The role of religion in the development of Jane Eyre - Essay Example

The role of religion in the development of Jane Eyre Above and beyond all Christ preached the simple credo of love; love your God and love your neighbour. It is ironic therefore that in Jane Eyre Christianity is portrayed on the whole as a harsh and unloving religion. Jane experiences, throughout her life, various forms of Christianity in the shape of Brocklehurst, Helen Burns, Rochester and her cousin St. John Rivers. Critics have attributed this multitude of religious attitudes to the fact that Bronte herself had experiences with several Christian ideologies, from her Anglican father to her Calvinist schooling (Franklin 1995). Jane’s first experiences with Christianity that are dealt with in great detail in the novel begin with her schooling under the awful guidance of Brocklehurst. He is portrayed quite simply as a hypocrite. Brocklehurst is a man who chooses to control his flock rather than lead them and it is clear from the novel that he is more interested in the power he has as Lowood’s superintendent than in the actual care of his charges. His attitude is one of “fire and brimstone”; sinners are not forgiven, they burn in hell. He uses terror very well to control his charges; on meeting Jane and learning that she is supposedly a liar, he remarks “Deceit is indeed a sad fault in a child…it is akin to falsehood and all liars will have their portion in the lake burning with fire and brimstone.” His brand of Christianity is extremely harsh; he believes that “humility is a Christian grace”, which by itself is a faultless belief. However the manner in which he instills this virtue is shown to be nothing short of criminal. Under his charge, the students are starved at Lowood, supplied with meager and inedible rations; burnt porridge, rancid meat and begrudged a meal of bread and cheese on the grounds that when their bodies are fed their souls are starved. He quotes eruditely from the words of Christ, “ If ye suffer hunger or thirst for my sake, happy are ye.”, quite forgetting that the children do not suffer it for God’s sake but because they are powerless orphans who are suffering it for the sake of a man who wishes to be economical for some purpose of his own. The appearance of his lavishly dressed and obviously well fed family give us an indication of where the money is going perhaps, though it is not overtly stated in the novel. Brocklehurst is considered to represent the “hypocritical Calvinist” by several critics like Franklin (1995) and Vejvoda (2003), his character based on the Calvinist schoolmaster who taught Bronte herself . Certainly Brocklehurst’s religion is a severe one based on the mortification of the “worldly sentiments of pride” and “the lusts of the flesh.” However his hypocrisy is revealed by his selective application of the rules of his religion to those weaker and more powerless than himself. His attitude to women is unduly harsh and intruding, for example when he inspects the state of the girls’ stockings and objects to their curls as immodest. The sheer cruelty his beliefs border on are in actuality completely opposed to the tenets of Christianity. Christ did indeed preach humility and virtue, but the love that should accompany it is conspicuously absent. Brocklehurst knows no love and is unqualified to look after the souls of any other human being, as is evidenced by Jane. His God is one she rejects completely; her innate sense of justice rebels at the mistreatment and hypocrisy that is meted out to the orphans in the name of God. Jane’s development is clearly influenced by Brocklehurst though, if only to completely reject the faith that he follows. She sees that what is called charity and Christian behaviour by society is in essence nothing but a method to suppress and control. The treatment that the orphans are subjected to leaves a deeper impression on her though. It gives her the idea that poverty is something to be rejected and despised. This comes through towards the end of the novel when she is fleeing from Rochester and looking for shelter. The housekeeper treats her like a beggar and this rankles. Later she tells the housekeeper that though she herself would have done exactly the same, it is not something to be proud of, and that her behaviour was not entirely Christian. Here it is important to realize that this statement arises from the treatment she received as a child under the portals of Gateshead and Lowood where charity was revered in the giver but the receiver was reviled.. Helen Burns, whom she met at Lowood, had a far more lasting impression on the growth of Jane. She is perceived to be a Protestant with shades of universalism by Vejvoda. She embodies Christianity far better than Brocklehurst even though they share many of the same ideas. Both clearly believe that endurance of hardship, mortification and suffering is a must. Humility is another precept they both preach. The similarity ends there. While Brocklehurst’s idea of humility and endurance requires the enforcing of these virtues on others in a manner no human should be expected to bear, Helen believes in a personal path. Helen preaches a faith that is far gentler. Her God is one of love and forgiveness, a notion that opposes the Christian notions of Reed and Brocklehurst. She advocates the steady patient endurance of all hardships and tribulations. For example, when Miss Scatchard beats her with twigs and when she is forced to wear a “slattern” notice bound to her forehead, she accepts it as only right. She teaches Jane that “the Bible bids us return only good for evil” and quotes from the Bible as easily as Brocklehurst does. The difference lies however in what teachings they choose to follow. Though she believes that suffering is a must (as does Brocklehurst) there is no hypocrisy in the belief. She has been trained to believe that her struggle here on earth will be rewarded in heaven. Struggle is her motif; when Jane commends her for her goodness with Miss Temple, she replies “there is no merit in such goodness” as it is passive and effortless. Helen’s God can be reached by all men who believe and strive after goodness. In the passage where Jane