Skip Navigation


Literature and Theology Advance Access originally published online on August 6, 2009
Literature and Theology 2009 23(3):344-355; doi:10.1093/litthe/frp040
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/3/344    most recent
frp040v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pyper, H. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press 2009; all rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Crucifixion in the Concert Hall: Secular and Sacred in James Macmillan's Passion of St John

Hugh S. Pyper

Department of Biblical Studies, The University of Sheffield, Arts Tower, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN, UK h.pyper{at}sheffield.ac.uk


   Abstract

James MacMillan's Passion of St John is a prime exemplar of the issues that can arise when a sacred text is presented in a secular space. MacMillan takes not only the text of the Gospel but the liturgical experience of the Good Friday liturgy into the concert hall. This raises the question of how the audience is expected to react to the performance. A particular problem arises from the inclusion of the Improperia, or Reproaches, a text which has been a point of controversy between Jewish and Christian interpreters and which makes direct demands upon its audience and their response. The argument of this paper is that MacMillan's setting characteristically intensifies the challenge and presents the choice between belief and unbelief as a choice between an ethical and an aesthetic reaction to the Christian story. This is a common but misleading polarisation accepted by both secular and religious critics. Each group present their own attitude to the text as morally superior to that of their opponents. Kierkegaard's view that the religious is to be distinguished from both the ethical and the aesthetic, and that the key moment is that of humour, may offer another model for dialogue between the secular and the religious in public discourse.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.