Is Catholicism legalistic?

[Mtatum1958]

So very well stated.

 

[margaret42]

As for Holy communion, it is also wrong for Catholics to receive from a Protestant Church. It’s a contradiction of the essence of the eucharist. Protestants believe it only “represents”, while Catholics believe it’s the “real presence”.

 

[Glenn]

From what has been shared on this post, I think I’m beginning to see the moral precepts (rules) of the Church in terms of boundaries and parameters, not chains. And my concern over mortal sin has been allayed. From what has been stated, it seems that mortal sin is an act or disposition that is accompanied by obstinacy, that is, a willful and persistent rejection of the love of God. Does this sound right?

“By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him; for whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything. Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God; and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us” (1 John 3:19-24).

 

[Fauken]

From what has been stated, it seems that mortal sin is an act or disposition that is accompanied by obstinacy, that is, a willful and persistent rejection of the love of God. Does this sound right?

Basically! You never accidentally commit a moral sin. It’s your choice.

 

[HeDa]

OP Some basic help in order to understand the Catholic Church better.

It is very seldom either/or but both/and.

Salvation is a process. From the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, my baptism, right now when I say “Yes” to Christ and at my very last breath some time in the future when I say “Yes.”. “Here and now but not yet.”

Mortal sin is something we do knowing it is bad, still we choose to do it by free will and we know that there are consequences for it. All three are needed for it to be mortal. Otherwise venial.

It is never just “Me and God” in the Catholic Church but “God, me and the whole Catholic Church.”

 

[edwest211]

A very good reply. Speaking generally, some think the Church is all about rules and “thou shalt nots” but it’s all about having a relationship with Jesus Christ who is alive at this moment. Just as God gave me parents who loved me, I understood that God is perfect and He doesn’t force us to love Him or keep His commandments. A priest won’t be pounding on your door on Monday if you missed Mass on Sunday. But all of us have a part to play in this world while we’re still alive.

Start reading Matthew 25:34 and keep going.

 

[guanophore]

I am coming from outside the Roman Catholic Church, and seeing how the structure (‘ecclesiastic organization’) of the church and its mandates/teachings is extremely legalistic.

I can understand why it would seem that way to someone.

The Catholic Church is a very large, diverse household, and there are many rules and guidelines designed to help the family function more effectively. To those who do not perceive themselves being in such a family, it might seem legalistic.

Jesus said “my yoke is easy, and my burden light”. And the disciple said of His commandments “they are not burdensome”. So how one perceives the family expectations relates to how that member sees themselves in relation to Christ and his family.

 

[guanophore]

My understanding is that the Church considers it a mortal sin to miss Mass (unless, of course, attending Mass is impossible). But there are times when I yearn to be alone with God, in private meditation and prayer. Is the issue not a matter of one’s heart, of one’s disposition toward God?

These things really have nothing to do with each other. Mass is when we gather as a Body and enter into the anamnesis of Calvary.

Private meditation and prayer should be conducted at other times. They compliment one another.

When I go to cannon law, things get more confusing. There’s an answer for everything. All I have to do is look it up. But then it becomes a matter of following the rules, not living according to a good conscience before God.

It is odd that you would say you are more confused reading canon law. And no, there is not an “answer to everything”, but in 2000 years of shepherding the faithful, the Church has figured out some helpful structure.

If one is more focused on following rules than one’s relationship with God, it is only naturally that one will experience legalism. If one’s conscience before God cannot be informed by those who came before us in the faith, then we will be poorly formed, having to learn the hard way what has already been learned by others. Only pride will prevent us from receiving their wisdom.

It appears in Catholicism that I am bound to the rules, not to my conscience before God.

It seems that you see a separation between these that Catholics do not.

he apostle Paul rejected in favor of simple faith in Christ.

Clearly you have misunderstood Paul, who was a faithful Pharisee until the day of his death.

Even if we could for a brief moment, is there anyone who believes that he can live an entire day in a state of absolute purity before God?

Of course. We walk by faith, in grace.

If the parents of John the Baptist can, what makes you think we cannot?

5In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari′ah,of the division of Abi′jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. Luke 1

Since God’s holiness is absolute, can we, in any of our thoughts or actions, truly measure up?

