‘The Workhouse’ – Tolkien’s Purgatory

[mark12_30]

Esty,

IMO Tolkien had the only appealing outlook on purgagory that I've ever encountered-- except for George MacDonald's long sleep. And MacDonald was not catholic...

Tolkien said that Frodo's trip to Valinor was both a reward and a purgatory. Letters, of course (ducks flying objects from the canonicity thread.) Now that my books are all nicely arranged on my cleaned-up re-org'd shelf, I know right where to find them... I'll return to this after lunch.

[Kuruharan]

I don’t understand why Grace takes effect only after a long period of punishment, as grace waives punishment in my understanding of Christian doctrine, but apparently he saw it that way.

It is perhaps a mistake to view this as punishment. It could be corrective and I would not equate correction with punishment. Something like Niggle being in the shop for repairs. Grace was what allowed him to proceed on to the Workhouse, even though he had not brought any of the required luggage. However, receiving Grace did not make Niggle entirely ready for what was to come. Niggle was not ready for Paradise because he perhaps could not understand it and not fully appreciate it. He had to go through the Workhouse to have a final reshaping of his mind. It is interesting to note that, if anything, Niggle developed a more practical outlook during his stay.

What about the necessity for repentance? Surely repentance requires that the individual be purified

Not necessarily. Repentance is more of the realization of the need rather than requiring a purification process to get to it.

If the individual is not so 'purified' by experience, how would they realise they needed grace?

If Niggle had been purified already he would not need the Grace. Purification sort of eliminates the need for repentance.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Quote:
Esty:
I don’t understand why Grace takes effect only after a long period of punishment, as grace waives punishment in my understanding of Christian doctrine, but apparently he saw it that way.


It is perhaps a mistake to view this as punishment. It could be corrective and I would not equate correction with punishment. Something like Niggle being in the shop for repairs.

Quote: Davem
What about the necessity for repentance? Surely repentance requires that the individual be purified


Not necessarily. Repentance is more of the realization of the need rather than requiring a purification process to get to it.

Much to consider here; but allow me to define a few terms so that readers will know from whence I come. Esty, I expect some variance between our definitions, perhaps you would like to clarify yours as well.

Mercy vs grace:

Mercy is not getting what I deserve. I break the law; I deserve to be punished; mercy isdisplayed when the judge chooses not to give me the punishment I fairly deserve.

Grace is getting what I don't deserve. I haven't earned any food; you feed me. I haven't shown you any loyalty; you welcome me into your family. Grace is displayed when gift is freely given without regard to merit: "Unmerited favor".

Given these definitions, protestant theology holds: "Behold the lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." The scriptures state we cannot earn that forgiveness, but can only accept or reject it. If we accept it, then our sin is taken away. It is a spiritual transaction, simple and complete. Hence, there is no punishment remaining.

Based on this, the childhood definition of purgatory that I grew up with-- purgatory is where you finish paying for the sins you comitted here-- simply makes no sense, and belittles the sacrifice of the messiah. If I can pay for my sin, why was he sacrificed?

On the other hand, what we do take into eternity (once we are stripped of our sin) is our character: as little or as much of it as we have developed in our years on earth. Tolkien's purgatory is geared , not so much toward punishment(although it is a dreary place to be sure) as it is geared toward character development. This is an entirely different discussion. Character development depends on the interaction of the soul with the grace of God; God gives the soul grace to grow in character.

This is why I say that Tolkien's purgatory is almost palatable. He does not belittle the sacrifice of the messiah; he merely desires to continue character development, to fill in what is lacking. While I see no scriptural support for his idea, I understand the heart behind it, and it is not one of false humility; it is one of wanting the best to give away.

"This day you will be with me in paradise" is still the decisive argument for me, and trumps all logic and storytelling of Tolkien and MacDonald combined. Nevertheless, I am as intrigued by Tolkien's view of purgatory as I am of MacDonald's-- not because I believe it or see scriptural room for it, but because I hear the heart-cry desiring nobility of character. That comes by grace; and the desire to prolong that period of grace is one I can understand.

And incidentally, that nobility of character is what Frodo sailed west to pursue. He did not need forgiveness; he had that. He needed healing, and part of the healing was enough nobility of character to see himself as he was: "in littleness and greatness." And that means, again, not so much mercy-- but grace.

