Douglas Wilson, blogger and noted theologian, writes:
One more quick comment on penitential seasons. I do believe it is possible for good, sound Protestants to observe such seasons, provided they redefine everything and do something very different from what gave rise to the historical practice in the first place. But it seems to me this is done with success rarely, and when it is successfully done, the question “why?” naturally arises.
In my view, the impulse behind penitenitial-seasons-gone-wrong is the same as the impulse behind purgatory.
[...]
So my point is this — for those evangelical Protestants who are engaged in “going back” or “recovering” certain liturgical practices, it is important to make sure that we are not falling into a trap that previous generations of our Christian brothers undeniably fell into. Seasons of penitence, the way they have been practiced for centuries (by people who also believed in purgatory for similar reasons), are potentially deadly. Okay, so we found something really cool in the barn. Let’s just fumigate it thoroughly before we talk about bringing it into the house.
One last comment. I am not talking here about penitential seasons per se being equivalent to purgatory because in a very real sense this life is where the purgation is supposed to occur. In other words, there are numerous ways in which repentance, cleansing, sanctification, and so on are supposed to be an ongoing reality in our lives. What I am saying is that our liturgical and historical idea of what penitence in the course of a penitential season is supposed to look like was largely shaped by people who also thought that the sufferings of Jesus on the cross needed to be supplemented by us to get the job of our forgiveness done. That is what we need to ditch, and a big shout out to the pope for doing so. [note: emphasis mine]
This seems to have a Dan Brown-ish anti-Catholic bent to it. The “you can do that thing the Catholics do, provided you redefine everything! and do something different.” At which point you’re not doing it at all. If what they’re doing is good, you’ve just thrown out the baby with the bathwater on the basis of basically … what?
And what is he talking about here is … Lent! And furthermore, he’s completely off base on the historical basis for ascetical striving (fasting, prayer and all that). St. Anthony was one of the first ascetics written about in any detail and his and the other desert fathers served as a basis for the Western and Eastern monastic movements. The problem with Mr Wilson’s objection, that those shaping the penitential season were faith/works people, ignores the fact that the penitential season and ascetic discipline arose in the first 4 centuries. The Protestant founders didn’t toss out the patristic Fathers, why does Mr Wilson? Calvin or Luther weren’t writing that St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. John Cassian, or St. John Chrysostom got “it mostly right” but had a faith/works problem. Purgatory, which seem Mr Wilson’s major objection developed in the Medieval period somewhat later than Lent, ascetic discipline, and monasticism.
Examine for a moment just a few of the reasons for fasting and the penitential season (in no way is this list likely to be exhaustive … just the top few that come to mind):
- We fast to turn our mind to God. That hunger that comes along with a fast provides the human animal with a reminder which can be often easily turned to a reminder that we owe all to God (the whole love Him with all our heart, mind, and strength).
- Our life is filled with noise and distraction. Ascetic struggle helps strengthen one as an athlete strengthens himself with exercise.
- Kyrie Eleision (Lord have Mercy) is stressed just a little more in the East than the West. However … it is a primary focus of the Lent penitential fast and striving.
Which of these notions is one the Protestant wants to cast off?
As a final note, examine the Canon of St. Andrew … wherein do you find the works=salvation objection which is noted as Mr Wilson’s primary objection. For example:
[...]
Therefore I am condemned, wretch that I am, therefore I am doomed by my own conscience, than which there is nothing in the world more rigorous. O my Judge and Redeemer Who knowest my heart, spare and deliver and save me, Thy servant.
Refrain: Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.
The ladder of old which the great Patriarch saw, my soul, is a model of mounting by action and ascent by knowledge. So, if you wish to live in activity, knowledge and contemplation, be renewed. (Genesis 28:12; Rom. 12:2; Titus 3:5) Refrain
Because of his crying need the Patriarch endured the scorching heat of the day, and he bore the frost of the night, daily making gains, shepherding, struggling, slaving, in order to win two wives. (Genesis 29:16-30; 31-40) Refrain
By the two wives understand action and direct knowledge in contemplation: Leah as action, for she had many children, and Rachel as knowledge, which is obtained by much labour. For without labours, my soul, neither action nor contemplation will achieve success. Refrain
Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit
[...]
Faith=Works. Is. Not. There. I’m afraid that Mr Wilson is just completely off base on this one.
My first problem with his argument is that he is comparing the Lenten observance (a practice) with Purgatory (a doctrine). He needs to decide which one he wants to pounce on.
I like what you have said here. But one thing: “Lord have Mercy” means something very different than what the West (and particularly Protestants) take it to mean. Sadly, the Antiochian website doesn’t seem to be working today, but they have a good article about why we say this little phrase so often and what it means. Here’s part of the explanation a blogging friend of mine took off the site several weeks ago:
“The word mercy in English is the translation of the Greek word eleos. This word has the same ultimate root as the old Greek word for oil, or more precisely, olive oil; a substance which was used extensively as a soothing agent for bruises and minor wounds. The oil was poured onto the wound and gently massaged in, thus soothing, comforting and making whole the injured part. The Hebrew word which is also translated as eleos and mercy is hesed, and means steadfast love. The Greek words for ‘Lord, have mercy,’ are ‘Kyrie, eleison’ that is to say, ‘Lord, soothe me, comfort me, take away my pain, show me your steadfast love.’ Thus mercy does not refer so much to justice or acquittal a very Western interpretation but to the infinite loving-kindness of God, and his compassion for his suffering children! It is in this sense that we pray ‘Lord, have mercy,’ with great frequency throughout the Divine Liturgy.
Here’s a different snippet I found:
http://www.orthodox.clara.net/whyishould.htm
This is the most common prayer in the Orthodox Church. To an English speaker it sounds negative. The Greek word “mercy” comes from the same word as olive oil. So “Lord have mercy!” has the following consequent meanings all at the same time: “Lord … have mercy, heal … soothe … bless … anoint … give peace … make clean … make joy come … give abundance … make whole … make holy!” so it is a fairly full prayer.
Did you respond to him at his blog too?
DebD,
In part I take the Canon of St. Andrew as a meditation on why we say “Lord have mercy” and what it means, but I think your quoted piece, “heal, sooth, etc” is very good.
I had another thought about my issue with Mr. Wilson’s article. He seems to be under the impression that only those who observe Lent believe in Purgatory. Has he never heard of the Lutheran, Episcopalian, and of course, Eastern Orthodox traditions?? Talk about having blinders on.
Okay, I think I need to just walk away from this one.