Catholicism and Legalism

[LilyM]

Is this how you view the church and the rules for fast and abstinence?

Exactly! The church’s rules about fasting and abstinence (seven whole days out of the year!), going to Mass (one hour or less a week, and a maximum of three or four other days of the year!) and confessing and communicating (each once a year!) are hardly anything like unduly onerous.

Neither are they completely baseless or insane. They all have solid basis in terms of what we, as Christians, should be willing to do anyways.

A truer analogy might be the captain ordering his men to shower twice daily at specified times - ie the basic activity is indisputably necessary and something that most all of them would probably do anyway, just not in precisely the manner ordered.

 

[Pug]

…he may, in short, act like a petty tyrant, throw his weight around obsessively, and enact whatever legalistic and insane rules he wants.

…

Something, rummaging through Scripture, about ruling with a rod of iron, and some odd stress on obedience that is strange to western ears.

Yes, you mean Psalm 2:5-12. Hey, might as well read it all at that rate.

So, maybe by legalistic you mean an insane rule, or simply a rule that is not based in our nature, but is rather arbitrary from nature standards. Like a rule imposed from without, perhaps. Like if a teacher were to say that on a multiple choice test where you have to fill in an answer blank, the answer “A” is incorrect, but “a” is the right answer. This would be an external sort of rule, saying that you cannot answer with a capitol letter, even though you did in fact know the material, you just didn’t follow directions.

I know this one teacher who takes off one point for no stapling and instead only twisting the edges of several sheets together…

I don’t know, but all those OT rules have that same sort of imposed from without feeling, and God/Moses dreamt those up. Don’t wear wool and linen together? :ehh: Sunday has that same sort of annoyingness for some folk as well.

Do you think fasting together as one Body (as a Church) is arbitrary, with practically no meaning or value? Lily made a good comparison about the showers.

 

[Truthstalker]

Is this how you view the church and the rules for fast and abstinence?

Good grief.

If he has the right to make regulations that are insane, legalistic and onerous, how much more does he have the right to make regulations for our good?

I’m not looking for a fight. I’m trying to understand Catholicism. You’re reading the words of someone who believed for many years that the Holy Spirit had left the Catholic Church centuries ago and all that was left was dry, dead religion. One of the first things I did when a friend of mine ‘abandoned his eternal salvation for the folly of the dead works of Catholicism, crucifying Christ again and making a mockery of faith’, (as I would have put it then, not now) )was set out to prove that Catholics believe only in a legalistic system that is totally of man. Instead I found a grace-based Christocentric system that has a deeper understanding of the Bible and history than I do/did as a Protestant… I was in shock. In some ways I still am. Lousy job of being a Protestant evangelist. That was long before I encountered CAF. In some ways I am from Jack Chick country. I have come a long way.

I understand fasting. Obedience. Discipline. But what I don’t understand is a requirement for fasting. I wrestled with fasting as Lent approached, and I decided not to, because of this issue. I didn’t understand it, and don’t understand it. It is for our good, so that we can share His holiness. But what parent tells his child he will go to hell if he doesn’t eat his peas? Peas are good for the child, death threats are a bit much.

 

[Cat]

I’m a convert to Catholicism from evangelical Protestantism, and I personally find the Catholic Church much less legalistic than any of my evangelical churches.

A while back, I posted a list of “rules” that Protestants must obey, or else their Christianity is “suspect.” Here are some of those “rules”–

