The Croxton Play of the Sacrament covers a subject that was familiar to the men and women of the late medieval era. Plays on the Passion of Christ and other Biblical scenes were common and from our modern perspective it is easy to forget that the “special effects” of these plays, like the bleeding oven and the voice of Christ issuing from his image, would have been much more effective than if we were to see them onstage today. But this is not because the men and women of this time were too ignorant to realize that the hand nailed to the Cross was not real; rather, the reactions would have stemmed from seeing something so sacred, i.e. the Host, desecrated, brought low, tortured and made to bleed. Seeing such a thing would have brought on a very visceral reaction from the devout. As the introduction notes, “the audience also perceived an essential symbolic relationship between dramatic presentation and ritual reenactment.” (755) Something of the sacred was brought into this drama performed by secular persons. This mix of sacred and secular, Christian and other, can be seen in the persons of Jonathas and his Jews. As noted by Beckwith in her article ‘Ritual, Church and Theatre: Medieval Dramas of the Sacred Body,’ Jonathas helps to re-enact the Passion of Christ upon the host, at times acting as a priest-like or Christ-like figure. “On these wordys there law growndyd hath he, That he said on Shere-Thursday at his sopere: he brake the brede and said “Accipite,” And gave his disciplys them for to chere. And more he said to them there While they were toegethere all and sum, Sitting at the table soo clere: “Comedite, hoc est corpus meum.”” (lines 397-404) Jonathas practically re-enacts the Mass for his fellow Jews in words eerily reminiscent of what is said during the Consecration of the Mass. Rather than consuming that bread in a sacred act, Jonathas reverts back to profanity, accosting and inflicting a series of tortures on the bread. “When ye have all smityn, my stroke shal be sene: With this same daggere that is so stif and strong In the middys of this print I thinke for to prene! One lashe I shall him lende or it be long.” (lines 465-468) Just as the play cavorts with the boundaries between secular and sacred and makes Jonathas both hated Jew and respected priest, so is the Mass inverted to become a violent spectacle that would have spoken deeply to its medieval audience.
I enjoyed reading Sarah's post, as I agree with her assertion that Jonathas attempts to profane the sacred bread (body of Christ) by "accosting and inflicting a series of tortures on the bread," as Sarah points out. I think this moment also serves to illuminate the preoccupation of Jonathas with material objects that is also illustrated at other points in the text. For example, Jonathas's lines, "For I thanke the[e] hayly, that hast me sent/ Gold, silver, and presious stonys;/ And abu[n]ddaunce of spicys thou hast me lent" (lines 157-159), demonstrate the way in which he cherishes expensive objects. Obviously, his position as the "chefe merchaunte of Jewes" (line 196) also suggests that he must be obsessed with material possessions. Thus, his profession, his appreciation for riches, and his obsession with the material manifestation of the body of Christ all work to characterize Jonathas as possessed by materials and, hence, greedy. This characterization, of course, propagates the prevalent stereotype that stems from the historical position of Jews as money lenders. I think "The Play of the Sacrament" is intended to communicate such a stereotype.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the portrayal of Jonathas, I want to make explicit something that is clearly understood both in the play itself and in Sarah’s post on this character’s pseudo-reenactment of the Mass. Jonathas’ representation of Christian practice participates in and represents Roman Christianity as being tied up in the use of Latin in the Mass. It is through the employment of this particular language that the Jew both demonstrates his central awareness of and ability to lampoon the Christian project. The capability of Jonathas and others (Jason, Malchus) to quote Latin words and/or biblical passages from Jerome’s Vulgate – e.g. “Accipite” (399); “Comedite, [hoc est] corpus meum” (404; Mt 26.26); “Ave” (412); “Judicare vivos et mortuos” (440) – suggests the extent to which Latin Christianity operated as a cultural center of which minority groups were aware (or at least they were capable of being convincingly represented by Christian playwrights as having been so aware). It would be surprising, one imagines, if _Christians_ were represented as demonstrating similar awareness of Jewish thought and/or the literature of the “other” Testament.
ReplyDeleteThe reality of Christianity is throughout mediated through a Roman-Latin lens. This is apparent not only in the Jews’ use of the Latin language, but also the attribution of this linguistic identity to “Jhesus” (“O mirabilis Judei, attendite et videte/ Si est dolor sicut dolor meus”; 717-8) and in the way in which miracles are legitimated by a Roman governing authority, e.g. “In an howshold wer con[v]ertyd, iwis, elevyn./ At Rome this miracle is knowen welle knowthe./ This maricle at Rome was presented, forsothe,/ In the yere of our Lord a M1 cccc lxi” (55-58; note too, of course, the Roman dating formula). The play thus assumes not only the centrality of Christian concerns and motifs but even that the expression of Jewish opposition was, whether consciously or not, defined by linguistic and otherwise performative mimesis.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think Sarah turns our attention to a very important aspect of the religious significance of the spectacle of drama within this play. Sarah selects an important point from the introduction, explaining that “the audience also perceived an essential symbolic relationship between dramatic presentation and ritual reenactment” (755). Symbolism is the key theatrical element which would have imbued the play with such immediate religious significance. Without going off on too much of a theological tangent, I must point out that the sacraments are regarded by a majority practitioners as the most important experiential element of the Catholic faith, as they represent the moments when the spiritual and the philosophical are manifested in a tangible form. In the Eucharist, the bread and wine do not just theoretically symbolize Christ's body and blood, Catholic doctrine imagines them to literally be transfigured once the sacrament is performed. For this reason, the scene described by Sarah can be imagined as not only a symbolic reconstruction of the Passion, but also as a kind of physical re-enactment. As Jonathas proclaims, "Now am I bold with bataile him to bleyke/This middle part all for to prene,/ A stowte stroke also for to strike:/ In the middys it shal be sene!" (474-480), he is clearly imagining the destruction of Christ's physical body. However, a Catholic audience would not have imagined his subsequent stabbing of the bread as an empty act of lame symbolism, but instead a horrific destruction of the real, physical body of Christ.
ReplyDeleteSarah draws our attention to two important points here. First, this was a play, so the actors and the “special effects” served to further interpret the text for the medieval audience. Secondly, that the play works to define, merge and redefine boundaries. I was intrigued by the ways in which Jonathus and Aristory compare and contrast. Both are prosperous merchants and their introductory monologues are very similar. Both thank their God and provide a rundown of their prosperous trades. Where Aristory lists all the places in the world he trades with, Jonathus lists his merchandise of gems and spices. Both also assert their power and influence. Aristory is “most mighty of silver and of gold” (87) and “no man in this world may weld more richesse” (117), while Jonathus is “chefe merchaunte of Jewes” (196)and there is “noon so moche of might” (194) in Heraclea. They also recognize each other’s value. While the play as a whole has plenty of anti-Semetic undertones, there is no discrimination evident in their dealings with each other at the beginning of the play. Aristory even decorates his hall in fine furnishings to honor someone of Jonathus’ standing (259-60). While we know that Jonathus tricks Aristory into stealing the host for him, claiming he wishes to convert and worship God, Aristory doesn’t seem to need much persuasion once the price is right. Furthermore, despite his “worthy” Christian character, Aristory’s theft of the host is almost as bad as Jonathus’ desecration of it. For these two, there seems to be a merchant status that surpasses the division between Jew and Christian.
ReplyDelete