Evangelicalism vs Orthodox?

The title applies to my perceptions which are, in terms of EO, limited and, in terms of Evangelicalism, not universal. These are my observations. 

In church today it dawned on me that there is quite a difference between the preaching at churches such as mine (nominally allegiant to a denomination) and what I perceive to be the essence of the liturgical approach. The liturgy seems to be about Him; we are small in comparison. It is 'awe' inspiring in that regard.

Modern churches seem to be about His impact on our lives. What has He done for us. Things such as 'victory' and other such sentiments are specific to His action in our lives to encourage others and build up faith. I suppose that is the 'Protestant' ethic of applying that to 'earthy' concerns and building a better future. This isn't to say that it is self-ish necessarily. It is less awe inspiring and more centered on feeling. Generalizing, certainly, but there is a difference.

To many in these churches, the EO church and its liturgy is 'dead' because it isn't bumping and jumping and exciting. But I don't want enthusiasm and jumping and similar expressions to represent 'praising' God as if by sitting and meditating upon Him I'm not praising Him. Praise is too often associated with clapping, shouting, dancing and other such expressions which, if not careful, rules out anything else as 'dead' worship.

I get more of a thrill when my mind locks in on something about Him, even during such 'worship' and I'm carried away in it whether or not my body is moving an inch. Some of the most substantial intuitions (revelations? move of the Spirit?) about Him come during these times. I'm either focused on a particular lyric or trying to interpret a cloudy or sketchy lyric through my filter and it leads me to clarity. 

I've lately begun wearing earplugs whether due to age or because I'm comfortable saying it's too loud and distracting. Actually, at an oratorio a few years ago I had earplugs in and people thought it was rude. When I put the earplugs in their ears and they could hear the singing and the music with discrimination and clarity that accusation vanished. Not only did it save my ears, I could enjoy the music. Loud = praise. 

A few years later during an ordination for a minister I walked out because it was so loud. I was not alone on this met others in the hallway who shared similar sentiments and eventually someone older and wiser had them turn down the mics so people could actually hear.

"If I hear one more Chris Tomlin song..." (Sorry Chris but 'God's Dance Floor' jumped the shark, fun as it may be)

Does that mean I am not that into God or that I have become ungrateful or lost sight of what He's done or Who He is? Perhaps. But the deeper I go, the more silent I become. Isn't that what the hesychasts and monks say is the epitome of true worship? 

I feel no obligation to imitate, to do what others are doing. If I am so moved I will; if I'm not, I won't.

But I appreciate the Gospel background of my journey and the acoustic driven sounds of the CCM sound in my journey along with the chant of orthodoxy and all the other influences in the stream as they have carried me this far, deeper and more grounded in my faith than ever, restless and unsettled as I often am in my pursuit of more of Him.

We are all at different places in the journey and we are all on the same team if we're focused on Jesus as the access to 'God'. It seems, though, that the EO (and, for others, the Catholic Church) provides a repository for those who are longing for something deeper.

Doubt

I struggle with doubt. I'm not sure I struggle with actual 'doubt' so much as I struggle with feeling as if I have to believe or think a certain way compared to others and because I don't I think I have doubt. In other words, when comparing myself or feel as if I am supposed to believe a certain way, I associate 'doubt' with 'I don't believe.'

Truth of the matter is that when I stop comparing the doubt goes away. I may not be able to express what I feel or 'intuit' but this doesn't mean doubt in the sense of lack of belief or unwillingness to decide. So in this case, 'doubt' isn't accurate as at my core I have a solid set of beliefs. From the perspective of faith, I am a believer and I do not 'doubt' the basic tenets of the faith.

If we are totally depraved (something I do not subscribe to, i.e. doubt) then how can we know that anything touched by man is true at all? Holy Spirit? Word of God? What I question, i.e. doubt, are the propositions of men which, if you really get down to it, could include the very Bible on which the faith ultimately stands.

