Abstract
Did Jesus Christ laugh? Does laughter generate doubt? Is there room for laughter in the biblical tradition and patristic theology or is Christian life solely inextricably intertwined with seriousness and mourning? What is, in fact, the relationship between Christian faith and joy? Is John Chrysostom indeed the greatest opponent of laughter and drama? Why and how did such a debate stir the interest of such giants of literature as Charles Baudelaire, Hermann Hesse, Umberto Eco, and Nikos Kazantzakis? What are their respective positions in this matter? In this paper Professor Chrysostomos A. Stamoulis will argue that the Christian church is not a cheerless community and that laughter, joy, and desire do not negate the mystery of the Cross. In other words, what is at stake here is the interplay not between laughter and its overt rejection, but between its timely and untimely manifestation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose, trans. E. Kallifatide (Athens: Hellenic Letter, 1999), 236–242.
- 2.
George Martzelos, The Christology of Basil of Seleuceia and Its Ecumenical Significance (Thessaloniki: P. Pournaras, 1990).
- 3.
Plato, Symposium (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 202c–203a.
- 4.
The Monophysites, as also precisely the Nestorians, believed that sin constitutes an ontological characteristic of the “fallen” human nature. For this reason they avoided confessing the homoousion nature of Christ—“according to our humanity”—a principle of Orthodox theology, fearing perhaps that in this way “by extension the body of Christ would be considered sinful and profane.” (Martzelos G, 172–173). Most classical of all is the case of Eutychios, who, while referring to this theme, would say: “Until now I did not say that the body of the Lord and our God is homoousios with us… because while I confess it to be the body of God […] I have not called the body of God a body of man […] fearing until this moment to say it, because I knew the Lord to be our God” (Mansi VI, 741εξ.).
- 5.
Gregory the Theologian, Epistle 101, To Cledonius against Apollinarius, PG 37, 181C–184A.
- 6.
It is clear that in the Bible there is no information telling us that Christ laughed. By the same token, there is no information indicating that Christ did not laugh. However, there are indications to the laughter of God. See, for example, Psalm 2:4 and Proverbs 1:26, where these are related to the destruction of the impious, as well as other very interesting comments about the place of laughter in the lives of people, but also in their eschatological destiny (most classical of all: Eccl 2:2; 3:4; Gen 18:9–15; Jam 4:9; Lk 6:21–25. See Webster G., Laughter in the Bible” (St. Louis: The Bethany Press), 1960. This was a reality that raised serious questions in patristic theology and nourished the related dialogue, in which other people, besides theologians, took part primarily among men of letters, such as for example Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose, and Bountelier, Curiosités Esthetiqués, L’ Arte Romantique et Autres Oeuvres Critiques (Paris: Garnier Freres, 1971). The laughter of God, of course, was sometimes considered malevolent, as in the case of an intolerant and punishing God, and sometimes benevolent, as in the case of a reconciling and loving God who forgives. With extreme sensitivity this problem appears in Hesse E., Narcissus and Chrysostom, translated into Greek by Kondyles Fontas (Athens: Kastaniotes, 1989), 244, and especially in Kazantzakis N., The Life of Alexis Zorbas (Athens: Kazantzakis, 2007), 117, where the following delightful remarks are written: “Lately Zorba would light the fire quickly, cook, we would eat and then disappear on the road to the village. After some time, he would return in a sullen mood. ‘Where were you wandering again, Zorba?’ I would ask him. ‘Curse them all, boss’,” and change the conversation. One night upon returning, he asked me with a sense of urgency: ‘Does God exist, or not? What do you say, boss? And if he exists – anything can happen – how do you imagine him to be?’ I just simply raised my shoulders and didn’t say anything. ‘Now, don’t laugh, but I imagine God to be just like me. Only much taller, much stronger, more fool hardy; and immortal. He sits on soft sheepskins in ease, and his hut is the sky. It’s not made with scrap metals like ours but with clouds. He holds in his right hand not a sword, not a scale – such tools are for killers and grocers; God holds a large sponge filled with water, like a rain cloud. To his right is Paradise and to his left is Hell. Here comes the ill-fated soul, all naked, having lost its body and trembling. God looks upon it and laughs under his mustache, pretending to be bogeyman. ‘Come here,’ he says to her, ‘you coursed soul!’ He begins the interrogation. The soul falls down at the feet of God. ‘O my God!’ she cries out. ‘I have sinned!’ And she begins to innumerate all her sins, one after another, without end. And God grows weary and yawns. ‘Stop!’ he shouts. ‘You have deafened me!’ He then stretches out his arm with the sponge and with one stroke wipes off all the sins. ‘Get yourself over to Paradise!’ he gestures. ‘Peter, take in this poor soul also!’.”
- 7.
Most characteristic is the reference of Clement of Alexandria, who, in his Pedagogue, dedicates a whole chapter on laughter with the title “On Laughter,” PG 8 445C–452A. See the related reference in Grosso A. M., Clemente Alessandrino, “A. Rostagni: il cristiano come l ‘uomos che sa sordridere, Quaderni Diparimento di Filologia, Linguistica e Traditione,” Classica 17, 2001, 19–242.
- 8.
Jean Rudhart, Rires et sourires divins. Essais sur la sensibilitè religieuse des Grecs premiers chrétiens. In Revue de théologie et de philosophie (1992), 124.
- 9.
The disciples said to him, ‘Lord, why do you laugh over our prayer of thanksgiving? We have done whatever is appropriate.’ He answered and said to them, ‘I do not laugh at you. You did not do this on account of your will, but because it is that through which your God will be glorified' (Rudolf Kascher, Marvin Mayer, Gregor Vurst, translated by Eleni Asteriou, Tina Theou, Billy Kouris, Maria Mavromataki, Elina Sinopoulou 2006).
- 10.
Teodor Baconsky, Les rire des Pères. Essai sur le rire dans la patristique grecque (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1996).
- 11.
Constantine P. Cavafy, The Walls in the Poems (Thessaloniki: Metope., n.d. 1897–1933), 23.
- 12.
“And the amazing thing, at the same time as prayer, there was no ceasing of much laughter…Tell me, O woman, you cover your head (for prayer) and sitting in church you laugh? You came to confess your sins, bowing before God to beseech him and to make your plea over those transgressions that condemn you and you do this with laughter?”, Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 121–122.
- 13.
“Always this overturn, this put down; laughter has become our possession and culture and amusement; nothing is stable, nothing firm. I say this not only to the men in public life, but also to those I am presuming; for the Church is replete with laughter. If someone says a joke, laughter occurs directly to those sitting about; and the amazing thing is that many do not cease laughing even at the time of prayer. Everywhere the devil is dancing, having so dressed all and in control of all; Christ is dishonored; no part of the Church is without it.” John Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 121.
- 14.
Here then stands the greedy man, not in a house, but at the center of the city, giving over to the devil, not his body, but his soul, and as if joining himself with and entering into a prostitute, he fulfills all of his desire and then goes out; and this the entire city sees, not just two or three men. And this is particular to the prostitutes, the silver belongs to the giver (John Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 121).
- 15.
John Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 122.
- 16.
There is some confusion in the use of these coming from the fact that in the Greek reality, especially on the level of legal terminology, the “public” is usually identified with the “state” […] The “state” and everything belonging to the “state” is also connected to the legal exercise of state power. To the degree that the “public” is identified with the “state,” it too is connected with exercise of power and authority. Thus, the understanding of what is public is confused with what is “common,” belonging to the realm of the community, because in this case it must be disconnected from the idea of exercising state power. On the other hand, when the idea of “private” is properly understood, then this is not antithetical to the “public,” but only to the “state.” Such an understanding, however, presupposes the differentiation of the “public” from the “state,” as noted above (John Petrou, Multiculturalisme and Religious Freedom, Thessaloniki: Paratiritis, 2003, 211).
- 17.
John Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 122.
- 18.
Mt 11:16–24.
- 19.
Jn 2:1–12.
- 20.
See Chrysostomos A. Stamoulis, Theotokos and Orthodox Doctrine. Study in the Doctrine of St. Cyrill of Alexandria, 227–233.
- 21.
Lk 6:21–25.
- 22.
Jam 4:9.
- 23.
“For everything there is a season, and a time for a every matter under the sun: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted; a time to kill, and time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; a time to seek, and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to cast away; a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and time to speak; a time to love, and time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace” (Ec 3:1–8).
- 24.
Lk 10:42.
- 25.
On the Prophetic glance see Chrysostomos A. Stamoulis, The Art of Theology and the Theology of the Art. Theology and Art (114).
- 26.
“And that strange happiness you sometimes feel, even when all things around you have become ashes—perhaps that is God” (Leivadites T., 247).
- 27.
John Chrysostom, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 122.
- 28.
“You don’t know what my friends mean to me/ And how, how strange and rare it is to find/ In a life made up so much, so much of remnants/… To discover some friend who has those qualities/ To have and to offer/ Those qualities on which the friendship is founded/ What significance is there in me telling you all these things -/ Without these friendships – life is a cauchemar!” (a bad dream) (Eliot T. S., 27).
- 29.
At the end of this enquiry. I do not know if Rudhardt is right when he says that “Greek laughter signifies an adhesion to the world, while Christianity leads one away from this world.” I am not even sure if present and future scholars would still dare to proffer so general an opinion given our so various early Christian sources. One thing, however, is clear for me now: Christianity that laughed certainly existed and did not escape from the world. At least not from the scholarly world (Claire Clivaze, 28).
- 30.
The greatest commemoration of the Church takes place at the heart of the Mystery of the Holy Eucharist. That is why I do not understand why there is so much ritualism over the day when Memorials may be offered. What is the “inappropriate” or “sinful” element (see introductory remarks on the subject of the Kollyvades in Papoulides K. (1991). The Kollyvades Movement. Athens: Apostolike Diaconia. I am of the opinion that the only reasons that hold up to their restrictive transfer from the day of Sunday to the day of Saturday are those of practicality. Thus, I have a feeling that the Church contributes in her own way to the exaggeration of the culture of oblivion. The exaggeration of a way, in a manner of speaking, of burying its dead all the more deeply, it no longer understands what it means to commemorate. (On the commemorations in the Holy Eucharist, see Priestmonk Gregory, The Holy Liturgy, Commentary (Athens: Synaxi, 1982), pp. 30, 35–36, 92–93, 116–119, 311–314, 318–319. From such a perspective, a similar contribution is also made by the way most of our contemporary churches are being built in our area, including the way they are “filled” with all those “unrelated” things that, in their non-esthetic and distasteful exaggeration, tend to distance rather than reveal, each day more and more, the mystery of the Incarnation of the Logos of God, the mystery of the reasonable worship. It is the manner by which the Christological memory and commemorations can flourish upon earth. Images of such a forgotten way are given to us in the writings of Nikos Gabriel Pentzikes: “Thessalonica is filled with such brilliant churches of that period […] We already mentioned specifics about the houses and the virtually homey dimensions of the church of this period. We also mentioned the fact that externally they resemble display cabinets of jewelry or antiques. Greatly contributing to this end is the wall-formation and the awareness of the construction material as if the stones and the bricks are elements of the organic formulation of a body. Many times, as one looks from the outside the arched windows, it appears as if one sees a human being. There! And you show the eyes. There! There in the cross between the eyebrows upon the nose. Twins or just simple, the windows seem to be children of the Church, who, regardless of her magnitude or if she is full of people or not, it is a complete world […] With the cross as the basic motif or the name of Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ is victorious… Outside of the church, as you wander around, you feel a sense of respect, which the body inspires as a vessel of the mystery of life […] the body conceals all the wealth of the star-filled sky that reflects the glory of the Lord God [… By building the churches of today, with their wall-formations and the treatment of their surfaces and levels, as well as their iconography and decoration, we demonstrate that we do not allow our soul to become aware or be inspired by the material and its geometric formulation, nor the themes depicted upon it, thus destroying with the mind every place where there could be, even in a naïve demonstration, the yearning and the authenticity of a deep sigh,” Toward Attending Church (Thessaloniki, Agrotikes Synetairistikes Ekdoseis, 1986), 33–40.
- 31.
