Talk:Scrupulosity

message: I visited this page after reading that several historical figures (St. Therese of Lisieux, husband of famous "Anne of Green Gables" author Lucy Maud Montgomery) suffered from religious scruples to a debilitating degree. 
There are three uses of the word - first, the out-of-common-usage meaning that is typically conveyed as "suffering from scruples", which has a specifically religious context; second,  the current common usage of the word, which more or less means "strict regard for what is right; scrupulous care; e.g., “Albert, with characteristic scrupulosity attempted to thread his way through the complicated labyrinth of European diplomacy.” [Note the absence from the definition of the elements of psychological disorder, obsession, religion, morality, pathology, guilt, distress and compulsion]" (copied from below). The third represents the transference of elements of religious scruples that resemble psychological disorders to definitions of clearly psychological conditions today, like OCD. 
A reader coming here to find what could be meant by the former usage, which is the one that commonly requires research to comprehend, goes away sadly uninformed, which misses the point of referring to an encyclopedia to find something out.
The closest hint one has is the reference to Ignatius of Loyola, describing his temptation to religious scruples after treading upon two straws that accidentally form a cross. The explanation "obsessive concern with one's own sins and compulsive performance of religious devotion" is both vague and inaccurate - the concern is not with what are actually defined as sins by the church, but what are perceived as sins by the sufferer and which are not, in fact, sins; also, religious devotions and practices may be involved, but not necessarily. 
The subsequent comparison with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder is only useful for those who already understand that term well, and have some idea how that comparison applies.
It would be very useful to fill out this article with more concrete examples, as well as a better definition and explanation of the church's response to the disorder. In religious terms, "religious scruples" are a temptation - the sufferer focuses with horror and guilt on small or even involuntary failures to demonstrate perfect love for God, to the degree that God's love and mercy towards them fade far into the background, and the sufferer believes themselves to deserve condemnation or even to actually be condemned on account of things as minor as Ignatius's treading on the two straws. 
This thinking ultimately rejects God's love and mercy and leads to despair or rejection of God, both of which are actual mortal sins, while treading accidentally upon cross-shaped straws (for example) is not a sin at all.
So for the example of the straws, Ignatius might have been led by the temptation (had he not recognized it as one), to think that though he saw the shape of the cross in the straws as he was about to tread on them, by treading upon them and not moving his foot aside to avoid it, he had demonstrated a lack of perfect love for the cross, for Jesus, and for God; that his own condemnation of himself based on this small action and coincidental occurrence of the shape was shared by God; that God recognized in him a lack of perfect love, which must also be hypocrisy, since he claimed to love the cross, Jesus and God; that indeed he was a hypocrite and deserved to be recognized as one; that he did not want to be but could not help it; that it is impossible to demonstrate perfect love for the cross unless one takes very great care at all times to avoid stepping on cross-shaped straws (and indeed by failing to treat with at least some movement of interior respect every shape that may coincidentally resemble a cross); that this is impossible; yet that thinking it is impossible is also a great sin since all things are possible with God; that he must be a very great sinner indeed since now it begins to become very stressful to try to figure out how to demonstrate love for God when straws are everywhere to trip you up; that a perfect devotion must be made in atonement for all of this... yet in the performance of the perfect devotion that will make up for the actual treading upon the straws, the implied sinful lack of love in having failed to avoid the appearance of disrespect, the apparent hypocrisy of claiming to love God while treading on straw-shaped crosses though they were spotted in time to avoid them, and the dismay at the obvious impossibility of always avoiding stepping on cross-shaped anything contrasted with the hope and belief that with God nothing is impossible... in the performance of the perfect devotion that will make up for all of this, another error is made.  
The exhausted soul quickly becomes paralyzed - it fears to move lest it make even more errors, it fears to approach God, it fears God has abandoned it, it fears God has condemned it, and it is no longer able to think of God's love or mercy at all. The soul then despairs, or abandons God - either outcome is the result of a successful temptation.
More concrete examples and some better explanation along these lines would help convey why people "suffered" from religious scruples, what exactly they were, and why it was considered both debilitating and bad. I understand that there may not be too many sources one could quote from to illustrate good examples, but some effort ought to be made. 
The article is lacking these to a sadly un-informative degree.  Modern medical comparisons and terminology are not useful to the reader who has little idea what was meant by "religious scruples" to begin with. If that could be better illustrated, additional concrete illustrations of similarities in OCD scrupulosity would also make sense in filling out this article so that the debilitative aspects are clearly understood, and be useful in tying the concepts together.
Note
 
After reading through the comments, I disagree with the perspective that this article ought to be primarily medical. It is appropriate to clarify where today's medical diagnoses differ from the historical perspective, but not everyone visiting here is primarily or only interested, or even interested at all in today's medical definition.
I would suggest a structure along the following lines:
History
Historical definition and concrete examples
Concrete, descriptive illustration of spiritual suffering 
Spiritual consequences of the suffering in the context of religious belief
Famous historical figures who suffered from religious scruples
The Church's recommendations on overcoming religious scruples
Today's Medical Understanding
Today's definition and concrete examples
Similarities (and differences) of OCD/OCDP with historical religious scruples
Famous people who suffer from what is called "scrupulosity" today
Treatment
[After a second read through the comments I see that a real effort has been made to fairly represent the condition historically. While acknowledging that good, fair and even strenuous effort, it is still apparent that someone who wants to understand why the condition caused suffering and was debilitating, and has even been described as "torture" and "martyrdom", will not understand it by reading this article in its current form.]
172.10.237.153 (talk) 10:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surprised to see that so much discussion resulted in such a non-informative article 

