lot more depth), the designation of “clean” or “unclean” is a fundamental, but often misunderstood concept in the Bible.
Someone can become ritually unclean by eating the wrong animals (Leviticus 11:26; Deuteronomy 14:8). Or for coming in contact with an animal corpse (Leviticus 5:2) or human corpse (Numbers 5:2b; 19:11 ). Women on their period (Leviticus 15:19-24) or who have recently given birth (Leviticus 12) are also a source of “uncleanliness.”
While clean and unclean does have moral implications in some passages, the primary use of the terms denote what is suitable for use in worship (holy, separate) and things that are not (common, everyday). In other words, who can and cannot participate in the practices of a community. The “unclean” stay out of community practices until the appropriate time has passed, or the appropriate ritual offerings, sacrifices, and/or washings has taken place.
Throughout Leviticus 13 and 14, when dealing with צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}, the priest is determining whether the member of his community can remain in close proximity and with the others. Why? Because that is the responsibility God gave him (It’s right there, in the Torah. God’s law). The priest must do what is best for the community, which may include separating its members.
(If you can’t see where we are going yet…)
For the People in the Back
The Bible records no deaths from צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}. It was more of a chronic illness than a death sentence. Be that as it may, the Bible makes it clear that the ailment was not something the people wanted spreading. The Bible makes it clear that the ailment was not something that God wanted spreading.
Currently we are in the midst of a pandemic. COVID-19 is marching across the globe like an actual Biblical plague. Unlike צָרַעַת {tsara`ath}, COVID-19 is taking lives. Thankfully the current death count is a lot lower than anything we find in Exodus or Revelation, but our loved ones are still at risk. [Note: this was originally written in March of 2020. This note is being composed in December of 2020. The death toll is at biblical proportions now.]
Across the world clergy members and church leaders of all denominations (and faiths for that matter) have had to make absolutely agonizing decisions about how to best protect the people God gave them care over. Do they close the doors of not only their churches, but also their soup kitchens, food pantries, homeless shelters, domestic violence shelters, youth programs, prison ministries, and a host of other loving practices in fear of causing more harm than good.
Some kept their doors open believing “faith in God” will protect their people from the virus. Personally, we have serious problems with the theodicy and theology behind this sentiment, but we can still say, “God bless and keep you,” praying they are correct.
However, others closed their doors and conducted “church” through Facebook live, radio addresses, or a series of phone calls. They sent emails, Google docs, Tweets, and left disinfected cards of encouragement in physical mailboxes. They did home visits for the most vulnerable, staying on the other side of a glass door.
Like the priests in Leviticus, these leaders did, and are doing, everything they can to keep the community safe without breaking the community.
They are following sound medical and religious determination for the protection of their flock. They are responding to a physical threat while safeguarding the spiritual health of their people.
They deserve our thanks for bearing that burden. Not incoherent screeds about their lack of faith.
Unless, of course, the priests of the Hebrew Bible following the Law, were also similarly “faithless”? Perhaps those who need to shut the doors are not the same as those who need to shut their mouths.