Is my depravity what is causing me to 'doubt' that we are depraved? Doesn't take long before I'm buckled up in the corner like Robert Pirsig (whose book, on some level, may have saved my life).

Did a quick search on the word 'doubt' as translated in the KJV with focus on the New Testament (to be cross referenced with the LXX, though there are some mentions in the various lexicons) and there are many Greek words in various shades of subtlety of meaning that are rendered with the one English word doubt.

So as I listen to Drexciya and read my Church Fathers, below is what is found in the New Testament (Greek) for "doubt" using Blue Letter Bible and references to Strong's and Vine's concordances. As you can see, for us to project our definition or understanding of 'doubt' back into the New Testament is to miss the subtlety of each use and meaning.

They all seem to indicate some idea of the will waiting for something - more information? - before making a decision or mental assent toward the object, action or idea being proposed. It is a suspended (quantum?) state. There is a division, two rather than one, so it separates and leads to hesitation and is ultimately an internal wrestling that needs resolved. 

To not have faith is an indication of doubt in the mix. I couldn't tell you what it means to have full faith without any doubt. I have faith and it manifests in belief but there are always area where there is doubt because I haven't brought my mind into captivity and it is there, in the mind, were doubt resides. It is the gatekeeper to translate 'faith' into 'belief.'

ἀπορέω doubt, be perplexed, stand in doubt,
1 Verb Strong's Number: g639 Greek: aporeo Doubt (Be In, Make To), Doubtful, Doubting: always used in the Middle Voice, lit. means "to be without a way" (a, negative, poros, "a way, transit"), "to be without resources, embarrassed, in doubt, perplexity, at a loss," as was Herod regarding John the Baptist, Mar 6:20 (RV, following the most authentic mss., "was much perplexed"); as the disciples were, regarding the Lord's betrayal, Jhn 13:22, "doubting;" and regarding the absence of His body from the tomb, Luk 24:4, "were perplexed;" as was Festus, about the nature of the accusations brought against Paul, Act 25:20, AV "doubted," RV, "being perplexed;" as Paul was, in his experiences of trial, 2Cr 4:8, "perplexed," and, as to the attitude of the believers of the churches in Galatia towards Judaistic errors, Gal 4:20, AV, "I stand in doubt," RV, "I am perplexed." Perplexity is the main idea. See PERPLEX. Cp. the noun aporia, "distress," Luk 21:25. [View Entry in Its Context]
1 Verb Strong's Number: g639 Greek: aporeo Perplex, Perplexity: is rendered "perplexed" in 2Cr 4:8, and in the most authentic mss. in Luk 24:4; see DOUBT, A, No. 1.