[mark12_30]

LETTERS:

p.198

...For mortals... this is strictly a temporary reward: a healing and redress of suffering. THey cannot abide for ever, and though they canot return to mortal earth, they can and will 'die'- of free will, and leave the world.

("mortal earth" is not a typo, that is the correct quote. )

p. 328

Frodo was sent or allowed to pass over Sea to heal him-- if that could be done, before he died. He would have eventually to 'pass away'; no mortal could, or can, abide forever on earth, or within time. So he went both to a purgatory and a reward, for a while: a period of reflection and peace and gaining a truer understanding of his position in littleness and greatness, spent still in Time amid the natural beauty of 'Arda Unmarred', the Earth unspoiled by evil.

Frodo's 'purgatory' does not sound like a punishment to me. Tolkien states as much in the following:

Footnote on page 386:

She (Galadriel) Concludes her lament with a wish or prayer that Frodo may as a special grace be granted a purgatorial (but not penal) sojourn in Eressea, the Solitary Isle in sight of Aman...

p.411

As for Frodo or other mortals, they could only dwell in Aman for a limited time-- whether brief or long. The Valar had neither the power nor the right to confer 'immortality' on them. Their sojourn was a 'purgatory', but one of peace and healing and they would eventually pass away (die at their own desire and of free will) to destinations of which the Elves knew nothing.

Tolkien specifically states that Frodo's 'purgatory' is one of peace and healing.

[davem]

But isn't the point of the Niggle story the nature of the subcreator? In Niggle's Parish the Tree is a 'given', but the rest, the perfecting of the place comes about as a result of Niggle's stay in the Workhouse. In other words, Niggle's Parish only comes into being because Niggle went through that purgatorial experience. Say all you want about the 'gift' of the Messiah, but if the Messiah gave us everything then we would have nothing uniquely our own to give ourselves. God is the Creator, creating the primary world, we are subcreator's & we create, in His image, secondary worlds. Niggle is purged so that he can become a more accomplished subcreator. The skills he learns in the Workhouse enable him to make his vision of the Tree & the Lands surrounding it 'real'. For Tolkien, it seems to me, what lies beyond the Mountains is not 'eternal bliss' but eternal (sub) creativity. And that subcreativity will involve work, suffering of a kind, in order to bring new things into being. Tolkien's paradise is not a place of rest, but of work.

From this perspective, 'Grace' isn't the issue. Grace is another thing, for another purpose. Leaf by Niggle is about the nature of subcreation, not salvation. Grace plays a part: ''Its a gift' he said.', (& in the Shepherd's invitation), but subcreation is a different thing - it doesn't depend on grace, or on being 'saved' - Melkor is a subcreator in that he wants to rearrange the world, he dreams of the world being different, & that begins as a plan, a 'secondary world which only exists (at first) in his mind. Any storyteller, 'saved' or not, graced or not, is a subcreator. Subcreation, for Tolkien, is part of our nature, inherited from our 'Father' - it is neither blessed nor cursed, its simply what we do. 'Leaf by Niggle' is about how Niggle comes to understand the nature of subcreation, & how to best make use of the gift (or the 'Grace' if you will).

So, as I said, the Workhouse is not Purgatory in the strict sense - it doesn't work in the same way, because its not designed to achieve the same thing.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

mark/Helen, thanks for both excellent posts! Yes, your definitions of mercy, grace and redemption coincide quite closely with mine. The explanation of Tolkien's purgatory that you have found for yourself makes it more understandable for me, though I still have to brush up on the Catholic definition to see how it compares to the 'official' church theology. The quotes from 'Letters' reinforce that approach, and the idea that the Halls of Mandos are the Middle-earth equivalent, as davem suggests, would also show a more lenient concept on JRRT's part.

davem, you go on from the 'Workhouse' purgatory to 'Niggle's Parish' Paradise. You know, I've always thought that heaven would be a boring place the way many people envision it, just sitting around - a sub-creative eternity sounds fascinating! Though the Paradise aspect wasn't part of my original topic in this thread, I have no objection at all to including it in the discussion!

