The Gospel According To Baudelaire: The Revolt Necessary for Faith 1 st Semester Senior Language-Singleton

Transcription

1 Charles R Major The Gospel According To Baudelaire: The Revolt Necessary for Faith 1 st Semester Senior Language-Singleton Saint Peter, of all Jesus disciples, is chosen to be the rock on which Jesus church is to be built. At the Last Supper, he alone speaks up, swearing vehemently that he is ready to go to prison or death for Jesus, ready to fight and die for him. Jesus prophesies that Peter will deny him thrice before the cock crows. Peter denies it. After Jesus is arrested, Peter is accused of being His follower and, as prophesied, thrice denies Him before the cock crows. The cock crows. Peter bitterly weeps, repenting. Even that disciple, the rock on which Jesus is to build his church, sins horribly and requires Jesus sacrifice and forgiveness for his salvation. But certainly this oversimplifies the problem. Certainly it is not for naught that Jesus chooses this man as the rock. Certainly when, at the Last Supper, Jesus says that all his flock will be scattered, this man, who is the only one to speak up, is not insincere when he swears he will not deny Jesus and will die for Him. Certainly again, Peter does not completely ignore Jesus prophesy. Jesus prophesy, then, seems to make Peter doubly culpable for his denial. Not only does he deny Jesus, but he also has been warned that he will. If he has the respect for Jesus he must certainly have to have followed him as he has, he must must take the prophesy somewhat seriously. If it does not eat on his mind, it must have caused some impression--some warning. Yet, even with this warning, Peter denies Jesus. And not just a single time, in an instant, where he did not have time to consider what he was doing. Perhaps the first denial was such an event. Perhaps even the second. But at least an hour passed before the third denial. Peter had time to think about his first two denials. Warming himself by the slave s fire, did he make nothing of his two denials? Did he not recall Jesus prophesy those few hours before? Or perhaps, in that hour, Peter had another thought. Perhaps Peter thought that he had done well to deny Jesus. This is where Baudelaire s poem The Denial of Saint Peter brings us. This poem ends Saint Peter denied Jesus... he did well! Though the title of the poem brings us to believe that it is about Saint Peter, the poem does not mention Peter until that final final line. Indeed, when the reader arrives at the end of the poem he may be surprised to find the poet saying that Peter did well to deny Jesus. The middle five stanzas of the the poem are about Jesus, are spoken to PAGE 1 OF 6

2 Jesus, yet they seem to sympathize with him and take pity on him against the vileness of God that is introduced in the first two stanzas. The poet of The Denial of Saint Peter begins with a question, the essence of which seems to be how do we understand suffering in a world with God? God is presupposed in the poet s actual question: What does God do with the flood of curses/that ceaselessly rise to his dear Seraphim? The poet then does not spend any time pondering over this question, but quickly answers that God gorges himself on the blasphemies, is enchanted by the moans of martyrs, and that heaven is still unsatiated. The next movement the poet makes is strange. He cries out to Jesus and seems to try to find sympathy between Jesus suffering and the suffering of all those the first two stanzas refer to. The strangeness is that this is sympathizing with suffering that is seen as caused by God, for which God is fully culpable, not only of causing but also of enjoying. Somehow, by the end of the poem, the poet does not sympathize with Jesus against God, for he says that Peter was right to deny Jesus. How do we understand the progression of Baudelaire s poem? How does the poet move from revolting against God as evil, to sympathizing with Jesus, to revolting against Jesus as well? The middle section of the poem is then divided into two parts. The first part asks Jesus, do you remember and then lists the events of the crucifixion, beginning with Jesus crying out to his father in the garden, if it is possible, for his fate to be taken from him. The second part begins, Jesus hanging on the cross, and asks him, did you dream and then lists what the poet seems to regard as the proudest, most glorious moments of Jesus career. Specifically, the poet lists the moments when Jesus wielded, or seemed to wield, the most Earthly power: when he rode, as if a king, into Jerusalem, and when he expelled the moneychangers from his father s house. The poet describes these moments as when Jesus was master. He concludes this middle section: Did not remorse/penetrate in your side deeper than the spear? Remorse--for what? For worldly power. The poet sees Jesus crying out on the cross in remorse for the loss of his worldly power and glory. The poet first cries out in revolt against God. He then sympathizes with Jesus sufferings as he is PAGE 2 OF 6

3 crucified. He then asks if Jesus, while hanging on the cross, dreamed, regretting the loss of worldly power. Assuming that the answer to the question he poses Jesus regarding His dreams is yes, the concluding stanza makes sense. If worldly power is what is important, therefore Jesus dreaming on the cross is entirely impotent. Worse than that, his impotence is a chosen impotence. He has the power to bring Legions of Angels to his assistance, but doesn t. The poet sees Jesus denying his Earthly power, all that the poet acknowledges, for some incomprehensible principle or other. As such, Jesus action, or lack of action, is actually immoral. Therefore, for the poet to accept Jesus as he understands Him would be to accept the worthiness of dreams of power, while not acting on them, due to whatever principles Jesus might have. It is incomprehensible. So our poet unsheaths his sword and charges valiantly into the world, ready to act on his dreams, ready to die for them if need be. He leaves Jesus, hanging without worldly power on the cross. As he leaves Jesus, he supports himself by comparing his denial of Jesus to Peter s, saying that Peter did well to deny Jesus. In order to understand why the poet reaches out to Peter in this moment, let us return to the story of Peter s denial. Before Peter has denied Jesus, when the slaves come to arrest him, Peter takes out his sword and cuts the ear off of one of the slaves. Before Peter can strike again, Jesus speaks: Let that be enough. Jesus then goes to the slave, puts his hand to the slave s ear, and heals it. Peter had told Jesus that he was willing to fight and die for him, and he acted accordingly. Peter, recognizes worldly power as valuable, pledged in love his worldly power for Jesus, and acted as he understood that pledge. Peter, in the instant before Jesus stopped him from striking again, was happy, knowing he was doing his duty to his Lord. But his Lord stopped him. Jesus stopped him from using that worldly power he valued so highly. Let us imagine a reader approaching the Gospel personally, without constantly hearing the interpretations of the stories as he reads. The reader arrives at the Last Supper. Jesus tells Peter, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail. Peter responds, Lord, with you I am ready to go to prison and to death. The reader chants along with Peter in PAGE 3 OF 6