διακρίνω doubt, judge, discern, contend, waver, misc, Contend (-ing): lit., "to separate throughout or wholly" (dia, "asunder," krino, "to judge," from a root kri--, meaning "separation"), then, to distinguish, decide, signifies, in the Middle Voice, "to separate oneself from, or to contend with," as did the circumcisionists with Peter, Act 11:2; as did Michael with Satan, Jud 1:9. See RV marg. of Jud 1:22, where the thought may be that of differing in opinion. See DIFFER, DISCERN, DOUBT, JUDGE, PARTIAL, STAGGER, WAVER. [View Entry in Its Context]
1 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Decide, Decision: primarily signifies "to make a distinction," hence, "to decide, especially judicially, to decide a dispute, to give judgment," 1Cr 6:5, AV, "judge;" RV, "decide," where church members are warned against procuring decisions by litigation in the world's law courts. See CONTEND. [View Entry in Its Context]
3 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Differ, Differing, Different, Difference: lit., "to separate throughout, to make a distinction," Act 15:9; RV is translated "to make to differ," in 1Cr 4:7. In Jud 1:22, where the Middle Voice is used, the AV has "making a difference," the RV, adopting the alternative reading, the accusative case, has "who are in doubt," a meaning found in Mat 21:21; Mar 11:23; Act 10:20; Rom 14:23; Jam 1:6; 2:4. See CONTEND. [View Entry in Its Context]
2 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Discern, Discerner, Discernment: signifies "to separate, discriminate;" then, "to learn by discriminating, to determine, decide." It is translated "discern" in Mat 16:3, of discriminating between the varying conditions of the sky (see dokimazo, No. 3, below, in Luk 12:56), and in 1Cor 11:29, with reference to partaking of the bread and the cup of the Lord's Supper unworthily, by not "discerning" or discriminating what they represent; in ver. 31, the RV has "discerned," for the AV, "would judge," of trying oneself, "discerning" one's condition, and so judging any evil before the Lord; in 1Cr 14:29, regarding oral testimony in a gathering of believers, it is used of "discerning" what is of the Holy Spirit, RV, "discern" (AV, "judge"). See CONTEND, DECIDE, DIFFER, etc. [View Entry in Its Context]
4 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Divide, Divider, Dividing: "to separate," discriminate, hence, "to be at variance with oneself, to be divided in one's mind," is rendered "divided" in Jam 2:4, RV; AV, "partial." See DISCERN. [View Entry in Its Context]
3 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Doubt (Be In, Make To), Doubtful, Doubting: See CONTEND and DIFFER, A, No. 2; in Act 11:12, AV, "nothing doubting," RV, "making no distinction;" in Jud 1:22, RV, "who are in doubt" (AV, "making a difference," RV, marg., "while they dispute"); in Jam 1:6, AV, "wavereth," RV, "doubteth." This verb suggests, not so much weakness of faith, as lack of it (contrast, Nos. 4 and 5). [View Entry in Its Context]
103 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Judge (Noun and Verb): denotes "to separate throughout" (dia, and No. 1), "discriminate, discern," and hence, "to decide, to judge" (also "to contend, to hesitate, to doubt"); it is rendered "to judge" in 1Cr 6:5, in the sense of arbitrating; in 1Cr 11:31 (1st part), the RV has "(if we) discerned (ourselves)," AV "(if we would) judge" (krino, No. 1, is used in the 2nd part); so in 1Cr 14:29, RV, "discern" (AV, "judge"). See DECIDE, A, DISCERN, A. No. 2. Notes: (1) In 1Cr 6:2 (last clause) "to judge" represents the noun kriterion, which denotes "a tribunal, a law court," and the meaning thus is "are ye unworthy of sitting upon tribunals of least importance?" (see RV marg.), i.e., to "judge" matters of smallest importance. Some would render it "cases," but there is no clear instance elsewhere of this meaning. See JUDGMENT-SEAT. (2) In Hbr 11:11, the verb hegeomai, "to consider, think, account," is rendered "she judged (Him faithful)," AV (RV, "she counted"). See COUNT, No. 2. [View Entry in Its Context]
1 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Partial, Partiality: "to separate, distinguish, discern, judge, decide" (dia, "asunder," krino, "to judge"), also came to mean "to be divided in one's mind, to hesitate, doubt," and had this significance in Hellenistic Greek (though not so found in the Sept.). For the AV, "are ye (not) partial" in Jam 2:4, see DIVIDE, No. 4. "'This meaning seems to have had its beginning in near proximity to Christianity.' It arises very naturally out of the general sense of making distinctions" (Moulton and Milligan). [View Entry in Its Context]
101 Verb Strong's Number: g1252 Greek: diakrino Waver, Wavering: is rendered "to waver" in Rom 4:20, RV (AV, "staggered"); in Jam 1:6 (twice). See DOUBT, No. 3.