God is at work within us to will and to do. He does not ask us to do that which he does not also enable us to do.

 

[guanophore]

What if I miss the mark for a brief moment? A lustful thought?

Do you think that none of the Apostles or prophets upon which the Church is founded ever missed a mark? What if you do?

Was it a mortal sin or a venial sin? Can I get to a priest in time for confession? Was my confession sincere – or sincere enough?

Many people make an act of confession daily, and we confess during the liturgy. Fortunately we do not need to pre-occupy ourselves with making a perfect confession in the Sacrament. Are you honestly saying that you doubt whether you are sorry for your sins?

If I cannot rest, truly rest in the grace of the Lord Jesus, is there any hope?

I don’t see how there could be.

Tying my salvation to anything other than his mercy seems to lead only to bondage, not freedom.

If you see the sacraments as “other than his mercy”, then it is no wonder you perceive the Catholic faith as you do.

 

[Glenn]

guanophore, please see my later post #103. I think my initial questions have been answered, and my concerns allayed. Thanks for also entering into the discussion.

 

[guanophore]

From what has been shared on this post, I think I’m beginning to see the moral precepts (rules) of the Church in terms of boundaries and parameters, not chains. And my concern over mortal sin has been allayed. From what has been stated, it seems that mortal sin is an act or disposition that is accompanied by obstinacy, that is, a willful and persistent rejection of the love of God. Does this sound right?

I am glad that you have found this relief. God has created us, and knows we need boundaries.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

The Catholic Church is a very large, diverse household, and there are many rules and guidelines designed to help the family function more effectively. To those who do not perceive themselves being in such a family, it might seem legalistic.

Just as the Mosaic law was effective for the Pharisees.

 

[guanophore]

Just as the Mosaic law was effective for the Pharisees.

If this were true, then there would be no need for Jesus to come, would there?

That being said, Jesus was so hard on the Pharisees because 1) they sat on the seat of Moses 2) they had most of it right - they were the most closely aligned with what was intended.

If you think that rules and guidelines are not beneficial in helping a large and diverse household to function more effectively, you may have little experience in trying to manage one!

I would think it would be obvious, from the continuing fragmentation in the Anglican communion, what happens when all the standards are left up to individuals.

 

[po18guy]

When looking in from the outside, Christ’s Church looks legalistic and Mary appears as a giant.

Once inside, you see that the Church is Love - every one of the seven Sacraments springs from God’s love of all mankind. They are for our temporal and eternal benefit and blessing. Are there rules? Show me a church without rules and I’ll show you hell on earth.

As established by Christ and those with His authority, yes there are some norms, but only five precepts of being Catholic:

1. “You shall attend Mass on Sundays and on holy days of obligation and rest from servile labor.” We must “sanctify the day commemorating the Resurrection of the Lord” (Sunday), as well as the principal feast days, known as Catholic holy days of obligation. This requires attending Mass, “and by resting from those works and activities which could impede such a sanctification of these days."
2. ”You shall confess your sins at least once a year." We must prepare for the Eucharist by means of the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession). This sacrament “continues Baptism’s work of conversion and forgiveness.
3. ”You shall receive the sacrament of the Eucharist at least during the Easter season." This “guarantees as a minimum the reception of the Lord’s Body and Blood in connection with the Paschal feasts, the origin and center of the
   Christian liturgy."
4. ”You shall observe the days of fasting and abstinence established by the Church." “The fourth precept ensures the times of ascesis and penance which prepare us for the liturgical feasts and help us acquire mastery over our
   instincts and freedom of heart.” See below for more about fasting & abstinence.
5. “You shall help to provide for the needs of the Church.” “The fifth precept means that the faithful are obliged to assist with the material needs of the Church, each according to his own ability.”

These are far from onerous, as so many wrongly suspect. They are the yoke of which He spoke, which is light and easy once you actually try it on.

Also that Mary is ever humble and leads always and everywhere to her Son. She brought Him to the world and now leads the world to Him.

Perfect.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It doesn’t seem legalistic to me because I rarely run up against any of the legal -isms.
In fact compared to Eastern Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox, stuff like the Western fasting rules seems stupidly easy.

