In Praise of Folly Part 6

There is another, and he of no mean credit, whom for respect to his person I shall forbear to name, who commenting upon that verse in the prophet Habakkuk (_I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction, and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble_), because tents were sometimes made of skins, he pretended that the word tents did here signify the skin of St. Bartholomew, who was flayed for a martyr.

I myself was lately at a divinity disputation (where I very often pay my attendance), where one of the opponents demanded a reason why it should be thought more proper to silence all heretics by sword and f.a.ggot, rather than convert them by moderate and sober arguments? A certain cynical old blade, who bore the character of a divine, legible in the frowns and wrinkles of his face, not without a great deal of disdain answered, that it was the express injunction of St. Paul himself, in those directions to t.i.tus (_A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject_), quoting it in Latin, where the word _reject_ is _devita_, while all the auditory wondered at this citation, and deemed it no way applicable to his purpose; he at last explained himself, saying, that _devita_ signified _de vita tollendum heretic.u.m_, a heretic must be slain. Some smiled at his ignorance, but others approved of it as an orthodox comment And however some disliked that such violence should be done to so easy a text, our hair-splitting and irrefragable doctor went on in triumph. To prove it yet (says he) more undeniably, it is commanded in the old law [_Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live_]: now then every _Maleficus_, or witch, is to be killed, but an heretic is _Maleficus_, which in the Latin translation is put for a witch, _ergo, &c_. All that were present wondered at the ingenuity of the person, and very devoudy embraced his opinion, never dreaming that the law was restrained only to magicians, sorcerers, and enchanters: for otherwise, if the word _Maleficus_ signified what it most naturally implies, every evil-doer, then drunkenness and wh.o.r.edom were to meet with the same capital punishment as witchcraft But why should I squander away my time in a too tedious prosecution of this topic, which if drove on to the utmost would afford talk to eternity? I aim herein at no more than this, namely, that since those grave doctors take such a swinging range and lat.i.tude, I, who am but a smattering novice in divinity, may have the larger allowance for any slips or mistakes.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 370]

Now therefore I return to St. Paul, who uses these expressions [_Ye suffer fools gladly_] applying it to himself; and again [_As a fool receive me_], and [_That which I speak, I speak not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly_]; and in another place [_We are fools for Christ's sake_]. See how these commendations of Folly are equal to the author of them, both great and sacred. The same holy person does yet enjoin and command the being a fool, as a virtue of all others most requisite and necessary: for, says he [_If any man seem to be wise in this world, let him become a fool that he may be wise_]. Thus St. Luke records, how our Saviour, after his resurrection, joining himself with two of his disciples travelling to Emmaus, at his first salutation he calls them fools, saying [_O fools, and slow of heart to believe_], Nor may this seem strange in comparison to what is yet farther delivered by St. Paul, who adventures to attribute something of Folly even to the all-wise G.o.d himself [_The foolishness of G.o.d_ (says he) _is wiser than men_]; in which text St. Origen would not have the word foolishness any way referred to men, or applicable to the same sense, wherein is to be understood that other pa.s.sage of St. Paul [_The preaching of the cross to them that perish, foolishness_]. But why do I put myself to the trouble of citing so many proofs, since this one may suffice for all, namely, that in those mystical psalms wherein David represents the type of Christ, it is there acknowledged by our Saviour, in way of confession, that even he himself was guilty of Folly; _Thou_ (says he) _O G.o.d knowest my foolishness?_ Nor is it without some reason that fools for their plainness and sincerity of heart have always been most acceptable to G.o.d Almighty. For as the princes of this world have shrewdly suspected, and carried a jealous eye over such of their subjects as were the most observant, and deepest politicians (for thus Caesar was afraid of the plodding Ca.s.sius, and Brutus, thinking himself secure enough from the careless drinking Anthony; Nero likewise mistrusted Seneca, and Dionysius would have been willingly rid of Plato), whereas they can all put greater confidence in such as are of less subtlety and contrivance So our Saviour in like manner dislikes and condemns the wise and crafty, as St. Paul does expressly declare in these words, _G.o.d hath chosen the foolish things of the world_; and again, _it pleased G.o.d by foolishness to save the world_; implying that by wisdom it could never have been saved. Nay, G.o.d himself testifies as much when he speaks by the mouth of his prophet, _I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nought the understanding of the learned_. Again, our Saviour does solemnly return his Father thanks for that he had _hidden the mysteries of salvation from the wise, and revealed them to babes_, i.e., to fools; for the original word _vnpriois_, being opposed to _oooois_ if one signify wise, the other must foolish. To the same purpose did our blessed Lord frequently condemn and upbraid the scribes, pharisees, and lawyers, while he carries himself kind and obliging to the unlearned mult.i.tude: for what otherwise can be the meaning of that tart denunciation, _Woe unto you scribes and pharisees_, than woe unto you wise men, whereas he seems chiefly delighted with children, women, and illiterate fishermen.