διαλογισμός thought, reasoning, imagination, doubtful, disputing, doubting, 2 Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Disputation: is translated "disputations" in Rom 14:1. See below. [View Entry in Its Context] 1 Noun Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Dispute, Disputer, Disputing: denotes, primarily, "an inward reasoning, an opinion" (dia, "through," suggesting separation, logismos, "a reasoning"), e.g., Luk 2:35; 5:22; 6:8; then, "a deliberating, questioning," Luk 24:38; (more strongly) "a disputing," Phl 2:14; 1Ti 2:8 (AV, "doubtings"); in Rom 14:1, "disputations;" marg., "(not for decisions) of doubts" (lit., "not unto discussions of doubts," which is perhaps a suitable rendering). Cp. dialogizomai, "to reason." See DOUBTING, IMAGINATION, REASONING, THOUGHT. [View Entry in Its Context]
101 Noun Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Doubt (Be In, Make To), Doubtful, Doubting: expresses reasoning or questioning hesitation, 1Ti 2:8. See DISPUTE, A, No. 1. Note: For AV, "doubtful" in Rom 14:1 see DECISION, B, No. 2. [View Entry in Its Context]
2 Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Imagination: dia, and No. 1, is rendered "imaginations" in Rom 1:21, carrying with it the idea of evil purposes, RV, "reasonings;" it is most frequently translated "thoughts." See DISPUTE. [View Entry in Its Context]
1 Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Reasoning: "a thought, reasoning, inward questioning" [akin to dialogizomai, see REASON (Verb), No. 1], is translated "reasoning" or "reasonings" in Luk 5:22, RV (AV, "thoughts"); Luk 9:46; Luk 9:47, RV (AV, "thoughts"); 24:38 (AV, "thoughts"); Rom 1:21 (AV, "imaginations"); 1Cr 3:20 (AV, "thoughts"). See DISPUTE, A, No. 1. Note: In those mss. which contain Act 28:29, occurs suzetesis, "a disputation," which is translated "reasoning" (AV). [View Entry in Its Context] 
6 Strong's Number: g1261 Greek: dialogismos Thought (Noun): "reasoning," is translated "thoughts" in Mat 15:19; Mar 7:21; Luk 2:35; 6:8; in Luk 5:22, AV, RV, "reasonings;" in Luk 9:47, AV, RV, "reasoning," and Luk 24:38, AV, RV, "reasonings;" so 1Cr 3:20; in Luk 9:46, AV and RV, "reasoning;" "thoughts" in Jam 2:4, AV and RV. See DISPUTE, IMAGINATION, REASONING.

διαπορέω doubt, be perplexed, be much perplexed, be in doubt, dia, "asunder" (intensive), and No. 1, signifies "to be thoroughly perplexed," with a perplexity amounting to despair, Act 2:12; 5:24; 10:17, AV, "were in doubt," "doubted," RV, "were (was) perplexed." See also Luk 9:7 (some mss. have it in Luk 24:4, where the most authentic have No. 1). See PERPLEX.

διστάζω doubt, "to stand in two ways" (dis, "double," stasis, "a standing"), implying "uncertainty which way to take," is used in Mat 14:31; 28:17; said of believers whose faith is small. Cp. No. 5.

μετεωρίζομαι be of a doubtful mind, from meteoros (Eng., "meteor"), signifying "in mid air, raised on high," was primarily used of putting a ship out to sea, or of "raising" fortifications, or of the "rising" of the wind. In the Sept., it is used, e.g., in Mic 4:1, of the "exaltation" of the Lord's house; in Eze 10:16, of the "lifting" up of the wings of the cherubim; in Oba 1:4, of the "mounting" up of the eagle; in the NT metaphorically, of "being anxious," through a "distracted" state of mind, of "wavering" between hope and fear, Luk 12:29, "neither be ye of doubtful mind" (AV, marg., "live not in careful suspense"), addressed to those who have little faith. Cp. No. 4. The interpretation "do not exalt yourselves" is not in keeping with the context.

ψυχή doubt (be in, make to), doubtful, doubting: lit., "to raise the breath, or to lift the soul," signifies "to hold in suspense," RV of Jhn 10:24 (AV, "make us to doubt"), suggestive of "an objective suspense due to lack of light" (Warfield), through a failure of their expectations, rather than, subjectively, through unbelief. The meaning may thus be, "How long dost Thou raise our expectations without satisfying them?"

