Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-31-2012, 09:47 AM

I am intrigued if anyone can explain why the Catholics celebrate Lazarus Sunday fourteen days before Easter Sunday but the Orthodox venerate Lazarus Saturday the day before Palm Sunday. This seems to be a very serious discrepancy. I know there was a great deal of variation in the old liturgies. Yet I find it striking that the Latin liturgical calendar in 'year one' (= the Passion) would theoretically make Lazarus Sunday fall essentially on the first day of the year (1 Nisan). Has anyone else noticed this?

It is especially important to note that Clement seems to follow what is usually identified as the Johannine formula for Passover. In other words, Jesus was crucified on Friday the fourteenth of Nisan. Yet if this really wasn't specifically Johannine and just reflective of Clement's gospel - and if furthermore we assume that this Alexandrian Church Father's preferred gospel was some variant form of Mark - the possibility that no resurrection on Easter Sunday was present in this text is particularly significant also.

Talley has shown that the Alexandrian Church resisted fixing baptism to Easter Sunday. Could it be that this was because the tradition did not originally venerate the resurrection on that day? Maybe the liturgy placed the emphasis on the crucifixion rather than the resurrection of Christ.

We have to remember that the Jewish religion wouldn't have assigned any significance to the Sunday (unless perhaps the beginning of the counting of the Omer). Clement does specifically say that he 'arose' on this day. But it is hard to believe that an empty tomb could have been the basis for an event as significant as what has become the traditional Easter Sunday celebration. In some ways the empty tomb could have just been the day he disappeared.

stephan huller · 03-31-2012, 02:52 PM

Another level to this is the rabbinic tradition that man was created on the first day of the year - the world being created six days earlier:

Quote:

The Talmud (Rosh Hashana 10b) relates a dispute between Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yehoshua as to when the world was created. Rebbi Eliezer is of the opinion that the world was created in the month of Tishrei and Rebbi Yehoshua is of the opinion that it was created in the month of Nisan.

The commentators explain that there is really no dispute between the two. Rebbi Eliezer is referring to when Hashem (G-D) conceived of the idea to create the world and Rebbi Yehoshua refers to the actual physical creation. Furthermore, the commentators explain that when Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Yeshosha discuss the creation of the world taking place in either Tishrei or Nissan, they refer specifically to the creation of man which occurred on the sixth day of creation. The first day of creation was five days before, either on the twenty-fifth of Elul or the twenty-fifth of Adar. Thus, according to Rebbi Yehoshua man was created on the first day of Nissan.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-31-2012, 09:47 AM	#21
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I am intrigued if anyone can explain why the Catholics celebrate Lazarus Sunday fourteen days before Easter Sunday but the Orthodox venerate Lazarus Saturday the day before Palm Sunday. This seems to be a very serious discrepancy. I know there was a great deal of variation in the old liturgies. Yet I find it striking that the Latin liturgical calendar in 'year one' (= the Passion) would theoretically make Lazarus Sunday fall essentially on the first day of the year (1 Nisan). Has anyone else noticed this? It is especially important to note that Clement seems to follow what is usually identified as the Johannine formula for Passover. In other words, Jesus was crucified on Friday the fourteenth of Nisan. Yet if this really wasn't specifically Johannine and just reflective of Clement's gospel - and if furthermore we assume that this Alexandrian Church Father's preferred gospel was some variant form of Mark - the possibility that no resurrection on Easter Sunday was present in this text is particularly significant also. Talley has shown that the Alexandrian Church resisted fixing baptism to Easter Sunday. Could it be that this was because the tradition did not originally venerate the resurrection on that day? Maybe the liturgy placed the emphasis on the crucifixion rather than the resurrection of Christ. We have to remember that the Jewish religion wouldn't have assigned any significance to the Sunday (unless perhaps the beginning of the counting of the Omer). Clement does specifically say that he 'arose' on this day. But it is hard to believe that an empty tomb could have been the basis for an event as significant as what has become the traditional Easter Sunday celebration. In some ways the empty tomb could have just been the day he disappeared.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.