The season of Lent
Geoff Pilliner reflects on Lent and its origins, meaning and message
So, what do modern Quakers think about Lent? George Fox would have known well that the church of those days recognised Lent as the prelude to Holy Week and Easter, and rejected the notion as being all about ‘times and seasons’, which did not fit with his view that Christianity was a full-time religion.
But modern Quakers are not so set on disregarding ‘times and seasons’. Most Meetings observe Christmas, often with a party and carols, although it is difficult to ignore Christmas anyway, with all the commercial hype surrounding it. We know about Easter because it is marked with two public holidays. Many of us, however, unless we were brought up in the church, do not even know when Whitsun is in the calendar. And Lent is a strange Ramadan-like period when mainstream Christians are supposed to give something up in preparation for Holy Week – such as sweets. But in rejecting times and seasons and the rituals associated with them, are we ignoring the stories behind them too? Are we ‘throwing the baby out with the bath water’? Is there something of spiritual value we are overlooking?
Luke’s gospel
The season of Lent is based on the account, principally in Luke’s gospel, of Jesus’ preparation for his ministry (Luke 3:21-22 and 4:1-15). The story does not relate specifically to the events leading to his crucifixion, and the link has, largely, been devised by Christians over the last few centuries. In making this link, perhaps the church has missed the real essence of the story and missed something important in the process.
The Bible story tells us that Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist, went into the desert for, perhaps, forty days, faced three major temptations, and then embarked on his ministry. Ignore the Christian doctrine. This reads as a slice of Jesus’ personal experience, experience that we can identify with. Some Biblical scholars are sceptical about the story because they cannot verify it from independent sources. It cannot be verified, because no-one else was there, but, to me, it communicates as a very personal set of experiences originally described by Jesus himself and not invented by some later gospel writer.
Spiritual leadings
So what did happen? Jesus, like many of us, came to a point in his life where he was ready to commit to his spiritual leadings. He went to John the Baptist to be baptised in the River Jordan, as many others did at that time. That was obviously a deep spiritual experience for Jesus. Many, after an experience like that, would want to make big changes to their lives immediately, perhaps to emulate the Baptist at another site along the river. Not so Jesus. He withdrew into a silent space to work out what his new commitment really meant, what he was really being led to do. With all this new spiritual power, what was he going to do with it?
He could do plenty. He could use it to succeed in the world and have the means to provide those who followed him with everything they wanted. He could offer them spiritual certainty. He could offer them a new world and persuade them with money or possessions. He could turn their stones into bread.
Or he could force them, by his sheer personality, to do whatever he wanted them to do, convince them of any truth he cared to express, irrespective of its basis in real experience. He could tell it like they had to believe it. He could use his power to control. He could worship the devil and control the world.
Or he could put on a big show. He could perform something miraculous that would stun everyone into believing he was a marvel. He could become a celebrity. He could jump off the roof of the temple and get people to follow him because of his personality.
It took a long time – forty days we are told – to work through these ‘temptations’, and realise that neither political power, nor public provision, nor the popularity of celebrity status would fulfil his leadings. He went out and talked to ordinary people about spiritual things and living a life of which they could be proud, and he died ignominiously because of this. History tells us that his decision was right.
Spiritual commitment
What has this got to do with Quakers? Many of us, I believe, have had that experience of accepting spiritual commitment. It may well be that we have felt we should reflect this commitment by big changes in our life. How many are prepared to stand back, to think it through, to look for further leadings, to reject the temptations of accepting the power it might give, the success it could bring, or the trappings and popularity of celebrity status, and instead go into the world to carry a simple message of love for one another? And how many would accept the ultimate cost of this?
The Lent story is worth re-reading, to let it challenge us to wait quietly in the Light, to know how far we have responded to our own spiritual insights and to recognise the possible cost of really living up to the promptings of love and truth in our hearts.
You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.