Pharisee Comparison

[Minion_w_a_drum]

There is something I’ve been giving much thought to lately, after reading through these forums on Catholic Answers.

Does anyone else see similarities to the Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus’ time and modern day Catholics/Christians? What I’m saying is there are many threads asking questions on the rules and “legalities” of the Catholic Church. Just reading this morning, I came across the following:

Is it wrong to talk to Saints?

Is it wrong if I eat pizza on Fridays if I pick off the pepperoni first?

Is it wrong to not like the Pope?

Is it better if I don’t know the gravity of the sin I am committing, to lessen the severity? Would this put atheists at an advantage?? (Seriously?? So we all should become atheists so we can more easily attain heaven??!!)

And these were just on the first page of one forum! I don’t know, but it just seems to me there are many many people too wrapped up in obeying the rules and laws of the church, thinking that will be their ticket into heaven.

Personally, I’ve always believed that our ticket to heaven was punched by Jesus on the cross. All we have to do to redeem that ticket is live as Christ like life as possible. And one thing Jesus didn’t do in his day was get hung up on rules and regulations. In fact, he admonished those of the church for doing so, and at every opportunity.

 

[adamhovey1988]

There is something I’ve been giving much thought to lately, after reading through these forums on Catholic Answers.

Does anyone else see similarities to the Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus’ time and modern day Catholics/Christians? What I’m saying is there are many threads asking questions on the rules and “legalities” of the Catholic Church. Just reading this morning, I came across the following:

Is it wrong to talk to Saints?

Is it wrong if I eat pizza on Fridays if I pick off the pepperoni first?

Is it wrong to not like the Pope?

Is it better if I don’t know the gravity of the sin I am committing, to lessen the severity? Would this put atheists at an advantage?? (Seriously?? So we all should become atheists so we can more easily attain heaven??!!)

And these were just on the first page of one forum! I don’t know, but it just seems to me there are many many people too wrapped up in obeying the rules and laws of the church, thinking that will be their ticket into heaven.

Personally, I’ve always believed that our ticket to heaven was punched by Jesus on the cross. All we have to do to redeem that ticket is live as Christ like life as possible. And one thing Jesus didn’t do in his day was get hung up on rules and regulations. In fact, he admonished those of the church for doing so, and at every opportunity.

So, Jesus DIDN’T tell the woman caught in adultery to sin no more? Sounds like a rule to me. (John 8:11). As for the Pope, I think it helps to actually READ what he says and not what Rush Limbaugh or MSNBC TELLS you he said. There are so many thinks wrong with what you just said that I don’t even know where to begin. "

“Is it better if I don’t know the gravity of the sin I am committing, to lessen the severity? Would this put atheists at an advantage?? (Seriously?? So we all should become atheists so we can more easily attain heaven??!!)”
That’s a bit of an odd thing to say. I see what it says your religion is, but I am having a hard time believing it. God loves you. Love involves following him. Sometimes, this includes following rules. (Romans 6)

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

Yes you are correct. Jesus told the woman to sin no more. He gave her a rule. But, he also did not stone her to death, according to the law (if I’m not mistaken.) If I’m right, Jesus “broke” a rule- or at least did not follow it.

I’m not saying there should be no rules. I’m just saying don’t sometimes too much emphasis gets put onto rule following?

" is a tattoo of a crucifix next to a polish eagle wrong?? Really??

Does anyone really think it will come down to something like that on judgment day?? The type of tattoo you have or if you missed removing 2 pieces of pepperoni?

Read the posts. I’m not making up this stuff.

 

[GEddie]

There’s a difference between being strict with one self and trying to lay down the law for others.

If I understand the Gospel Pharisees aright, they were zealous in the second, while ignoring or minimizing the first.

ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

Methinks also that the Pharisees get a not altogether deserved bum rap. We have more in common with them than with other factions of our LORD’s day.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Lucretius]

The law itself isn’t evil, but it can used as a means to justify evil, if it is separated from its spirit and purpose.

For example, if I go to Red Lobster and order a massive Lobster tail, am I breaking the law? The Church says we aren’t to eat meats on Fridays, and so technically I’m not. But the purpose of this law is to teach us to fasting together, and experience the goods that come from fasting. And massive premium fish meals don’t do that. So, even if we are following the law, if we ignore it’s purpose, then we have forsaken the law ultimately.

