Eli, Eli, Lama Sachthani - a peek behind the Lord's last few words

[afthomercy]

On this feast day of the great St. Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church, I am pleased to place my reflection on Mathew 27:46 before the CAF community:

“ELI, ELI LAMA SABACHTHANI” – a peek behind the Lord’s last few words.

In “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”(Mt. 27:46) Our Lord was expressing his utter anguish at the separation He felt from the Father. Traditionally, this separation has been understood to be the natural fallout of the weight of mankind’s sins. 2 Cor 5:21 tells us “For He made Him who knew no sin TO BE sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”. But the troubling question is: did Jesus really merit this separation, considering that He was only walking on the path chalked out for him by the Father? Is the Father so ‘unfair’? Rather could there have been wheels within wheels, which even Our Lord, in his human nature, was unaware of? Where there overriding factors that made it NECESSARY for the Father, irrespective of everything, to forsake him?

The Book of Job, Chapter 1, verses 6-12, points to the answer. There we are told that God boasts to Satan about his servant Job. Satan back answers him that Job’s righteousness stems solely from God’s favour upon him. If only God were to withdraw his hand, “he will curse you to your face!” Now, Jesus is the New Job. The Father has always carried him in the palm of his hand. This leads Satan to bitterly complain that he’s unable to train his gunsights on him properly / get a ‘clean shot’ at him. The Father knew that unless settled, this issue could rear its ugly head in the future, and so, as he had done once before in the Old Testament, he stood aside and told Satan: “Go ahead, he’s all yours!” The Father could not take Jesus into confidence about this, for had he done so, Satan would have again cried foul.

Our Lord was foxed by his Father’s sudden absence. The cry of anguish that escaped his lips could be interpreted as: My Father, till yesterday I was the apple of your eye, so what happened today for you to leave me in the lurch, particularly at the most difficult time in my life? We can imagine the Father cringing in his heart and saying silently: My Son, I need to do this to shut Satan’s mouth. Just hang in there, and I’ll explain everything when you get up here!
…/////…

 

[Autumn_Smoke]

Very good thoughts. Thanks for sharing them!

I’ve also thought he uttered those words so that people would know he was the fulfillment of Psalm 22, where these words are first uttered and speak about our Lord’s crucifixion.

Very specific prophecies including verses 17 & 18 of the Psalm which say, “they pierce my hands and my feet. All my bones are on display; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.”

 

[RPRPsych]

I think this explanation, though popular these days (when we tend to emphasize the humanity of Jesus at the cost of His Divinity) is incomplete. Call it the “Jesus Christ Superstar” school of exegesis.

Reading the entirety of Psalm 22 (Vulgate 21) will give you an entirely different picture.

 

[kdbueno]

Jesus Christ’s pain is inconceivable, the more we think of it, the more it becomes real.

 

[afthomercy]

Thank you for your comments.

As regards the comment that this is just another exegetical hypothesis, I’d like to respond that its anything but! Exegesis says that either (a) the Lord mouthed Psalm 22 to tell the Jews that He was the personification of it and that’s why he wouldn’t come down from the cross or (b) the evangelists put those words in his mouth so as to tell the Jews the same thing. However my point is that the Lord felt a genuine anguish that stemmed from a genuine human ignorance of the Father’s compulsions.

The cause for the canonisation of the Venerable Thomas a Kempis has not progressed in centuries ostensibly because there were no eye witnessess to his death at the age of 92 and hence it could not be said with certainty that he received death without denying the faith! Now if the Church can set such a high standard for canonisation, then how much more will not the Heavenly Father take care to ensure that the genuineness of his Son’s sacrifice be kept above question? Had He not abandoned him in the final moments, Satan would forever had taunted that he was never given a fair chance to get him to apostasise. This is where the parallel with Job of old becomes clinching.

As for the comment that over-emphasis on His humanity detracts from his divinity, I ask: when were they ever in competition? I can understand if He were partly human and partly divine, then over emphasis on one certainly detracts from the other. However since He was/is simultaneously cent per cent human and cent per cent divine, this situation does not arise.

 

[BobCatholic]

Or Christ was quoting the first line of Psalm 22 and signaling “Look! I’m fulfilling this scripture!”