It appears that Fr. Philotheos Faros agrees with Tsitsanis, while Pentzikes totally disagrees. I have the feeling that the two approaches, existential to the extreme, are not by necessity in contradiction. In each case, I like to believe that the cloudiness of Sunday is removed in the end by the mystery of liturgical communication, the Holy eucharist, which as an inaugurated eschatology has already entered into the present time. Its ultimate fulfillment, however, the catholic resurrection and encounter, is something that the Church, at the present time, can only anticipate and hope for. See N.G. Pentzikes, Consolation for the City and Prefecture of Drama, Athens: Agra, 1986, where he observes: “They found the old man, with the multitude of sins like a mountain on his hunched back, singing, thanking God and all the Saints, glorifying their sacred names, and dancing on the hollow, between the height where the Sacred Cemetery of the city of Drama lies, and the opposite side, where there is a humble and popular café. In the shop they were playing the famous record of Tsitsanis, Cloudy Sunday. I had asked that they change that record, saying that it was Sunday and it cannot be cloudy, but always, in the ebb and flow of the days, it is the sunny and glorious day of God, when another sun, more powerful than the one we see shedding light upon us, one that, from time to time and often frequently, is hidden. Once you realize this Sun’s Light even once, it will never go out.” Fr. Ph. Faros, Circumstances and Choices. Autobiography (Athens: Armos, 2005), 88–89: “My father left early in the morning and returned drunk in order to sit at the festive table. Before eating our final bite, father would begin his earthquake that developed into a pandemonium of shouts, tears, threats and many other similarly frightful things. These experiences were the primary reason why during the rest of my life the festive days and even on Sundays I always had a sense of melancholy. Tsitsanis spoke to my heart with his song: “Cloudy Sunday you resemble my heart that is always cloudy.” Some “pious” people, of course, were scandalized by Tsitsanis who spoke like this about Sunday, the day of the Resurrection of the Lord. The Resurrection of the Lord however is not some “theological” chit chat, but a life experience that begins with the Holy Eucharist and is completed and realized to become a joy and a communion and a way of life. In recent years, when some of us have started having an essential relationship among ourselves on the day of Sunday with the Divine Liturgy in church and continue this relationship in a climate of fellowship outside of the church, reaching its zenith with a common meal that lasts until late into the afternoon, I experience Sunday as the joyful day of the Resurrection of the Lord.”
- 32.
“Feast day wounds/ force you to count those absent/ empty places at the table/ even when someone else is sitting there” (Koumourou Sonia, 2000).
- 33.
“Now all things are filled with light—heaven and earth and the places beneath the earth; let all creation celebrate the Feast, the resurrection of Christ, upon which it is founded” (Matsoukas N. A., 553).
Suggested Reading
Baconsky T. (1996). Les rire des Pères. Essai sur le rire dans la patristique grecque. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer.
Cavafy C. (n.d.). The Walls in the Poems (1897–1933). Thessalonica: Metope.
Eco U. (1999). The Name of the Rose, trans. E. Kallifatide. Athens: Hellenic Leter (pp. 236–242).
Gregory the Theologian. Epistle 101, To Cledonius Against Apollinarius, PG 37 (181C–184A).
John Chrysostom. Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews 15, PG 63.
Martzelos G. (1990). The Christology of Basil of Seleuceia and Its Ecumenical Significance. Thessalonica: P. Pournaras.
Minois G. (2000). Histoire du rire et du la derision. Paris: Fayard.
Rudhart J. (1992). Rires et sourires divins. Essais sur la sensibilitè religieuse des Grecs premiers chrétiens. In Revue de théologie et de philosophie.
Stamoulis Ch. (2000). The Art of Theology and the Theology of Art. Theology and Art. Thessaloniki: Palimpseston.
Stamoulis Ch. (2003). Theotokos and Orthodox Doctrine. Study in the Teaching of St. Cyril of Alexandria. Thessaloniki: Palimpseston.
Stamoulis Ch. (2004). The Human Nature of Christ and Sin in the Antiochian Theologians of the Fifth Century. An Exercise in Self-Consciousness. Thessaloniki: Palimpseston.
Webster G. (1960). Laughter in the Bible. St. Louis: The Bethany Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stamoulis, C.A. (2021). Did Christ Laugh? Umberto Eco’s Question and Saint John Chrysostom’s Response. In: Rapti, V., Gordon, E. (eds) Ludics. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7435-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7435-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-7434-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-7435-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)