Rethinking Ash Wednesday

-
In this post, I suggest a more modern interpretation of why Christians continue to impose ashes. (My 2016 Ethical Musings post Ash Wednesday sketched the traditional understandings of the annual Christian practice of imposing ashes.)
Christianity needs to rethink Ash Wednesday. Few twenty-first Christians in the developed world feel very guilty, especially compared to Christians during the Middle Ages. Furthermore, guilt is a poor motivator for changing behavior. Finally, increasing numbers of Christians reject not only the theological doctrine of original sin but also all of the several interpretations of Jesus’ crucifixion that emphasize his death as an essential requirement for God forgiving human sin. Hence, a majority of Christians have voted with their feet, absenting themselves from Ash Wednesday observances, tacitly believing the observances generally meaningless and irrelevant.
Rethinking Ash Wednesday begins by recognizing that the words used to impose ashes – Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return – has two widely ignored meanings vitally relevant to contemporary life.
First, being dust emphasizes that humans are physical beings. Our spiritual dimension has no independent existence. Instead, the human spirit consists of those physical attributes that are quintessentially and uniquely (only in degree) human.

Second, because humans are dust, humans are inherently integral elements of God’s glorious creation. Therefore, we should celebrate rather than bemoan or lament human life and the human condition. Consequently, adding glitter to the ashes imposed on Ash Wednesday is a very appropriate act (though I’ve not yet seen this interpretation of that act).

Comments

Anonymous said…
“Guilty” is not what I feel. Although I cannot be responsible for what was wrong in the world before I became old enough to do anything about it, at my present age I do feel intermittent responsibility for the manifold and profound injustices of the world. I do confess that often I ignore those injustices because I either benefit from them personally or am too lazy to confront them. Ash Wednesday serves us well if it reminds us of corporate guilt, the things left undone – or, as one confessional prayer put it, “the evil done on our behalf”. In my mind, failure to address these injustices replaces the historical concept of original sin.
Maybe there are additional moments of individual culpability (the “things done”) that ride on top of that… more for some people, less for others. If we have arrived at the point where few people commit direct, explicit sin in the classical sense, then great… but there is plenty of other bad stuff to address.
March 7, 2017 at 3:37 PM
George Clifford said…
Responsibility and guilt are different. Personal culpability is important when a person is directly responsible for causing evil. But much of the evil in the world – and, as you observe, there is lots of it – is not directly attributable to any person or small group.
March 7, 2017 at 3:38 PM
Jay Croft said…
I do have problems with the BCP service, especially Psalm 51. My mother was legally married when she conceived me!

Yet the Ash Wednesday service should not be abandoned. It serves a purpose, as does Good Friday. Not many people participate in either, but it's there, and is an essential part of the Church Year.

As for glitter on the ashes, I think it's silly, but then I'm an Old Curmudgeon.
March 9, 2017 at 7:10 AM
George Clifford said…
I am not proposing that we eliminate either Ash Wednesday or Good Friday from the liturgical cycle. What I am proposing is an alternative interpretation to make those days more meaningful for people who do not live with guilt at the center of their spiritual and theological lives.
March 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A starting point for theology

-
Theology used to be known as the queen of the sciences.Theology was dethroned several centuries ago because of the growing recognition of the scientific method’s inapplicability to theology.
In general, theologians have begun their work from one of two starting points, either implicitly or explicitly.
One of those starting points was God.Theologians working from this starting point presumed that humans could directly apprehend God.For example, the classical arguments for the existence of God – the ontological, cosmological, and so forth – all rest on this presumption.
This starting point requires assuming that humans are able to know God.Consequently, some religious traditions posit that humans have a soul that is similar in nature to God.The Roman Catholic Church, for example, teaches that at conception a human receives an immortal soul.Many other traditions have similar teachings about humans having an immortal or eternal soul.Since the soul is immortal, there is no physical eviden…
Read more

Jesus, Lamb of God

-
The image of Jesus as the Lamb of God pervades Christianity. The lamb is a familiar symbol for Jesus, found not only in today's gospel[1] but also throughout the New Testament as well as in art and literature. The image of Jesus as the Lamb of God reinterprets the Jewish Passover narrative, which describes the angel of death in Egypt passing over Israelite houses marked with the blood of a lamb, killing only the Egyptian first born. Thus, we have the Agnus Dei, “O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us,”[2] a part of Christian liturgies since the early fourth century.[3]

Biblical images and metaphors are often complex and confusing. For example, Biblical authors describe Christians as God's sheep, although they sometimes refer to Jews as sheep, even in the New Testament.[4] New Testament authors similarly describe Jesus as both the Lamb of God and the shepherd, two conflicting images actually found in a single verse in the Revelation of John.[5]…
Read more