Friar Lawrence: Holy Savior or Heinous Sorcerer?
The question before us concerns Shakespeare's character, Friar Lawrence, in the play "Rome & Juliet".
We know that he is a cleric, a Franciscan, and that he involves himself to negative effect in the tragedy of the two young lovers. Most interpretations see him as a holy man who seeks to do good at great risk to himself. But the prosecution here wonders if that is so. More accurately, the prosecution wonders
A. Whether he is an alchemist &
B. Whether he uses his alchemical knowledge for sorcerous practices.
B. Whether he uses his alchemical knowledge for sorcerous practices.
As to the first point it is without doubt that Lawrence has knowledge of herbs and plants and uses them to create potions and salves. Jonathan Hughes in his book “The Rise of Alchemy in Fourtheenth-Century England” writes that the Friar
“was based on a long history of knowledge of the occult among the mendicants, and the friars were probably among the most significant collectors of occult texts.”
The author of “The Book of Aquarius – Alchemy and the Philosopher’s Stone” states outright that “Friar Laurence is presented as somewhat of a philosopher, who studies Nature. He is an alchemist as we can see from the first of his lines…”
“was based on a long history of knowledge of the occult among the mendicants, and the friars were probably among the most significant collectors of occult texts.”
The author of “The Book of Aquarius – Alchemy and the Philosopher’s Stone” states outright that “Friar Laurence is presented as somewhat of a philosopher, who studies Nature. He is an alchemist as we can see from the first of his lines…”
Rebekah Owens in her article at Shakespeare Birthplace Trust states that “Friar Lawrence … expresses beliefs about the curative powers of plants which are derived from Philippus Paracelsus (1493-1541) … a Swiss physician (whose) adherence to more esoteric practices such as alchemy and astrology led to his insistence on the importance of the spiritual aspect of effecting a cure, rather than just relying on medication, however efficacious the herbal compounds were.”
Furthermore, Lawrence is secretive in his workings (as expressed below – “why does he sneak around so much? Why not just tell everyone?”). Hughes writes about this secretive nature that:
“The term occult, derived from the Latin occultus (hidden), refers to the secret supernatural or divine forces to be found in the terrestrial sphere beneath the moon. The belief in such powers was based on the notion that everything within the earth emanated from the same divine force that governed the heavens and that nothing corporeal could ever be lost but remained in a constant state of flux and would ultimately be restored to its original divine purity. The scientific understanding of the workings of nature was the key to the occult wisdom imparted to the late medieval art of alchemy…”
And that
“Alchemists were shadowy figures on the fringes of society with no formal standing.”
Alchemists were feared and marginalized in much of Europe b/c they had such purported power. Lawrence lives, not in the heart of Verona, but in a cell in a monastery removed from the city.
Further during the period in which Shakespeare is writing, King James I was himself obsessed with witchcraft, alchemy, and sorcerers and wrote (or commissioned) a compendium of such lore titled “Demonology” in 1597. The subject must have been much on the minds of Shakespeare and his audience.
Furthermore, as Hughes notes, “…the alchemist continued to attempt to harness the transformative powers of the sun and moon.” The first appearance of the Friar he is collecting herbs in the twilight between night and morning;
The grey-eyed morn smiles on the frowning night,
Chequering the eastern clouds with streaks of light,
And flecked darkness like a drunkard reels
From forth day's path and Titan's fiery wheels:
Now, ere the sun advance his burning eye,
The day to cheer and night's dank dew to dry…
- Act 2, Scene 3
Finally, Owens suggests that Shakespeare seems to have based the character of Lawrence on Paracelsus, but another prime candidate for the character is one Roger Bacon.
Furthermore, as Hughes notes, “…the alchemist continued to attempt to harness the transformative powers of the sun and moon.” The first appearance of the Friar he is collecting herbs in the twilight between night and morning;
The grey-eyed morn smiles on the frowning night,
Chequering the eastern clouds with streaks of light,
And flecked darkness like a drunkard reels
From forth day's path and Titan's fiery wheels:
Now, ere the sun advance his burning eye,
The day to cheer and night's dank dew to dry…
- Act 2, Scene 3
Finally, Owens suggests that Shakespeare seems to have based the character of Lawrence on Paracelsus, but another prime candidate for the character is one Roger Bacon.
Hughes mentions that “One of Europe’s leading scientists, the Franciscan Roger Bacon (1220-92), who was reputed to have had a laboratory on Folly Bridge in Oxford…introduced the concept… that alchemical medicines could preserve and extend human life. He had… a vision of a universal science integrating all branches of knowledge that could lead to salvation and the prolongation of life…”
Shakespeare was no doubt well aware of Bacon as he was a major figure in the Scholastic field of the Medieval era. In fact in England during the reign of Henry III (_) “the English court was becoming the focus for the study of alchemy and the occult,” as Hughes states.
