How has legalism impacted modern discussion within and on the church in your opinion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andy_82
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Andy_82

Guest
I found myself last night falling down a rabbit hole here. I was guilty of remaining in an unproductive conversation. They were guilty of being needlessly fundamentalist, both were being pretty childish. Yet, overall the impression that I came away with is that while my behavior was far from perfect, that of the others came with what could be best described as being legalistic to the point of looking past church history and only examining the written word at its face value. Upon further research, I’m apparently not alone in wondering about this as the Pope himself appears to describe such folks as being of a ‘straight jacket mentality.’ Is this really such a problem now in your opinion?
 
In a society like today where so much of God’s law is being eviscerated by secular society, I think, while it is not ideal, that many Christians have tightened their hold upon the precepts of the Lord, for better or for worse.
 
Last edited:
Andy_82 said:
Is this really such a problem now in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Indeed. I had no idea there were fundamentalists in the Catholic church until i joined CAF. It’s actually a contraction in terms.
 
I’m finding that modern apologetics are essentially fundamentalists with a little education behind them and little more. This is how it was when Christ was alive and that’s it seems to be an ongoing theme to them.
 
Are you in America? If so, try not to assume that it represents the rest of the world. One cannot understand Catholicism without understanding Italian culture.
 
Hehe, I am. The Massachusetts area to be specific. Which, I suppose is part of my problem: this is a culturally liberal state with a lot of Italian influence. Which, may well explain the clash: nuance doesn’t exist in the minds of many. Yet, in the mind of an Italian it’s the little things that add up at the end of the day.
 
The best cultural research is by a guy named Geert Hofstede, you can go on this website and do a head to head comparison of US and Italian culture: Compare countries - Hofstede Insights

What you need to notice is the high uncertainty avoidance index for Italy over America. This manifests itself by having more rules that are less strictly followed.
 
Yes! LOL That’s exactly what many don’t seem to understand: yes, there’s a rule. But, there’s also reality and that the rest of the country is so dominated by a protestant, nee, northern European frame of mind means that gets lost in the shuffle. Thank you for that resource as just a quick glance was like seeing Nonna’s face. 😉
 
And if you think America has low uncertainty avoidance, then welcome to Britain. Because we don’t just nail paper complaints to Churches - we invent new ones. Hence Catholicism grates with British culture because the average Brit has a panic attack at the idea of not following the rules we have. You should see the melee that ensues when some renegade stands on the right hand side of the escalator on the London Underground.
 
I’ve been that guy. King’s Cross three years ago. I didn’t know the meaning of the English raised brow till then.
 
Yeah i think i remember the headline in the Times the next day. “American tourist attempts to spark second rebellion”.
 
Hehe, it was a bit frightening at first. I kept wondering if I was violating some emergency exit route.
 
I posted in the thread last night that the church in her divinity is perfect. But, the men that administer her presence in the world are not. Not wishing to boast, I wish more would understand that and both the clergy and the laity make a mess here and there for they themselves are not divine.
 
Your question is a bit loaded.

Some people think “legalistically” based on the plain meaning of the words, while some people try to interpret and “grow” the meaning of documents and teachings by getting at some underlying theme that isn’t necessarily shown by the plain language.

Some people think in black and white; others think in shades of gray.

The Church is currently coming off a long period in its history where there were so many shades of gray that many people just threw the rule book out the window, leaving those who actually try to follow the rules thinking that their Church is falling down like London Bridge. Those who would think legalistically see themselves as trying to right the ship and steer it back on course before it hits a devastating iceberg.

Both approaches above are needed and it is in balancing them that we reach a good moderate point.
Try to be patient with those whose approach doesn’t match yours.
I go through this all the time with constitutional interpretation too.
 
Last edited:
Your summary is pretty much the conclusion I have drawn to this day after years of battling b/w these two “points of view” myself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top