So…when we want to steal, we mortify the flesh by not stealing etc etc.

I agre with Joe, I think. If a guy beats himself privately, Pope or not, it’s probably wrong to insist that it is wrong.

On the other hand, being as Scripture doesn’t tell us to do it, or what benefits it might have, it is equally or even more wrong, in my view, to claim that it provides and spiritual benefit.

I think one could even argue that in the claiming of benefit, it can cause one to sin, because it could direct one away from real biblical moritification and bible study and such like, because of some imagined benefit attain by a whip.

1 Corinthians 9:27
Romans 8:13
Colossians 3:5
Galatians 5:24

“The term “mortification of the flesh” comes from Saint Paul in this quote: “For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live”.[ Epistle to the Romans 8:13]
The same idea is seen in the following verses: “Put to death what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry”.[Colossians 3:5] “And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires”.[Galatians 5:24 ]“

“It is held by some interpreters that St. Paul in the words: “I chastise my body” refers to self-inflicted bodily scourging (1 Corinthians 9:27). The Greek word hypopiazo (see Liddell and Scott) means “to strike under the eye”, and metaphorically “to mortify”; consequently, it can scarcely mean “to scourge”, and indeed in Luke 18:5, such an interpretation is quite inadmissible. Furthermore, where St. Paul certainly refers to scourging, he uses a different word. We may therefore safely conclude that he speaks here of mortification in general”

Hardly. Does McCain mean this?

“Paul did not harm himself in pursuit of this union. Suffering found him, and he even pleaded unsuccessfully with God to relent (2 Cor. 12:7-10).”

That following an admission that the verse in question is vexing?

All the arguments of error are from silence, and ignore centuries of evidence found in contrary tradition. Let’s call it straight: Protestants don’t like the idea of physical mortification because it is just too medieval and too Catholic. Period. Even is a very Protestant pope like JPII.

Bad theology:

I only need to have faith, to believe better and more, to grow spiritually. Doing spiritual disciplines is, at best, misleading myself as to the real problem with my soul having little faith and putting myself in danger of pride; or, at worst, a capitulation to works-based righteousness where I am giving reason to suspect whether I am even a Christian. After all, “salvation is by faith alone.”

Obviously, this theology is guilty of historical ignorance as to the practice of the Church (which is often dismissed as mere tradition) and is basically Gnostic in character, denying the biblical vision of discipleship as the redemptive shaping of the whole person in its reductive focus on an internal-only “faith.”

Bad culture: the cultural institutions we participate in, the commercials, the media we consume, the kinds of food we eat, are driven by the goal of convenience. “Everything should be easy, quick, and painless” and Americans live our lives, outside of Sunday (maybe), like this is true.

Evangelicals believe that by the sheer force of will (helped by the Holy Spirit’s work in motivational preaching, especially of good theology) we can live, work, play, eat, etc. by the norms and practices of Convenience-Land 24/7 and then flip the switch and choose to deny themselves when Jesus calls us to. Why? Because “the truth will set us free” and we know the Gospel and decided to follow Jesus, so we should be free to be able to flip the switch, right?

Some strong-willed Christians are able to do so, so everyone else believes the reason they cannot is because they don’t have enough faith and aren’t “spiritually mature.” So, more preaching and bible studies are called for, until more Christians are able to will themselves to break out of the Monday-Saturday mold of self-comfort to obey Jesus.

That, in the end, precious few Christians have that kind of willpower and so most fake it does not seem to raise concerns. Perhaps for the sake of the many, we should live lives that don’t form a mold of self-comfort in the first place.

Nah, that would be inconvenient. And that would mean that a lot of our evangelical leaders, esteemed for their great will-to-holiness (at least until their wills falter because of sex if they’re politically conservative, money if they’re liberal), would lose some of their “freedoms” to pursue and enjoy “adiaphora.”

The point of the post was actually to point out a weakness among us Protestants when it comes to any talk of spiritual disciplines involving self-mortification. The degree to which we recoil in horror at the Pope’s practice might not be merely or only a reaction to the theological errors it involves, but may well have to do with general antipathy toward any thought of self-mortification.

I wrote a little post about this myself. (I won’t link so as not to shamelessly self-promote.) I would be interested to hear what you believe fasting does that is different from what the pope was doing. In other words, why is fasting acceptable, even assumed, and self-beatings aren’t?