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

On this feast day of the great St. Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church, I am pleased to place my reflection on Mathew 27:46 before the CAF community:

“ELI, ELI LAMA SABACHTHANI” – a peek behind the Lord’s last few words.

In “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”(Mt. 27:46) Our Lord was expressing his utter anguish at the separation He felt from the Father. Traditionally, this separation has been understood to be the natural fallout of the weight of mankind’s sins. 2 Cor 5:21 tells us “For He made Him who knew no sin TO BE sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”. But the troubling question is: did Jesus really merit this separation, considering that He was only walking on the path chalked out for him by the Father? Is the Father so ‘unfair’? Rather could there have been wheels within wheels, which even Our Lord, in his human nature, was unaware of? Where there overriding factors that made it NECESSARY for the Father, irrespective of everything, to forsake him?

The Book of Job, Chapter 1, verses 6-12, points to the answer. There we are told that God boasts to Satan about his servant Job. Satan back answers him that Job’s righteousness stems solely from God’s favour upon him. If only God were to withdraw his hand, “he will curse you to your face!” Now, Jesus is the New Job. The Father has always carried him in the palm of his hand. This leads Satan to bitterly complain that he’s unable to train his gunsights on him properly / get a ‘clean shot’ at him. The Father knew that unless settled, this issue could rear its ugly head in the future, and so, as he had done once before in the Old Testament, he stood aside and told Satan: “Go ahead, he’s all yours!” The Father could not take Jesus into confidence about this, for had he done so, Satan would have again cried foul.

Our Lord was foxed by his Father’s sudden absence. The cry of anguish that escaped his lips could be interpreted as: My Father, till yesterday I was the apple of your eye, so what happened today for you to leave me in the lurch, particularly at the most difficult time in my life? We can imagine the Father cringing in his heart and saying silently: My Son, I need to do this to shut Satan’s mouth. Just hang in there, and I’ll explain everything when you get up here!
…/////…

Jesus utterance of Psalm 22 was a cry of victory. Read the rest of the Psalm.

 

[abucs]

Jesus utterance of Psalm 22 was a cry of victory. Read the rest of the Psalm.

Yes, i think it is so beautiful for God to refer to Jewish cries for help expressed in psalm 22 by taking on the suffering expressed in it. No longer can we think of God as a remote non caring Being. The prayers of psalm 22 were answered in the most beautiful and thought provoking way.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

Yes, i think it is so beautiful for God to refer to Jewish cries for help expressed in psalm 22 by taking on the suffering expressed in it. No longer can we think of God as a remote non caring Being. The prayers of psalm 22 were answered in the most beautiful and thought provoking way.

Read the rest of the psalm.

 

[abucs]

Read the rest of the psalm.

I have very often. It is my favourite piece of Scripture.

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

I have very often. It is my favourite piece of Scripture.

Then you should know it is a prayer of victory.

 

[ynotzap]

On this feast day of the great St. Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church, I am pleased to place my reflection on Mathew 27:46 before the CAF community:

“ELI, ELI LAMA SABACHTHANI” – a peek behind the Lord’s last few words.

In “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”(Mt. 27:46) Our Lord was expressing his utter anguish at the separation He felt from the Father. Traditionally, this separation has been understood to be the natural fallout of the weight of mankind’s sins. 2 Cor 5:21 tells us “For He made Him who knew no sin TO BE sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”. But the troubling question is: did Jesus really merit this separation, considering that He was only walking on the path chalked out for him by the Father? Is the Father so ‘unfair’? Rather could there have been wheels within wheels, which even Our Lord, in his human nature, was unaware of? Where there overriding factors that made it NECESSARY for the Father, irrespective of everything, to forsake him?

The Book of Job, Chapter 1, verses 6-12, points to the answer. There we are told that God boasts to Satan about his servant Job. Satan back answers him that Job’s righteousness stems solely from God’s favour upon him. If only God were to withdraw his hand, “he will curse you to your face!” Now, Jesus is the New Job. The Father has always carried him in the palm of his hand. This leads Satan to bitterly complain that he’s unable to train his gunsights on him properly / get a ‘clean shot’ at him. The Father knew that unless settled, this issue could rear its ugly head in the future, and so, as he had done once before in the Old Testament, he stood aside and told Satan: “Go ahead, he’s all yours!” The Father could not take Jesus into confidence about this, for had he done so, Satan would have again cried foul.

