Let’s Laugh: Humor and the Christian Life
The Name of the Rose is a 20th Century novel by the Italian author Umberto Eco, set in a fourteenth century Benedictine monastery, which follows the exploits of William of Baskerville, a Sherlock Holmes-like investigator who is commissioned to inquire into a series of murders occurring within the monastery walls. As William of Baskerville puts it, the story follows “what has happened among men who live among books, with books, [and] from books.” As such, the characters grapple with many of the theological controversies of the era, ranging from Franciscan debates over poverty to the struggle for power between the Empire and the Papacy.
This series will not serve as a literary analysis, but instead will investigate particular issues that arise over the course of the novel. While these articles will hopefully lend new insight to the reader familiar with The Name of the Rose, they also aim to be accessible to the unfamiliar reader, and to do so without ruining the delights of the novel, should he decide to pick it up in the future.
In a world in which comedy makes up such a large part of our entertainment diet, it can be hard to imagine that laughter is unilaterally sinful. Nevertheless, this is precisely the claim that Jorge, one of the oldest monks of the Abbey, makes. Jorge argues that Jesus never laughed and that “coarse jests and idle words or words that move to laughter” ought to be forbidden for pious Christians (Eco 103-104).
Within the Christian tradition, Jorge is far from alone in these claims. St. John Chrysostom argued that while laughter itself is not a sin, it can so easily lead to sin that it ought to be avoided (Chrysostom 442). St. Benedict, the founder of the monastic order to which the fictional Jorge belongs, forbade his monks from indulging in laughter (Rule 26).
The thesis that laughter is inherently sinful, along with the idea that Jesus never laughed, will be viewed, rightly I think, as preposterous by most modern Christians. While the question of the Lord’s laughter will not be addressed here, suffice it to say that there is enough irony recorded in his teachings (camels walking through needles; Pharisees straining out gnats) to make Jesus’s constant sternness an unlikely proposition (Mt. 19:24 & 23:24).
With that said, the church fathers are not entirely wrong on the matter of laughter either. While scripture speaks favorably of laughter on several occasions, there are also clear warnings against excessive or vicious laughter. If humor is a morally uncertain act, capable of being harnessed for both good and evil purposes, it is worth asking: why do we laugh when we laugh, and when is it good or evil? To answer this we must first ask, what is humor, and why is it funny?
Humor occurs when there are two or more things that appear incongruous but are in fact united (Lewis 54). Another way of saying this is that things become humorous when our expectations are disproportionate to reality. Examples are abundant. We find it funny when people imitate animals or even other people. We find sarcasm funny, which occurs when we say the opposite of what we mean. Jokes about married life, professions, and Christian behavior all capitalize on pointing out the ways in which reality can stray far from the ideal (why do you always take two Baptists fishing?). The incongruities of language (puns, dad jokes) and the body (funny sneezes, unexpected belches) are often catalysts for laughter.
If humor and laughter are a response to the incongruous, then what we find incongruous will determine what we joke and laugh about. This is where the moral rubber meets the road. True and good humor recognizes the incongruities of this life (sin in a world that ought to be perfect, being spiritual beings made for eternity in fleshly bodies destined for death) and also recognizes the hope given to us in the Gospel of Christ. People in difficult or traumatic situations often turn to humor as a way to avoid despair. When the unbelieving employ this method, their instinct is not wrong, but their action—according to their worldview—is baseless; such humor is a crutch. It is only the Christian, in full knowledge of the redemption of the world and resurrection of the body, who may justifiably laugh.
Yet, there are certainly ways in which laughter can be misused, when it springs from an understanding of the world which is not in submission to the message of the Gospel. This is where the critique of John Chrysostom becomes pertinent: humor may be put to sinful use when it mocks and derides, when it makes trivial that which ought to be serious, and when it is embraced to mask sinful behavior, like cruelty or cowardice.
Mockery and derision stand the closest to the line between good and bad humor. The same joke to one person could be taken as “good natured” or “all in fun” and not produce any real derogatory effect, but could cut too close to home and be emotionally harmful to another. For “making fun” to qualify as good humor, the person being made fun of must herself possess a certain amount of self-awareness and humility, so that she might find the joke funny herself. Likewise, a measure of good will is required on the part of the jokester. This is what enables friends to make fun of each other. Good friends will both understand each others’ capacity for receiving jest, and trust that jokes are made in goodwill, rather than with the intention to tear down. Using humor to tear one down for the amusement of yourself or others is not ultimately loving, as it does not will the good of its subject.
Flippancy steals what ought to be taken seriously and renders it as if it is comical. As C. S. Lewis points out, “among flippant people the joke is always assumed to have been made” (Lewis 56). Flippancy is not a tasteful kind of humor which appreciates and points out incongruity and irony, but instead it laughs indiscreetly, whether at things truly holy or truly risible. Flippancy makes consistent jokes about the tragic, the virtuous, and the holy, and is one of the most destructive forms of humor conceivable. It flattens out the world of vice and virtue such that, for the flippant man, there is no difference between the two.
The final poor use of humor is the camouflaging of sinful behavior (Lewis 55). This is what occurs when a teenage boy performs some cruelty on his younger and weaker brother, and when confronted, excuses, “it was just a joke!” Humor, similarly to alcohol, can inebriate one’s moral inhibitions such that a cruel or cowardly or insecure soul might become bolder and bolder, simply for the sake of laughs. Because jokes always contain an element of the truth, jokes allow for true observations to be made in ways and settings which might otherwise be socially inappropriate or personally hurtful. The apparent un-cancelability of comedians who consistently walk the line of the funny and the unacceptable provides a pertinent example. This phenomenon is not entirely wrong—sometimes jokes are useful for sharing or exposing uncomfortable truths. That said, jokes can allow for half-truths and harmful comments to go unchecked, and should therefore be guarded against by Christians.
Humor therefore does have evil and perverted expressions. The solemnity and seriousness expected by the monks in The Name of the Rose, however, is no less guilty of perversion. Seriousness, devoid of any humor, is a condition of pride; if you can’t laugh at yourself, you think too much of yourself (Lindvall). That is the condition of life in the fallen world. Christians are enabled to laugh because they understand two principles: first, that our world is not how it ought to be, and second, that we are redeemed through the blood of Christ. If we only knew the first principle, dreadful seriousness, flippancy, or even despair would seem appropriate responses. But Christians, who hope in God’s redemption, instead may look at the disparity between reality and perfection and may laugh, knowing that the redemption of the world is at hand.
Chrysostom, John. Homilies on the Statues. From: A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. Vol. 9. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. 28 vols. in 2 series. 1886–1889. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999.
Lewis, C. S. The Screwtape Letters. HarperCollins, 1996.
Lindvall, Terry. “The Role of Laughter in the Christian Life.” C.S. Lewis Institute, https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/the-role-of-laughter-in-the-christian-life/.
The Rule of Saint Benedict. Translated by Cardinal Gasquet. Cooper Square Publishers Inc., 1966.
Eco, Umberto. The Name of the Rose. Translated by Richard Dixon. New York: First Mariner Books, 2014.