[Child of the 7th Age]

Interesting discussion, everyone. Just a very brief comment on something that was said in Davem’s previous post:

. Leaf by Niggle is about the nature of subcreation, not salvation.

Davem, I am not an expert, but I’m wondering if we are making our lines too rigid. Subcreation is definitely operating here, but I see glimmers of salvation as well. I’m wondering if we’re constructing an artificial wall beween these two concepts that Tolkien would not have seen.

For example, at one point in Leaf by Niggle, while Niggle is lying in darkness in the Workhouse, I recall that he mentions hearing a severe “First Voice” and a gentle “Second Voice”. When Parrish thanks Niggle for helping to hurry his release from the Workhouse, Niggle replies:

No. You owe it to the Second Voice…..We both do.

I’ve always thought the First Voice sounded like God the Father and the Second Voice like God the Son, and to me that holds echoes of salvation. It seems to me that Tolkien felt that the best subcreation, that which was true and pure, must have some spiritual content or value. I don’t mean that it has to be on an explicitly religious subject, but it must reflect the values that Tolkien saw as stemming from God’s creation plan. I cannot see Tolkien setting up an arbitrary line between salvation and subcreation. To him they were two reflections of the same fundamental truth. I do agree that a Paradise spent sitting around in eternal bliss sounds awfully boring and I would far prefer the sub-creation variety.

There is a lot of substance in Esty's first post. By focusing on Purgatory, grace, and salvation, I think we're only touching on part of it. Let me go away and hack at the computer and come back shortly.

[Kuruharan]

davem

And that subcreativity will involve work, suffering of a kind, in order to bring new things into being.

Why do you say that? Do you think the work itself is suffering?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Grace is getting what I don't deserve. I haven't earned any food; you feed me. I haven't shown you any loyalty; you welcome me into your family. Grace is displayed when gift is freely given without regard to merit: "Unmerited favor".

The application of Grace is broader than mere release from the Workhouse. That Niggle is allowed to spend time developing his character in areas of his weaknesses is, itself, Grace. To construe the two voices as Law and Grace is to misunderstand this. Rightly or wrongly, I have always seen the two voices as Father and Son - - - the Son was not even known of in the Old Testament, but there are multitudinous instances of Grace throughout the O.T. So the two Voices are discussing the application of continued Grace to Niggle, and what form it should take, whether more punishment, or reward.

[Formendacil]

Actually, Selmo, the Catholic Church has NOT done away with Purgatory. You are conflating Limbo and Purgatory. Limbo was the theological concept of a place outside of Heaven for those who die without Baptism, yet who lived lives worthy enough of reward, and since Heaven requires Baptism for entry (or so holds Catholic dogma), then there needed, in fairness, to be somewhere for those such as innocent babies or righteous heathens to go after death, since they clearly had not merited Hell.

The current thought in the Church officially does away with that, and replaces it with the dogma of "baptism of desire", the idea that desiring baptism is itself merit enough to go to Heaven. Presumably, this desire is assessed in ways we can't exactly measure.

Purgatory, on the other hand, while certainly less emphasized since Vatican II as a result of an attempt to get away from the whole idea of "Catholic guilt" and get closer to being a people of joy, remains very much a part of Catholic theology.

It is, as has been noted already on this thread, a place for those who have not died in a state of perfect grace, but who are not overall bad enough for Hell. It is important to distinguish between Catholic and Protestant concepts of how Grace works here. Classical Protestantism believes in the doctrine of "sola gratia"-- through grace alone. This is, in fact, one of the great dividing lines theologically between Catholics and Protestants. Catholics hold that Faith AND Works are necessary to get into Heaven. It is not enough just to believe, if you truly believe, you must DO.

Now, it is true that Catholics believe, as Protestants do, that entry into Heaven is impossible without God's grace. However, it is necessary to do your part as well. It's not just a matter of saying "I accept Jesus as my lord and saviour", and POOF!, you're in the lineup for Heaven. In Catholic dogma, you are now eligible... but you still have to deal with those sins, since no one ever stops sinning. Confession (the Sacrament of Penance) and the Eucharist are both ways of erasing sin, but it is almost impossible to be going to confession so often that, when you die, you haven't a sin on your soul.

