Dave Francis thinks about Lent and Easter.
Let's start with Lent. Traditionally, Christians treat the 40 days leading up to Easter as a period of reflection, recalling the gospel story of Jesus' 40 days in the Wilderness when he fasted, was tempted by the Devil and prepared for his ministry. At this time, Christians are encouraged to show self-discipline in 'giving up' something that may be getting in the way of their spiritual life or progress and to be more focussed on the needs of others. Many Christians see this as a time when they become closer to God and practise more humility.
For those of us who do not share the more metaphysical goals, there is still much in this tradition that we might do well to observe. More than this, it may even be a benefit to forego the metaphysical goals and simply to give additional attention to one or more of the more down-to-earth virtues of self-discipline, study and generosity.
It's said, for example, that those who self-identify as 'religious' give more to charity, are more successful in matters of self-control and are more likely to act on their concern for others. But in what sense is it true that religious believers are more generous than others?
According to Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society, 'the difference between religious and non-religious giving is not that great, and in any event, when you look at what they are giving to, the difference is given an interesting context. While religious believers give partly to their own churches, the non-religious tend to support charities that directly benefit the most vulnerable in societies.' secularism.org.uk/opinion/2014/06/bbc-poll-shows-that-religious-people-give-more-to-charity-than-non-religious-maybe
And what about self-discipline? This is one of the claimed benefits of Lent, Ramadan, Shabbat, regular attendance at places of worship and so on. Lent, in particular, as well as being a time of abstinence, is intended to be a time of reflection, study perhaps, and a time of focussing on the needs of others.
It is interesting to examine what feelings may be involved here. Psychologists often differentiate between shame and guilt. Guilt is useful when immoral behaviour is involved: perhaps you will do better next time, but guilt can also be destructive, leading to excessive self-blame and paralysis of action. Shame, they say, is not so much to do with doing something wrong, so much as being someone you feel is wrong. If shame prompts someone to change for the better it can be useful, but other feelings of shame can work in the opposite direction, creating a cycle of low self-esteem and even depression. Humility can be a great virtue, but not when it becomes a stick to beat yourself, at one extreme, or at the other extreme, a competition. As Donald Trump said, 'I think I am, actually humble. I think I'm much more humble than you would understand.'
So how is a 'religious' Lent working for people here? Is it helping them to reflect on their lives and priorities in a positive way? Or is it adding to the weight of the wrong sorts of guilt and shame? Perhaps it's all more to do with the experience and personality of the individual than the religious underpinning itself. So, for those with a Christian heritage, why not recognise the Lenten fast in some way each year? There is much to reflect on in the traditional story of Jesus' temptations in the Wilderness, not least the idea that times of self-discipline, study, giving up of some selfish indulgences for a while and thinking how one can best use one's life for the benefit of others, might actually make things a little better than they might otherwise be.
Then there's Easter. Traditionally, Easter is made up of the events of Holy Week, beginning with Jesus' 'triumphal entry' into Jerusalem on a donkey and ending with his resurrection from the dead seven days later. For many of us in SOF, the theological belief associated with Easter, that a man took all of the world's sin upon himself so that, by some mysterious transformational process, 'those who believe on him may not perish', is at best a comforting, if somewhat incomprehensible myth. At the same time, I do believe that there is something of real, if not ultimate value, in the old story. At the very least it is a moving tale of self-sacrifice for a greater good.
Countless subsequent stories have reworked it. One of the best, for me, is in the film Terminator 2, where the Arnold Schwarzenegger character, a 'Terminator' from the future, sacrifices himself in order to safeguard the future of humanity, even when he believes that it is 'part of human nature to destroy yourselves'.
The Easter story is a perennial story of hope despite adversity, of love despite human hate and horror, of self-sacrifice despite the unworthiness of those for whom the sacrifice is made. What could be more inspiring?
There's another by-product of the Easter story that has interested me, and that is the Shroud of Turin. Could it really be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth? And even if so, does it matter? These days I get my main science education from being a member of the British Society for the Turin Shroud. Scientists from across the world have studied the Shroud in minute detail and a wealth of scientific and quasi-scientific hypotheses has been produced in attempting to explain the mysterious image (which I have seen myself at the 2010 exhibition in Turin) of a crucified man on a linen sheet. Was the image formed through: a divine miracle resulting from the resurrection; a natural process of putrefaction reacting with the cloth; a quantum phenomenon; an ingenious painting; or a deliberate execution of a man in medieval times used to forge a valuable relic, or through some as yet unexplained process? All these theories have been put forward by experts from a variety of scientific and historical fields.
Reading and puzzling over the different beliefs and opinions, along with the evidence and argument brought forward, casts an informative light on the nature of human endeavour across the centuries, but particularly of recent, more 'rational' times. Are not many of those putting forward theories in favour of the Shroud's authenticity hoping for something more to life than meets the eye? But perhaps that's a fundamental instinct of being human?
So, for me, the Easter story and much of the subsequent art, science, history, music, poetry and film inspired by it, is well worth keeping. But as to much of the theology that also sprung from the myth, having read a great deal of it, I'm just not sure that it adds anything that can't be eclipsed by the simply human responses that see glimpses of hope in the midst of darkness.
Dave Francis is an education consultant, a trustee of the SOF Network and editor of the 'Solarity' materials for Young People's Philosophy and Religion Clubs: www.sofn.org.uk/solarity