is wracked by wretchedness after Brocklehurst has denounced her as a liar,she admonishes her for her earthly ties and longings: "If all the world hated you, and believed you wicked, while your own conscience approved you, and absolved you from guilt, you would not be without friends." (Ch.8) Jane misinterprets this to mean that she must be self-sufficient, but Helen is actually speaking of God, as becomes clear later in the passage. This talk is evidence of Jane’s religious ignorance. While she has had a strict Christian upbringing it was a religion that made no real impact on her soul. It merely impressed her with its cruelty and hardship. Charity as represented by the Reeds and Lowood has, in her eyes, a tinge of shame, not the virtue it is supposed to have. Brocklehurst’s God is harsh, whimsical and a distant figure who merely judges. Helen speaks of a God who is present within her and is always there waiting for her to find him. Through this conversation Jane gets a glimpse of this new God but it is not till Helen’s death that Jane truly begins to see him and accept this personal form of religion. When she sees Helen dying of fever, knowing of her own impending death and welcoming it as a chance to meet her Maker and Saviour, she says with incredulity (Ch.9): "But where are you going to, Helen?  Can you see?  Do you know?" "I believe; I have faith:  I am going to God." "Where is God?  What is God?” "My Maker and yours, who will never destroy what He created.  I rely implicitly on His power, and confide wholly in His goodness:  I count the hours till that eventful one arrives which shall restore me to Him, reveal Him to me." "You are sure, then, Helen, that there is such a place as heaven, and that our souls can get to it when we die?" "I am sure there is a future state; I believe God is good; I can resign my immortal part to Him without any misgiving.  God is my father; God is my friend:  I love Him; I believe He loves me." "And shall I see you again, Helen, when I die?" "You will come to the same region of happiness:  be received by the same mighty, universal Parent, no doubt, dear Jane." Again I questioned, but this time only in thought.  "Where is that region?  Does it exist?"  And I clasped my arms closer round Helen; This is evidence of her lingering, perhaps unconscious suspicion that Helen’s faith may not have been as true as she portrayed them to be; an understandable worry considering the hypocrisy of the other “good” Christians she has met till date. Here she sees the strength that God can give and chooses Helens religion. Her death and manner of facing it convinces Jane of a new face of God and this acceptance influences all her decisions later, with Rochester and St.John. Franklin (1995) states that in the novel “Helen…represents an ideal that the novel suggests is too good to live”. This idea fits in with Helens similarity in many ways to Christian martyrs and indeed Christ himself, whose intense unwavering faith allowed them to endure msery and torture and lived altogether short snuffed out lives. Rochester is the third Christian she encounters. He is generally regarded to be Catholic and in fact in the novel he admits it himself when explaining why he has adopted Adele – “ I keep it and rear it rather on the Roman Catholic principle of expiating numerous sins, great or small, by one good work.”   In Victorian England Catholicism itself was not admired and akin to idolatry, which is another theme in the book (Vejvoda, 2003). Rochester is portrayed therefore as an idolater and a sinner. He is debauched and unrepentant. It seems to me that Rochester does not represent Christianity alone but also a temptation for Jane, a test of her courage and moral strength – one that she passes. He appeals to her innate passionate nature, himself being a very passionate man of violent emotion. However this is in contrast to the teachings of Helen. Their meeting in the garden when he proposes to her has been called “Eden-like” by Yeazel (1974). This is very appropriate to the idea of Rochester as tempter. He clearly represents sin; he is an adulterer and has fathered an illegitimate daughter, and tries to commit bigamy as well with Jane. When that fails he proposes that she becomes his mistress. In other words, he advocates all the pleasures of the flesh with no apparent remorse. When he is found out by Mason at the altar he actually tries to justify his attempted bigamy -  “Compare these clear eyes with the red balls yonder--this face with that mask--this form with that bulk; then judge me, priest of the gospel and man of the law, and remember with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged!” .(Ch.25) To him there is no wrong in asking her to be his mistress as long as no-one finds out – “ As to the new existence, it is all right:  you shall yet be my wife:  I am not married.  You shall be Mrs. Rochester--both virtually and nominally”. (Ch.26) It is entirely due to the faith she learned from Helen that Jane is capable of refusing his offer. Her ideas; that as long as she does the right and moral thing God will protect and look after her, are what saves her from giving in to the temptation which was undoubtedly strong. And it is Helen’s influence on her decision that leads her to the last of her major influences, St. John. St. John Rivers is undoubtedly as Calvinistic as Brocklehurst is. However it is equally clear that he is not a hypocrite; he is willing to face the privations he asks others to bear. In fact he forces himself to give up things that are dear to him- Rosamund, for example, his family and his country, to go to India and spread the word of God. His religion is as cold as Brocklehursts though. Even though he loves Rosamund he will not marry her. Instead he chooses to marry Jane, but this decision is not based on any love or affection; rather it is a cold business-like choice based on the fact that she will be suitable in helping him spread the Word, that she is built capable of facing privation. Even his proposal is one that is more of a call to arms, a conversion; "God and nature intended you for a missionarys wife.  It is not personal, but mental endowments they have given you:  you are formed for labour, not for love.  