Sexual Abuse

Abuse - sexual, as in my case, or any other - will mess you up. I was probably in my late 30s when I was able to pinpoint the exact moment when my life changed forever. Though I do not know the exact age, I know the exact location, circumstance and people in the room as clear as I am writing this. That meant more 20 plus years of layer upon layer built upon that wound so that area of my life was underdeveloped, overcompensated for in other ways and a mythological creature was built upon that vortex.

The curious thing is that I remembered it and could talk about that moment but the disconnect was so great that I did not know that it was the source. I may have have noticed it when feelings of rage flared up around the person even though I didn't quite know why; I just thought that person was just a jerk and I justified the behaviour because of the abuse within his family. In hindsight, after this I would find myself amongst the company of outcasts, most, maybe even all, of whom had come from abusive or troubled environments.

I recall being at one of my friend's houses and having his stepfather threaten to whip all of us in the room, me included, with a belt because we were being too loud. And he most certainly meant it. My friend would later move on to the military and I lost touch with him though back at home he was seen in town behaving in a fashion that would lead one to believe he carried on the same manner of raising children. 

It was never a conscious thing. I just knew I did not belong in certain cliques and, though not antagonistic toward those cliques, I did not fit in. So I fell into the non-clique cliques and even hung with the 'hoods' loosely enough not to go down those paths which, I am well aware, were also symptomatic of abuse. Had I chosen to go down that path rather than soak up the vibes without actually entering, those addictions may have done more damage sooner.

It was then that the seeds of rebellion were planted. Though it would in time graduate beyond the suburbs it was comfortable, suburban rebellion. Sneaking out at night, alcohol - lots of alcohol - and rock music though, again, it was the obligatory classic rock and the rebellion that got a knowing smile from those who lived through it the first time and passed it on to us.

However, this was a linear progression. This was not a circular progression out of which people grow and conform into their expected role once they've shaken the 'teenage rebellion' rite of passage. No, this would grow differently than those within my family.  I was not alone in this as many from my class would follow similar trajectories and it always led me toward believing that there was some form of trauma underlying all of these people's lives.

I graduated beyond the classic rock of my youth and 'discovered' Motley Crue (now classic rock) and heavier, louder rock and roll, though comfortably from within my suburban bedroom. Alcohol was not frowned upon so it was easily accessible. In my case, it started before I became a teenager. It was all controlled, the parameters of our rebellion laid before us. And I think, when coupled with the abuse, because there was no relief for feelings of which I was not aware, I progressed. I wanted more, further, deeper, louder, angrier, self-inflicted as other than appearance and my internal dialogue I had learned to put on airs.

I kept clean cut rather than becoming a stoner cliche. I maintained, though this was a gradual slope, a job. From the upper echelons of my first job to working in a coffee shop, I cannot remain oblivious to the fact that my addictions were leading me to make some minimalist choices.

There was always 'something' there that kept me from going all in, some effort at restraint that kept me from doing heroin, that kept me from growing my hair long and living the cliche. But that 'something 'was slowly losing its grip and I was gradually on my way there. Addiction isn't always instant. Perhaps our level of security slows the journey and we can go a long time without going all the way there. But it was coming.

Before I left on my walkabout I met my now wife. It was she who kept me going and it was she who I turned to on the lonely journey across the country, even as I lived among and with people. She was my life line though I didn't know it at the time. And it was because of her I returned when the bottom was falling out and I somehow knew where I was heading. And it was through her that I was introduced to a faith that would ultimately reveal that moment in time when life changed, when my innocence was lost and I would spend my youth trying to destroy that innocence - and myself in the process - and my adulthood trying to reclaim it.