We may farther take notice, that among all the several kinds of brute creatures he shews greatest liking to such as are farthest distant from the subtlety of the fox. Thus in his progress to Jerusalem he chose to ride sitting upon an a.s.s, though, if he pleased, he might have mounted the back of a lion with more of state, and as little of danger. The Holy Spirit chose rather likewise to descend from heaven in the shape of a simple gall-less dove, than that of an eagle, kite, or other more lofty fowl.

Thus all along in the holy scriptures there are frequent metaphors and similitudes of the most inoffensive creatures, such as stags, hinds, lambs, and the like. Nay, those blessed souls that in the day of judgment are to be placed at our Saviour's right hand are called sheep, which are the most senseless and stupid of all cattle, as is evidenced by Aristotle's Greek proverb, a sheepishness of temper, a dull, blockish, sleepy, unmanly humour. Yet of such a flock Christ is not ashamed to profess himself the shepherd. Nay, he would not only have all his proselytes termed sheep, but even he himself would be called a lamb; as when John the Baptist seeth Jesus coming unto him, he saith, _Behold the Lamb of G.o.d_; which same t.i.tle is very often given to our Saviour in the apocalypse.

All this amounts to no less than that all mortal men are fools, even the righteous and G.o.dly as well as sinners; nay, in some sense our blessed Lord himself, who, although he was the _wisdom of the Father_, yet to repair the infirmities of fallen man, he became in some measure a partaker of human Folly, when he _took our nature upon him, and was found in fashion as a man_; or when _G.o.d made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of G.o.d in him_. Nor would he heal those breaches our sins had made by any other method than by the _foolishness of the cross_, published by the ignorant and unlearned apostles, to whom he frequently recommends the excellence of Folly, cautioning them against the infectiousness of wisdom, by the several examples he proposes them to imitate, such as children, lilies, sparrows, mustard, and such like beings, which are either wholly inanimate, or at least devoid of reason and ingenuity, guided by no other conduct than that of instinct, without care, trouble, or contrivance. To the same intent the disciples were warned by their lord and master, that when they should be _brought unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates and powers_, they shall _take no thought how, or what thing they should answer, nor what they should say_: they were again strictly forbid to _enquire into the times and seasons_, or to place any confidence in their own abilities, but to depend wholly upon divine a.s.sistance.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 378]

At the first peopling of paradise the Almighty had never laid so strict a charge on our father Adam to refrain from _eating of the tree of knowledge_ except he had thereby forewarned that the taste of knowledge would be the bane of all happiness. St. Paul says expressly, that _knowledge puffeth up, i.e._, it is fatal and poisonous. In pursuance whereunto St. Bernard interprets that _exceeding high mountain_ whereon the devil had erected his seat to have been the mountain of knowledge.