A missionarys wife you must--shall be. You shall be mine:  I claim you--not for my pleasure, but for my Sovereigns service.” (Ch. 34). Yeazel describes this as the conversion of Victorian women. However Jane rejects St.John’s philosophy as well. Intuitively she realizes that to accept his way of life she must give herself up – “I daily wished more to please him; but to do so, I felt daily more and more that I must disown half my nature, stifle half my faculties, wrest my tastes from their original bent…” and by now she has evolved to a stage where she no longer will give her soul, her identity up to anyone else. She has taken Helen;s philosophy and made it her own; do the right thing and do not sin, but do not submit to the wrongs that others inflict on you. This is partly from her sufferings as a child bbut more recently as a result of her encounter with Rochester. After having given up a love that was all that she had ever hoped for, I believe that she could no longer submit to anything that would eclipse that love. Instinctively, she also realizes that her nature was not meant for servitude of the sort that St. John expected from her. Another factor that I think discouraged her was the coldness of his faith. Both Helen and Rochester had warmth in them; though Helen’s warmth as directed to her God, she applied it to her friends, and Rochester had fairly consumed her with his passion. As a child she had starved for love and having received it from the two of them she knew she could no longer go back to lovelessness. Her delight in finding out that she had relatives in the Rivers family confirms this. Though she admires him and his resolve, she rejects him on a primal level. Jane eventually chooses Rochester over every one else. It can be interpreted as her choosing sin, but I believe that it is more of her asserting herself and realizing that until now she had been the dependant in every relationship she had and that now it was time that she asserted her ascendancy over everyone else. She took Rochester back on her terms. Of course, with Bertha dead, there was no question of her sinning at all, but the fact remains that she went back to Rochester on the basis of a spiritual summons long before she knew about the fire. The Christian influences on her life no doubt shaped her decision, and indeed the mysterious summons that she received seems to be almost an intervention from God to show her whom to choose; she prays-"Show me, show me the path!" I entreated of Heaven” (Ch.35) and the next thing she hears is the frantic voice of Rochester. Yeazel points out the fact too – “that the voice has an internal origin, that it emerges from Jane herself and is not simply a miracle descended from high” corroborating the observation that is a decision sanctioned not just by God but by Jane. The spiritual journey of Jane therefore leads her back to happiness, a true fairy tale ending. This has been noted by Clarke as well in his comparison of Jane Eyre to Cinderella and other Grimms fairy tales. Christianity is rampant in both tales and there are many similarities in the tales that are of note. However another important theme that is evident in Jane Eyre is the one of idolatry. It is strictly warned against throughout the novel, in the form of Helen who admonishes Jane that “Brocklehurst is not a God” (Ch.8) and then again during the relationship between Rochester and Jane. He clearly idolizes her and she warns him against it. Ironically Jane herself is prone to the unchristian fault of idol worship; when she listens to Helen conversing knowledgeably with Miss Temple and construing Virgil she describes it as her “organ of veneration expanding” with every word. Once she sees the threat of Blanche as well, her love for Rochester takes on a quality of worship wherein she believes herself to be unworthy of him and much below his station. This attitude changes as she develops and by the time she goes back to him she comes to him as an equal, proving that true love is not one where there are masters and their submissive lovers but equals “before God”. I think this is one reason why she never accepts St. Johns religion either, for he is evidently her superior in intellect and spirit in her eyes ; he seems faultless and even though cold she has reverent respect for him, something she realizes cannot replace true equal love. He considers her to be his subordinate and treats her as such and this is something that she can’t accept at the end of her development. Her respect for him also borders on worship, which is evident as she ends the story with his words, with his faith; a mark of his impression on her. Though she could not live with him she recognized his spiritual superiority to her. Jane’s development therefore has been influenced by all the Christian forms she came into contact with; from her rejection of accepted Christian charity as represented by Brocklehurst and her inability to come to terms with the stark self sacrifice of St. John. She chooses in the end a faith based on love and warmth, and one that she has made entirely her own. Elements of pagan worship came into her life but at the end it cannot be doubted that her decisions were always human. She chooses to forgive and to accept the flaws of others; a trait that was endorsed by Christ himself. It is a journey of struggle and pain, of self-denial and heartbreak, but one that she accepts with stoic resolve and courage; Helen’s way originally, but now entirely Jane’s. REFERENCES Bronte Charlotte, “Jane Eyre” Clarke M., (2000), “Bronte’s ‘Jane Eyre’ and the Grimm’s Cinderella” ,Studies in English Literature 1500-1900., Vol. 40, No. 4 , 695- 710. Franklin J., (1995), “The merging of Spiritualities: Jane Eyre as Missionary of Love”, Nineteenth Century Literature, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp 456 -482. Solomon E., (1963), “Jane Eyre:Fire and Water”, College English, Vol. 25, No.3, pp 215 -217. Vejvoda K., (2003), “ Idolatry in Jane Eyre”, Victorian Literature and Culture, pp 241 -261. Yeazell R., (1974), “More True than Real:Jane Eyre’s “Mysterious summons””, Nineteenth Century Fiction, Vol. 29, No.2, pp 127 – 143. Read More