• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The History Of Lent

Adonia

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well, since we have been talking about Lent in another thread, how about a little Lent history?

In an article from the Catholic Education Resource Center they write: "Since the earliest times of the Church, there is evidence of some kind of Lenten preparation for Easter". For instance, St. Irenaeus (d. 203) wrote to Pope St. Victor I, commenting on the celebration of Easter and the differences between practices in the East and the West: "The dispute is not only about the day, but also about the actual character of the fast. Some think that they ought to fast for one day, some for two, others for still more; some make their 'day' last 40 hours on end. Such variation in the observance did not originate in our own day, but very much earlier, in the time of our forefathers"

And there is more historical information about the practice of Lent. "The Council of Nicea (325), in its disciplinary canons, noted that two provincial synods should be held each year, "one before the 40 days of Lent." St. Athanasius (d. 373) in this "Festal Letters" implored his congregation to make a 40-day fast prior to the more intense fasting of Holy Week. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 386) in his Catechectical Lectures, had 18 pre-baptismal instructions given to the catechumens during Lent. St. Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444) in his series of "Festal Letters" also noted the practices and duration of Lent, emphasizing the 40-day period of fasting".

So we can see that Lent is not some new practice, but goes directly back to the earliest days of the newly forming Universal Christian Church.
 

just-want-peace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No supporting or denying this practice, but this history reminds me of the story of a newlywed couple & cooking.

The wife was going cook a ham, & he watched as she prepared it. She went through all the preliminaries, but just before she put the ham in the pot, she cut off about 6” of the small end.

“Why did you cut off that part?” said the man.

“I dunno”, she replied, “Mama always did & she always cooked a good ham.”

After a few episodes of this action the man got real curious, & asked his MIL why she did this.

“I dunno”, she replied, “Mom always did & she always cooked a ham real good.”

Well, this really piqued his curiosity, so he asked GMIL the same question!


(Ready for this? Too many times this is precisely why we do what we do??!!)



“Had to”, she replied, “so it would fit into my pot:eek:



How many times do we fall into the same faulty logic????????
Just because something was beneficial/needed/customary/liked etc. in the past, certainly does not mean that its needed today.
Search for useless/outdated laws and see the proof of this !!!:Rolleyes
 

Adonia

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So actually, we see lent is an RCC observance, not found in Scripture at all.

No, it is a Universal Christian Church observance and every Christian of that early era and for centuries afterwards participated in it. Only some 1600 plus years later when your guy John Smyth started the Baptist sect was so much of what was a part of the Christian faith removed from observance.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
So actually, we see lent is an RCC observance, not found in Scripture at all.

Do you count all of the early church fathers as RCC practices? What about Apostolic Fathers? Again, this argument that if the RCC does it it must be bad doesn't hold water. You need a stronger argument than that.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No, it is a Universal Christian Church observance and every Christian of that early era and for centuries afterwards participated in it. Only some 1600 plus years later when your guy John Smyth started the Baptist sect was so much of what was a part of the Christian faith removed from observance.

Actually, the RCC had adopted mant things from the old "mystery, Babylon" religion of Nimrod & Semiramis, such as Mariolatry(replacing Semiramis with Mary), belief in purgatory, the office of pope, etc. THOSE are the things removed from proper worship.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Do you count all of the early church fathers as RCC practices? What about Apostolic Fathers? Again, this argument that if the RCC does it it must be bad doesn't hold water. You need a stronger argument than that.
If it aint in Scripture, it aint true! (Matters of faith/worship, that is.)
 

Adonia

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Are you saying that Lent is required?

I am simply saying that the observance of Lent is a centuries old practice of Christianity and is in no way against the Scriptures. In fact, it aligns with them and places out in the open for all to see the most important facet of the Christian experience - the death and resurrection of the Savior. A time for reflection and renewal and the joy of the resurrection, and the promise of eternal life for the believer.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In the mind of the fundamentalist Christian it can't be. There is no express command to have "Sunday School", so it is completely out of the question.
Sunday or church school is not part of worship. In the Roman Catholic system, Lent is a part of worship, used to prepare the individual for Easter rite. In Protestantism, worship is what occurs during the worship service.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Sunday or church school is not part of worship. In the Roman Catholic system, Lent is a part of worship, used to prepare the individual for Easter rite. In Protestantism, worship is what occurs during the worship service.

I'm challenging you on this one. Sunday School is definitely part of worship taking place in the church. You can't have it both ways.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I'm challenging you on this one. Sunday School is definitely part of worship taking place in the church. You can't have it both ways.
No, it is not. Sunday school is biblical instruction but it is not accompanied by the elements of worship. There is no congregational call to worship, no corporate prayer, and no corporate call to repentance. You do not see the ordinance of the Lord's Supper being administered during Sunday school. The worship service is when the local church meets corporately and all the elements of worship are present. If you want you to go 15 rounds on this one as we did with Lent, I am your huckleberry.
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Or should the children be taught at home???

Ultimately, parents are responsible for teaching their children. However, under parental supervision, being exposed to other forms of teaching is not harmful.
 
Top