I can see where it would seem more legalistic to someone who was either inclined to approach the faith by studying Summa Theologica instead of reading Story of a Soul, or else was in one of those “irregular situations” where they run up against rules in an unpleasant way.

 

[nodelink]

Are non-Catholics anti-nomian?

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I would think it would be obvious, from the continuing fragmentation in the Anglican communion, what happens when all the standards are left up to individuals.

Perhaps you are thinking of Free churches, rather than Anglican churches. In the US, the Episcopal Church (TEC) is just finishing its triennial governmental gathering, both the House of Bishops (parallel to USCCB) and the House of Deputies (clergy and lay representatives from each diocese) met for almost two weeks, discerning the direction and ‘rules’ of Church. The hierarchy of our two branches are quite parallel, from Bishops on down. The decision-making process, however, is a bit different. Standards are not left up to individuals, as you claimed. I’m not sure where you learned that bit of information, but it is incorrect.

 

[guanophore]

I’m not sure where you learned that bit of information, but it is incorrect.

Actually I admit it is limited to reading postings here at CAF and the links.

You may be right, and I have a misunderstanding.I have the impression that TEC is like “majority rule” rather than adhering to the Apostolic faith.

In the US, the Episcopal Church (TEC) is just finishing its triennial governmental gathering, both the House of Bishops (parallel to USCCB) and the House of Deputies (clergy and lay representatives from each diocese) met for almost two weeks, discerning the direction and ‘rules’ of Church.

Are there any parameters for deciding these directions, or is it basically the majority rule opinion?

The decision-making process, however, is a bit different. Standards are not left up to individuals, as you claimed.

Can you provide any documentation/references for this process? It would seem that I need to be educated.

 

[Gorgias]

So if David had died prior to his confession, would he have been condemned to Hell. I tend to think not.

That’s an interesting take on ‘sin’ and ‘salvation’, don’t you think?

I believe God is concerned not just about our track record, but the overall disposition of our character.

‘Track record’ makes it sound like He’s keeping score. He’s not. If there is a track record, it gets wiped clean each time we receive the sacrament of reconciliation!

How does “overall disposition” work, though? Like you say – we’re all sinners! So, it kinda sounds like what you’re really arguing for is universal salvation: that is, we all get a pass!

While we all commit sins of commission and omission, it is not so much our individual acts that make us sinners; it is the fact that we are still sinners, that we still have an old nature at war against our new nature, that makes us sin. So God’s forgiveness must extend beyond our individual acts

I’m not seeing the logical flow, here. Yes, we’re sinners. But, our sins are individual acts. If forgiveness is of the person, rather than of the act, then it’s not forgiveness at all (but rather, a sort of ‘license’ to sin)!

 

[Glenn]

That’s an interesting take on ‘sin’ and ‘salvation’, don’t you think?

‘Track record’ makes it sound like He’s keeping score. He’s not. If there is a track record, it gets wiped clean each time we receive the sacrament of reconciliation!

I tried to explain in more detail in the same post.

David loved God, but his love, like our love, was not yet perfected. God understands our weaknesses and our vulnerabilities. The fact that David was confronted by Nathan, and the fact that he did repent, is owed, I believe to God’s providence.

I agree, ‘track record’ is not the best use of words. It is not tit for tat with God. He looks at our whole character. We will sin (individual acts), but is pattern of our life (our character and disposition) – I believe the Church uses the term “habitual” – one of love for God or hatred of God? God is outside of time; he knew that David would repent, because he knew David’s character. He knows not only what we have done but what we will do. And it is not all on us. From the Catechism 2001: “This [grace] is needed to arouse and SUSTAIN our collaboration… God brings to completion in us what he has begun.”

When I refer to God as forgiving the person, I am referring to the fact that we are related to him not just in a legalistic sense, but as a child to a parent. If our disposition is one of habitual love for God, if we are truly a new creation in Christ – though not yet faultless or perfect – we will not linger forever in an unrepentant state. So the idea of David dying before he repents is hypothetical, for God knows his heart, and his grace will sustain him until the point of repentance.