So, the first thing to ask when dealing with these “thou shall not”: what is the goal of following these rules?

The Pharisees failed because instead of the purpose of the law being love of God and Neighbor, it became a means to glorify themselves and look down upon others. Their ignoring of the purpose of the Law is also why they can’t see how Christ fulfilled it.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[redbetta]

These look more like examples of being scrupulous as opposed to dealing with actual Church rules. I’ve notice that some posters just cannot accept that the Church does not have a teaching on every little thing or circumstance in life. For some things, all you really need is common sense.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

The laws and rules are starters for people as yet needing guidance because their hearts and minds are not yet one with Christ. It is like an ethics of virtue. If you practice specific instances of virtue you change in character such that you come to know what is right without rules and laws. Until the law is written in the heart the external law is needed even with all the not picking details. Do you remember what Jesus said about the highest commandment that has within itself all the others? Love is the first and most important commandment.

 

[rcwitness]

Good question.

A Pharisee would have been very well “equiped” if he were to become a disciple of Jesus… consider Paul. And several were mentioned as doing so in the Scriptures.

It was their forsaking the greater gifts of faith and mercy and placing higher honor to customs and external piety.

It’s the higher Law of Charity which gives worth to everything else. And Jesus brought God’s Charity as a covenant to all!

If the Pharisees converted, they had a lot more to suffer! I think it’s part of why Jesus chose those who were not in high positions. And they were more inclined to humility, maybe.

 

[roseofshannon]

We desire to form a loving relationship with God and a loving relationship is often about the little things.

Similarly, you wouldn’t want to commit adultery against your beloved husband, of course; not because he DEMANDS that of you, but because you love him. (Although infidelity is serious enough that you would risk losing the relationship altogether.)

As you grow in love, you also desire to please your spouse in the little things as well. So you want to learn all you can about his feelings about things and preferences.

Perhaps you know that little joke you think is funny would cause a slight hurt of his feelings or dishonor your beloved in front of others…so you refrain.

This is all done out of love, not to avoid being cast out from his presence.

Does that make any sense?

The Act of Contrition states it so well when we say, “I am heartily sorry for having offended thee, because I dread the loss of Heaven and the pains of Hell,
BUT MOST OF ALL,
because thou are all good and DESERVING OF ALL MY LOVE.”

The Pharisee, in contrast, is more concerned about the speck in his brothers eye than the plank in his own. Plus their motivation for following the law was to show off to others and feed their Pride and Vanity.

 

[Usige]

Methinks also that the Pharisees get a not altogether deserved bum rap. We have more in common with them than with other factions of our LORD’s day.

ICXC NIKA

This is unfortunately the case. It shows a lack of understanding if one think the Pharisees were the “bad guys” vs the Sadducees as the “good guys”. Most don’t seem to know that the Sadducees rejected bodily resurrection, held that the soul ceased to exist after death, and we’re the Sola Scripturan of their time. From a pure religious standpoint Christ taught consistently with pharisaic beliefs rather than sadducaic beliefs. Most things I read say that the Sadducees were not very interested in religion, but more politics.

Christ did not rebuke the Pharisees for holding to the law, but rather for being hypocrites. One just needs to read Matthew 5:17-20 to see that Christ did not reject the law.

**Matthew 5:17-20 **
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

We shouldn’t obsess about meeting ever nuance of the law, but we also shouldn’t act like the law (discipline, doctrine, etc.) are unimportant as long as we are “good people”.

 

[roseofshannon]

Just wanted to add to my response above:

The Pharisee thinks they are better than others because they follow the law so well. They swat gnats and swallow camels.

Those who tend to scrupulosity are on the other end of the spectrum. They are overly concerned with the little things and lack a belief in God’s love and mercy. It’s failing to understand that he simply asks that we try our best and when we fall to ask forgiveness and try again.

So it’s loving and reasonable to ask your husband if he likes salt on his eggs and to try to remember that. But the scrupulous would be like a spouse who frets over forgetting to salt their husbands eggs at breakfast and cries, “Please don’t beat me!” The husband is like, “Of course I wouldn’t do that, Silly.” Scrupulosity can be very annoying.

