TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 11 °C Sunday 19 May, 2013

Column: If you’re not religious, why observe a Lenten sacrifice?

As children, we used to try to get out of Lenten obligations – now we use them as if they are a second chance at New Year’s resolutions.

Lisa McInerney

I COULDN’T HELP giggling on Ash Wednesday when a pal asked her Facebook congregation whether they thought she should give up chocolate or her iPhone for Lent.

Not because I ridicule anyone’s spiritual intentions. If you’re a Catholic, then you are expected to demonstrate some sort of penitence for the Lenten season. And though I haven’t called myself Catholic (except when referring to my taste in music) for the last three years, the remnants of springtime guilt aren’t so easily brushed off. There is something so very unwholesome about gobbling éclairs this time of year, and if I, fallen as I am, still feel uneasy about proceeding as normal during Lent, then I cannot underestimate how powerful that obligation feels for the devout.

No, what tickled me was my friend’s anguish over which of her daily luxuries she should vow to do without. Her sweeties, or her smartphone. Her urge to give something up for Lent was robust, yet mostly formless. What should it be? Food? Pastimes? Snarking over social media? In the end, she lumped for chocolate. Giving up her iPhone would be far too difficult, and it definitely wouldn’t do her any good.

I’m a rural lass, so when I was a kid, everyone’s default setting was Catholic. I don’t think there was a single child in my school who subscribed to a different belief system (although we naturally suspected the girls who came from big houses, as they were more likely to be carriers of that vaguely dreadful Protestantism). Lent was the period before Easter during which you were expected not to eat sweets, and you entered it after gobbling your weight in pancakes, which then promptly disappeared from the menu for the rest of the year.

“What did you give up for Lent, Nana?” “Hope, pet.”

Things had been different for my grandmother. They had had the Missions in her day, so she’d been up to her oxters in angry zealots and their spit-flecked declarations that everyone in the Parish was doomed to sizzle. Wildly descriptive passages, sometimes with bonus sound effects, blared from the altar, and there wasn’t even chocolate egg compensation at the end of the ordeal. “What did you give up for Lent when you were small, Nana?” I’d ask, to which her melancholy response was, “Hope, pet.”

Mercifully, by the time I was old enough to make Lenten promises, the sting had all but been taken out. Some kids gave up chocolate, but not sweets. Other kids gave up sweets, but not crisps. Others were allowed to indulge all they liked on Sundays. Anyone whose birthday fell inside Lent was granted amnesty, as were the kids who attended their birthday party. Saint Patrick’s Day, of course, was as full of Refreshers, Eat-A-Yolks and Tayto candy popcorn as it was full of Guinness for our elders.

Used to these relaxed rules, as we got older we figured out other ways of getting through our Lenten obligations with the minimum of nuisance. The Trócaire Lenten Fast was very popular amongst my crowd in secondary school, as vowing to spend twenty-four hours eating nothing but soup absolved you from having to ditch the Chewits for the season. Other kids piously gave up swearing, or impertinence, or dodging homework, or basically anything else that they shouldn’t have been doing in the first place.

So I got to wondering why it is that whole swathes of us who used such dastardly, slippery tactics to get out of Lenten obligation as kids still observe the tradition as adults. I mean, if you’re not a devout Catholic, why would you bother? Maybe it’s that even when we grew old enough for our parents to concede to us our own decisions, Lenten self-denial proved a habit too engrained to be shaken off. Or maybe… just too handy.

My friend who put to public vote what she should give up for Lent gave up chocolate because giving up chocolate would be corporally beneficial. Giving up an iPhone, on the other hand, wouldn’t result in anything as positive as losing a few pounds or making a substantial saving on dental bills. What benefit would it be to Jesus if you couldn’t detag unflattering photos on Facebook or find out when the next episode of Ashley Banjo’s Secret Street Crew was on? Lent is supposed to be about going out in solidarity with Jesus, right? He didn’t spend forty days in the desert because he couldn’t access Google Maps.

For most of us, Lenten denial is more a personal purge than a spiritual reinvention

The idea of binding yourself to a strict fast generally doesn’t work well within the confines of modern living. Many devout Catholics spend Lent reflecting, or performing charitable acts, or by spending more time in church. But for the rest of us, Lenten denial is more a personal purge than a spiritual reinvention. A second chance at one’s New Year’s Resolutions. Spring-cleaning. And what better personal trainer to keep you in check than someone conveniently omnipresent?

