The things that make me laugh, weep, and live.
Published on August 5, 2004 By Shulamite In Religion
Bloggers have written articles bemoaning legalism within the church. I have to say I agree. Despite the fact I belong to a very conservative denomination, I less represent my denomination than I do my Jesus when discussing faith, religion, and the like.

My brother and I have separately come to the same conclusion though both raised in the same denomination. And as stated on other articles of mine, I reach my conclusions about my chosen denomination only after I've fully explored my faith and know and understand what I believe and why. Before we start this discussion, I think you should know that about me. We both conclude legalism is not what Christ called for within his Body and is a result of man being at the helm, if you'll forgive a mixed metaphor.

When man runs things, he wants to put rules on everything. We're all about rules, aren't we? As a school teacher myself, this really sucks. Because I hate these penny-rules. No gum, no drinks, no food, no whatever. This is a load of bull, but I understand it does go a long way to curbing havoc and is therefore a necessary evil in many (and most) situations. But its legalism at it's finest. If people would obey the larger umbrella laws, ie respect others and their property as well as yourself and your ownthings, we'd not have any trouble at all would we?

I think this is the same thing with religion and faith. If we all obeyed the simple umbrella premises "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, & body and love your neighbor as yourself" then we'd not need any thing else to go with it point blank. But the thing is, we don't. Like school kids who know what to do but don't, we're given explicit commands that have little to do with morality and more to do with legalism.

Unquestionably, the Bible sets forth the notion that we have God-given authorities and we're to obey them to His glory. I think this includes our pastors. That said, we don't have to agree with everything our pastors command to obey them, knowing that we please the Lord in doing so. The Bible says it. That's enough. God places these people in authority for our own well-being. That said, I think some of what my pastor preaches is leagalism and is not Biblical per se. It might be inferred from Scripture, but I have a very clear defense for my beliefs on the contrary from Scripture as well, so it has to personal conviction -- which I think falls well within orthodoxy.

My brother once visited a church where the preacher said something legalistic in a sermon, preaching it as "God's truth." My brother, unable to contain himself, said aloud, "That's not in the Bible!" Unfortunately for him, it was a little too loud. He was rather embarrased but nonetheless correct.

In my church, the higher you move up in ministry, the more legalism you're saddled with. I know ... I've moved up and gotten more. I despise it. But I know what I'm in for before I accept the position so I obey. I do not whine or backbite or groan or gossip about it. It's just how the pastor wants it done. I sponsored some kids for camp. We're the only campers whose girls wear a skirt to worship every evening. Pastor's rules. It's a lot of work to get that many kids changed and on time. I have to wear one too and I hate skirts. It's legalism. Skirts aren't in the Bible. I won't go there. You get my point. But I submit to authority and don't undermine him with the girls. I do, however, wear the same skirt every evening. Denim; huge and comfy. Some kids feel better because they only brought one skirt or one pair of slacks (the guys). Then it's just funny to them that their counselor is in their boat too.

I'm also not one who ascribes to total abstinence from alcohol. Many reasonable and righteous men and women reach this same conclusion as well as the teetotaller position. Therefore, it's a personal conviction sort of thing and not doctrinal -- and is well within the pale of of orthodoxy, as I've said beofre. Hence, it's legalistic if it's mandated. But I do believe for some people, alcohol really is a sin. If they are easily lured by it, if they easily abuse it, it is a sin. Just as anything can be for that matter. Temperance is for all things, not just alcohol. My pastor would greatly disapprove of my opinion on this matter, but that's why I don't widely make it known. Alcohol doesn't always do me good, so I don't choose to use it often. Just personal conviction.

I don't cuss (Southern word for "curse" or "foul language") because it's not uplifting or edifying. I think that's more explicit in the Bible but I don't look down my nose at those who, in moments of great frustration or panic or anger or passion let fly with a word or two (or three!). However it's temperance I'm concerned with... I don't care much for a person whose vocabulary is littered with abusive and foul language. That's just disgusting to me and, for practical purposes, distracts from communication endeavors.

