Hot and cold

The lectionary reading for Morning Prayer this morning was from The Revelation of John (3:14-22). This is writing to the church in Laodicea and laying into it for being “luke-warm”, “neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!”
The interesting thing about this is that I’d always been rather confused about it. I’d only heard it explained as being about enthusiasm (“hot”) or the lack of it (“cold”), but this never made much sense, because why would God be looking for a church without enthusiasm?
A friend who’s training to be a priest was talking about this a while ago and said that, in fact, this was talking about water. In those days, water that was cold was fresh from the spring and so safe to drink. Water that was hot had been boiled and was again safe to drink. Water that was luke-warm, however, was in danger of being tainted, poisonous, because it had been lying out in the sun. So, the church was being condemned for being tainted, for being neither fresh nor purified.
There’s also a likelihood that John was referring to the spring waters in the town, which were famously warm (neither hot nor cold). Cold spring waters were good to drink. Hot springs were sought after for their healing properties (think about all those Roman baths!). But the spring in Laodicea was good for neither nourishment nor healing. Just like the church there.

pax et bonum

Article posted at 10:01am on 18 January 2005
Category: Faith, Musing