And perhaps this may be another argument which ought not to be omitted, namely, that Folly is acceptable, at least excusable, with the G.o.ds, inasmuch, as they easily pa.s.s by the heedless failures of fools, while the miscarriages of such as are known to have more wit shall very hardly obtain a pardon; nay, when a wise man comes to sue for an acquitment from any guilt, he must shroud himself under the patronage and pretext of Folly. For thus in the twelfth of Numbers Aaron entreats Moses to stay the leprosy of his sister Miriam, saying, _alas, my Lord, I beseech thee lay not the sin upon us wherein we have done foolishly_. Thus, when David spared Saul's life, when he found him sleeping in a tent of Hachilah, not willing to _stretch forth his hand against the Lord's anointed, Saul excuses his former severity by confessing, _Behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly_. David also himself in much the same form begs the remission of his sin from G.o.d Almighty with this prayer, _Lord, I pray thee take away the iniquity of thy servant, for I have done very foolishly_; as if he could not have hoped otherwise to have his pardon granted except he pet.i.tioned for it under the covert and mitigation of Folly. The agreeable practice of our Saviour is yet more convincing, who, when he hung upon the cross, prayed for his enemies, saying, _Father, forgive them_, urging no other plea in their behalf than that of their ignorance, _for they know not what they do_.

To the same effect St. Paul in his first epistle to Timothy acknowledges he had been a blasphemer and a persecutor, _But (saith he) _I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief_. Now what is the meaning of the phrase [_I did it ignorantly_] but only this? My fault was occasioned from a misinformed Folly, not from a deliberate malice. What signifies [_I obtained mercy_] but only that I should not otherwise have obtained it had not folly and ignorance been my vindication? To the same purpose is that other pa.s.sage in the mysterious Psalmist, which I forgot to mention in its proper place, namely, _Oh remember not the sins and offences of my youth!_ the word which we render offences, is in Latin _ignorantias_, ignorances. Observe, the two things he alleges in his excuse are, first, his rawness of age, to which Folly and want of experience are constant attendants: and secondly, his ignorances, expressed in the plural number for an enhancement and aggravation of his foolishness.

But that I may not wear out this subject too far, to draw now towards a conclusion, it is observable that the christian religion seems to have some relation to Folly, and no alliance at all with wisdom. Of the truth whereof, if you desire farther proof than my bare word you may please, first, to consider, that children, women, old men, and fools, led as it were by a secret impulse of nature, are always most constant in repairing to church, and most zealous, devout and attentive in the performance of the several parts of divine service; nay, the first promulgators of the gospel, and the first converts to Christianity, were men of plainness and simplicity, wholly unacquainted with secular policy or learning.

Farther, there are none more silly, or nearer their wits' end, than those who are too superst.i.tiously religious: they are profusely lavish in their charity; they invite fresh affronts by an easy forgiveness of past injuries; they suffer themselves to be cheated and imposed upon by laying claim to the innocence of the dove; they make it the interest of no person to oblige them, because they will love, and _do good to their enemies_, as much as to the most endearing friends; they banish all pleasure, feeding upon the penance of watching, weeping, fasting, sorrow and reproach; they value not their lives, but with St. Paul, _wish to be dissolved_, and covet the fiery trial of martyrdom: in a word, they seem altogether so dest.i.tute of common sense, that their soul seems already separated from the dead and inactive body. And what else can we imagine all this to be than downright madness? It is the less strange therefore that at the feast of Pentecost the apostles should be thought drunk with new wine; or that St. Paul was censured by Festus to have been beside himself.

And since I have had the confidence to go thus far, I shall venture yet a little forwarder, and be so bold as to say thus much more: all that final happiness, which christians, through so many rubs and briars of difficulties, contend for, is at last no better than a sort of folly and madness. This, no question, will be thought extravagantly spoke; but consider awhile, and deliberately state the case.

First, then, the christians so far agree with the Platonists as to believe that the body is no better than a prison or dungeon for the confinement of the soul. That therefore, while the soul is shackled to the walls of flesh, her soaring wings are impeded, and all her enlivening faculties clogged and fettered by the gross particles of matter, so that she can neither freely range after, nor, when happily overtook, can quietly contemplate her proper object of truth.

