Over the past several weeks, I’ve been inclined to focus on the practice of Lent. I’ve seen my Roman Catholic friends do this for years, but I never gave it much thought. Yet Lutherans, Anglicans, and other denominations inheriting the Reformation tradition also observe this part of the liturgical calendar. Most people who practice Lent sacrifice something from their daily life (usually a food item) from Ash Wednesday until Maundy Thursday.
Its purported purpose is to imitate the suffering and temptation of Christ during His forty-day fast in the desert. In centuries past, the methods of penance were much more serious compared to the types of self-denial we commonly see today. Giving up sweets (for example) during the Lenten season may indeed trivialize the sufferings of Christ, but that’s not my main reason for opposing the practice.
Of the many theological errors before us, one of the most common is the confusion between historia salutis (redemption accomplished) and ordo salutis (redemption applied). The former represents those once-for-all, unrepeatable events in redemptive history. Roman Catholicism, for example, makes the serious mistake of confusing historia salutis and ordo salutis with respect to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross (i.e., their practice of the Mass in which Christ is “re-sacrificed”). Charismatic movements do the same thing with Pentecost.
Similarly, the practice of Lent takes the historia salutis event of Christ in the desert and turns it into something which can be counterfeited on an individual level. In doing so, it fits perfectly with a works-righteousness mentality. Inherent within Lent is the idea that its practice brings one “closer to God,” making a man-centered mockery of God’s grace.
Read more -->HERE.
No comments:
Post a Comment