Part 15 (2/2)

And it is to be remembered, that the man who could thus reason, thus decide, was head of that Church which excited the mocking condemnation of the soliloquist of _Christmas Eve_: and that Caponsacchi, ”the warrior-priest, the soldier-saint,” bore likewise the t.i.tle of Canon. To so remember may serve to cast new light upon Browning's supposed att.i.tude towards Roman Catholicism.

VI. The most important subject of discussion in relation to _Easter Day_ is that touching its so-called asceticism. Here also, as in _Christmas Eve_, two interdependent questions must be asked: (1) What is the _nature_ of the asceticism advocated by the First Speaker? (2) How far may it be regarded as the expression of Browning's own theory of life? A plain answer to the first question is necessary in order that, by comparison with the treatment of the same subject elsewhere, it may be possible to determine the extent to which the opinions advanced are in agreement: whether Browning was desirous of advocating renunciation even in the degree held essential by the First Speaker. The key to the position seems to be contained in two recorded comments on the poem by the poet and his wife. When Mrs. Browning complained of the ”asceticism,” her husband answered, that it stated ”_one side_ of the question.” Her supplementary observation adds, ”It is his way to _see_ things as pa.s.sionately as other people _feel_ them.”[81] It was by the exercise of this exceptionally powerful imaginative faculty that the author of _Easter Day_ has dramatically stated the case which he perceived might be made out for renunciation, as well as for grateful acceptance and enjoyment of the gifts of life. If we admit the accuracy of the criticism which would define the spirit of the poem as refusing to recognize, ”in poetry or art, or the attainments of the intellect, or even in the best human love, any practical correspondence with religion,”[82] then indeed we are bound to acknowledge that it stands absolutely alone in Browning's work and is in direct opposition to his theory of life. I venture to think, however, that a careful study of this particular aspect of the poem will result in the conviction that the First Speaker is represented as realizing that, desirable as is renunciation in his own case, it is not the highest course possible to human nature.

Sections VIII, XVI, XX, XXIV, x.x.x, are those which deal chiefly with this question of asceticism. Taken in sequence, they present in outline the history of the spiritual life of the First Speaker. This it is desirable to notice very briefly before comparing the rule of life thus indicated with that suggested by references to Browning's work elsewhere. In Section VIII is depicted the att.i.tude of the First Speaker towards the Gospel story; the att.i.tude of ”the fighter” who would not only wrestle with evil, but would search for any possibly existent danger and bring it to light (Section XIV). To such a nature the intellectual belief in the Incarnation--”the all-stupendous tale--that Birth, that Life, that Death!”

is productive of heartstruck horror: whilst for a practical acceptance of the faith, life must be regulated in accordance with Scriptural teaching, expressed in

Certain words, broad, plain, Uttered again and yet again, Hard to mistake or overgloss--(_E. D._, viii, ll. 257-259.)

words which declare that the loss of things temporal is the gain of things spiritual and eternal. But the asceticism thus advocated does not find full explanation until Section x.x.x. The gradual revelation begins with Section XVI where, before judgment has been p.r.o.nounced from without, conscience pa.s.ses sentence upon itself; realizing that that which it had deemed in life a mere temporizing, had in fact been a final choice. That, dallying with the good things of life, whilst believing renunciation the higher course, had meant a practical decision in favour of things temporal to the exclusion of things spiritual. In that exclusion lay the error. And the recognition of failure here is in entire accordance with Browning's usual att.i.tude towards life. Condemnation is merited not on account of indulgence, but because that indulgence had meant running counter to the convictions of the man who held that, for him, renunciation was the higher course. Not possessing the courage of his opinions, he had chosen that which he recognized as the lower course, the path of compromise: enjoyment in the present, renunciation before it was too late. Therefore for him who had so chosen--the h.e.l.l of Satiety.

Now, as we have already noticed,[83] the experience of the results of the Judgment tended to exhibit the true worth, both absolute and relative, of the things amid which life had been hitherto pa.s.sed. Satiety checked enjoyment of the beauties of Nature. Why should this be? In Section XXIV is given the answer:

All partial beauty was a pledge Of beauty in its plenitude.

