MAINSTREAM MESSENGER
Vol. 3, No. 2 April 2000
Taking a Look at Legalism
by Richard Kahoe
Religions in general and Christianity in particular have seemingly forever waged warfare with ideologies (-ism’s) from without, ranging from Gnosticism to communism and beyond. More persistent threats, perhaps, come from what I call “ism’s within.” One of those is legalism.
Legalism, at one time or another, in one form or another, seems to blight every major faith. One essential function of any religion is to provide a code of conduct. Legalism attempts to solve this need by specifying, in great detail, just what behaviors (and prohibitions) are required of the individual.
At times when I identify my own denomination, a person replies, “Oh I know them; they don’t drink or dance or play cards or go to movies,” or some such litany. Sorry to say, that claim to fame brands some of our churches, but I prefer to emphasize more positive aspects of my religious heritage.
Legalism is so familiar to many Judeo-Christians that they have difficulty imagining any other option. Perhaps, for most Christians, new testament Pharisees epitomize legalism. Much of Jesus’ ministry, especially the sermon on the mount, consisted of his efforts to lift his followers above such legalism.
Recall the formula, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, but I say unto you.” Uncomfortable as the thought may be to many Christians, Jesus went above and beyond legalism, emphasizing the intents of “the heart.” He based morality on principles — love, justice, grace — rather than on specific behaviors. Going beyond legalism like this is called “supralegalism.” Jesus was a supralegalist.
Psychologically legalism gives a great deal of security and comfort to some people (many are drawn to religion because they need such security). When people think they can stay right with God just by following a very specific set of do’s and don’ts, religious practice seems relatively simple.
However, legalism is strewn with potholes. People who stress that path almost always become selective about what they emphasize. If preaching against sex and booze draws “Amens,” the preacher may follow the easy path of entertaining the congregation with a comfortable code. Or a church may take a rigid stand on Jesus’ teaching about divorce, but ignore the implications of his pacifism — turning the other cheek. Legalists also tend to turn outward in judgment and self-righteousness, harshly judging others who do not follow the particular emphases of their selective code.
I checked the biblical references on divorce and self-righteousness. Yes, the Bible has much more to say against the latter, in contrast with the self-righteous judgments some church people make against the divorced.
Legalism provides comfort to insecure people. But, as they become more mature and experienced in their faith, they often discover that the rigid codes oversimplify reality.
They may begin to explore the principles underlying morality to face internal “heart” issues rather than overt behavior. However, when believers rise above legalism to some version of “principles morality,” they face the danger of using their reasoning to justify questionable behavior.
Legalism may be the easier path, but as Erwin Goodenough, a religion scholar, has written, the “safe road is the road of legalism, but all moral progress has come from supralegalists.”
Probably, most of us muddle along somewhere between the extremes, make some errors in moral judgment and pray we do not presume too much on God’s grace. That kind of ambiguity is to slippery for many religious leaders and believers; no wonder legalism continues to crop up in virtually all religions.
Richard Kahoe is a licensed psychologist and lay minister. He is chair-elect of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists.