N-Town And Writing On The Ground

[volgadon]

And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

-John 8:3-9.

At least for me, this is one of the most enigmatic moments in the New Testament. Jesus, almost oblivious to the going-ons around him, crouches, scribbling something on the ground. Just what he wrote is never revealed and the text indicates that Jesus' spoken words- not the written words- were what affected the scribes and Pharisees. Yet, was the act of writing really unrelated to the events? From a literary point of view, I would have to say absolutely not. First off, the act of stooping and writing appears twice. It is obviously more than just an irrelevant aside, besides, I see no indication of the author of John being that execrable an author. Also, most early versions and references do not mention the act of writing.[1]

An odd detail to add if it had no bearing on Jesus' words. Furthermore, is it reasonable to suppose that the scribes and Pharisees paid no attention whatsoever to Jesus' strange behaviour, that none even attempted to see what he was writing?

It seems likely to me at least that the writing had some bearing on the words Jesus spoke. The solution adopted by the author (or authors) of the N-Town play, The Woman Taken in Adultery, is as good a guess as any. By fleshing out the dry bones of a story, drama can often reveal important insights. A story has to be shown in order to be effective. Mere declamation wont do.

The N-Town author discovered an important plot device in the act of writing on the ground, using it to propel the story forward to its conclusion.

Jesus. Look which of you that never sin wrought,

But is of life cleaner than she;

Cast at her stones, and spare her nought,

Cleant out of sin if that ye be.

Here Jesus, again stooping down, shall write on the ground, and all the accusers, as if put to shame, shall go apart into three separate places.

Pharisee. Alas, alas I am ashamed!

I am afeard that I shall die;

All my sins, even properly named

Yon prophet did write before mine eye.

If that my fellows that did espy,

They will tell it both far and wide;

My sinful living if they out cry,

I wot never where my head to hide.

Accuser. Alas, for sorrow mine heart doth bleed!

All my sins yon man did write;

If that my fellows to them took heed,

I cannot me from death acquit.

I would I were hid somewhere out of sight,

That men should me me nowhere see ne know;

If I be take, I am afflight

In mickle shame I shall be throw.

Scribe. Alas the time that this betid!

Right bitter care doth me embrace;

All my sins be now unhid:

Yon man before me them all doth trace.

If I were once out of this place,

To suffer death great and vengeance able,

I will never come before his face,

Though I should die in a stable.[2]

As in John 8, Jesus invites the scribes and Pharisees to execute the law in its full severity, provided they are free from sin. Ashamed, the accusers all leave in different directions, each having seen Jesus write out the exact sins they were guilty of commiting. That, according to the N-Town play, was the purpose of writing on the ground. The play in its entirety, in the original Middle English is available online.[3] In terms of simplicity, immediacy and emotional impact, The Woman Taken in Adultery is one of the finest medieval plays.

[1]http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-John-PA.pdf

[2]Adapted by A. C. Cawley, "Everyman and Medieval Miracle Plays," pp. 140-141.

[3]http://www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/teams/sdnt24frm.htm

http://calba-savua.blogspot.com/2012/05/n-town-and-writing-on-ground.html

[Calm]

interesting and in my view, it makes for a good guess.

[The Nehor]

I think he was drawing pictures of baby pandas in the dirt.

[volgadon]

I think he was drawing pictures of baby pandas in the dirt.

If we are going off on randomn tangents then I might as well say that I was attacked by a Jack Black look-a-like on my mission.

Edited May 5, 2012 by volgadon

[The Nehor]

If we are going off on randomn tangents then I might as well say that I was attacked by a Jack Black look-a-like on my mission.

Are you suggesting that Jesus was drawing a picture of your assailant? Because that would be amazing.

[volgadon]

interesting and in my view, it makes for a good guess.

Thanks. I'm open to other suggestions, but so far this explanation makes the most sense for me.

[volgadon]

Are you suggesting that Jesus was drawing a picture of your assailant? Because that would be amazing.

The Bible Code market has already been cornered, so I have to come up with my own fad.

Edited May 5, 2012 by volgadon

[The Nehor]

The Bible Code market has already been cornered, so I have to come up with my own fad.

I'm starting one where I claim to be John the Beloved.

[volgadon]

I'm starting one where I claim to be John the Beloved.

Cults are fads too, aren't they?

[volgadon]

I wanted to add that it is a shame this play isn't staged often. It would work well for a small troupe with minimalistic stage setting and props. Medieval plays are underrated.