Furthermore, A.G.Molland, in an essay “Roger Bacon as Magician” reveals that
“a prose romance (was) written probably in the late sixteenth century and entitled The Famous historie of Fryer Bacon. Containing the wonderful things that he did in his life: also the manner of his death: with the lives and death of the two conjuerers, Bungye and Vandermast. Very pleasant and delightfull to be read. …the deeds recounted are of a type that would later be termed magical. (John Bale) in his Summarium of 1548 described Bacon as a ‘juggler and necromantic mage’ who was said to have performed great marvels at Oxford.”
There is little doubt that Shakespeare would have known about or perhaps even read this work.
It becomes clear, therefore, that Friar Lawrence is indeed an alchemist based on the figures of Paracelsus and Roger Bacon.
Shakespeare was no doubt well aware of Bacon as he was a major figure in the Scholastic field of the Medieval era. In fact in England during the reign of Henry III (_) “the English court was becoming the focus for the study of alchemy and the occult,” as Hughes states.
Furthermore, A.G.Molland, in an essay “Roger Bacon as Magician” reveals that
“a prose romance (was) written probably in the late sixteenth century and entitled The Famous historie of Fryer Bacon. Containing the wonderful things that he did in his life: also the manner of his death: with the lives and death of the two conjuerers, Bungye and Vandermast. Very pleasant and delightfull to be read. …the deeds recounted are of a type that would later be termed magical. (John Bale) in his Summarium of 1548 described Bacon as a ‘juggler and necromantic mage’ who was said to have performed great marvels at Oxford.”
There is little doubt that Shakespeare would have known about or perhaps even read this work.
It becomes clear, therefore, that Friar Lawrence is indeed an alchemist based on the figures of Paracelsus and Roger Bacon.
As to the second charge, that of sorcery,
- Galatians 5:20 proclaims that sorcery proceeds “from corrupt nature”.
- Revelation 22:15 preaches that sorcerers will have no access to the Tree of Life nor will “anyone who loves falsehood and lives in it.”
- Revelation 21:8 states that the final lot of sorcerers “awaits them in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, and is the second death.”
- Tiele says "worship even in its most primitive form always contains an element of veneration" and calls sorcery "a disease of religion" (Science of Religion, II, 136, 141)
- Saint Augustine defines sorcery as an attempt to avoid, master, or deny the incarnate nature of humanity (with all the flaws such incarnation entails). In response to Faustus, Augustine wrote
- What we call sorcery in your doctrine is your making Christ's passion and death to have been only in appearance, so that, by a spectral illusion, He seemed to die when He did not. (Contra Faustum, Book XXIX)
Bacon and the other alchemists were engaged in something called “The Great Work” – a system of symbols and signs designed to improve and perfect humanity. Omitting the oafish interpretation of alchemists trying to transmute actual lead into gold in order to become materially wealthy, the alchemical movement had two major branches of interpretation. For one branch, this system was a code that hid the language of spiritual improvement. For the other branch, the system was a coded language for the actual attempt to improve and prolong the physical life of the race and the perfection of human society. This second branch was sorcerous in nature.
- Galatians 5:20 proclaims that sorcery proceeds “from corrupt nature”.
- Revelation 22:15 preaches that sorcerers will have no access to the Tree of Life nor will “anyone who loves falsehood and lives in it.”
- Revelation 21:8 states that the final lot of sorcerers “awaits them in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, and is the second death.”
- Tiele says "worship even in its most primitive form always contains an element of veneration" and calls sorcery "a disease of religion" (Science of Religion, II, 136, 141)
- Saint Augustine defines sorcery as an attempt to avoid, master, or deny the incarnate nature of humanity (with all the flaws such incarnation entails). In response to Faustus, Augustine wrote
- What we call sorcery in your doctrine is your making Christ's passion and death to have been only in appearance, so that, by a spectral illusion, He seemed to die when He did not. (Contra Faustum, Book XXIX)
Bacon and the other alchemists were engaged in something called “The Great Work” – a system of symbols and signs designed to improve and perfect humanity. Omitting the oafish interpretation of alchemists trying to transmute actual lead into gold in order to become materially wealthy, the alchemical movement had two major branches of interpretation. For one branch, this system was a code that hid the language of spiritual improvement. For the other branch, the system was a coded language for the actual attempt to improve and prolong the physical life of the race and the perfection of human society. This second branch was sorcerous in nature.
To accomplish their goals, alchemists sought what was referred to as “the elixir of life” (elixir vitae) or “pure mercury” –
… a substance thought to be capable of changing base metals into gold. The same term, more fully elixir vitae, “elixir of life,” was given to the substance that would indefinitely prolong life—a liquid that was believed to be allied with the philosopher’s stone. (Encyclopedia Britannica)
Where the first branch saw the transmutation of lead to gold as an allegory for transmuting base and ignorant souls into farseeing, intelligent souls, the second saw it as a metaphor for an actual dominance and control of matter and time. The second branch thought of the elixir as a liquid or potion derived from natural elements which contained the essence of life itself. It allowed not only a prolongation of life but the ability to raise those who had died; thus transmuting base clay (lead) into pure life (gold).