I’ve written before about pick ‘n’ choose Catholics (Cafeteria Catholics, they call them in the US) who have merged personal tradition with religious identity so successfully, they can’t tell where Lenten obligation ends and their detox diet begins. Generally, when we speak about the pick ‘n’ choosers – people who identify as Catholic but don’t follow the teachings which go against their personal moral code – we talk about how they keep the more pleasant religious traditions and ignore the more rigorous ones. For example, a lot of people marry in a Catholic church, but don’t go to Confession.

What’s intriguing about the pick ‘n’ choosers who have given up cake or fags or chardonnay for Lent is that they’re honouring one of the most inconvenient Catholic traditions of all. It’s strangely endearing that you can have a whole glut of Catholics who don’t go to Mass on Sundays because it’s archaic, or personally meaningless, or just boring, but happily refuse themselves M&Ms and frothy coffee for forty days and nights.

Why would you give up something you love for Lent, if there are much less tiresome Catholic obligations you’ve been ignoring for years? Why not spend Lent doing charitable deeds or being kind to the earth instead?

But of course, if you give up M&Ms and frothy coffee, you’re reaping the benefits in your pocket, waistband and complexion. And it’s not that self-denial is particularly difficult. It’s much easier to not do something than to take on a new challenge.

Giving up nice things for Lent might not be fun, but it’s very personally fulfilling if you succeed at it. And when we’re on a health kick, we do find structure, and camaraderie for our agonies, and visible finish lines. Which is probably why we took to organised religion in the first place.

Read previous columns by Lisa McInerney>

Read next:

Comments (44 Comments)

  • I gave up women for Lent when I was a teenager. Nobody told me the 40 days had ended.

    Reply
  • Can we give up paying tax for lent?

    Reply
  • Even though many people in this country are lapsed Catholics or indeed non-believers, culturally the majority in Ireland are of Catholic heritage. I think you alluded to this in your article when you mentioned people who want to get married in a church, but never go to mass and so-on. Carrying on the Lenten tradition is an extension of this. I would also like to mention Lisa that it is not only Catholics in Christianity who are expected to make the Lenten sacrifice, but Protestants of all denominations are expected to do so too. It amuses me that Irish Catholics (whether religious or merely cultural ones) seem to lack an understanding of the traditions of other Christian faiths, especially ones which have long co-existed with Catholicism in this country.

    Reply
    • “. . . co-existed with Catholicism in this country”.

      Without any ‘troubles’ at all. :)
      I don’t understand the difference between the different branches of christianity. It just doesn’t interest me. The sooner religion is in the ‘rear view mirror’, the better.
      Also, if people want to give up something for Lent, give up reality TV, and watching soaps. Basically anything which numbs the brain. Substitute the time with reading or watching the news. Stupidity and ignorance are lauded on TV. It’s a pity that more people don’t know the likes of Hitchens, Harris, Randi, DeGrasse Tyson, Sagan, Cox etc. . But they know what’s going on in Emmerdale. Newton wept.

      Reply
    • Good point Conor. I find it irritating that so many commentators act as if Roman Catholics have some monopoly on Christianity. Roman Catholics are just one Christian denomination on this island. And Lenten sacrifice is alive and well in all Christian denominations. And while I am on the point – the Church of Ireland is NOT a Protestant church – it is Anglican and claims apostolic succession and therefore is catholic. (With a small ‘c’). And I can assure you there is as much “giving up” going on in the Anglican (C of I) church as there is in the RC church – whatever the motivation.

      Reply
    • Thanks Helen. It very often goes unrecognised that 200,000 people in this country are part of a tradition that is not Catholic. It’s interesting to note that Lisa describes of her childhood experience thinking that any form of Protestantism was something vaguely dreadful and something that only the girls in the big houses were adherents of. It’s from these seemingly harmless childhood misunderstandings that adulthood ignorance emerges.

      Although on your point about Anglicanism not being a Protestant religion, I understand your reasoning, but as a force that emerged during the reformation, it has in my experience been referred to as a branch of Protestantism. Indeed any of my Church of Ireland friends would refer to themselves as Protestants along with my Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist friends.