Our Lord was foxed by his Father’s sudden absence. The cry of anguish that escaped his lips could be interpreted as: My Father, till yesterday I was the apple of your eye, so what happened today for you to leave me in the lurch, particularly at the most difficult time in my life? We can imagine the Father cringing in his heart and saying silently: My Son, I need to do this to shut Satan’s mouth. Just hang in there, and I’ll explain everything when you get up here!
…/////…

Some have entertained the thought that Jesus knew that some souls would not accept the salvation that Jesus offered by His total giving of Himself, and He cried in His humanity that some would be lost, such was His love for humanity, and for His Father who desired that all would be saved. He wept over Jerusalem too, because He foresaw what would happen to it for their disbelief. He is called The Man of Sorrows

 

[abucs]

Then you should know it is a prayer of victory.

The psalm is a desperate cry for help to a God who the Jewish writer still has faith in.

It is a promise that if God does help him then he will dedicate himself to God.

The psalm then turns into a praise of God either in anticipation of being saved or in being saved.

The psalm then claims that because of God’s saving help, people in the future will turn to God.

This last bit you can categorise as a victory, but it is a victory very much set in the future.

I see the incarnation of Jesus and his sacrificial death as the saving answer from God which is at the heart of the turning point in the psalm. That is why Jesus references the psalm from the cross.

 

[sirach2v4]

As Dei Verbum from Vatican II expressed, the scripture is a constant source of inspiration and no explanation is probably ever complete.

We see so much in Jesus’ words on the cross, and even in his agony and death we see the great love of the Father for us (for when we see Jesus we see the Father). This love is essentially infinite and it is difficult to overstate it.

But, reading this thread I am reminded of the incarnational overtones, that God has become Man and came to serve us. Doesn’t scripture say someplace that Christ had been crucified from the foundation of the world? Jesus gives us a glimpse here of what he must have said on the road to Emmaus of how the scripture spoke about him. He would be*** seen*** as foresaken to reveal the mystery that he was not, for how can God foresake himself?

Yes, I had not thought of the parallel with the book of Job - thanks for the insight on that.

How can we be “bored” with Mass that gathers us into that eternal moment of love and grace?

(I’ve gotten a lot of squiggles that my spelling is bad on several lines - my regrets.)

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

The psalm is a desperate cry for help to a God who the Jewish writer still has faith in.

It is a promise that if God does help him then he will dedicate himself to God.

The psalm then turns into a praise of God either in anticipation of being saved or in being saved.

The psalm then claims that because of God’s saving help, people in the future will turn to God.

This last bit you can categorise as a victory, but it is a victory very much set in the future.

I see the incarnation of Jesus and his sacrificial death as the saving answer from God which is at the heart of the turning point in the psalm. That is why Jesus references the psalm from the cross.

Read it again.

 

[PNEUMA]

Or Christ was quoting the first line of Psalm 22 and signaling “Look! I’m fulfilling this scripture!”

Or, simply because the Father who was dwelling in him, left him.

 

[afthomercy]

Thanks once again to all for your comments.

However, almost everyone seems to be fixated on Psalm 22. The thrust of my OP read together with my post#5 is that there were overriding compulsions on the Father. In other words, irrespective of everything (including the existence or otherwise of Psalm 22), the Father would have forsaken him and Jesus, on his part, would have verbalised his anguish!

 

[abucs]

Psalm 22, part of Scripture and written 1000 years before the crucifixion.

 

[BobCatholic]

Or, simply because the Father who was dwelling in him, left him.

Nope.

That would mean the Father is not omnipresent, since he wasn’t present in Christ at the time.

I’m not going down that street, to Heresyville. Not going to look for my lost shaker of salt there.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

On this feast day of the great St. Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church, I am pleased to place my reflection on Mathew 27:46 before the CAF community:

St Anthony of Padua would have interpreted this verse according to how tradition has interpreted it, not merely giving his own opinions. All the Church Fathers are clear that Jesus was not literally separated from the Father (as Protestants heretically claim) and that Jesus was intoning Psalm 22.