1. Must have a daily Quiet Time (Morning Watch, Devotional, etc.). Should include Bible study and prayer. A person who is not doing this is probably not a Christian, since a real Christian will crave daily fellowship with God, which means prayer and Bible study. The one exception might be if you are a mother of a newborn, but by the 3rd week or so, you should be back to having your daily Quiet Time.
2. A real Christian should be tithing. 10% is the minimum. A Christian who isn’t tithing is sinning because they aren’t living by FAITH, and since a real Christian doesn’t practice sin, then it is questionable whether the non-tithing Christian is really a Christian.
3. A real Christians should be listening almost exclusively to Christian music. Contemporary Christian music is ideal, but other styles are acceptable. Some classical music is suspect, since it was written by pagans. A Christian who spends a lot of time listening to secular music is suspect–why would a real Christian want to listen to music that doesn’t glorify the Lord?
4. A real Christians shouldn’t swear, smoke, drink alcohol, or suffer from any of the other addictive sins. Overeating is acceptable, but very very shaky grounds, since our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, and we should keep them fit, thin, and attractive. Probably the overweight Christian got fat before they accepted Christ as their personal Savior, and they are working on becoming fit and thin.
5. A real Christian doesn’t waste time with secular television, movies, theater, dance, comedy, art, or literature, except for Andy Griffith. That’s OK.
6. A real Christian doesn’t bring secular newspapers or other news media into their home. There are “Christian” sources for news.
7. A REAL Christian wouldn’t celebrate Halloween! It’s of the devil, and a real Christian flees the devil.
8. A real Christian should be homeschooling their children, with Christian (Protestant) schools as a “second-best” option. If the real Christian sends children to a secular or public school, it is because they want to be a witness to the godless.

etc.

These are just some of the “rules” that I ran across over the years. Some of you might laugh and say I am exaggerating. No, sir or ma’am. If anything, I am I am probably underestimating the situation. Most Protestant sects don’t write these rules down anywhere (except for the one about smoking and drinking), but they are there, nevertheless, and woe to the “Christian” who doesn’t follow them. Ever heard of “shunning?”

 

[Pax]

I’m glad you’re not looking for a fight…neither am I. Nevertheless, I’m still trying to get a handle on why all of this bothers you as it does. My problem lies in the fact that I in no way identify with your feelings and misgivings about these things. It is difficult for me to appreciate where you are coming from since my perspective and experience seem so different.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’m a convert to Catholicism from evangelical Protestantism, and I personally find the Catholic Church much less legalistic than any of my evangelical churches.

A while back, I posted a list of “rules” that Protestants must obey, or else their Christianity is “suspect.” Here are some of those “rules”–

1. Must have a daily Quiet Time (Morning Watch, Devotional, etc.). Should include Bible study and prayer. A person who is not doing this is probably not a Christian, since a real Christian will crave daily fellowship with God, which means prayer and Bible study. The one exception might be if you are a mother of a newborn, but by the 3rd week or so, you should be back to having your daily Quiet Time.
2. A real Christian should be tithing. 10% is the minimum. A Christian who isn’t tithing is sinning because they aren’t living by FAITH, and since a real Christian doesn’t practice sin, then it is questionable whether the non-tithing Christian is really a Christian.
3. A real Christians should be listening almost exclusively to Christian music. Contemporary Christian music is ideal, but other styles are acceptable. Some classical music is suspect, since it was written by pagans. A Christian who spends a lot of time listening to secular music is suspect–why would a real Christian want to listen to music that doesn’t glorify the Lord?
4. A real Christians shouldn’t swear, smoke, drink alcohol, or suffer from any of the other addictive sins. Overeating is acceptable, but very very shaky grounds, since our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, and we should keep them fit, thin, and attractive. Probably the overweight Christian got fat before they accepted Christ as their personal Savior, and they are working on becoming fit and thin.
5. A real Christian doesn’t waste time with secular television, movies, theater, dance, comedy, art, or literature, except for Andy Griffith. That’s OK.
6. A real Christian doesn’t bring secular newspapers or other news media into their home. There are “Christian” sources for news.
7. A REAL Christian wouldn’t celebrate Halloween! It’s of the devil, and a real Christian flees the devil.
8. A real Christian should be homeschooling their children, with Christian (Protestant) schools as a “second-best” option. If the real Christian sends children to a secular or public school, it is because they want to be a witness to the godless.

etc.

These are just some of the “rules” that I ran across over the years. Some of you might laugh and say I am exaggerating. No, sir or ma’am. If anything, I am I am probably underestimating the situation. Most Protestant sects don’t write these rules down anywhere (except for the one about smoking and drinking), but they are there, nevertheless, and woe to the “Christian” who doesn’t follow them. Ever heard of “shunning?”