Farther, Plato defines philosophy to be the meditation of death, because the one performs the same office with the other; namely, withdraws the mind from all visible and corporeal objects; therefore while the soul does patiently actuate the several organs and members of the body, so long is a man accounted of a good and sound disposition; but when the soul, weary of her confinement, struggles to break jail, and fly beyond her cage of flesh and blood, then a man is censured at least for being magotty and crack-brained; nay, if there be any defect in the external organs it is then termed downright madness. And yet many times persons thus affected shall have prophetic ecstacies of foretelling things to come, shall in a rapture talk languages they never before learned, and seem in all things actuated by somewhat divine and extraordinary; and all this, no doubt, is only the effect of the soul's being more released from its engagement to the body, whereby it can with less impediment exert the energy of life and motion. From hence, no question, has sprung an observation of like nature, confirmed now into a settled opinion, that _some long experienced souls in the world, before their dislodging, arrive to the height of prophetic spirits_.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 384]

If this disorder arise from an intemperance in religion, and too high a strain of devotion, though it be of a somewhat differing sort, yet it is so near akin to the former, that a great part of mankind apprehend it as a mere madness; especially when persons of that superst.i.tious humour are so pragmatical and singular as to separate and live apart as it were from all the world beside: so as they seem to have experienced what Plato dreams to have happened between some, who, enclosed in a dark cave, did only ruminate on the ideas and abstracted speculations of ent.i.ties; and one other of their company, who had got abroad into the open light, and at his return tells them what a blind mistake they had lain under; that he had seen the substance of what their dotage of imagination reached only in shadow; that therefore he could not but pity and condole their deluding dreams, while they on the other side no less bewail his frenzy, and turn him out of their society for a lunatic and madman.

Thus the vulgar are wholly taken up with those objects that are most familiar to their senses, beyond which they are apt to think all is but fairy-land; while those that are devoutly religious scorn to set their thoughts or affections on any things below, but mount their soul to the pursuit of incorporeal and invisible beings. The former, in their marshalling the requisites of happiness, place riches in the front, the endowments of the body in the next rank, and leave the accomplishments of the soul to bring up the rear; nay, some will scarce believe there is any such thing at all as the soul, because they cannot literally see a reason of their faith; while the other pay their first fruits of service to that most simple and incomprehensible Being, G.o.d, employ themselves next in providing for the happiness of that which comes nearest to their immortal soul, being not at all mindful of their corrupt bodily carcases, and slighting money as the dirt and rubbish of the world; or if at any time some urging occasions require them to become entangled in secular affairs, they do it with regret, and a kind of ill-will, observing what St. Paul advises his _Corinthians, having wives, and yet being as though they had none; buying, and yet remaining as though they possessed not_.

There are between these two sorts of persons many differences in several other respects. As first, though all the senses have the same mutual relation to the body, yet some are more gross than others; as those five corporeal ones, of touching, hearing, smelling, seeing, tasting, whereas some again are more refined, and less adulterated with matter; such are the memory, the understanding, and the will. Now the mind will be always most ready and expedite at that to which it is naturally most inclined.

Hence is it that a pious soul, employing all its power and abilities in the pressing after such things as are farthest removed from sense, is perfectly stupid and brutish in the management of any worldly affairs; while on the other side, the vulgar are so intent upon their business and employment, that they have not time to bestow one poor thought upon a future eternity. From such ardour of divine meditation was it that Saint Bernard in his study drank oil instead of wine, and yet his thoughts were so taken up that he never observed the mistake.

Farther, among the pa.s.sions of the soul, some have a greater communication with the body than others; as l.u.s.t, the desire of meat and sleep, anger, pride, and envy; with these the pious man is in continual war, and irreconcile-able enmity, while the vulgar cherish and foment them as the best comforts of life.

