If there is one area of life in which discussion is futile, it is when trying to persuade a Moral Legalist in a situation where somebody has transgressed a law, rule or principle, that he regards as both absolute and primary.
Such people cannot be made to recognize that the crucial move in their argument has been their own personal choice to regard values as existing ultimately in the form of laws.
As well as, secondly, the choice to place This Law, here-and-now, as above all other laws that could (in principle) be applied to the situation under discussion.
In other words; any possible argument has already-been pre-decided by the prior choice of These-Laws as necessarily valid and supreme, and the prior choice to apply This-Law here-and-now.
Moral legalists have taken a vastly complex situation unfolding in real-time; and applied-to-it a grossly simplified model, that begs all the most fundamental questions.
On the one hand we have Life; but on the other hand a set of Laws and relations between Laws. These Laws are then claimed to be descriptive of The Ultimate Truth about Life. The claim is that Life derives from Laws.
In other words, the Man-assumed model of reality which is The Laws; is given primacy over all the multitude of details of that existence in which we find ourselves.
There can be no relevant "evidence" for this assumption of the primacy of Law. It is an act of faith, a personal decision.
Such moral legalists (and they are legion, and occur in all Christian denominations) cannot be persuaded; because they regard every attempt to point-out the fact of their assumptions, and that all such assumptions depend upon a personal choice of what-to-believe; as a challenge to their core moral values - hence as necessarily emanating from an evil tempter.
One who debates a moral legalist, is subjectively assigned a (literally) demonic role.
The reaction to any challenge to the assumption of the validity and applicability of Law is therefore typically extreme, and always negative.
And also projective - in the sense that it attributes motivation in absence of knowledge. Any pointing-out of "my" assumptions as assumptions is experienced as an evil-motivated attack on what I have assumed to be ultimate good.
Naturally enough, albeit mistakenly and sinfully; this may subjectively be regarded as "justifying", or even requiring (moralistic zeal!) - justifying an extreme response against this threat.
Thus moral legalism is, I believe, a major cause of the extraordinary extremity of hostile rhetoric from some Christians online, and sometime IRL; and a cause of the inability of so many Christians to learn from experience, from Life. Because when These-Laws have-been accorded metaphysical primacy, primacy by-assumption; then anything that happens in Life can have nothing to teach us about the validity and applicability of These-Laws.
Note added: If not, then what? If not Moral Legalism, then what instead?
The answer lies in distinguishing the limitations of this actual mortal life from the ideal situation of Heaven - and in remembering the ultimate primacy of Heaven. Here-and-now in this vast and impersonal world as-is; we are stuck with legalism and bureaucracy as inevitable evils. Laws can be improved and reduced, implementation should be supervised and shaped by wise human judgment - but all Laws are ultimately wrong.
And yet we are stuck with them, especially when it comes to public and societal morality (we can, and should, try to exclude laws and law-like rules as much as possible from a loving marriage, family, and strong friendships.
(For the same reason, we should resist the temptation to conceptualize loving marriages and families in terms of societal-derived models - destructive errors such as regarding the family as essentially structured like a "social institution", as analogous to a mini-nation; as properly "ruled" by monarch, or "democracy", or whatever...)
However; Heavenly morality and values are wholly relational, i.e. rooted in love between persons - and there is no place for Laws in Heaven.
This is what we need to hold in mind, in order to avoid the self-blinded and destructive zealotry of the self-defined-Christian - but often net-evil, and in-practice demon-aligned - Moral Legalists.
5 comments:
But aren't there wrong assumptions and right assumptions? I mean, if I jump out the window on the assumption that there's a net below me to catch me, my assumption is going to be justified or not justified. (Assuming I want to survive!)
I think the Catholic approach to this question (unless I'm reading you wrong) has been most recently articulated in JPII's Veritatis Splendor. And I think it's fair to say (although I might be wrong) that it's basically this: there is a danger of legalism (against which so many of Christ's words were aimed), but there is also a danger of "situationalism" or situation ethics, and both must be avoided.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veritatis_splendor
It seems to me that the most important sentence in this post is "Heavenly morality and values are wholly relational, i.e. rooted in love between persons - and there is no place for Laws in Heaven." If this hypothesis is correct, the rest of the post proceeds from it.
@Jonathan - Yes.
Once we recognize that, we realize that with laws - albeit necessary in this mortal earthly life - we are talking of lesser evils, rather than positive goods. That may help create an attitude that recognizes the limits of objectivity, and need for good motivations on the part of those entrusted with framing and implementing laws/ rules/ regulations etc.
Without good motivations in people, laws become pernicious: a rationale and disguise for evil - as we see all around us.
Comment from Jack
6 Jul 2026, 16:23
In a recent post, Ed Hurst points out that pharisaical legalism arises from a juvenile lack of moral maturity -- the deep personal connection with God; and that it is motivated by envy and the desire to gain an advantage over established authorities (parents, teachers, or God, as the case may be).
That said, it is insightful (and somewhat entertaining) to consider moral legalists as spiritual juveniles.
https://radixfidem.blog/2026/07/05/root-of-legalism/
@Jack - I didn't find the linked post at all convincing!
It seemed to be making something specific and particular, historical, tribal, and psychological - about a very general phenomenon to which a high proportion of the most active/devout modern Christians remain strongly committed.
Indeed, until very recently, the modern world has been becoming more and more legalistic (i.e. bureaucratic) through my lifetime.
Post a Comment