      Reply
    • It’s too easy but I’m going to say it anyway….too many (including us atheists) have been forced to give up plenty for Lent (and the rest of the year) – jobs, holidays, petrol, new clothes, etc.

      Reply
    • Don’t think anyone will disagree with you there Paul, only every day is Lent in Ireland.

      Reply
    • Protestantism is (theologically) any Christian religion that is not RC, Anglican, Oriental Christian or Eastern Orthodox. Anglicanism has at different times and places in its history adopted some of the characteristics of the reformed churches, but that does not affect its theology. The church in Ireland, despite its minority status, has deviated very little. I know that even Anglicans sometimes use the term Protestant to describe themselves (even the rector in our church has used the term) but it is more than incorrect – I believe it has come about in Ireland because of the minority status in the south, by way of differentiation – and also possibly by association with Presbyterianism and other protestants in NI. (I’ve never heard an Episcopalian or a member of the Church of England describe themselves as Protestant.) What is boils down to is ignorance, both on behalf of the Anglicans who use the term about themselves, and the Roman Catholics who use the term about Anglicans. and as you point out, an unwillingness to recognise the validity of any other faith on this island. But I suppose we have the RC hierarchy to thank for that. Presumably and hopefully that will change and we will no longer have to read lines such as “Catholics, Muslims and Jews…” ;-)

      Reply
  • I gave up abstinence and Catholicism for Lent.

    Reply
  • “He didn’t spend forty days in the desert because he couldn’t access Google Maps.” Quality.

    Reply
  • Catholicism is more of an ethnicity in Ireland than a religion. Most Catholics couldn’t tell you what transubstantiation is, nor how it encompasses some of the many differences between it and reformed Christian faiths. They could, however, tell you who’s been born, married or dying in the parish since this time last week.

    Asking a non-practicing Catholic to give up giving up for Lent is like asking them to give up part of their identity. That’s why christenings, communions, confirmations, weddings and funerals will continue to be held for people who are effectively agnostic or atheist. And why Lent, like Halloween, will live on long after people give up the faith that inspired it.

    Reply
  • Humans are predisposed to bargaining both rational and superstitious. We see a bargaining phase during terminal illness. Sacrificing oneself for someone else would establish strong bonds or mutual benefit etc. Most primitive societies saw intent in the random acts of nature and religions used this sacrifice bargaining instinct to appease the gods . From a psychological perspective people are more easy to influence and indoctrinate when they are suffering which is why religions do the suffering, fasting, poverty obedience, chastity thing.

    Reply
    • Cyril, surely you don’t take the writings in the bible literally?

      Reply
    • Sheelagh this notion of taking the Bible literally has to be one of the most dishonest arguments of the religion of the modern era. While it was to be welcomed four centuries ago in that it quenched the fires of the inquisition of the Catholic Church. (The absence of this argument within Islam is the reason they establish Sharia courts based on the Koran). However it is intellectually dishonest in the extreme.

      Are we supposed to believe the creator of the universe speaks to a 4000 year old desert tribe in riddles somewhat like the joker out of the movie Batman? The same creator that constructed the human brain told desert primitives that the execution of homosexuals was a noble endeavour? That sees women as wretched beings and menstruating women as being unclean and who mandates that supposed witches be put to death? Are we to believe a creator is speaking in poetry when he tells us that the non believer will be cast into the fire like a burning bush? Are these the type of things an all knowing and all loving creator would wish to whisper in the ear of desert primitives? Would he not have something to say about slavery? Perhaps also mentioning that it is not the wisest thing to force young girls into marriage?

      This form of self deception served a purpose in more savage post medieval times. It was a stepping stone on the way to leaving behind the vestiges of our less enlightened ancestors. In the 21st century civilised western society should value intellectual honesty more than a misplaced sentiment about the feelings of religious people. Humans adapt and learn. Things that were once sacred in traditions get left behind in the graveyard of mythology. While I have probably offended more religious people than I can care to imagine I do so because they place the bar of offence in front of themselves. To place fear of offending people above robust argument is so dangerous a concept in a nuclear armed society. Saudi Arabia have successfully managed to extradite one of their people from Malaysia for posting 3 remarkably benign tweets about Islamic society.

