The Passover Controversy in the East and West, David Rudolph

Cambridge University 2004 (unpublished) source :

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/500dc7e1c4aac913a35a0c2c/t/541a54d4e4b09b50ed979f44/1411011796553/Passover+Controversy+in+the+East+and+West.pdf

Second century Gentile churches followed two calendar traditions concerning Passover. Almost all of the churches in Asia (where Paul devoted much of his ministry [1 Cor 16:8, 19; Acts 19:10, 26), as well as churches in Asia Minor, Cilicia, Syria, Judea (until c. 135) and Mesopotamia, observed Passover in accordance with the Jewish calendar, on the fourteenth day of the first month, the month of Nissan (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.1; 5:24:1; Athanasius, Syn. 2; Epiphanius, Pan. 70.9.8-9; 10.3-5; Theodoret, Haer. Fab. Comp. 3.4; see Cantalamessa 1993:128b).1 Far from being a minor schismatic group, Gentile Christians who celebrated Passover on Nissan 14 stretched across a vast geographic region that represented the heartland of apostolic Christianity.

By contrast, the churches in the West—in Italy, Greece (including Corinth), Spain, Britain, Gaul (which included the present-day area of France, Belgium, the south Netherlands, south-west Germany)—observed Passover on the Sunday following Nissan 14 (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.1; Vit. Const. 3.18). These churches retained the name pa¿sca (Passover)2 but they moved away from celebrating Passover on the same day as Jews, with Jews and in the manner of Jews. Little by little, they de-Judaized Passover.

When did the split between East and West over the dating of Passover occur? According to Epiphanius (Pan. 70.9.2), who sought to answer this question, most of the churches in the East and West until c. 135 followed a common tradition of observing Passover when the Jerusalem church did, on Nissan 14.3 The Jewish overseers (e˙pisko/pwn) of the Jerusalem church were instrumental in determining the proper date of Passover for the Gentile wing of the church:

For this was their chief and entire concern: the one unity, so that there would be no schisms or divisions…Now altogether there were fifteen bishops from the circumcision, and it was necessary at that time, when the bishops from the circumcision were being ordained in Jerusalem, for the whole world to follow them and celebrate the feast with them, that there might be one accord and one confession, one feast celebrated; this was the reason for their solicitude which gathered the minds of people into the unity of the church. <But since the feast?> could not be celebrated <in this fashion?> for such a long time, by God’s good pleasure in Constantine’s reign the matter was <set right> for the sake of harmony (Epiphanius, Pan. 70.10.3-5; trans. Amidon 1990:274; critical edition: GCS [Holl/Dummer] 3.243; cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.5-6).

Epiphanius comments that the unifying influence of the circumcised overseers ceased during the reign of Hadrian when all Jews, including Christian Jews, were expelled from Jerusalem (c. 135).4 The subsequent two centuries, from the Hadrianic exile until the Council of Nicaea (c. 325), was marked by controversy in the church over the dating of Passover:

In a word, there was great confusion and fatigue, as many of the scholars know, during the times when a tumult arose in the preaching of the church concerning the debate about this feast, and in the time of Polycarp and Victor, when the East and the West in their dissension did not accept letters of commendation from each other, but at certain other times as well, and in the time of Alexander bishop of Alexandria, and Crescentius, each of whom is known to have written to the other and quarreled, and down to our own times. <The church> had continued in this troubled state since the time following the circumcised bishops. Therefore the <bishops> from every place gathered at that time and having investigated the issue carefully, ruled that the feast should be celebrated with unanimity, according to what was fitting to the date and the rite (Epiphanius, Pan. 70.9.8-9; trans. Amidon 1990:273-74; critical edition: GCS [Holl/Dummer] 3.242).

Epiphanius mentions Polycarp (bishop of Smyrna) and Victor (bishop of Rome), two secondcentury church leaders who agreed on the importance of celebrating Passover but differed strongly over when the church should celebrate the festival. Victor was furious that the churches of the East continued to observe Passover on Nissan 14 and he threatened to excommunicate the Asian dioceses unless they conformed to the Passover tradition in Rome.5 In response, the bishops in the East gathered together and appointed Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus, to reply to Victor.

