Comments on: Tenebrae

By: David Salmanson

David Salmanson — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:34:15 +0000

Newsweek has some of the best religious history writers in the MSM. They do a great job dealing with the whole writing from a believers standpoint. I think they did a great job of capturing the context of the times and the confusion among Jesus’ followers. All of which points to the importance of Paul in creating Christianity as a new religion.

By: A. Greenwood

A. Greenwood — Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:38:51 +0000

I love spiritual aesthetics too, Ben Huff. That’s probably why you and I both have multiple crossings of the river Tiber stamped onto our spiritual passports. But aesthetics takes a lot of time and energy. Before we start advocating it too strenuously for our own people, we should think seriously about the effort involved in creating those kinds of aesthetics and see what else that effort is currently being used for. We may be better off leaving the ‘bells and smells’ to the Catholics, and keep cadging invitations to Mass.

By: Mark N.

Mark N. — Sun, 27 Mar 2005 06:57:23 +0000

I’ve never forgotten a trip to temple square at the beginning of my mission, back in 1975, when a Book of Mormon exhibit placed participants in total darkness at the crucifixion of the Savior, and then attempted to recreate the appearance of the Savior to the Nephites as a backlit illustration of the Savior was slowly brought from pitch black to bright white to parallel the account in 3rd Nephi. It was something (pardon my redundancy) never to be forgotten.

By: Christian Y. Cardall (TSM)

Christian Y. Cardall (TSM) — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:19:28 +0000

The confusion and disorientation of the disciples—both in the midst of the Passion, and the aftermath—is something I haven’t thought about much. Newsweek’s cover story this week has some thoughts on this that were interesting to me, ignoramus that I am when it comes to New Testament and early Christian scholarship. If anyone’s read it, I’d be curious to know what those more knowledgable think of it.

Also, the layout and classic artwork in the print version of the article are gorgeous. A painting of Christians in the coliseum with lions, with burnt crucified corpses, is particularly arresting.

By: Ben Huff

Ben Huff — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:12:11 +0000

Of course, the best thing about this Tenebrae service–perhaps even the lack of NT readings ended up being a plus in a way–was that it prompted a friend to say, “What was that all about? What’s up with Christ having to suffer and die?” So we had this great conversation about it, and read from Exodus and Matthew and John and Hebrews and Mosiah and Ether and 3 Nephi. That sort of thing is what this celebration business is all for. Exodus 12:27 says, “when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses.”

By: Ben Huff

Ben Huff — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:02:35 +0000

Of course I agree, Rosalynde; aesthetics has to take a back seat to true doctrine. I wonder, though, whether we Mormons couldn’t do both. Actually, it’s not really the aesthetics I’m thinking of so much as the richness of the celebrations. The Tenebrae service was very–er–dark, dark in a way that seemed a bit much to me, given that we know what happened next. So if I were designing a celebration for the start of Good Friday, I would probably do it differently. Such as, I would probably include more readings from the New Testament account of these events — something that was conspicuously absent from this Tenebrae service. But I feel like we Mormons let Easter go by too quietly. We make a much bigger production of Christmas, but I would think it should work the other way.

Am I missing something? Of course, General Conference in the spring often picks up something of the Easter theme. I’ll be listening for it especially this time around. And we also have competing loyalties, perhaps, to April 6th. Is there a hidden rationale here?

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:17:59 +0000

Oops, I forgot to mention that the “you” as the English subject of the verb is also simply built into the form of the verb itself (an independent pronoun is not required).

By: Kevin Barney

Kevin Barney — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:14:48 +0000

Thanks for the beautiful post, Ben. I was invited to a Tenebrae service, and I wanted to go, but it involved logistics in the city (Chicago) late at night on a weeknight that I hadn’t had time to steel myself for. Maybe next year with more notice I’ll take the plunge.

In my youth fireside last Sunday night, one of the things I meant to do but didn’t have time for was to help the kids parse Jesus’ expression on the cross, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani.” So I’ll do it here.

El means “God.”

The -i at the end is called a pronominal suffix, and means “my.” Accordingly, “Eli” means “my God,” repeated twice for emphasis.

Lama means “why.”

The -thani at the end of sabachthani is a first person singular verbal pronominal suffix, and is the object of the verb, meaning “me.”

The sabach is an Aramaic verb, meaning “to abandon, forsake.”

So sabachthani means “abandoned me.”

The Hebrew equivalent would be azavthani, and indeed some Greek manuscripts reflect this Hebrew word in lieu of the Aramaic.

I realize this is just a little thing, but being able to understand Jesus’ actual words on the cross I think helps you to appreciate them more deeply.

By: Rosalynde Welch

Rosalynde Welch — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:05:43 +0000

What an astonishing aesthetic–and spiritual–experience, Ben. But as much as I love the poetry (and Latin!) of “high” Christian worship, I wouldn’t trade it for the richness of doctrine we enjoy. Thanks for reminding me of that.

By: Ronan

Ronan — Sat, 26 Mar 2005 06:45:11 +0000

Ben, that’s a lovely post. I just went to a Catholic Good Friday mass which was really, really nice.