4 his heart. He is warmed and inspired by his courage and devotion. In his mind, he raises his sword and follows behind Peter, ready to be commanded into battle for his Lord. As his Lord is being carried away, like a highwayman in the night, he raises his sword with Peter and, swinging wildly, manages to cut the ear off of a slave of the high priest. Invigorated by this blow, he raises his sword a second time, when his Lord, before he swings, just manages to say: Let that be enough. Surprised, Peter turns to look at his Lord, who moves forward to the slave, fallen to the ground and clutching his ear--and his Lord reaches out to his enemy s ear, healing it. What do Peter and the reader feel? Betrayal. Peter, the rock on which Jesus is to build his church, devotes himself, as he understands devotion, to Jesus. When the slaves come to arrest him, he is more than ready to make good his promise of devotion. But then his Lord spurns him and heals the enemy. Peter, who values the worldly power the sword wields, finds Jesus action to be incomprehensible and offensive. What exactly does Peter think in those following hours? Shocked, Peter follows his Lord as He is carried away. Not with Him, but trailing behind several paces, like a curious bystander at the scene of a crime. Has my Lord, who I was willing to fight and die for, rejected me? Am I now all alone in this world, rejected by Him to whom I had given all? wonders Peter. Feeling rejected and lost, he goes into the courtyard of the high priest, where he joins the slaves who were warming themselves by a fire. Questioning himself and the world, the recently-faithful joins that class who his Lord had all too recently favored over him, in rejecting his devotion and, instead, healing this supposed enemy. It is this Peter, who denies Jesus three times, that the poet of The Denial of Saint Peter identifies with. Both value worldly power. Both have seen their master willing give it up. Both not only find this incomprehensible, but even as a betrayal of their love and trust. In that hour before his third denial, then, Peter might ve thought much like this poet, that he had done well to deny Jesus, as Jesus had apparently denied him. That Jesus lived in a world that he could not understand and act in. And he therefore decided he would, instead, leave that world for one where he might put his dreams into action, where he could draw his sword to fight for what he believed, and perish by the PAGE 4 OF 6

5 sword if such was to be his end. Here we must leave our poet, for Peter does not wholly deny Jesus. He does not leave the campfire outside the building where Jesus is being held. And, after he denies Jesus a third time, and the cock crows, he weeps bitterly. He weeps in repentance. Somehow, the fulfillment of Jesus prophesy shows Peter his error. Perhaps Baudelaire s poem does not simply take a certain non-canonical interpretation, nor does it simply choose a single instance in Peter s life to represent. That is, what the poem does represent to the reader might have a deeper meaning than simply representing this instant of revolt. The reader of the poem, if he skimmed too lightly over the title, might simply view the poem as a man s cry out in revolt to God upon observing the suffering of those most devoted to God. This reader might then be surprised by the final line. Saint Peter denied Jesus... he did well! Saint Peter is the head of the apostles. He is one of the closest to Jesus. His denial was but a moment which might have spread over several hours, but still only a moment of weakness. What if Peter s denial of Jesus was a necessary step in his progress of faith? What if those sentiments, the revolt against God, expressed by Baudelaire in this poem are necessary for one to achieve true faith? The poem The Denial of Saint Peter does not relate any event that is not true. Martyrs cry out in pain to God, as do criminals. Men curse God for their pains and unhappiness. These pains and unhappiness, these cries to God, seemingly continue forever. The events related in the middle section regarding Jesus life are all events that occurred. Baudelaire does not lie to make his revolt against God. The revolt is a natural response to a certain perspective on divine and mortal events. The cock crows. Peter bitterly weeps, repenting. Peter regains his faith. Warming himself by the slaves fire, Peter feels like God has forsaken him. How could God allow his son to suffer so? How could his son allow his own suffering, which will cause so much suffering for those who love Him? This feeling of forsakenness for Peter comes out of the instant of Jesus choosing to heal the man Peter views as his enemy, rather than accept Peter s expression of devotion. But, as Baudelaire s poem has shown, this feeling does not have to come from such an active act of apparent forsaking. Instead, it arising naturally out of a PAGE 5 OF 6

6 contemplation of the pain of the world, especially the pain of those who most love God, and who, it seems God would most love. Peter s faith, before the moment in front of the fire, has not accepted the apparent forsakenness that is inherent in the world. It is incomplete. Only through coming to realize and understand the way in which the suffering of the world naturally defies the loving God that he loves, can Peter overcome that understanding and have true, strong faith faith based on the necessity of apparently evil events in the world in fulfilling God s will and in finding salvation. Selected Bibliography Baudelaire, Charles. The Flowers of Evil, The Denial of St. Peter, #118. Oxford World s Classics. Oxford, Quotes are my own translations. The Gospel According to John, Chapters 13, 18. Translated by: Lattimore, Richmond. The Gospel According to Luke, Chapter 22. Translated by: Lattimore, Richmond. The Gospel According to Matthew, Chapter 26. Translated by: Lattimore, Richmond. PAGE 6 OF 6