Why So Quiet? Selective Silence in the Scriptures and York Plays

 While reading the York Plays, I noticed that five of the eight summaries of the plays we read for Thursday's class reference Jesus' silence. The summary of "Christ Before Pilate (2): The Judgement" says that "as in the preceding trial scenes, Christ is largely silent, and the dramatic life of the play is generated by the cut and thrust of the disputes amongst His adversaries," (York Mystery Plays 192). This emphasis by the plays on Jesus' silence interested me because it is something I did not notice much in the scripture readings.

In class we compared the Passion as presented in the scriptures to our present-day idea of it. From class, I got the idea that the main way in which our present-day view of the Passion differs from that of the scriptures is that we focus much more on the suffering of Christ than the scriptures do. They, on the other hand, are concerned with emphasizing that Jesus was the enthroned Lord as predicted by the Jewish texts. Thinking  about this scriptural focus on the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy, I wondered why the York Plays portray Christ's silence so explicitely?

Silence can go unnoticed in narrative. When reading we usually focus on the sound we are told is there. Dialogue implies the sound of voice; sensory imagery tells us explicitely that sound exists within the world of the text. An absence of sound is not as notable. So, although Jesus may have stayed silent in the scriptures, the question is whether the scriptures choose to draw our attention to this silence. 

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/437230

The synoptic gospels all mention how, at certain points, Jesus "answered nothing" when questioned by Pilate, Herod, and the high priests (Mt 27:12; Mk 14:61; Lk 23:9). This differs from John, where Jesus answers every question asked of Him. In Matthew, the question that triggers Jesus' silence is "art thou the king of the Jews" (Mt 27:11). When asked the same question in John, Jesus answers "sayest thou this thing of thyself, or have others told it thee of me" (Jn 18:34). There is no point, during John, when Jesus refuses to answer a question. While He does not answer certain questions in the synoptic gospels, His refusals are not consistent. Although the phrase "answered nothing" occurs in all three, it comes up in a different context in each one. In Mark "the high priest...asked Jesus, saying: answerest thou nothing to the things that are laid to thy charge by these men? But he held His peace and answered nothing" and in Luke Herod "questioned him in many words. But he answered him nothing" (Mk 14:60-1; Lk 23:9). There is a moment in Matthew similar to that in Mark, in which Jesus is accused by the priests and "answered nothing" but this differs from Mark in that a direct question is not posed to Christ - there are simply accusations thrown while Jesus stands silent (Mt 27:12). In fact, across the depictions of the Passion in the three synoptic gospel readings we did there are only five places where Jesus' silence is explicitely mentioned. Therefore, these mentions are inconsistent across the synoptic gospels and nonexistent in the Passion as portrayed in John. 

But what about places where we might expect Jesus to speak or cry out and He does not? There are specific places in John and the synoptic gospels where one might expect Jesus to speak or make a sound and the text makes no mention of that happening. One recurring moment is when the crown of thorns is placed on Jesus' head and the soldiers abuse Him. "The soldiers platting a crown of thorns, put it upon his head...and they came to him...and they gave him blows" (Jn 19:2-3). A similar episode occurs in Matthew and Mark but not in Luke. In Matthew, there is a moment when Jesus is mocked while simultaneously enduring physical abuse: "they spit in his face and buffeted him: and others struck his face with the palms of their hands, saying: Prophesy unto us, O Christ, who is he that struck thee" (Mt 26:67-8). Jesus does not respond to this abuse, though we might expect Him to given that crying out is a common response to pain and it is also common to verbally rebuke insults. He does not respond, but the text does not explicitely mention His silence. The inconsistency continues when we consider moments like Mark 15:37, in which Jesus cries out while on the cross. Just like His silence in the face of questioning, His silence in the face of suffering and abuse is also inconsistent in the scriptures. 

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2012/aug/07/york-mystery-plays-god-friend-devil

Why, then, is His silence emphasized in the York Plays? One could cite it as dramatic effect, but I find this unsatisfying considering that The Dream of the Rood, a poem (not a play), also features a silent Christ. Jesus' silence in The Dream of the Rood may serve to amplify the voice of the cross and redirect the reader's focus, but why amplify the voice of the cross rather than that of Chrst? It seems an odd choice to me. Creative, but odd. Yet it fits into the pattern we see in the York Plays. A quiet Jesus is contrasted with the environment around Him - in which everything, even the cross, speaks. The dialogue of the soldiers in "Christ Before Pilate (2): The Judgement" is particularly annoying. Four soldiers trade off insulting Christ, and if this exchange is irritating to read we can only imagine how obnoxious it would be when acted out on stage (York Mystery Plays 205-8). The cross in Dream of the Rood can also be interpreted as irritating - it bemoans its existence: "many years ago - I still remember the day - I was cut down at the edge of the forest...men drove their dark nails into me...I endured much hostile fortune on that hill" (Dream of the Rood lines 31-32, 50, 55). Reading the plays and this poem leads me to wonder why everyone has a say in the story except Christ, who appears more as an easily manipulated rag doll than as the savior. Especially frustrating is the fact that, as we have seen, that is not who He is in the scriptures. As noted, He is silent in some cases but not all. For the most part He speaks, making the moments of silence more impactful. His excessive silence in the York Plays, while perhaps intended to make His accusers look ridiculous or create a comedic effect, is a reduction of the rhetorical effect that His silence has in the scriptures. 

The York Plays do, however, make apparent the fact that our modern emphasis on Christ's suffering during the Passion had already begun to develop. The York Plays enlarge the parts of the narrative in which Christ is abused. The cross in The Dream of the Rood narrates that "I saw the Lord of hosts stretch out his arms in terrible suffering (lines 56-7). John of Caulibus also focused on Christ's suffering. Departing from the intention of the scriptures (proving that Jesus is Christ) is no modern innovation, then. I do not have a complete answer for why we focus on the suffering of Chrst when thinking about the Passion, but I can speculate. We are human beings, prone to empathy, but I think it is more than that. As we have said countless times in class, medieval Christians wanted to see God. Placing an emphasis on Christ's suffering can be another way of getting close to Him. We cannot imagine what it is like to be the Almighty, but we can relate to the trials of Jesus - in our daily lives we endure ridicule and pain at the hands of other people just for speaking what we think is the truth. So, while the gospels are trying to prove to us that Jesus is the Lord, we are inclined, as human beings, to focus on the very human suffering He endured in an attempt to be closer to Him.

-Aethelthryth