My view on lent:

My biggest problem with lent is the public display of fasting which is contrary to scripture: Matthew 6:16-18

Just as well, overhearing discussions of humble brags, “oh man, this is so hard fasting from x” while displaying ashes on one’s forehead seems overtly contrary to scripture. Again, Matthew 6:16-18 is clear.
Additionally it has been my experience that repentance and fasting lose much of their substance for those practicing the tradition.

However....
We cannot oversimplify and call lent a “Roman Catholic invention” or a “pagan” practice given its presence, minimally the term, in the early church with people like Athanasius.
In the modern conception: Advent is to Christmas what lent is to Easter. While asceticism is removed and shallow tradition enters into the practice, this can happen in most everything.
My biggest issue with lent, again, is not the concept but the public proclamations of fasting and what seems to be shallow understandings of fasting and repentance.
We do not “fast” from sins once a year, but we mortify daily. Fasting is, traditionally, abstaining from food and drink for the purpose of a heightened, humble, awareness of dependency upon God.
Additionally, we do not merely repent once a year but are to have a lifestyle of repentance.

Just the same; Fasting can be practiced anytime of the year, especially coupled with deep and meaningful repentance. It’s a rich practice.
This is all to say, lent can be practiced and practiced well with good benefit.

At the same time, lent is not required for any believer.

So long as we retain the necessity of taking up the cross daily, and not showcasing fasting, I have no problem with lent.
This is to say, if you practice lent - make it deep, and genuine. Do not grumble, moan, or showcase your fasting

Contrary to some who say, “display your ashes for the day,” why don’t you obey Jesus and begin Ash Wednesday by washing your face immediately as you begin your fast?

More from For later read

Every single public defender. Every single day.


Bail arguments, motions, oral arguments, hearings. Judges don’t know, follow, or care about the law. Prosecutors are willing to take advantage of it. And mandatory minimums, withheld evidence, & pretrial detention coerces people to plead before trial. When theres a jury. A shot.

But defenders still fight. And still win. Most times wins aren’t “Justice.” It’s power of repetition of argument in front of same judges. Introducing those in power to the people they oppress. Not just a RAP sheet or words on a page. Defenders make it harder to be brutal & cruel.

I worked as a public defender at an office as well resourced as any in the country. Social workers, team of investigators, a reentry team, support staff, specialist attorneys in immigration, housing, education, family. Relatively low caseloads (80-100). And yet still injustice.

Most think that balancing the scales of justice means more funding for defenders. Thats part of it. Enough a attorneys to actually be at bail hearings. Wrap around services to be able to help people trapped in the system end up better off in their communities. Lower caseloads.

You May Also Like