Oneness Pentecostalism And Experiential Trinitarianism

Pretty heady title. It's the stuff my wife makes fun of me for reading lovingly referred to as 'light reading'. My challenge is always to translate that into the real world. In her words: 'how does that help you love me more?' Fair enough. Having been raised Oneness Pentecostal, it is her frame of reference. I was immersed in it for several years but have since moved on as I found the gymnastics required to make Scripture 'fit' was not much different than the same gymnastics Trinitarians are accused of using.

I have found that experientially that the Trinitarian view makes more 'sense' than does the Oneness view which just seems, ironically perhaps, more heady than the Trinitarian view. As 'simple' as it appears there is something about it that just comes up short. It seems to me that it leaves no room for the 'Person' of Jesus. Without the Personhood of the Godhead what do we have? We have an essence, a deity that remains distant, unknowable.

Perhaps this is why the emphasis on the Spirit as it too remains unknowable yet when we are so moved, or filled, that unknowable essence 'manifests' itself. We are not focusing on reflecting on the character of Christ as a 'Person' His behaviour appears as something 'to do' not something to know which is perhaps why holiness is often so emphasized. I never felt as if I was getting to know 'Jesus' as a 'Person' as the emphasis was on His Godhead often as if the sole purpose of the Church was to debate and convince those without the revelation that this is the Truth. But once in the camp, I struggled to figure out what the purpose was beyond getting filled with the Holy Ghost and debating those on the outside of the camp to get them to come in to get filled. There was something missing.

Again, my experience, not an 'eternal' truth of all believers and all Oneness doctrine.

The cult of the Bishop was another troubling element. Often those in the church were stunted and couldn't make a move without permission or a blessing from the Bishop. When we wanted to get married we couldn't even talk to an elder. We were basically blocked even though we had been there for more than five years.

We walked just before we got married. No animosity just tired of the silly. For as 'free' as the church claimed to be in the Spirit it was just as institutional as any other church made of men with power.

Moved on to a non-denominational church loosely affiliated with Aimee Semple McPherson's denomination (which is another bizzaro tale) where it was basically the opposite. We learned here about freedom and love. When there was a change of leadership it went back into the very same atmosphere that led us to this church in the first place and we were out.

We went several weeks, maybe even months, without a church home. One morning I asked if she wanted to go to a church on the outskirts of town, one I had attended once for a Bible study 20 years prior (with an ex-girlfriend). We went and were home and have been there since.

And yet...

Something is missing. It could be age but the 'worship' flows like a rock concert (or, in my case, a rave) where one's enthusiasm reflects how grateful we are and how much we love God. I have lately started wearing earplugs and generally have to spend time translating the shaky 'theology' of the lyrics through my interpretive filter.

It's a powerhouse of a Church but lately I have begun longing for the deeper things of God. It seems that in place of liturgy there are 'small groups' to go deeper into the church as Sunday mornings are mostly refresher courses with an emphasis on 'saving' those in need. I don't knock this as introducing someone to the love of Christ is a life changer.

However, I have been longing for the deeper things of God. This is not on a strictly intellectual level although the intellect is essential to harnessing the mind in the pursuit. And this is where the readings of the Church Fathers has brought me into the light of the Trinity. It doesn't make 'rational' sense; it takes what we consider to be 'rational' and aligns it, gives it stability and opens it up to something beyond it, something mysterious.

And it is this mystery that has brought me to the doors of Eastern Orthodoxy. From what I read - and it is only reading at this point aside from one visit to a local church 20 years ago and a scene from Baraka - it bathes in this mystery. This is not mystery in the sense of rejecting explanation. It is mystery in the sense of the Dao in that the deeper you go the deeper you go. And the deeper you go the more it makes sense experientially in the light of what Scripture unfolds. It is a framework, a repository, through which the mystery of Scripture enlightens every man that comes into the world.

And here is where I am. It overshadows everything, drawing me in. The writings of the early Fathers is at once liberating and enraging as I wish I would have discovered them years ago as it may have brought me time and saved me from the other divergent paths. But these paths serve a purpose and are reflective of many in the world at large and somewhat parallel as those who bounce from tradition to tradition yet within the Christian faith such as we ourselves have done.