To draw this back to Tolkien somewhat... let's use the Elves as a comparison. It has already been said on this thread that Mandos seems an appropriate analogy for Purgatory, and I think it apt.

Now, when an Elf dies in good graces with the Valar and with the world in general, it is inevitable that he or she will be reborn, correct? Since it is the inherent nature of the Elves to be reborn, rebirth for an Elf could be equated to Heaven for Catholics. However, Elves are not necessarily reborn immediately after death. While a certain waiting period seems to be in order, the period also seems to vary. Some, such as Glorfindel or Finrod, who would be the Elven equivalents of the Saints, pass through remarkably quickly, whereas the average time in Mandos seems to be somewhat longer, just as most of humanity spends a bit more time in Purgatory than Mother Theresa or John Paul II. Then there are those who take FOREVER... the Sons of Fëanor for example seem to be consigned to particularly long sentences.

I would say, though, that Mandos also functions as "Hell" for the Elves. Hell, by a more modern definition, is a separation from God's presence and love, the natural intended state of humanity. Well, the nature state of the Elves is corporal life in Arda while it lasts, so the state of being permanently separated from it would, by definition, be Hell.

Getting back to Purgatory, it is certainly understood as a place of perfection. Niggle is obviously a good enough man that deserves Heaven (and for Niggle, Heaven is getting to finish his tree, which makes one feel that the phrase "Heaven on Earth" is applicable, and also makes one wonder what tastes of "Heaven" in our lives we will encounter in their fullness on the other side...), but he is not a perfect man...

Now, because the Catholic concept of justification, being made right before God, does not just involve accepting God's grace, but involves work. It is not an instantaneous process, but a more labourious one, and it requires the work of the person it concerns. Because of free will, we can't just be flicked from bad to good. It has to be our effort, though it is only the grace and mercy of God that we have the strength or the guidance to succeed. For Niggle, before he was ready for Heaven, he had various problems with his personality, his management of time and his efficiency being the "allegories" of sinful defects. When his time in his cottage, painting away, which can be taken as his mortal life, is over and he is not yet perfected, he is taken to the workshop to finish the job.

I'm fairly sure I've rambled more than need be... and I'm quite sure there's some repetition with what's already in this thread, and I'm positive more can be said, but I'm at what feels like a good place to stop. Convalescents have the right to be selfish, don't they?

Obviously, as resident Catholic, I can't avoid a thread touching directly on such things... but I am exhausted, and I can only hope the above makes sense. My leg throbs and my butt is numb is my excuse if it doesn't...

[littlemanpoet]

Just one thing, Formendacil, it appears to me that you have confounded Grace and Faith, as opposed to Works. Could you elucidate, when your leg throbs less?

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Just one thing, Formendacil, it appears to me that you have confounded Grace and Faith, as opposed to Works. Could you elucidate, when your leg throbs less?

Hmm... that seems to be a fair criticism. I do seem to have conflated the two ideas, though I'm not entirely sure that that changes the position or strength of my argument entirely.

Classical Protestantism, as I have been taught, believes in both sola gratia, by grace alone, and sola fidei by Faith alone. Together with sola scriptura, these are the Protestant answers to the three major issues of the Reformation: How are we saved? (Protestants answer Grace alone), How are we made right before God, that is: how are we justified before God? (Protestants answer Faith alone), and Where does authority reside? (Protestants answer Scripture alone).

Now, the third question doesn't concern this matter--not directly anyway. Certain the debate of Scripture alone vs. Scripture AND Tradition could make for an interesting Tolkien debate-- LotR alone, or do we count the HoME? However, we are dealing here with "How are We Saved?" and "How are We Justified?"

The first question bears on the Purgatory issue very clearly. Basically, it is asking "How can we enter Heaven?" The Protestant opinion, Grace Alone, clearly has no use for Purgatory, hence why it isn't found in their theology. If the only reason we're going to Heaven is because God has said so, then what point is there to a place of purification or penance? None--the dead sinner is going to Heaven through nothing he has done, but through complete gift. All he has to do is say "yes".

The Catholic view, obviously, has to be different. If it were the same, we'd've had no Reformation. The Catholic opinion is that while Grace is NECESSARY for Heaven, it's not the whole story. We have the belief that it is necessary for us to do our part too. Without Grace, Heaven is unattainable and impossible, but Grace is there to help us attain it, not to hand it to us on a silver platter.