 

[rose_kelly]

These look more like examples of being scrupulous as opposed to dealing with actual Church rules. I’ve notice that some posters just cannot accept that the Church does not have a teaching on every little thing or circumstance in life. For some things, all you really need is common sense.

“Examples of being scrupulous” yes I agree. But when scruples are the issue ( which isn’t necessarily going to be a permanent condition) its usually an emotional anxiety problem that’s the cause, rather than a lack of common sense, which can also affect the most intelligent.

 

[Minion_w_a_drum]

These look more like examples of being scrupulous as opposed to dealing with actual Church rules. I’ve notice that some posters just cannot accept that the Church does not have a teaching on every little thing or circumstance in life. For some things, all you really need is common sense.

Where does this mindset come from, if not from the Church itself? Who but the church speaks of “if you do this you’ll go to hell, if you do that you’ll go to hell…” I know where I spent 12 years of catholic school I absolutely got this mindset drilled into my head. The same goes with the above example of eating lobster tails on Lenten Fridays. That was never denounced in 12 years of my catholic schooling- what was stressed was the adherence to not eating meat.
Maybe the church doesn’t come out and say your good works will get you to heaven but they certainly say the converse, that your sins will send you to hell, so… It’s like the mathematical principal of if a+b = c, then b+a=c…

 

[redbetta]

“Examples of being scrupulous” yes I agree. But when scruples are the issue ( which isn’t necessarily going to be a permanent condition) its usually an emotional anxiety problem that’s the cause, rather than a lack of common sense, which can also affect the most intelligent.

I did not mean to imply that these people lack common sense. Scrupulousness just makes it hard to realize that they have the answer already. If I was not clear and offended someone, I just wanted to clarify.

 

[redbetta]

Where does this mindset come from, if not from the Church itself? Who but the church speaks of “if you do this you’ll go to hell, if you do that you’ll go to hell…” I know where I spent 12 years of catholic school I absolutely got this mindset drilled into my head. The same goes with the above example of eating lobster tails on Lenten Fridays. That was never denounced in 12 years of my catholic schooling- what was stressed was the adherence to not eating meat.
Maybe the church doesn’t come out and say your good works will get you to heaven but they certainly say the converse, that your sins will send you to hell, so… It’s like the mathematical principal of if a+b = c, then b+a=c…

I just graduated from 14 years of Catholic schooling last year. We were told racism is bad, recycling is good, and buy fair trade. Nothing about personal sins or what you can or cannot do. Must be a generational thing.

From what I understand, the Church does not say anyone is in hell or someone is definitely going to hell. She defines actions that strain or rupture one’s relationship with God, but, what each individual case is or will be only God can tell.

 

[rose_kelly]

I did not mean to imply that these people lack common sense. Scrupulousness just makes it hard to realize that they have the answer already. If I was not clear and offended someone, I just wanted to clarify.

Think no more of it. You’ve demonstrated clearly and empathetically what you think the problem is, and I’m quite sure you haven’t offended anyone.

 

[rose_kelly]

From what I understand, the Church does not say anyone is in hell or someone is definitely going to hell. She defines actions that strain or rupture one’s relationship with God, but, what each individual case is or will be only God can tell.

You’re understanding of what the church says is the same as mine.
If someone thinks otherwise they are misunderstanding what the church teaches.

 

[rcwitness]

So… are you going to become Catholic educators of more accurate instruction???

 

[AttendeDomine]

And one thing Jesus didn’t do in his day was get hung up on rules and regulations. In fact, he admonished those of the church for doing so, and at every opportunity.

I think it’s a common error, IMHO, to liken the Pharisees to simple rule-setters. There’s much more to it than that.

Our Lord admonished the Pharisees for being **hypocrites **and for being legalists, that is, for doing things for external show and not because of an interior conversion of heart.

Regarding rules and regulations, I’m sorry, but that’s not what my Bible says.

In Matthew 23 we read Christ addressing the Pharisees.

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

.

Christ makes it clear there that the Pharisees were doing well by obeying some parts of the Law (see Leviticus 27 and Deuteronomy 14), but yet were gravely sinning by avoiding the deeper principles underlying it, such as “justice and mercy and faith.”

Or earlier in the chapter:

“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.

Christ was not against “rules,” He was against people who only observed them because they were doing so out of human respect and self-love, and not because they had God as their aim.