message: I visited this page after reading how several historical figures (St. Therese of Lisieux, husband of famous "Anne of Green Gables" author Lucy Maud Montgomery) suffered from religious scruples to a debilitating degree. 
A reader coming here to find out what religious scruples were and why they were debilitating goes away sadly uninformed, which misses the point of referring to an encyclopedia to find something out.
The explanation "obsessive concern with one's own sins and compulsive performance of religious devotion" is both vague and inaccurate - the concern is not with what are actually defined as sins by the church, but what are perceived as sins by the sufferer and which are not, in fact, sins; also, religious devotions and practices may be involved, but not necessarily.
In religious terms, "religious scruples" are a temptation - the sufferer focuses with horror and guilt on small or even involuntary failures to demonstrate perfect love for God, to the degree that God's love and mercy towards them fade far into the background, and the sufferer believes themselves to deserve condemnation or even to actually be condemned on account of things as minor as Ignatius's treading on the two straws.
This thinking ultimately rejects God's love and mercy and leads to despair or rejection of God, both of which are actual mortal sins, while treading accidentally upon cross-shaped straws (for example) is not a sin at all.
So for the example of the straws, Ignatius might have been led by the temptation (had he not recognized it as one), to think that though he saw the shape of the cross in the straws as he was about to tread on them, by treading upon them and not moving his foot aside to avoid it, he had demonstrated a lack of perfect love for the cross, for Jesus, and for God; that his own condemnation of himself based on this small action and coincidental occurrence of the shape was shared by God; that God recognized in him a lack of perfect love, which must also be hypocrisy, since he claimed to love the cross, Jesus and God; that indeed he was a hypocrite and deserved to be recognized as one; that he did not want to be but could not help it; that it is impossible to demonstrate perfect love for the cross unless one takes very great care at all times to avoid stepping on cross-shaped straws (and indeed by failing to treat with at least some movement of interior respect every shape that may coincidentally resemble a cross); that this is impossible; yet that thinking it is impossible is also a great sin since all things are possible with God; that he must be a very great sinner indeed since now it begins to become very stressful to try to figure out how to demonstrate love for God when straws are everywhere to trip you up; that a perfect devotion must be made in atonement for all of this... yet in the performance of the perfect devotion that will make up for the actual treading upon the straws, the implied sinful lack of love in having failed to avoid the appearance of disrespect, the apparent hypocrisy of claiming to love God while treading on straw-shaped crosses though they were spotted in time to avoid them, and the dismay at the obvious impossibility of always avoiding stepping on cross-shaped anything contrasted with the hope and belief that with God nothing is impossible... in the performance of the perfect devotion that will make up for all of this, another error is made.
The exhausted soul quickly becomes paralyzed - it fears to move lest it make even more errors, it fears to approach God, it fears God has abandoned it, it fears God has condemned it, and it is no longer able to think of God's love or mercy at all. The soul then despairs, or abandons God - either outcome is the result of a successful temptation.  
172.10.237.153 (talk) 10:55, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A talk-page-only example of how religious scruples caused anguish to the sufferers 

message: The article is lacking historical examples illustrating how someone suffered from religious scruples to a sadly un-informative degree.  Modern medical comparisons and terminology are not useful to the reader who has little idea what was meant by "religious scruples" to begin with. If that could be better illustrated, additional concrete illustrations of similarities in OCD scrupulosity would also make sense in filling out this article so that the debilitative aspects are clearly understood, and be useful in tying the concepts together.
I disagree with the perspective that this article ought to be primarily medical. It is appropriate to clarify where today's medical diagnoses differ from the historical perspective, but not everyone visiting here is primarily or only interested, or even interested at all in today's medical definition.
[After a read through the comments I see that a real effort has been made to fairly represent the condition historically. While acknowledging that good, fair and even strenuous effort, it is still apparent that someone who wants to understand why the condition caused suffering and was debilitating, and has even been described as "torture" and "martyrdom", will not understand it by reading this article in its current form.]
172.10.237.153 (talk) 10:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surprised to see that so much discussion resulted in such a non-informative article 

message: Welcome, 172; thank you for your interest in this page.  Editor Eubulides no longer edits Wikipedia, and I edit only sporadically.  I do not plan to engage in a rewrite or update of this article, but stopped by to try to help you learn some editing techniques.  This article has not been touched for six years, so it certainly has issues.  However, your suggestions might be noticed by others if you first take note of the following:1.  New talk page entries go at the bottom of the talk page.  I have added a header to the top of this page that provides helpful information about how to edit Wikipedia talk pages.  If you could read that, your communication here would be more effective.  Before attempting to change an article, it is helpful to learn to communicate on talk pages with other editors about your proposed changes.  2. You should always sign your talk page entries; you can do that by entering four tildes ( ~~~~ ) after your message.    3.  I have archived the older talk page entries here; it is good to keep length in mind when editing talk pages.  You might first propose sources for any content you want to change or add.  All text on Wikipedia must be supported by reliable sources, and discussion is facilitated by making sure your content changes can be supported.  4.  You will notice at the top of this talk page that this article is supported by three WikiProjects: the Medicine Project is one of them.  I have included a link to what kind of sources must be used to support statements about health.  Yes, there will be content in this article that is not strictly Med Project related, but any text relating to individual's health (including mental), must be supported by a reliable medical source.   5.  Please have a look at WP:MEDMOS on how we organize and talk about health issues; for example, we do not refer to individuals who have a given condition as "sufferers".   6.  You might also be interested in looking at Scruple (disambiguation), linked at the top of this article, which points to another article on scruples, conscience, about non-pathological scruples.  The scope of this article is the psychopathological condition.  I hope this will give you a starting place for learning how to communicate on talk, so that you can then propose reliable sources and content additions.  Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welcome IP