“ELI, ELI LAMA SABACHTHANI”

In “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”(Mt. 27:46)

Note the context: When Jesus said these words it was 3pm - which was the liturgical hour of prayer for the Jews (cf Acts 3:1) - so Jesus as High Priest was entering into liturgical prayer. Also note that Jesus spoke in Hebrew here, which was rare for Jesus to do - this is one of the only times Jesus spoke and the Gospel Writer had to translate Jesus’ words: “Eli Lama Sbachthani, that is My God why have you forsaken me.” This is because Hebrew was the liturgical prayer language. And note that Jesus is indeed intoning Psalm 22, similar to when a Priest says “Our Father…” we automatically recognize what comes afterwards.

Now, Psalm 22:1 says: “My God why have you forsaken me, why are you so far from helping me.” So the “abandonment” felt here was that of not sending divine help to rescue him. Even though Jesus said “I can call upon my Father and He will send twelve legions of angels to me,” God the Father chose not to send this help in order that the Jews and Romans could have their way with Jesus.

There is no such thing as separation from the Father unless one is (a) non-Divine, and (b) in mortal sin. Jesus experienced neither. He was only ‘abandoned’ in the sense that God did not send help to rescue him.

It was David who originally prayed these words of Psalm 22. But we know David was not suffering separation from the Father or divine wrath. Rather, David was experiencing what all good Christians have experienced: I’ve been a good person, so why is this bad stuff happening to me, doesn’t God care about me? Jesus shows us that even when bad things happen to good people, it’s not because God is upset, but because God is using this bad to bring about a greater good. The Book of Job is about God sending suffering upon righteous Job, not protecting him, but it had nothing to do with God being separated from Job or upset with Job.

Traditionally, this separation has been understood to be the natural fallout of the weight of mankind’s sins. 2 Cor 5:21 tells us “For He made Him who knew no sin TO BE sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

I don’t know what tradition you have in mind, but I’ve not heard any major Catholic theologian or church father say this. And if you look at what the Church Fathers say about 2 Cor 5:21, you will see it had nothing to do with that.

Our Lord was foxed by his Father’s sudden absence. The cry of anguish that escaped his lips could be interpreted as: My Father, till yesterday I was the apple of your eye, so what happened today for you to leave me in the lurch, particularly at the most difficult time in my life?

False. That’s John Calvin’s heretical interpretation in which he says Jesus literally but accidentally spoke doubt about God. Jesus was not caught off guard at all. He knew and predicted that He would be handed over to the Jews and Romans. Jesus even says: “Behold, the hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home, and will leave me alone. Yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me. I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace.” (Jn 16:32) This passage would be nonsense if Jesus was abandoned by both the Apostles and the Father.

We can imagine the Father cringing in his heart and saying: My Son, I need to do this to shut Satan’s mouth. Just hang in there, and I’ll explain everything when you get up here!

That simply cannot be. Jesus was sent for this purpose. Jesus knew everything that would happen and why it would happen. At age 12, Jesus was Lost for 3 days, causing Mary to worry. But Jesus told Her that He was doing the Father’s work. Jesus was aware. From this event, even the Blessed Virgin learned that She would someday again lose Jesus for 3 days but get Him back. So even Mary knew the Cross wasn’t the end.

Had He not abandoned him in the final moments, Satan would forever had taunted that he was never given a fair chance to get him to apostasise.

This is not part of the Gospels at all. This wasn’t what Christ’s sacrifice was about at all. The Cross was Jesus acting as High Priest offering up a sacrifice. Your comment doesn’t even make sense, for if God abandons a person, that person is by definition in mortal sin, which Jesus was not. God said to Mary “I will put enmity between you and the serpent,” showing that even Mary wasn’t abandoned by God ever.

irrespective of everything (including the existence or otherwise of Psalm 22), the Father would have forsaken him and Jesus, on his part, would have verbalised his anguish!

Sorry bro, but this is basically Protestant error, from the Pretend Reformers and from the phony doctorates of Protestant scholars. It is not faithful to the Scriptures at all and is rejected by every Church Father and major theologian in Church history.

St Anthony of Padua, please find us some humility to surrender our personal opinions to the Church’s tradition!