I was chatting with a Baptist woman a few days ago, and she admitted that she liked having a Margarita now and then.

She was proud to tell me that she wouldn’t be kicked out of her congregation if anyone found out, but it was still a secret that she drank them from time to time. Then she asked me in all seriousness if I would be kicked out of my Church if anyone found out I liked them, too!

Who says Protestants don’t teach traditions of men?

BTW, I double-checked the bottle of Margarita mix in the fridge to make sure I spelled it correctly!

 

[Truthstalker]

I’m glad you’re not looking for a fight…neither am I. Nevertheless, I’m still trying to get a handle on why all of this bothers you as it does. My problem lies in the fact that I in no way identify with your feelings and misgivings about these things. It is difficult for me to appreciate where you are coming from since my perspective and experience seem so different.

If I understood where I am coming from I would be somewhere else, but here I am. IOW, if I understood what bothers me about this, then it would probably be solved. Looking at this on this thread is helpful, anyway.

I suspect some people think that if you present logical argumentation to a Protestant, he will, if he is honest, instantly convert to Catholicism. People are much more complex than that. While we reason, we are a lot more than reason. Habits, viewpoints, presuppositions about the way the universe runs. I sometimes wonder if most of the time on CAF we are arguing about the wrong issues, because we are working from radically different bases. Sometimes we don’t realize how far apart we are, or how strongly ideas have taken hold of people.

If you tell a small child he has to do everything Mom says unless it is legalistic, you know what happens. Anything the child decided he doesn’t want to do is suddenly “legalistic.” That is at play, too. Catholics and Protestants use words in different senses and the Catholic context is very different in many ways, say on justification, than the Protestant, because the understanding is different. It is very difficult to understand the imposition of fasting. After I wrote the “insane captain” post I realized that there was no room in that expression for love, trust, or obedience. The things imposed are for our good, “that we may share His holiness.” Some Catholics are bad Catholics, but there are also good.

Maybe the cure is just more exposure to Catholicism, and not just the intellectual stuff, but showing up at Mass until the osmosis works.

But I am not the only Protestant who has ever looked at things this way, and I think it is important for Catholics who want to do apologetics to understand where Protestants are coming from. They are not just Catholics who have rejected the Pope. 500 years of suspicious separation has had an effect.

 

[Stephen_C]

Off topic for just a sec.
TS,
Maybe you should check out this forum.
chnetwork.org/forums/
It is not a apologetic’s debate forum. It is for folks just like you.
Ok, back to the topic…

 

[Bobby_Jim]

Part of the deal here is that Catholicism is a community religion. Some strains of Protestantism, for example, can be extremely individualistic.

If “community” sounds like a liberal buzzword, sorry. But the sense is that sometimes we do things together, as a group, rather than everyone going their own way all the time. Just like, once upon a time, families would all sit down together at the table for dinner time, or all go out together for a day at the beach - didn’t matter if you weren’t hungry, or didn’t feel like swimming that day, you went. You didn’t say, oh, I’ll just grab McDonalds later and eat in front of the TV, or I’m going to the movies with Jimmy. Being part of a family meant you were obligated to do certain things whether you really felt like you were getting anything out of it. Families also come up with all sorts of different practices and traditions that everyone takes part in, even if after a while you’re not sure how or why it started. Although not codified in law, you went along, if not out of love for your family, then at least out of some sense of obligation to your family.

Anyway, Catholicism is kind of like that, a big family. Quite literally it is the Body of Christ. We don’t always just do our own thing. There are things we do in common. We go to Mass on Sundays. The church has a common prayer (the Liturgy of the Hours). The church has common feast days & holy days. And yes, the church has common practices like abstaining from meat on Fridays in Lent. Even if you don’t feel like you get anything out of it, it helps in some way to build up the Body of Christ, and to my way of thinking, reminds you that you are a part of the Christian family more than just 1 hour a week on Sundays.

 

[Truthstalker]

Any LOTR fans who see where this issue shows up in Tolkien’s work?

 

[Pax]

If I understood where I am coming from I would be somewhere else, but here I am. IOW, if I understood what bothers me about this, then it would probably be solved. Looking at this on this thread is helpful, anyway.