Polycrates’ Letter to Victor

Polycrates wrote to Victor in c. 191 from Ephesus, the city from which Paul wrote First Corinthians (1 Cor 16:8). The letter is preserved for us in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (c. 311),6 and we may assume that Eusebius came across it when he catalogued the library at Caesaria. Eusebius introduces the letter with editorial comments:

At that time, no small controversy arose because all the dioceses of Asia thought it right, as though by more ancient tradition, to observe (parafula¿ttein) for the feast of the Saviour’s Passover (pa¿sca) the fourteenth day of the moon, on which the Jews had been commanded to kill the lamb. Thus it was necessary to finish the fast on that day, whatever day of the week it might be. Yet it was not the custom to celebrate in this manner in the churches throughout the rest of the world, for from apostolic tradition they kept the custom which still exists that it is not right to finish the fast on any day save that of the resurrection of our Saviour. Many meetings and conferences with bishops were held on this point, and all unanimously formulated in their letters the doctrine of the church for those in every country that the mystery of the Lord’s resurrection from the dead could be celebrated on no day save Sunday, and that on that day alone we should celebrate the end of the paschal (pa¿sca) fast…but the bishops in Asia were led by Polycrates in persisting that it was necessary (crhvnai) to keep the custom which had been handed down to them of old. Polycrates himself in a document which he addressed to Victor and to the church of Rome, expounds the tradition which had come to him as follows:

Therefore we keep the day undeviatingly, neither adding nor taking away, for in Asia great luminaries (stoicei√a) sleep, and they will rise on the day of the coming of the Lord, when he shall come with glory from heaven and seek out all the saints. Such were Philip of the twelve apostles, and two of his daughters who grew old as virgins, who sleep in Hierapolis, and another daughter of his, who lived in the Holy Spirit, rests at Ephesus. Moreover, there is also John, who lay on the Lord’s breast, who was a priest wearing the breastplate, and a martyr, and teacher. He sleeps at Ephesus. And there is also Polycarp at Smyrna, both bishop and martyr, and Thraseas, both bishop, from Eumenaea, who sleeps in Smyrna. And why should I speak of Sagaris, bishop and martyr, who sleeps at Laodicaea, and Papirius, too, the blessed, and Melito the eunuch, who lived entirely in the Holy Spirit, who lies in Sardis, waiting for the visitation from heaven when he will rise from the dead? All these kept the fourteenth day of the Passover according to the gospel, never swerving, but following according to the rule of the faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, live according to the tradition of my kinsmen, and some of them have I followed. For seven of my family were bishops and I am the eighth, and my kinsmen ever kept the day when the people put away the leaven. Therefore, brethren, I who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord and conversed with brethren from every country, and have studied all holy Scripture, am not afraid of threats, for they have said who were greater than I, ‘It is better to obey God rather than men.’

He continues about the bishops who when he wrote were with him and shared his opinion, and says thus:

And I could mention the bishops who are present whom you required me to summon, and I did so. If I should write their names they would be many multitudes; and they knowing my feeble humanity, agreed with the letter, knowing that not in vain is my head grey, but that I have ever lived in Christ Jesus.

Upon this Victor, who presided at Rome, immediately cut off from the common unity the dioceses of all Asia, together with the adjacent churches, on the ground of heterodoxy, and he indited letters announcing that all the Christians there were absolutely excommunicated. But by no means all were pleased by this, so they issued counter-requests to him to consider the cause of peace and unity and love towards his neighbours. Their words are extent, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them too Irenaeus, writing in the name of the Christians whose leader he was in Gaul (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.1–5.24.11 [Lake, LCL]).

It is notable how many apostles, bishops and heroes of the faith Polycrates mentions who observed Passover on Nissan 14. Moreover, it is significant that he refers to them positively as stoicei√a (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.2), the term Paul uses in Galatians 4:9 (cf. Gal 4:3; Col 2:8, 20) to refer to some kind of calendar-related enslavement. We may conclude that Polycrates, who ‘studied all holy Scripture,’ did not interpret Paul’s comments in Galatians 4:9-10 as precluding the Christian observance of Passover.

