I can't link to the article, because you have to be a subscriber to read it, but here's the relevant paragraph:
In the spring of 1761, an aging François-Marie Arouet (a.k.a. Voltaire) took it upon himself to rebuild the small parish church that stood on his sprawling estate at Ferney. The self-proclaimed Deist, mocker of the Biblical storyline, and indefatigable critic of ecclesiastical abuses spared little expense in this latest—and most curious—project of reform and reformation. In place of the old façade, he erected a new one in the modern neoclassical style, with two handsome bell towers, each capped with a gleaming dome. Over the altar, he installed a baldachino as well as an imposing crucifix (costing 1,200 livres) by a prominent sculpture from Lyon. A letter to the Pope, inquiring if his Holiness had any relics to spare, produced—somewhat disappointingly—a hair shirt once worn by St. Francis (Voltaire had been hoping for a couple of bones). And then, with the renovations complete, the manor lord did something that no one could have foreseen; he became a regular attendee at Sunday Mass—even, it was reported, receiving communion on the Easter feast day.
I have no doubt that some people would argue that this proves little more than Voltaire's eagerness to observe the proprieties, although this was not notably one of the man's characteristic traits. (Indeed, he had a remarkable talent for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.) Still, they could be right; after all, Voltaire wrote a great many diatribes against faith and the Christian religion in particular. I suspect, though, that he was one of those confused but not uncommon souls who somehow manage simultaneously to hold two sets of contradictory beliefs. His skepticism, his distaste for the abuses of the Church, and for the follies of belief, were real enough; so too, was his belief in God.
18 comments:
His dedication of the chapel - Deo Erexit Voltaire - always seems to me to be both impossibly vain and improbably sincere, like the man himself.
Decades ago, I read an now-unfindable essay by Harold Nicolson which portrayed Voltaire as a scoundrel with an overwhelming sense of justice. That portrayal has stayed with me.
There's an Auden poem, Voltaire at Ferney, - Auden again! - which is too talky and wanky for my taste: almost an adoring view, it does exhibit the enormous prestige the man attracted both during and after his life.http://poetry.eserver.org/voltaire.html.
My personal - and conservative - sympathies lie elsewhere, over the channel, with Johnson and Burke and Reynolds etc: the comfy old Club! That's just me. But Voltaire was funny, as few Frenchmen have been...and an old Marist boy has just got to love this:
Sur un Christ habillé en Jésuite
ADMIREZ l’artifice extrême
De ces moines industrieux;
Ils vous ont habillé comme eux,
Mon Dieu, de peur qu’on ne vous aime.
Robert Townshend
I like these sceptics who just about manage to believe something by being in two minds about things. I find it heartening. In my house there are many mansions.
Also, I do like Voltaire's remark, 'God must be bad at geography' - about the errors the higher critics had begun to find in the OT. Much funnier than all of today's 'brights' can manage collectively or singly.
I do think it funny that people, in their rush to "deify" their agnostic or deist heroes forget that they were men, made of dust, as we all are. Everyone holds two sets of contradictory beliefs, to some degree or other. Or else, everyone knows what is right, and does exactly the opposite, as Ovid famously said.
Warren
Aye, those of us torn betwixt our rational skeptical minds and the yearnings of our spirit have not drawn a happy lot in life. Peace can be had, but at a cost.
There's a good post by Razib Khan down at GNXP about the subject currently, that you may find interesting.
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/08/virtue-sin-and-normalcy.php
Of all the regular contributors there, he wins my respect for being as well-read on history and the social sciences as he is on math and the biological sciences. Not surprisingly, his conclusions and analysis are the most cautious and circumspect of the posters there. Since I've been reading him since back in the days of the USENET, I've really enjoyed watching him shift as a thinker. Unlike many of the regular posters there he also is a master at subtlety; I really wonder how many get his underlying message.
Mr Townshend, I must take exception to your suggestion that French people are not usually funny. There is typically far more hilarity at a French dinner table than an English one, and livelier, faster exchange in general. Only Irishmen and media types in England, and perhaps some aristocrats, according to rumour (I've never met one) are very conversational, let alone amusingly so.
But I think that after the French Revolution (yes, that far back) men and women in public life, including intellectuals, felt that frivolity and humour did not become them, that they were a mark of the old aristocratic way of life. Since then, they have adopted these stiff and humourless personae, especially the left-wing and radical types. But it isn't natural to them as a people.
Clio
Rabelais, Moliere, Balzac etc. The French always seemed pretty funny to me.
As for V holding contradictory ideas, good for him. I hope that as I get older, I can hold more and more contradictions within myself, and that they all get along just ducky.
The English used to eat in silence when I lived there (in the sixties). Irish people not only talk at the dinner table, they scream and roar and rant and orate and incantate and generally act drunken, fanatical, bardic or maudlin as the mood takes them. And that's just the first course! My English gf broke down in tears at the first family meal she was invited to. She thought we were going to start brawling. Good thing she never showed up when we were having a real argument.
Good story, PatrickH, and it confirms my impressions about the Irish in general. Has anyone ever remarked (I suppose someone must have written about this) that several of the really big "British Invasion" bands of the 1960s - I'm thinking esp. the Beatles and Stones, but there are probably others - were heavily populated by men of Irish descent? Your people, PH, are showmen at heart...
Clio
Lennon and McCartney were both of Irish lineage, but I don't think any of Jones, Jaggar or Richards is or were.
Most people in Britain who use the nickname "Mick" are of Irish stock, as far as I can tell. I suspect Jagger is. Has a rather Irish face, too - full lips and dark hair with blue eyes. I don't know about Jones (Welsh, probably), or Richards.
Clio
An extraordinary list, the pre-Romantic English authors who were Irish:
Sheridan, Burke, Steele, Goldsmith, Swift, Sterne...
And the thing is, you'd still want to read much of their stuff.
Robert Townshend
Jagger is a Yorkshire name and Scutts, his mother's maiden name, is English too.
Mick is short for Michael.
All right, Thursday, I'm happy to take correction on this one. And yes, I know Mick is short for Michael; I said it was a nickname. But it seems to be more common to the Irish. I still suspect the man has Irish or Celtic blood in him somewhere, but I'm not insisting on it.
George Harrison's family was heavily rooted in Ireland. Maternal grands from Wexford. The Stones were English, though Clio's right about B Jones.
And I'm sure many of the Invasion bands were heavily influenced by an Irish heritage. Music hall was also influenced by my crazed people wasn't it? There's music in our minds, there inside the miasma, the Celtic miasma that T H White wrote about in Once and Future King. Music and miasma. The Glory of Ireland!
Most of the bands that came out of Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool (Beatles, The Smiths, Oasis etc.) have tended to have large Irish contingents. Bands that have come out of London and SE England have tended to be English English (The Stones, Led Zepplin, The Clash, Radiohead, Coldplay), though Welshmen named Jones seem to pop up rather often in them as well.
Heh, so hair shirts really do exist. I always though they were just a metaphorical expression.
It would be interesting in light of Thursday's point about Englishness and Irishness in Brit music, to see if there any differences between the south and eastern sourced stuff and the northern/Midlands stuff in terms of Irish/Celtic influence.
I don't have the time myself. But it makes me wonder...
Post a Comment