There are other affections of a middle nature, common and innate to every man; such are love to one's country, duty to parents, love to children, kindness to friends, and such like; to these the vulgar pay some respect, but the religious endeavour to supplant and eradicate from their soul, except they can raise and sublimate them to the most refined pitch of virtue; so as to love or honour their parents, not barely under that character (for what did they do more than generate a body? nay, even for that we are primarily beholden to G.o.d, the first parent of all mankind), but as good men only, upon whom is imprinted the lively image of that divine nature, which they esteem as the chief and only good, beyond whom nothing deserves to be beloved, nothing desired.

By the same rule they measure all the other offices or duties of life; in each of which, whatever is earthly and corporeal, shall, if not wholly rejected, yet at least be put behind what faith makes the _substance of things not seen_. Thus in the sacraments, and all other acts of religion, they make a difference between the outward appearance or body of them, and the more inward soul or spirit. As to instance, in fasting, they think it very ineffectual to abstain from flesh, or debar themselves of a meal's meat (which yet is all the vulgar understand by his duty), unless they likewise restrain their pa.s.sions, subdue their anger, and mortify their pride; that the soul being thus disengaged from the entanglement of the body, may have a better relish to spiritual objects, and take an antepast of heaven. Thus (say they) in the holy Eucharist, though the outward form and ceremonies are not wholly to be despised, yet are these prejudicial, at least unprofitable, if as bare signs only they are not accompanied with the thing signified, which is _the body and blood of Christ_, whose death, till his second coming, we are hereby to represent by the vanquishing and burying our vile affections that they may arise to a newness of life, and be united first to each other, then all to Christ.

These are the actions and meditations of the truly pious person; while the vulgar place all their religion in crowding up close to the altar, in listening to the words of the priest, and in being very circ.u.mspect at the observance of each trifling ceremony. Nor is it in such cases only as we have here given for instances, but through his whole course of life, that the pious man, without any regard to the baser materials of the body, spends himself wholly in a fixed intentness upon spiritual, invisible, and eternal objects.

Now since these persons stand off, and keep at so wide a distance between themselves, it is customary for them both to think each other mad: and were I to give my opinion to which of the two the name does most properly belong, I should, I confess, adjudge it to the religious; of the reasonableness whereof you may be farther convinced if I proceed to demonstrate what I formerly hinted at, namely, that that ultimate happiness which religion proposes is no other than some sort of madness.

First, therefore, Plato dreamed somewhat of this nature when he tells us that the madness of lovers was of all other dispositions of the body most desirable; for he who is once thoroughly smitten with this pa.s.sion, lives no longer within himself, but has removed his soul to the same place where he has settled his affections, and loses himself to find the object he so much dotes upon: this straying now, and wandering of a soul from its own mansion, what is it better than a plain transport of madness? What else can be the meaning of those proverbial phrases, _non est apua se_, he is not himself; _ad te redi_, recover yourself; and _sibi redditus est_, he is come again to himself? And accordingly as love is more hot and eager, so is the madness thence ensuing more incurable, and yet more happy. Now what shall be that future happiness of glorified saints, which pious souls here on earth so earnestly groan for, but only that the spirit, as the more potent and prevalent victor, shall over-master and swallow up the body; and that the more easily, because while here below, the several members, by being mortified, and kept in subjection, were the better prepared for this separating change; and afterward the spirit itself shall be lost, and drowned in the abyss of beatific vision, so as the whole man will be then perfectly beyond all its own bounds, and be no otherwise happy than as transported into ecstasy and wonder, it feels some unspeakable influence from that omnipotent Being, which makes all things completely blessed, by a.s.similating them to his own likeness. Now although this happiness be then only consummated, when souls at the general resurrection shall be re-united to their bodies, and both be clothed with immortality; yet because a religious life is but a continued meditation upon, and as it were a transcript of the joys of heaven, therefore to such persons there is allowed some relish and foretaste of that pleasure here, which is to be their reward hereafter. And although this indeed be but a small pittance of satisfaction compared with that future inexhaustible fountain of blessedness, yet does it abundantly over-balance all worldly delights, were they all in conjunction set off to their best advantage; so great is the precedency of spiritual things before corporeal, of invisible before material and visible. This is what the apostle gives an eloquent description of, where he says by way of encouragement, that _eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive those things which G.o.d hath prepared for them that love him_.