Striking also is the language of ‘oughtness’ used in reference to celebrating Passover. Neither Polycrates nor Victor considers the dating of Passover to be a matter of indifference or adiaphora. Neither is flexible on this issue. On the contrary, both bishops consider the celebration of Passover to be a matter of obeying God and deviation from their received traditions to be heterodoxy:

  1. According to Eusebius, Polycrates believed that it was ‘necessary (crhvnai) to keep (diafula¿ttein) the custom’ (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.1).
  2. Polycrates quotes Acts 5:29 concerning the celebration of Passover on Nissan 14, ‘…for they have said who were greater than I, “It is better to obey (peiqarcei√n) God rather than men”’ (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.7). For Polycrates and the bishops of Asia,
  3. observing Passover on Nissan 14 was not only a good tradition, an ancient tradition and an apostolic tradition. It was a matter of obeying God.
  4. Polycrates writes that the tradition of observing Passover on Nissan 14 is ‘according to the gospel…according to the rule of the faith’ (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.6). Victor excommunicated all the churches of the East because he believed that observing Passover on the proper date was essential. Similarly, Polycrates and all the bishops of Asia were willing to be excommunicated by Victor rather than violate what they believed to be God’s will (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.2-4). Why did Polycrates and the bishops of Asia consider the celebration of Passover on Nissan 14 to be mandated by God? Support for their position came from the laws of Passover in Exodus 12 (read at Melito’s Passover seder [Melito, Peri Pascha 1]) and the example of Jesus in the gospels (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.6; Hippolytus of Rome, Against All the Heresies). In addition to these authoritative texts, a living chain of apostolic tradition existed in the person of Polycarp (bishop of Smyrna), who lived from c. 69-155.7 Polycarp served as a bridge between the apostolic and post-apostolic period. He knew John and the other apostles and testified that they observed Passover on Nissan 14 (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.16). Polycarp passed on this tradition, which he learned from the apostles, to Polycrates’ generation of bishops in Asia. This chain of apostolic tradition (John → Polycarp → Polycrates and the bishops of Asia) is historically plausible and not disputed by Victor, bishop of Rome. The traditional place of John’s burial in Ephesus would have also been a perpetual reminder of the apostolic origin of the tradition.

Irenaeus’ Testimony About Polycarp

Irenaeus (bishop of Lyons in Gaul), who followed the Roman dating of Passover, explains that the Asian tradition of observing Passover on Nissan 14 originated, at least in part, with the apostle John. Irenaeus knew this because he personally knew Polycarp (John’s disciple) when he was a boy:

For while I was still a boy I knew you in lower Asia in Polycarp’s house when you were a man of rank in the royal hall and endeavoring to stand well with him. I remember the events of those days more clearly than those which happened recently, for what we learn as children grows up with the soul and is united to it, so that I can speak even of the place in which the blessed Polycarp sat and disputed, how he came in and went out, the character of his life, the appearance of his body, the discourses which he made to the people, how he reported his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord, how he remembered their words, and what were the things concerning the Lord which he had heard from them, and about their miracles, and about their teaching, and how Polycarp had received them from the eyewitnesses of the word of life, and reported all things in agreement with the Scriptures (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.20.5-6 [Lake, LCL]; Irenaeus, Haer. 3.3.4).

According to Irenaeus, Polycarp always celebrated Passover with John and the other apostles on Nissan 14. After becoming the bishop of Smyrna, Polycarp sought to convince Anicetus (the bishop of Rome) to observe Passover on Nissan 14 as the apostles did:

…and when the blessed Polycarp was staying in Rome in the time of Anicetus, though they disagreed a little about some other things as well, they immediately made peace, having no wish for strife between them on this matter. For neither was Anicetus able to persuade Polycarp not to observe it [Passover on Nissan 14], inasmuch as he had always done so in company with John the disciple of our Lord and the other apostles with whom he had associated; nor did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it [Passover on Nissan 14], for he said that he ought to keep the custom of those who were presbyters before him (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.16 [Lake, LCL]; cf. 4.14.1; Irenaeus, Haer. 3.3.4; Jerome, Vir. ill. 17).

Anicetus did not claim to follow apostolic tradition as the basis for Rome’s Passover dating, the Sunday after Nissan 14. Rather, he claimed to follow the tradition of the ‘presbyters before him’ who, according to Irenaeus, went back only as far as ‘Pius and Telesphorus and Xystus.’ These were the bishops in Rome just before, during and after the Jerusalem church went into exile (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.4-6; 5.24.14). Eusebius (in the fourth century), on the other hand, held that the Roman dating of Passover originated with the apostles, but he provides no line of transmission to substantiate his claim (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.23.1; 5.24.14, 16). Not unexpectedly, later sources attribute the tradition to Peter and Paul.

