Rigid Christianity?

Last updated on: May 15, 2018 at 2:26 pm by Chase Padusniak

Rigid Christianity? 2018-05-15T14:26:44-04:00 Chase Padusniak

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In fact, this framework can end up undervaluing repentance. The Tradition of the Church speaks of repentance as a constant and ongoing activity rooted in an essential and inescapable need to cry out to God for grace. This cry leads us to confess our myriad sins. Repentance is always ongoing and ends not even with death (i.e. Purgatory or some sort of Purgatorial state is also the Tradition of the Church). We see this in the Great Canon of St. Andrew of Crete:

Where shall I begin to lament the deeds of my wretched life? What first fruit shall I offer, O Christ, for my present lamentation? But in Thy compassion grant me release from my falls.

Come, wretched soul, with thy flesh, confess to the Creator of all. In future refrain from thy former brutishness, and offer to God tears in repentance.

We also see this in the Prayer of the Publican, which is integrated into the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, repeated by parishioners every week:

God, have mercy on me, a sinner. God, cleanse me of my sins and have mercy on me. I have sinned without number, forgive me, O Lord.

In other words, I am not arguing that we need less repentance; rather, I am indicating that such rigidity, rooted in a certain sort of Pelagianism can very easily lead people to direct their attentions wrongly, either too specifically and at others, or simply away from their general need for constant repentance. And this makes sense. Many Latin Mass-goers seem themselves as preserving a sense of righteousness abandoned by the Church as a whole. Carl E. Olson, for example, wrote the following in response to Gaudete et Exsultate:

Unfortunately, the document also contains more than a few remarks or suggestions that are either puzzling or disconcerting—and not, I think, for the right reasons. The passage quoted by Martin is certainly one of more obvious examples. Yes, there are undoubtedly a few Catholics who fixate on liturgy and doctrine in a way that can be unwise or unhealthy. But how many more Catholics obsess about “tolerance” and “openness” to certain ways of being or living—usually advanced with a lengthy, ever-evolving acronym—in a way and to a degree that is far more obvious and problematic? How many Catholics show little or no concern for liturgy and doctrine, and view “being Catholic” as either some sort of curious birthright or an embarrassing attachment to “recover” from? And how many Catholics obsess—and I don’t use the term loosely or lightly—about being accepted, embraced, and otherwise feted by those in power and in the limelight?

Francis, as has been his common practice, warns not only against having too much concern for doctrine, but also too much emphasis on rules, describing as “pelagian or semi-pelagian” those who feel superior “because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style” (par 49). He says that like “the prophet Jonah, we are constantly tempted to flee to a safe haven. It can have many names: individualism, spiritualism, living in a little world, addiction, intransigence, the rejection of new ideas and approaches, dogmatism, nostalgia, pessimism, hiding behind rules and regulations. We can resist leaving behind a familiar and easy way of doing things.”

The argument becomes: “but don’t we have bigger problems?” That is not how a Christian should be thinking about repentance. The issue is not too much doctrine or dogma, but rather how we address ourselves to the need for repentance—is it constant and unending, or something to be made pointed, directed at others, or, at times, too strongly and specifically at oneself?

This last instance (pointedly directing it at oneself) can cause scrupulosity. This is an issue that, I think, we often don’t take seriously enough. One piece on Catholic.com, for example, is entitled “Scrupulosity: The Occupational Hazard of the Catholic Moral Life.” It reads, in part:

There are good intentions behind this way of thinking. It is meant to emphasize our freedom and our responsibility and to uphold God’s sovereignty. The scrupulous individual might feel pretty small at the end of the day, but at least he’s been responsible and God remains sovereign. It is almost as if he can crank up God’s sovereignty a notch or two if he is in a demeaned state of guilt! In fact, the scrupulous person often has a feigned humility. It may look like the real thing, but it’s not.

Note that the emphasis on freedom is resonant with the quasi-Pelagianism I discussed above. But even beyond this we can see how crippling such a condition can be. It turns people into self-interrogators mired in their own sins—finding evil and horror where they are not. It was this mindset that led Martin Luther to sola gratia. The emphasis on particular works and devotions mentioned above (and let me be clear that I am not saying to avoid the Rosary or daily Mass, or whatever else—these are goods, though they must be understood properly) combines with this mentality to produce crippling anxiety. Traditionalist priests and writers will go on about how video games are evil, Harry Potter teaches witchcraft, and any time not spent in prayer is automatically and de facto an offense to God.

All I can say is that I have seen several dear friends travel this road. I have seen how a desire for greater piety can lead to an inability to function, finding any time spent relaxing as a breeding ground for mortal sin (and yes, idle hands may be the Devil’s playthings, but watching some TV, or taking in a film, or having a beer with friends—these things are not merely idleness). Hemmed in on all sides, such people easily slide into a state of hopelessness—unable to practice the true repentance discussed above because their definition has been corrupted by such “rigidity.”

Go back Continue Reading

Previous Post

May 2, 2018

Merciful God, Wrathful God

Next Post

May 15, 2018 Loving Oneself

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Culture Politics Reviews Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 December 2020 November 2020 July 2020 May 2020 April 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 August 2019 July 2019 April 2019 March 2019 December 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who baptized Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Peter Paul Elijah John the Baptist