But, engrossed in contemplation of the partial beauty the spectator had found that ”the pledge sufficed [his] mood.” Therefore, the plenitude was not for him, but for those only who had looked above and beyond the pledge, seeking that of which it was a proof. And in each of the successive attempts towards happiness by an appeal to art, and to the exercise of the higher intellectual faculties, the same explanation of failure is vouchsafed by the Judge. The symbol has been accepted for the reality, the pledge for the fulfilment. After the final choice has been made in favour of Love, ”leave to love only,” the fuller explanation follows; the secret of life's success or failure. Failure through the inability to recognize the Divine Love in the visible creation, or in the more immediate revelation to man: in either case ample proof being afforded to him who had eyes to see, intelligence to grasp, and heart to respond to the Love so taught. Yet the soliloquist of _Easter Day_ had proved himself incapable of such recognition of the highest truth. The world of sense had been used not to subserve but to supersede the world of spirit. To the nature which thus found in all externals a temptation to rest content with ”the level and the night,” asceticism was as essential to the preservation of the spiritual life as, under certain conditions, amputation may be to the preservation of physical life.

But it must not be overlooked that the necessity for amputation implies the existence of mortal disease. Hence, whilst realizing this personal necessity for renunciation, the speaker recalls the teaching of the divine Judge of the Vision as pointing to a higher standard of life for him who should be able to attain to it. A life in which all things should be not avoided as a snare, but accepted as cause for thankfulness; the relation of the gift to the Giver being recognized as const.i.tuting its primary value. To the lover of the beautiful is pointed out how

All thou dost enumerate Of power and beauty in the world, The mightiness of love was curled Inextricably round about.

Love lay within it and without, To clasp thee,--but in vain! (_E. D._, x.x.x, ll. 960-965.)

In this pa.s.sage may be found the solution to the whole question of the asceticism advocated. When the love thus expressed had been realized, the step was not a difficult one to the acceptance of the fuller revelation of Love in the Incarnation. And in this realization the highest aspect of life temporal would have been reached. Love, not abrogating the law would have served as its fulfilment. As the statements of Bishop Blougram are personal in relation to the treatment of doubt, so the speaker in _Easter Day_ would make out a case for personal asceticism. Not advocating it as the ideal universal course, he would yet claim for it highest value as safeguarding his individual life. To him who is incapable of moderation, renunciation may become a necessity; yet, through renunciation, may be attained that higher life consisting in a grateful enjoyment and generous communication of all gifts of the Divine Love.

Of the other poems dealing with this subject indirectly or directly, _Paracelsus_, 1835, _Rabbi Ben Ezra_, 1864, _Ferishtah's Fancies_, 1884, are sufficiently representative of the different periods of the poet's literary life to render them valuable as ill.u.s.trations of his mode of treatment. In the last, at least, we may be fairly confident that the decision given is his own.

In one aspect _Paracelsus_ may be regarded as the history of a man of genius who marked out for himself a career of complete asceticism; of work apart from human sympathy, love, and friends.h.i.+p, as well as from all gratifications of the flesh. And the scheme was pursued unflinchingly--for a time--until the inevitable reaction set in, spirit and flesh alike avenging themselves for their temporary suppression. Not only are love and friends.h.i.+p found claiming their own, but

A host of petty wild delights, undreamed of Or spurned before, (_Par._, iii, ll. 537-538.)

offer themselves to supply the place of what the earlier ascetic, in a moment of despairing self-contempt, terms his ”dead aims.” The declaration at Colmar is made whilst the influence of reaction still prevails.

I will accept all helps; all I despised So rashly at the outset, equally With early impulses, late years have quenched.

All helps! no one sort shall exclude the rest. (_Par._, iv, ll. 235-239.)

Only when he has learned from experience that human nature is not to be developed through suppression, that ”its sign and note and character” are ”Love, hope, fear, faith”--that ”these make humanity,” only then can he fearlessly, as in youth, ”press G.o.d's lamp to [his] breast,” a.s.sured of the divine guidance and protection.

_Sordello_, so closely allied to _Paracelsus_ in time of composition (pub.

1840, begun before _Strafford_, 1836), demands a brief reference since it has been especially singled out for notice in this connection as const.i.tuting ”an indirect vindication of the conceptions of human life which _Christmas Eve and Easter Day_ condemns.”[84] In the _Sixth Book of Sordello_ the question of renunciation has become imminent and practical.

It is the moment for decision. The imperial badge which he tells his soul ”would suffer you improve your Now!” must be accepted or rejected: and with it the attendant temporal advantages. But the reflections occupying the poet's mind, at this crisis of his fate, are akin to those following the Vision of the Judgment in _Easter Day_. Why not enjoy life to the full? Why treat it as a mere ante-room to the palace at the door of which stands the Usher, Death? Even accepting the simile

I, for one, Will praise the world, you style mere ante-room To palace.

Oh, 'twere too absurd to slight For the hereafter the to-day's delight.[85]

<script>