Notes

 1 ‘The Quartodeciman [Passover on Nissan 14] controversy, which continued for over two centuries in Asia Minor (Canon no. 7 of the Synod of Laodicea, ca. 350), testifies with clarion voice to the perennial desire of many Anatolian Christians to maintain the Jewish heritage of the Christian observance of Easter/Passover’ (Oster 1992). Athanasius (Syn. 2) writes in the fourth century that ‘the Syrians, Cilicians, and those who dwell in Mesopotamia dissented from us and kept the Pascha at the same time as the Jews’ (trans. Cantalamessa 1993:162).

2 The term ‘Easter,’ with reference to the Christian festival, is first attested in the writings of Bede (eighth century). Many scholars today anachronistically use the term when rendering pa¿sca (or its equivalent) in English translations of patristic texts (even Acts 12:4 in the King James Version mentions ‘Easter’). This has unfortunately contributed to the mistaken notion that the early church abandoned the name ‘Passover’ for ‘Easter’ or instituted a completely new Christian festival.

3 Epiphanius quotes the Regulation of the Apostles, which he considers to be a reliable source, ‘You shall not calculate, but celebrate the feast whenever your brethren from the Circumcision do. Keep it together with them…Even if they err, do not be concerned’ (Epiphanius, Pan. 70.10.2, 6; trans. Cantalamessa 1993:73-74; critical edition: GCS [Holl/Dummer] 3.243; cf. Boyarin 1999:13; L’Huillier 1996:21). Epiphanius rejects the Audian interpretation of the Regulation that ‘Keep it together with them’ refers to Christians celebrating Passover with non-Christian Jews. However, he acknowledges that ‘the Circumcision’ (Jewish Christian overseers in Jerusalem until c. 135) observed Passover on Nissan 14 and led the whole church in following this practice. Epiphanius’ account would explain how such a large geographic segment of the second century church, in all of Asia and much of Asia Minor, came to accept and maintain the practice of celebrating Passover on Nissan 14. The account is also consistent with the Torah-observant ethos of the early Jerusalem congregation (Acts 21:17-26) and what we know of the later Jewish Christian ‘Nazarene sect’ (cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.5; Epiphanius, Pan. 29.7.1- 8). Moreover, John, one of the pillars of the Jerusalem church, is reputed to have observed Passover on Nissan 14 (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.16). It makes the most sense, in our view, to assume that the decline of Jerusalem (Jewish) leadership in the church (from c. 135) cut lose an already existing tendency to de-Judaize Passover in the churches of the West, around the time of Xystus’ bishopric in Rome (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.4-5; 5.24.14). Cf. Holl 1927:218ff.; Richard 1965:260-82; 1961:179-212; Huber 1969:56ff.

4 See Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.5-6.

5 Dissension existed in the church of Rome over the dating of Passover. Prior to Victor, during Eleutherius’ bishopric (c. 174-189), a presbyter by the name of Blastus, and ‘many of the Church’ who followed him, called into question the Western dating of Passover, ‘…there is Blastus, who would latently introduce Judaism. For he says the Passover is not to be kept otherwise than according to the law of Moses, on the fourteenth day of the month’ (Pseudo-Tertullian, Haer. 8; cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.15; 5.20.1).

6 The source documents quoted in Hist. eccl. 5.23–25 are generally held to be reliable. Petersen 1992:317-21 raises the problem of inconsistencies in Eusebius’ editorial comments but concludes that the revisions are superficial.

7 Polycrates was about thirty years old when Polycarp died.

Bibliography

Amidon, Philip R., trans. The Panarion of St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1990.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. God’s Festivals in Scripture and History I. Berrien Springs: Biblical

Perspectives, 1995.

___________________. From Sabbath to Sunday: A Historical Investigation of the Rise of Sunday

Observance in Early Christianity. Rome: The Pontifical Gregorian University Press, 1977.

Barclay, John M. G. ‘“Do we undermine the Law?” A Study of Romans 14.1-15.6.’ Pages 287-308 in

Paul and the Mosaic Law. Edited by James D. G. Dunn. WUNT 89. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr

(Paul Siebeck), 1996.

Barnes, Timothy D. Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.

