Inferno, Canto 23 Dr. Gregor Thuswaldner
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ต.ค. 2021
- Dr. Gregor Thuswaldner of Whitworth University reflects on Dante's Inferno, Canto 23.
100 Days of Dante is brought to you by Baylor University in collaboration with the Torrey Honors College at Biola University, University of Dallas, Templeton Honors College at Eastern University, the Gonzaga-in-Florence Program and Gonzaga University, and Whitworth University, with support from the M.J. Murdock Trust. To learn more about our project, and read with us, visit 100daysofdante.com
I love how you taught this and all the biblical references and associations. Thank you for explaining everything so beautifully!!
1
Another great presentation. This series is one if the most worthwhile discussions of any book I’ve seen.
Such a great explanation of intertextuality. Thank you Dr. Thuswaldner!
Another great interpretation and love the intertextual explanation that brings it all together. Another great example of how the punishment fits the crime, or sin in this matter. Thank you.
Dr. Thuswaldner, I enjoyed your presentation very much. Very clear and well presented and also very informative. Thank you.
This was excellent. Thank you Dr. Thuswaldner!
Excellent. Not easy to squeeze some content in such a short time, but this is a great highlight.
Grateful for your teaching. Wonderful explanation and so thankful for your insights. Navigating this complex journey is challenging however made exciting by all of you outstanding mentors.
Great explanation.
This is soo helpful. A million thanks.
If you’d like to see some more comments to each canto of the Divine Comedy, I’m doing one video for each canto on my channel 👍🏻
@@tomlabooks3263 Thanks. I'll check it out.
I wonder if part of the meaning of this canto is about the sacredness of life and that Caiaphas' punishment is for using his position to cause the death of Jesus. Only God has the power to create life and end it, and those that seek to exercise such power will ultimately be punished for eternity.
Great lecture. Minor correction: it's Matthew 23:27.
👍
Canto 23: The travelers escape the Malebranche by Virgil’s clasping Dante on top of him as they slide down a dirt ramp from the fifth into the sixth bolgia, residence of hypocrites. Originally, a hypocrite was a Greek actor who, concealed beneath a large mask, hid his true identity in his portrayal of another person. “Hypocrites” became those who said one thing, while internally believing the opposite. Instead of masks, these shades wore robes made of lead covered with gild. With heads hidden beneath deep cowls, they processed like cloistered monks. Their torment was a contrapasso of hypocrisy: in Hell, their appearance remained regal or spiritual; however, the body beneath the cloak suffered under an unrelenting weight. One sinner was not clothed but lay, naked, on the ground in a cruciform position. Passing hypocrites would step upon him. This was Caiphas, the leader of the Sanhedrin, who claimed that Jesus was a blasphemer. Since Dante condemns him with the hypocrites, the poet must have thought the high priest really believed otherwise, that Jesus was not a blasphemer but truly the Messiah! Dante’s reason why the archways over this bolgia, alone, had been broken during the harrowing of Hell is ambiguous. Because of the missing bridges, travelers would not view Caiphas unless they descend into the bolgia, itself. The collapsed archways raise the question whether Caiphas should or should not be seen, physically, as a hypocrite whom travelers would pass by (or by-pass!) as they journeyed through Hell.
Your comment that Dante thought Caiaphas believed Jesus was the Messiah is a stretch. As the high priest and a Sadducee, working with Pharisees, scribes, et. al. in the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas belongs to the group Jesus admonishes as hypocrites.
@@joses2325 I agree that the statement, itself, is a "stretch." However, why would Dante have placed Caiaphas among the hypocrites, if Dante did not think that Caiaphas was hypocritical? What else would make Caiaphas a "bad enough hypocrite" to merit this bolgia other than to say Christ was a blasphemer and believe he was not. If he was not, then he would be the expected Messiah. And yes, Christ did call the Pharisees and scribes hypocrites, the question is: why?
@@patcamerino5456 I do not think Dante thought of Caiaphas in the manner you forward. The following is from John 11:49-52 and from Canto 23 notes of my Esolen translation:
49But one of them, Cai'aphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all; 50you do not understand that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish." 51He did not say this of his own accord,* but being high priest that year he prophesied** that Jesus should die for the nation..."
*Bible note: Caiaphas agreed that, as Jesus was not (in their opinion) the Messiah, any popular insurrection now could end only in disaster; so it was better, he argued, to do away with him. He was unconscious of the deeper meaning of his words, namely that Jesus must die for the salvation of man.
**Bible note: Caiaphas unwittingly announces that Jesus will die for the salvation of the nation. This is not his own insight, but the grace of prophecy speaking through him in virtue of his priestly office and position as chief teacher of Israel.
As for why Jesus called them hypocrites, Jesus says in Matthew 23:1-4, 1Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, 2"The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; 3so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. 4They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.”
This leads to 23:27 that Dr. Thuswaldner mentions in the lecture at minute 4, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but inside they are full of the bones of the dead and have all kinds of filth.”
Dr. Thuswalder mistakenly states chapter:verse as 27:23.
@@joses2325 Thanks for the lengthy biblical notations, ones that were not available to Dante. I'm also pleased my comments prompted your thoughtful response. Many of the comments thus far have been complements about the presentations, per se. However, focusing on content and interpretation has its place in these discussions. I have offered one possible "interpretation," one with which you don't agree. Fortunately we both seem to be enjoying reading Dante's words and attempting to understand their meaning some 700 years later. Christ was crucified in a location for all to see as they passed by. Caiaphas was staked out in a cruciform position where all who passed by could step on him. For me, that is a very interesting contrapasso worthy of a hypocrite who says one thing while believing another.
@@patcamerino5456 Spot on. Thanks for the discussion opportunity.
I love this series, and this is another excellent interpretation, however; Dr. Thuswaldner makes note of "Christian anti-Semitism throughout the ages...." Realizing these are interpretations, I don't think a terrible notion such as anti-Semitism should be included without further explanation. It's quite a sweeping (and again, terrible) charge.
It’s pretty common knowledge