This likewise is that better part which Mary chose, which shall not be taken from her, but perfected and completed by her mortal putting on immortality.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 397-398]

Now those who are thus devoutly affected (though few there are so), undergo somewhat of strange alteration, which very nearly approaches to madness; they speak many things at an abrupt and incoherent rate, as if they were actuated by some possessing demon; they make an inarticulate noise, without any distinguishable sense or meaning; they sometimes screw and distort their faces to uncouth and antic looks; at one time beyond measure cheerful, then as immoderately sullen; now sobbing, then laughing, and soon after sighing, as if they were perfectly distracted, and out of their senses. If they have any sober intervals of coming to themselves again, like St. Paul they then confess, that _they were caught up they know not where, whether in the body, or out of the body, they cannot tell_; as if they had been in a dead sleep or trance, they remember nothing of what they have heard, seen, said, or done: this they only know, that their past delusion was a most desirable happiness; that therefore they bewail nothing more than the loss of it, nor wish for any greater joy than the quick return of it, and more durable abode for ever. And this (as I have said) is the foretaste or antic.i.p.ation of future blessedness.

But I doubt I have forgot myself, and have already transgressed the bounds of modesty. However, if I have said anything too confidently or impertinently, be pleased to consider that it was spoke by Folly, and that under the person of a woman; yet at the same time remember the applicableness of that Greek proverb:--

A fool oft speaks a seasonable truth.

Unless you will be so witty as to object that this makes no apology for me, because the word _aunp_ signifies a man, not a woman, and consequently my s.e.x debars me from the benefit of that observation.

I perceive now, that, for a concluding treat, you expect a formal epilogue, and the summing up of all in a brief recitation; but I will a.s.sure you, you are grossly mistaken if you suppose that after such a hodge-podge medley of speech I should be able to recollect anything I have delivered. Beside, as it is an old proverb, _I hate a pot-companion with a good memory_; so indeed I may as truly say, _I hate a hearer that will carry any thing away with him_. Wherefore, in short:--

[Ill.u.s.tration: Tailpiece 401]

Farewell! live long, drink deep, be jolly, Ye most ill.u.s.trious votaries of folly!

A POEM ON THE FOREGOING WORK.

THERE'S ne'er a blade of honour in the town, But if you chance to term him _fool_ and _clown_, Straight _satisfaction_ cries, and then with speed The time, the place, and rapier's length's decreed.

Prodigious fops, I'll swear, which can't agree To be call'd what's their happiness to be: Blest _Idiots!_ That in an humble sphere securely move, And there the sweets of a safe _dulness_ prove, Nor envy the proud heights of those who range above.

_Folly_, sure friend of a misguided will, Affords a kind excuse for doing ill; And _Socrates_, that prudent, thinking tool, Had the G.o.ds lik'd him would have prov'd a _fool_.

Methinks our author, when without a flaw, The graces of his mistress he does draw, Wishes (if _Metempsychosis_ be true, And souls do change their case, and act anew), In his next life he only might aspire To the few brains of some soft country squire, Whose head with such like rudiments is fraught, As in his youth his careful grannum taught.

And now (dear friend) how shall we to thy brow Pay all those laurels which we justly owe?

For thou fresh honours to the work dost bring, And to the theme: nor seems that pleasing thing, Which he so well in _Latin_ has express'd, Less comical in _English_ garments dress'd; Thy sentences are all so clearly wrought, And so exactly plac'd in every thought, That, which is more oblig'd we scarce can see The subject by thine author, or himself by thee.