[treehugger]

I am of the opinion that, Christ, did not write anything in particular but rather only doodled. The Bible indicates that Christ groned within Himself at times. I think He simply started doodling knowing that they all would realize how ridiculous they were.

[volgadon]

I am of the opinion that, Christ, did not write anything in particular but rather only doodled. The Bible indicates that Christ groned within Himself at times. I think He simply started doodling knowing that they all would realize how ridiculous they were.

How would that make them realise how ridiculous they were?

[Areabird]

Isn't this one of those accounts that was actually not written by John, but by a scribe a couple hundred years after the fact?

[volgadon]

Isn't this one of those accounts that was actually not written by John, but by a scribe a couple hundred years after the fact?

The link in my first footnote has a lot of interesting information, textua; and otherwise. The issue is complicated, the story wasn't originally in the Gospel of John, but is met independently in varying versions.

[Stargazer]

Well, as far as the story of the writing is concerned, yes, his writing their sins would seem to have more power to make them feel guilty and conscience-stricken.

However, adultery is not a solitary sin. I wonder why Jesus did not ask where her partner in crime was -- if she was taken "in the act", the fellow in question had to have been there at the same time. Perhaps he fought his way clear, but his absence in this tale is interesting in itself.

[treehugger]

I am of the opinion that, Christ, did not write anything in particular but rather only doodled. The Bible indicates that Christ groned within Himself at times. I think He simply started doodling knowing that they all would realize how ridiculous they were.

How would that make them realise how ridiculous they were?

I believe that those who attempted to trap Christ were not without understanding of what Christ spoke to them. The Bible tells us of their cunning and serpentine wisdom i.e. when they answered "we can not say" in response to a question Christ asked, because no matter how they responded they condemned themself.

I believe Christ statement was sufficient enough for the group to realize they once again erred in trying to trap Jesus. Jesus gave the group full authority to proceed with the stoning "he who is without sin cast the first stone". I do not think any thing more needed be said or done.

I think Christ writing/drawing in the sand, He was simply ignoring the group. Or even perhaps, the group was waiting for Christ to cast the first stone, as they most likely had no cause to believe he had sinned due to the fact they were constantly trying to trap him. Most likely the group all knew each others sins.

I can understand that believe Christ was writing out the groups sins adds a bit of interest to the story.

[wenglund]

Isn't this the only occasion, aside from the tablets of stone, where God, the Son, is recorded to have literally written something on earth? If so, I wonder if there is any significance to that, and whether that may give a hint to what was said or perhaps why we aren't told what is said.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[volgadon]

I believe that those who attempted to trap Christ were not without understanding of what Christ spoke to them. The Bible tells us of their cunning and serpentine wisdom i.e. when they answered "we can not say" in response to a question Christ asked, because no matter how they responded they condemned themself.

I believe Christ statement was sufficient enough for the group to realize they once again erred in trying to trap Jesus. Jesus gave the group full authority to proceed with the stoning "he who is without sin cast the first stone". I do not think any thing more needed be said or done.

Yet the text indicates that more was done, hence the riddle.

I think Christ writing/drawing in the sand, He was simply ignoring the group.

This is why I can't quite buy the explanation. When we have an indisputed example of Christ ignoring someone, that is, Herod, it is nothing like this.

Herod is actually ignored, whereas here Christ listens and responds.

Or even perhaps, the group was waiting for Christ to cast the first stone, as they most likely had no cause to believe he had sinned due to the fact they were constantly trying to trap him.

If they had no cause to believe that Christ had sinned, it would have been tantamount to a tacit admission of his divine status.

Most likely the group all knew each others sins.

Maybe, maybe not.

[treehugger]

there is no reason to suppose that ones method of ignoring someone will be the same. Yes Christ responded, and then He said nothing more, it is not unreasonable to say that He was then ignoring them or that He had nothing more to say. As for what they thought on His Divine status, doesn't Christ respond to their queries with "Thou sayeth". It makes a feel good story for Christ to have written their sins.

[volgadon]

there is no reason to suppose that ones method of ignoring someone will be the same. Yes Christ responded, and then He said nothing more, it is not unreasonable to say that He was then ignoring them or that He had nothing more to say.

Assuming that it suddenly becomes a way to ignore people (though I disagree), don't you think it looks a little childish for a man in his 30s to ignore people by scribbling on the ground?

As for what they thought on His Divine status, doesn't Christ respond to their queries with "Thou sayeth".

Yet that is no indication that they themselves considered Christ divine.

It makes a feel good story for Christ to have written their sins.

It also makes for a feel good story for Christ to say "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more," but it is in there.

Edited May 10, 2012 by volgadon