Boiled down, my point is this: legalism sucks but its the kink in the machine. We are called to submit to authority, but if we go through the proper channels and do so in a loving manner, I believe authority can be questioned (if we REALLY want to hear the answer and are willing to accept the answer and leave it at that). I don't put my faith in legalism any more than I do in religion. I think legalism does a lot to turn people from Christ, especially when unchecked. But people who do not submit to authority also do a lot to turn people from Christ. When the body hurts itself, when the hand won't obey the mind, we've got much bigger problems than legalism.

Comments
on Feb 19, 2005
Thanks Shulamite. I appreciate your candor. I just quit going to church, after 31 years, because I can no longer stand the legalism I've been subjected to all these years. Sometimes it's been real bad, and at other times, mild. I somehow let it get to me, and now I'm just sick and tired of it. I love the body of Christ so much, but now I'm not sure what course of action to take. I know God is patient, so I'm ok there. I can't do what you're doing any longer. My husband is very patient with me as well. I don't know what I'm looking for exactly, but it isn't what I was doing. I want God. I want Jesus. I want the Kingdom of God that was freely given to me by Christ himself. I don't know how most of that even looks anymore. Any thoughts? I'm all ears.
on Feb 20, 2005
This might seem a little strange coming from a preacher but I would say AMEN to your post.

I was raised in a church that was very legalistic in its teaching and practice. I did not trust Christ as my Saviour until I was 28 years of age. I am now a preacher in an independent, non-denominational church and still see quite an emphasis on legalism in many denominations to the degree that some think they please God by obeying rules and regulation even when their heart not in it at all. It's kind'a like going to church but wish you were really hunting or fishing instead. Whether it is the clothing they wear or don't wear, with food or drink or lack therof some feel they are pleasing to God eventhough there is little heart and conviction of Spirit.

I must admit though, that I do not think that unchecked tolerance of blatant sin is what manifest true love. Love requires the believer to speak out and stand against sin, but it should be done in mercy and grace.


To your quote:"If people would obey the larger umbrella laws, ie respect others and their property as well as yourself and your ownthings, we'd not have any trouble at all would we?"

I have to agree that the reasons we have laws and rules is because of the human heart- is desperatly wicked and deceitful above all things.... and left to itself everyman would do what is right in his own eyes. That would not be a good world, would it?

Nice post-
God Bless
preacherman
on Feb 20, 2005
All priests, by their very nature as priests, are intermediaries, interlopers, vicarious stand-ins - and therefore are thieves. Thieves of the believer's liberty of conscience. Thieves of the freedom that is entailed by the belief in a personal as opposed to a collective god. And they are no more entitled to the 'authority' they pretend to wield than I am entitled to promulgate civil laws for the 'good' of others.

A church is a collectivity of believers, yes. But that collectivity is no more than a loose alliance of individuals all (presumably) sharing a particular religious conviction in a particular god.

But because they share the same general conviction does not mean that they must, in order to be counted among the faithful, adhere to every pronouncement handed down from the pulpit, in the same way that a general political conviction does not entail belief in or adherence to the pronouncements of a given political leader.

You suffer from legalism within the church only to the extent that you are personally willing to tolerate it. Myself, when I first became acquainted with its presence I did what my conscience dictated. Which was to abandon that church and begin the spiritual explorations that have led me to my present position. And while that position is completely unorthodox in relation to christianity, I couldn't have got to where I am without first going there.

It's by no means necessary to follow the path that I have, simply as a consequence of taking an intolerant position towards the supposed authority of priests, prelates, bishops, apostles, vicars, pastors and their fraudulent ilk.

But I do think that an intolerance for authority of any kind makes for a more intelligent, critical and self-aware individual, and that contemporary christianity is sorely in need of those qualities.