I suspect some people think that if you present logical argumentation to a Protestant, he will, if he is honest, instantly convert to Catholicism. People are much more complex than that. While we reason, we are a lot more than reason. Habits, viewpoints, presuppositions about the way the universe runs. I sometimes wonder if most of the time on CAF we are arguing about the wrong issues, because we are working from radically different bases. Sometimes we don’t realize how far apart we are, or how strongly ideas have taken hold of people.

If you tell a small child he has to do everything Mom says unless it is legalistic, you know what happens. Anything the child decided he doesn’t want to do is suddenly “legalistic.” That is at play, too. Catholics and Protestants use words in different senses and the Catholic context is very different in many ways, say on justification, than the Protestant, because the understanding is different. It is very difficult to understand the imposition of fasting. After I wrote the “insane captain” post I realized that there was no room in that expression for love, trust, or obedience. The things imposed are for our good, “that we may share His holiness.” Some Catholics are bad Catholics, but there are also good.

Maybe the cure is just more exposure to Catholicism, and not just the intellectual stuff, but showing up at Mass until the osmosis works.

But I am not the only Protestant who has ever looked at things this way, and I think it is important for Catholics who want to do apologetics to understand where Protestants are coming from. They are not just Catholics who have rejected the Pope. 500 years of suspicious separation has had an effect.

There is a an awful lot of truth here that I can readily agree with. Religious beliefs are deeply held by those with a substantial and abiding faith. We all have a set of lenses through which we view things and 500 years of separation certainly has had its effects.

I have a much greater appreciation for the views of my non-catholic brothers and sisters in Christ now than I had twenty years ago. I am still learning and that’s why I am probing your thinking on matters such as this one. In doing that, I hope we will not simply talk past one another. Your quoted post is helpful in that regard making this latter point a non-issue.

 

[MariaG]

Maybe the cure is just more exposure to Catholicism, and not just the intellectual stuff, but showing up at Mass until the osmosis works.

Personally, I think this is the answer more than anything. As I said earlier, this really is felt, more than understood intellectually. The communion of saints.

Truly ironic in my opinion since the sense of fellowship is frequently much better in Protestant churches. But fellowship and communion of the saints are two very different things.

Any LOTR fans who see where this issue shows up in Tolkien’s work?

Sorry. NOT a fan. I would have my 17 year old look at it, but I don’t think he will understand what you mean for another few years yet. Who knows though, maybe I’ll ask him

God Bless,
Maria

 

[pprimeau1976]

I didn’t have time to read everybody’s post because frankly, there was alot of nastiness in this forum topic when the originator, imho, had honest intentions about a common perception about Catholicism. As Catholics, we should never let Canon Law and traditional disciplines get in the way of our spirituality.

Here is an example of how it can get in the way. Suppose there is a faithful Catholic who only eats stuff that’s grown and prefers “pleather” rather than leather. I am sure you have met these people before and they are often mislabeled as “liberal”. They don’t think that animals are like people, they just think that there is bad stewardship of God’s creation, and they want no part in anything that is inhumane. (Pope Benedict talked about this bad stewardship, btw). What should this person do on Friday’s during lent? If they followed the letter, they would be doing just that, following the rules. But we have to go beyond the letter and follow the heart of the law as well. And I say we, because I get caught in the same trap too.

Another example I can think of are how some people who know Canon law try to get away with their disobedience by finding legal loopholes. Take Father Gruner (the Fatima priest) for example. I agree with alot of his positions on the changes in Catholicism, however I totally disrespect his disobedience to the Church and the fact that he justifies it by citing such and such Canon. I don’t have the references, but if you just skim over his writings, you can see that he does it.

Keeping that reason in mind when we obey the law is following both the letter of the law and the heart of the law. Jesus never condemned the law, he condemned man’s bad habit - both manifest in the faithful and their leadership of the time- to only focus on the letter.

My recommendation to the original poster is to trust the church leadership and don’t be afraid to ask “why?” If an answer you get just doesn’t make sense, just keep asking someone else or do a little research until it does.

