My friend Nathan Lewis has published a post that I think would be beneficial for some who do not come from a church background that observes the litugical calendar.  

One of the primary emphases of the Season of Lent is repentace.  On the ecclesiastical calendar it is a time when Christians are encouraged to fast, sacrifice, and to recognize how easily we are prone to become dependent upon things rather than on God.  It is intended to be a time of reflection and renewed commitment to dependence upon the Lord.  But in non-litugical circles Lent is ignored, if not even scoffed about.  Contemporary Evangelicals often point to the deadness of ritualistic practice, and  eschew it altogether.

I am not part of a litugical tradition. Nor am I necessarily encouraging anyone to embrace litugical practices. (Though I recognize the substance and number of posts this week might give some a reason to question that assertion.)  But I do wonder if there might be some benefits “normal” Believers might be able to glean from our litugical side of the Family of God.  Maybe there are some things that we can consider that would break us out of our own dull routines.  It seems possible that we may be able to engage in some practices without them inherently leading to ritualistic deadness.

That’s the idea Nathan takes on in his post. He poses the question: “I can repent 365 days a year, so who needs Lent?” Then he wrestles with some of the common objections to Lent, and offers some insights about how we might benefit from a different kind of reflection during these next several weeks.

To read Nathan’s post click: Lent 2009.