EPISTLES

In an episode of The Jimmy Akin Podcast, Jimmy Akin responds to a video by Fr. Casey Cole, OFM, a young Franciscan priest. Fr. Cole argues that Catholics should not pray privately after Communion. He says they should immediately rejoin the singing of the Communion hymn. Akin introduces the concept of Pious Little Legalism. These are man-made rules imposed on others as if they measure true spirituality. He argues that Fr. Cole’s claims fall into this category.

Akin explains why this is an overly strict and incorrect reading of liturgical law. He shows that Church documents do not require every communicant to sing. Personal thanksgiving after Communion is recognized and encouraged.

The following transcript highlights the difference between liturgical discipline and personal spiritual preference. It urges charity, accuracy, and freedom within what the Church allows.

Pious Little Legalism Explained by Jimmy Akin:

What Father Cole is advocating is what I call a pious little legalism. This is a term I coined years ago to refer to situations where one person or a group of people propose a rule and insist that others follow it if they are among the truly pious.

Specifically, Father Cole has made up a rule that is nowhere stated in the text, to the effect that every single person needs to be singing the Communion hymn if it is physically possible for them to do so.

Obviously, they can’t do so when Communion is in their mouths, but otherwise they need to be singing. As he says in his second video:

“It is important that everyone sing. It is not just a concert for the choir. It’s not just an opportunity to hear beautiful music, but rather, by raising our voices, they become one, further symbolizing what we’re receiving.”

A Rule the Text Does Not Require

So that’s the rule that Father Cole is making up, because the text nowhere says that every single person in church needs to sing this. That’s his pious little legalism.

Pious little legalisms happen in all kinds of contexts, both Catholic and non-Catholic. The reason is that pious little legalisms are a way of reinforcing solidarity with particular groups. They serve as tribal identity badges that indicate you’re with the really spiritual people.

In a non-Catholic context, a Calvinist might say that if you don’t accept all five of the five points of Calvinism, then you aren’t truly spiritual and have a man-centered gospel. And a non-Calvinist might say that if you do accept all five of the five points of Calvinism, so that you hold that God picks certain people to go to heaven for no discernible reason and lets everybody else go to hell, then you have a monstrous view of God and a defective sense of true spirituality.

Doctrines vs. Disciplines

Those two views at least concern matters of doctrine that can be either true or false. But the same attitude appears when it comes to disciplines rather than doctrines.

In a Catholic context, pious little legalisms occur like, if you prefer the Traditional Latin Mass, you’re a troglodyte who isn’t thinking with where the Church is now. Or if you don’t prefer the Traditional Latin Mass, you have abandoned true spirituality.

Or, a step down from that, if you receive Communion in the hand rather than on the tongue, you’re not truly spiritual. Or if you receive Communion on the tongue rather than in the hand, again, you’re not truly spiritual.

Pious little legalisms abound because they’re a way of signaling your solidarity with a particular tribe. They are also ways of making yourself feel good by looking down on other people.

They thus violate the ethic that Jesus taught us, whereby we need to love our neighbor, not look down on them just because they’re doing something different than we do.

Akin Shares Anecdote on Pious Little Legalism

I’ve had a lot of experience with pious little legalisms. I lived through the liturgy wars of the 1990s. Father Cole is too young to remember those, but I remember them.

Some of the most aggressive purveyors of pious little legalisms were the liturgists who insisted that things be done according to their preferences, whether the law required that or not.

There was a joke at the time that some folks may remember: What’s the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist? Answer: You can negotiate with the terrorist.

Even some bishops got in on the act and started telling the faithful in their diocese things like they weren’t allowed to kneel for Communion, or to receive on the tongue, or they were required to remain standing when they got back to their seat, or things like that, even though the law didn’t require any of those things.

And thank God the Vatican vindicated those who wanted to express their personal piety in these ways.

A Misuse of Liturgical Authority

But what Father Cole is doing is following in the overly zealous liturgists’ footsteps in bossing people around with a pious little legalism—an interpretation that insists on a rigid uniformity that goes beyond what the law says.

Because it’s obvious that the law does not envision every person at Mass be singing the Communion hymn unless they physically have the host in their mouths, people can and do stop singing it when they’re on their way up to receive Communion. And if they can refrain from singing it, then they can also refrain from singing it when they get back to their pew.

In such a moment, they might find it conducive to their own personal spirituality to take a few moments to say thanksgiving to our Lord Jesus Christ for allowing them to receive Him in Holy Communion.

Source: Jimmy Akin (2025). Can you pray after Communion? [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/Z89sNf_aKXI