Protestant Reductionism?

As I've been leaning more and more, at least through books and online videos, toward Eastern Orthodoxy, I continue to have those 'Yes!' moment encountering those thoughts and statements that encapsulate what I have yet to verbalize. One of those crossed my sight yesterday on the Orthodox Bridge blog. I post it here only because I haven't fully digested it and the counterarguments against it to make it mine, so to speak.

But it struck a nerve as I've felt that the emphasis on PSA and the soundbites accompanying it such as 'we serve a living Savior' to account for the resurrection (and it's suspect theologies that are found in modern worship where Jesus dukes it out with the devil like a South Park episode) leaving more sorely wanting for the more. It gives me warm fuzzies some days and I enjoy the people at church but... I often feel as if my intellectual pursuit does not have room.

It isn't that I'm better than anyone, it just needs room to run and I haven't found that the non-denominational (or other) circles in which I run have that 'room' to allow it to roam and bring it back in. I've found this through the Church Fathers. I've found the edge of the hedge. In my 20 years or so running in 'other' worlds I did not find that 'great cloud of witnesses' to bring it into subjection. Like a wild stallion, it bucks against those things that are cliche, tired or off.

So it is that the term 'reductionist' hit me as an 'Yes, that's it!' moment. It isn't that it's there but the challenge is that to put it all together requires picking, choosing and building on my own when in fact, at least from what I have in theory found, it already exists. Granted, some of the things are new, or odd, to me such as the icons and the veneration of Mary but at the moment those aren't deal breakers as I 'get' wht is behind them on their own rather than contrasted with Protestant (generalizing, of course, as the breadth of Protestant is reflected in its countless denominations and non-denominations) theology. I have not been so moved as I have by the readings of the Fathers. I fully understand that as persons they are challenging, especially 1,500 years removed, but they aren't perfect, even as saints. But as a whole reflecting the accumulated tradition (understanding again the power plays at work as the Church and the State collided even cohabitated) the theology we claim to cling to today originates there. Chuck that and we may as well start over which, if you step back for a moment, is in fact happening. So for your reading pleasure with link to the original:

The great problem with Protestant teaching on salvation is its thorough-going reductionism. In the Holy Scripture and in the writings of the Holy Fathers salvation is a grand accomplishment with innumerable facets, a great and expansive deliverance of humanity from all its enemies: sin, condemnation, the wrath of God, the devil and his demons, the world, and ultimately death. In Protestant teaching and practice, salvation is essentially a deliverance from the wrath of God. (p. 288; emphasis added)

The traditional Christian teaching expressed in the New Testament and the writings of the Fathers on the subject of the atonement of our Savior is the Cross saved us in three essential ways: on the Cross Jesus conquered death; on the Cross Jesus triumphed over the principalities and power of this evil age; on the Cross Jesus made atonement for human sins by His blood. Because the Protestants were working out of a soteriological framework of a courtroom and declarative justification, they read the teaching about the Cross through these lenses and as a result articulated a reductionistic theology of the atonement, which ignored the traditional emphasis on the conquering of death and the triumph of the demons. Everything for Protestantism becomes satisfaction of God’s justice, and by making one image the whole, even that image became distorted in Protestant articulation. (p. 294)

. . . the greatest reductionism is found in the immense neglect of emphasis upon the heart of the New Testament teaching on salvation as union with Jesus Christ . . . . The theology of the Church bears witness to the fact that the mystery of salvation is accomplished not just on the Cross, but from the very moment of Incarnation when the Only-Begotten and Co-Eternal Son united Himself forever with humanity in the womb of the Virgin Mary, his Most Pure Mother. Salvation as union and communion between God and Man drips from every page of the new Testament and in the writings of Holy fathers. (p. 296; emphasis added)

Link