      I respect peoples need and right to private religion. There is ample evidence that some people need it but intellectual tolerance and the politicising of it is a different argument entirely. I poke fun at religion for the same reasons as I would at less than intelligent political decisions such as funding the development of a Children’s Hospital without first getting planning permission. That is not to mean these politicians are inherently stupid it just means that this particular aspect of their decision making is less than satisfactory.

      Reply
  • As you said they use it as a second chance to succeed with their new years resolutions and generally it’s perfect timing to get started on one’s bikini body for Summer.

    Reply
  • After a fruitless “discussion” with a pro-life, “Practising Catholic” on Saturday, I’ve decided to give up any pretence of tolerance. Politeness be damned – they can give it, now let’s see if they can take it.

    Reply
  • Total useless blog. If your not religious dont fast/sacrifice. If you are go ahead. Live and let live

    Reply
  • Of course your giggling was a ridicule of spiritual intentions. This entire article is a critique of catholics.

    How about I live my life the way I choose and you yours?

    I know TheJournal has an atheist agenda but I thought it could be just a little less obvious about it.

    So we may pick and choose.
    I welcome that as a Christian.
    Catholicism is only a man-made institution.
    I doubt God will really care in the end whether we did everything their way or not.
    Christianity is about faith above all.

    I’m not observing Lent myself because I never really got that far in the past :) but I have full respect for those who do whether for religious reasons or not.

    And your point about modern living is absolute nonsense. People who observe Lent feel the benefits now more than ever. In the past, many of the things that were given up (sweets, chocolate, technology) were in short supply, now they’re everywhere! To give them up requires immense personal commitment and I respect that hugely. People will be better at the other side for having made the sacrifice.

    And finally, YES giving up her iPhone would be good. The effect TheJournal app is having on my blood pressure these days is something I’d be much better off without :D not to mention the time I waste with all the other apps.

    Reply
    • David there is a world of difference between ridiculing and not having respect for someones beliefs or actions and those seeking to ban or prohibit them. So please stop this live and let live persecution argument. I don’t have respect for several beliefs of humans. I laugh at David Ike when he preaches that world leaders are reptiles disguised as humans. I laugh at those who believe Kim Jong il scored several holes in one on his first golf trip. Likewise I laugh at how otherwise intelligent people can believe nonsense bullshit from ancient desert tribes who didn’t know what an atom was. Your faith is a joke. But please don’t take that as me wishing to stop it. Saying or believing silly things isn’t a crime and neither should ridiculing such things.

      Reply
    • She says she isn’t ridiculing anyone and then goes ahead and does it anyway.
      I’m just pointing out the inconsistency.

      Comparing a religious belief to Kim Jong Il’s scorecard is apples and oranges.

      It’s possible to prove that Kim Jong didn’t score a hole in one but it is NOT possible to prove what happens after we die or why we are on this earth.

      I respect all religious or atheist views no matter how much I may disagree with them because we can’t prove either way whether they’re right or they’re wrong.

      So to ridicule anyone’s religious beliefs is not a crime, but I believe it’s very wrong and I’m disappointed with Christians, Muslims, and Atheists alike who feel their way is the only game in town and that everyone else is just plain stupid.

      Reply
    • I would like to see how you go about proving Kim Jong il didn’t score several holes in one on his first outing. Likewise I cant prove that we don’t live on after death. I also cant prove that we wont be reassembled by a dragon god and spend eternal life in its belly. We can only say the evidence for such assumptions is non existent. We can also understand the wealth of evidence why we would delude ourselves to believe such things. Evidence from the coffins of ancient Egyptians who were buried with treasure believing they would walk into the afterlife only for their bones to be found with the gold relatively intact. The evidence for a structure reassembling the conscious sentience of the brain goes against every known scientific principle. An inability to disprove something is an absolutely lame reason to believe.

      As for being bad to mock religion, I do not think religious peoples  feelings should come before combating misogyny, homophobia and a war on science.