… a substance thought to be capable of changing base metals into gold. The same term, more fully elixir vitae, “elixir of life,” was given to the substance that would indefinitely prolong life—a liquid that was believed to be allied with the philosopher’s stone. (Encyclopedia Britannica)
Where the first branch saw the transmutation of lead to gold as an allegory for transmuting base and ignorant souls into farseeing, intelligent souls, the second saw it as a metaphor for an actual dominance and control of matter and time. The second branch thought of the elixir as a liquid or potion derived from natural elements which contained the essence of life itself. It allowed not only a prolongation of life but the ability to raise those who had died; thus transmuting base clay (lead) into pure life (gold).
Like the later literary figures of Shelley’s Victor Frankenstein & Hawthorne’s Aylmer, Lawrence seeks to conquer death and perfect humanity through this second form of alchemy.
C.S.Lewis in “The Abolition of Man” points out that magic (sorcery) and Frankenstein’s idea of science are twins opposed to real alchemy and religion:
“In the old days, wisdom, not magic or science was the primary concern: ‘For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men (reality to the soul): the solution is a technique; and both (magic and science) in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious....’” 83-4
Hughes also notes that “Occult knowledge of the dynamic interplay between the four elements was seen as a key to knowledge of the workings of natural forces and the destinies of individuals and nations (all products of the earth) and even of the origins and ultimate fate of all life on earth.” Thus, Lawrence seeks not to save souls but to solve the problem of humanity and improve the fate of all life on earth.
Like the character he is based upon, Lawrence exhibits a desire to perform wonderful deeds using humans (Romeo and Juliet) as his experimental subjects. First he shows a knowledge identical to that of Bacon; then he tries to heal the rift in society using a secret marriage of two contrary people (like a marriage of heaven and earth); third he tries to use necromantic powers (powers of handling the dead) in order to prove the efficacy of his elixir vitae and successfully “fix” society. Just as the deeds of Bacon deemed to be sorcerous, so too does Lawrence operate, “not by the power of God but by the operation of evil spirits.” (Molland)
Lawrence seeks to fix human nature (the violent lust of Romeo & Juliet), conquer the hold of death over humanity (through his elixir), and perfect society (through the union of the two households) through his alchemical powers. This, though, is sorcery not holiness.
“In the old days, wisdom, not magic or science was the primary concern: ‘For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men (reality to the soul): the solution is a technique; and both (magic and science) in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious....’” 83-4
Hughes also notes that “Occult knowledge of the dynamic interplay between the four elements was seen as a key to knowledge of the workings of natural forces and the destinies of individuals and nations (all products of the earth) and even of the origins and ultimate fate of all life on earth.” Thus, Lawrence seeks not to save souls but to solve the problem of humanity and improve the fate of all life on earth.
Like the character he is based upon, Lawrence exhibits a desire to perform wonderful deeds using humans (Romeo and Juliet) as his experimental subjects. First he shows a knowledge identical to that of Bacon; then he tries to heal the rift in society using a secret marriage of two contrary people (like a marriage of heaven and earth); third he tries to use necromantic powers (powers of handling the dead) in order to prove the efficacy of his elixir vitae and successfully “fix” society. Just as the deeds of Bacon deemed to be sorcerous, so too does Lawrence operate, “not by the power of God but by the operation of evil spirits.” (Molland)
Lawrence seeks to fix human nature (the violent lust of Romeo & Juliet), conquer the hold of death over humanity (through his elixir), and perfect society (through the union of the two households) through his alchemical powers. This, though, is sorcery not holiness.
Instead of counselling Romeo to control himself, exercise patience, take a breath or two, that is the course of real alchemy and religion, Lawrence channels his lust into a controlled experiment to try and perfect human nature. If he is indeed the confessor of Juliet he would know her nature (and intelligent propensity to manipulate) and would counsel her to a similar course of self-control. But he uses her instead for his experiment with elixir vitae (which works, by the way). Thus instead of saving the two he leaves them to be
perjured, murd'rous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust
…
Mad in pursuit and in possession so,
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme
(Sonnet 129)
Then, above all, he flees from the scene rather than face his own consequences. He attempts, therefore “to subdue reality to the wishes of men (reality to the soul)” using “a technique” and is “ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious.”
Lawrence is, in short, a sorcerer.
Then, above all, he flees from the scene rather than face his own consequences. He attempts, therefore “to subdue reality to the wishes of men (reality to the soul)” using “a technique” and is “ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious.”
Lawrence is, in short, a sorcerer.
Comments
Post a Comment