 

[Nita]

In regard to binding non-doctrinal matters and our need to obey them:

Jesus said “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven…”. WHATEVER.

Nita

 

[Curious]

I’m a convert to Catholicism from evangelical Protestantism, and I personally find the Catholic Church much less legalistic than any of my evangelical churches.

A while back, I posted a list of “rules” that Protestants must obey, or else their Christianity is “suspect.” Here are some of those “rules”–

1. Must have a daily Quiet Time (Morning Watch, Devotional, etc.). Should include Bible study and prayer. A person who is not doing this is probably not a Christian, since a real Christian will crave daily fellowship with God, which means prayer and Bible study. The one exception might be if you are a mother of a newborn, but by the 3rd week or so, you should be back to having your daily Quiet Time.

1. A real Christian should be tithing. 10% is the minimum. A Christian who isn’t tithing is sinning because they aren’t living by FAITH, and since a real Christian doesn’t practice sin, then it is questionable whether the non-tithing Christian is really a Christian.

1. A real Christians should be listening almost exclusively to Christian music. Contemporary Christian music is ideal, but other styles are acceptable. Some classical music is suspect, since it was written by pagans. A Christian who spends a lot of time listening to secular music is suspect–why would a real Christian want to listen to music that doesn’t glorify the Lord?

1. A real Christians shouldn’t swear, smoke, drink alcohol, or suffer from any of the other addictive sins. Overeating is acceptable, but very very shaky grounds, since our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, and we should keep them fit, thin, and attractive. Probably the overweight Christian got fat before they accepted Christ as their personal Savior, and they are working on becoming fit and thin.

1. A real Christian doesn’t waste time with secular television, movies, theater, dance, comedy, art, or literature, except for Andy Griffith. That’s OK.

1. A real Christian doesn’t bring secular newspapers or other news media into their home. There are “Christian” sources for news.

1. A REAL Christian wouldn’t celebrate Halloween! It’s of the devil, and a real Christian flees the devil.

1. A real Christian should be homeschooling their children, with Christian (Protestant) schools as a “second-best” option. If the real Christian sends children to a secular or public school, it is because they want to be a witness to the godless.

etc.

I laugh, not because I think you’re being funny, but because your summary is so accurate (and dryly witty ). You have described very well the church a I used to go (non-denom) and most of the other non-denom churches in my area.

 

[joshua_b]

I was in Mass last night, and the O.T. reading really struck me. If you read the Bible, God is legalistic, most often due to reasons we can not grasp I would assume. Think about the Passover.

We are talking about God, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Is it “neccessary” for God (or His angels) to have a family sacrifice and eat an unblemished lamb, dressed as they are in flight, and systematically mark the doorposts of a house in blood to know that the inhabitants are to be passed over ? Absolutely not, but the Israelites were instructed none the less, very specifically, how to ensure that all of the inhabitants of a house would be alive next morning. I am going to make the assumption (even though the Bible doesn’t say as such) that had anyone NOT done exactly as they were instructed, then their firstborn would have surely not waken up. God turned Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt for doing nothing more than looking behind her (what in the world is THAT all about ?!?!?).

If the Catholic Church is truly the Church that God established, and God has these “legalistic” tendencies, wouldn’t it make sense that His Church would be a reflection of Him (God never changes, after all). Ultimately, we as Catholics accept that Jesus founded a visible Church (the Catholic Church), and we humbly submit to its “legalisms” out of submission to the will of God. God’s ways are not our ways, and I can’t neccessarily understand why it is neccessary to do some of the things His Church tells me I need to do, but I can’t fathom why someone would be turned into a pillar of salt for simply turning their head either.

 

[pprimeau1976]

There is nothing wrong with laws. They are practical. If we did not have laws, we would have no baseline in which to operate. Name me one denomination large or small that did not have “bylaws” or “rules of engagement”! You will not find one. But, I don’t know if it’s correct to compare Canon Law to the Divine Laws in scripture. You might run into a problem when someone says: “Well, how come your Canon Law is revised?”

Additionally, I don’t think Canon laws are necessarily infallible teachings. I could be wrong though.