This Catholic thought can, I think, be seen in parallel, in Tolkien's work. Frodo is given the Grace necessary to reach Mt. Doom and save Middle-Earth. He cannot do it on his own, but needs Gollum's intervention in the end (comparable to Grace), and he receives help along the way: Galadriel, Elrond, Gandalf, Faramir, Sam; who could all be seen as instruments of grace. If we applied the Protestant doctrine of Grace Alone to the same analogy, we'd have Frodo fly to Mt. Doom on the Eagles, one of which would bump him so that he dropped the Ring over the Fires.

The second question, How are We Justified, is closely entwined with the first. How are we made right before God? How are we made worthy of His Grace?

Well, the Protestant answer is Faith alone--all you have to do is confess and believe that Jesus is your Lord and Saviour, and you're in. Get yourself baptised, and it's all done. Well, Catholics hold that there's a bit more to it than this... Yes, you have to BELIEVE that Jesus is Lord, but you also have to do some work. Hence the Catholic/Protestant debate of Faith vs. Works. Properly, Catholics believe that both are necessary, but due to Protestants holding the position of Faith Alone, Catholics tend to overemphasize Works. And in contrast to Protestant practices, all of our strange rituals like rosaries and novenas, as well as numerous sacraments and detailed liturgies, it can certainly seem that we overdo the outward show and neglect the inward truth, and this is certainly a danger. Properly, however, all this outward show is simply the outward harmony of mind and body. If the mind is focused on Heaven, so should the body be as well. And this applies to acts of charity as well as to physical manifestations of inward faith.

Anyway, how does this Faith vs. Faith & Works debate translate in Tolkien? Well, to use the same Frodo analogy as in the Grace question, I would take a look at how Frodo is justified in the book. Is Frodo given the quest to Mt. Doom simply because he says that he will do it, as Faith alone would say is all that you need to receive Grace? No. Frodo receives the burden of the quest not just because he SAYS he'll do it, but because of what he has already himself DONE in getting the Ring to Rivendell. And when he receives "Grace" on the road, such as from Galadriel, it is not just because he said he'd take the Ring to Mt. Doom, but because he continued to demonstrate his steadfastness and effort.

I hope that more or less explains the difference. As I said, I don't think that the conflation makes much difference to what I was saying, but there definitely is a difference, and I certainly shouldn't have mixed them together.

[Selmo]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Classical Protestantism believes in the doctrine of "sola gratia"-- through grace alone. This is, in fact, one of the great dividing lines theologically between Catholics and Protestants. Catholics hold that Faith AND Works are necessary to get into Heaven. It is not enough just to believe, if you truly believe, you must DO.
.

I think that the Protestant belief in "through Grace alone" is a bit of an over-simplification.
I'm a Protestant, of the British Methodist variety, and like most Protestants I can say that "Salvation is through Grace alone - but Works are also needed." (I know it's not logical but Faith and Logic don't always mix well.)

The criteria for membership of the Methodist Church of Great Britain as stated in the 1932 Deed of Union: All those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour and accept the obligation to serve him in the life of the Church and the world are welcome as members of the Methodist Church. (My emphasis)

At least some protestants believe that Works are more than just desirable.

Thanks for the input from a Catholic viewpoint. I'll now have to re-read Leaf by Niggle with fresh eyes.
.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Selmo

(I know it's not logical but Faith and Logic don't always mix well.)

You see, here's the problem. Faith and Logic should mix well. They should harmonize. That they don't means that Christians aren't thinking clearly. We really need to stop that.

Just as works were absolutely essential to Niggle, so they are for Niggle's readers. Check out that letter from James sometime.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Thanks, davem, for the reminder on the 'purge' in purgatory - you're right, though it seems to me that it occurs by fire, as metal is purged of impurities. I wonder how that would fit in with Tolkien's idea of purgatory as drudgery?! work = fire? Bb, thanks for that link - I'll check it out before I get into any deeper waters in this discussion! I look forward to a closer look at that 'Letters' reference, mark/Helen!

edit - Cross-posted with Kuruharan - thanks for those thought-provoking comments!