Unrecorded laughter is not unrecorded joy
and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth.
An earlier Christian reader drew a markedly different lesson from the same narrative silence. John Chrysostom's Homily 6 on Matthew, §8, notices Christ's tears over Lazarus and Jerusalem, then says the evangelists nowhere mention his laughter or even a slight smile. In §9 he qualifies the moral: he means to discourage dissipation, rather than prohibit every laugh. The inspected English witness is George Prevost's translation, revised by M. B. Riddle, in the 1888 Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers volume, as reproduced by New Advent.
Chrysostom uses the silence to encourage penitential seriousness; Chesterton imagines joy so immense that it remains concealed. This is a comparison, not evidence of influence. It also requires distinguishing laughter from joy. Luke 10:21 explicitly represents Jesus rejoicing, while John 15:11 presents him communicating his joy to the disciples. Chesterton's ‘mirth’ therefore works most persuasively as a conjecture about the unshown fullness or expression of joy, not a claim that the Gospels never reveal joy in Christ. His cautious closing formula leaves that distinction open.
Sources
Revision 1 of 1 · 2026-11-07 · Suggest an edit