      Putting atheism on the same level as faith based religious ideology shows a contempt for honest enquiry. Atheists would readily change their belief if extraordinary evidence for Jesus, Muhammad, Thor, Zeus, Brahma or any of the thousands of other gods existed. There is rampant evidence that sky gods don’t administer anything resembling justice on earth. Why the hell would such beings get all judicial when we die? These are the reasons that Atheists believe religion is “away with the fairies”. Explaining the complexity of the universe by inventing an even more complex god is a cop out. That’s even before I get started on all the stupid evil and unscientific bullshit that is written in every ancient religious text.

      Reply
    • Anyone who is homophobic or against science should be challenged on what is their political view, not on their religion. I agree with criticising people who would claim that these beliefs are their religious view, but it’s not a reason to knock the religion entirely because that’s not what religion is about.

      Are homophobic Christians idiots? Yes, but only because they’re homophobes, not because they’re Christian!

      Reply
    • Just because dumbed down Christians do not read their religious texts but still proclaim them as the word of god doesn’t mean others will. You choose to ignore the majority of gods supposed word. If you are to believe god is the ultimate source of morality why do you not go out and murder gay people after all the bible says they deserve to be put to death?
      Why do you allow women receive an education as the Bible states they should learn from their husbands?

      Why do you not burn the villages and kill the people and their cattle if they worship gods other than Yahweh, after all Jesus says in Matthew that he came to keep the laws of the prophets?

      Who do you think is more versed in scripture present day Christians or the religious of centuries ago who read the Bible and lived by its moral,code?

      Mind control is a numbers game and by supporting the insane notion that these books are anything more than the rantings of humans in the infancy of our species is providing support for the violent conclusions of the minority. Once one believes these books were wrote by an intelligent being then anything can be justified. This is why non evidence based belief causes senseless suffering.

      Reply
    • You are welcome to believe whatever ridiculous notions you chose. You cannot shift the burden of proof however and you are not protected from ridicule if you cannot supply evidence for your beliefs.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

      Reply
    • Ah yes, because believing in God is like believing a teapot rotates the Sun. More ridicule. There’s a difference between something that cannot ever be proved (religion) and something that cannot be proved at this point in time due to lack of technology (teapot).

      Reply
    • I think you’re missing the point David.

      If I claim that there is a deity called The Flying Spaghetti Monster that exists and listens to all my hopes and dreams and acts upon these secret wishes then you would be perfectly reasonable to question that belief and to act incredulous when I doggedly argue its existence.

      The only difference in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and your deity is the existence of 2,000 years of literature – literature which I’m sure you’d agree contains some pretty dodgy content.

      Reply
    • @ David, your offence is taken, not given. You obviously defend your own Catholic agenda vehemently. Is TheJournal/Lisa McInnerny not as entitled as you to an opinion. You know you’re reading the opinion section, right? This isn’t being reported as fact. Don’t get so bent out of shape about it. You aren’t being villified in any way nor your good name being taken from you.

      Reply
  • Christianity didn’t arrive in Ireland until the 5th century. At that time, I seriously doubt if people gave up ANYTHING for lent, because they probably didn’t have anything to give up. Lent falls in mid-to-late winter, doesn’t it? Can you imagine trying to find enough food to feed yourself and your family before there were any Android apps? No text messaging? Go out and camp in Killarney National Park for a couple of years and then talk to me in mid-winter about Lenten sacrifice.

    I doubt if the concept of Lenten sacrifice was even practiced until times became more “comfortable” for more people. 7th century was a real drag.

    Reply
  • One thing that annoys me about lent is people who stuff their face on sundays because its a holy day. Lord save us give it up for the 40 or nothing ye lazy sods.

    Reply
  • Yay, that way we can all be part of Lent together. No health service, no schools open, no dole payments. Make everyone share in the sacrifice ;)

    Reply
  • Hi Helen. Just to make a comment on your view as a Catholic I see the Anglican Chirch as BOTH Protestant AND Catholic. It does not hold the authority of the Pope and does not believe belief in the Immaculate Conception. These two things show the Anglican church to be reformed or protesting but at the same time follows many of pre-reformation beliefs still held by the catholic church. But that’s just my opinion. Cheers.

    Reply
  • Is the journal exploring product placement? We had gratuitous Crunchies and now this sweetie drawer,
    Is this the rte woman’s role?

    Reply

Add New Comment