 8 Later sources claim that the Sunday Passover tradition originated with Peter and Paul, ‘Moreover the

Quartodecimans affirm that the observance of the fourteenth day was delivered to them by the Apostle John:

while the Romans and those in the western parts assure us that their usage originated with the Apostles Peter and

Paul. Neither of these parties however can produce any written testimony in confirmation of what they assert’

(Sozomon, Hist. eccl. 2.2.131; cf. The Paschal Canon of Anatolius of Alexandria).

7

Beckwith, Roger T. ‘The Origin of the Festivals Easter and Whitsun.’ Studia Liturgica 13 (1979): 1-20.

Boyarin, Daniel. Dying for God: Martyrdom and the Making of Christianity and Judaism. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1999.

Bradshaw, Paul F. ‘Easter in Christian Tradition.’ Pages 1-7 in Passover and Easter: Origin and

History to Modern Times. Edited by Paul F. Bradshaw and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Notre Dame:

University of Notre Dame Press, 1999.

_______________. ‘The Origins of Easter.’ Pages 81-97 in Passover and Easter: Origin and History to

Modern Times. Edited by Paul F. Bradshaw and Lawrence A. Hoffman. Notre Dame:

University of Notre Dame Press, 1999.

Brightman, Frank E. ‘The Quartodeciman Question.’ Journal of Theological Studies 25 (1923-1924):

254-70.

Broadhurst, Donna and Mal Broadhurst. Passover Before Messiah and After. Carol Stream: Shofar,

1987.

Cadman, W. H. ‘The Christian Pascha and the Day of Crucifixion: Nisan 14 or 15.’ Studia Patristica 5

(1962): 8-16.

Cantalamessa, Raniero. Easter in the Early Church. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1993.

__________________. L’omelia ‘In s. Pascha’ dello Pseudo-Ippolito di Roma. Ricerche sulla teologia

dell’Asia Minore nella seconda metà del II secolo. Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 1967.

Campbell, William S. ‘The Crucible of Christian Identity: Paul Between Synagogue and State.’ The

British New Testament Conference, Birmingham, UK. September 2003.

__________________. ‘“I Laid the Foundation”: Paul the Architect of Christian Identity?’ SBL

International Meeting, Cambridge, UK. July 2003.

Chilton, Bruce. Redeeming Time: The Wisdom of Ancient Jewish and Christian Festal Calendars.

Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002.

Colautti, Frederico M. Passover in the Works of Josephus. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Dederen, R. ‘On Esteeming One Day Better Than Another.’ Andrews University Seminary Studies 9

(1971): 16-35.

Duchesne, L. ‘La question de la Pâque au Concil de Nicée.’ Revue des questions historiques 28 (1880):

5-42.

Dugmore, Clifford W. ‘A Note on the Quartodecimans.’ Studia Patristica 4 (1961): 411-21.

Eisenbaum, Pamela. ‘Is Paul the Father of Misogyny and Antisemitism?’ Cross Currents 50:4 (2000-

01): 506-24.

Gerlach, Karl. The Antenicene Pascha: A Rhetorical History. Leuven: Peeters, 1998.

Grossi, Vittorino. ‘La Pasqua quartodecimana e il significato della croce nel II secolo.’ Augustinianum

16 (1976): 557-71.

Hall, S. G. ‘Melito in the Light of the Passover Haggadah.’ Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1971):

219-46.

Hardin, Justin K. ‘“Days, Months, Seasons, Years”: Gal 4.8-10 and the Imperial Cult?’ Paper presented

at the Annual Tyndale Fellowship Conference, 2004 (forthcoming). The paper is part of a larger

Ph.D. thesis provisionally entitled ‘Galatians and the Imperial Cult: A Critical Assessment.’

Holl, Karl. ‘Ein Bruchstück aus einem bisher unbekannten Brief des Epiphanius.’ Pages 159-89 in

Festgabe für Adolf Jülicher. Tübingen: Mohr, 1927.

Howard, J. K. ‘Christ Our Passover: A Study of the Passover-Exodus Theme in 1 Corinthians.’ The

Evangelical Quarterly 41 (1969): 97-108.

Huber, Wolfgang. Passah und Ostern. Untersuchungen zur Osterfeier der alten Kirche. Beihefte zur

Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 35. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1969.

8

L’Huillier, Peter. The Church of the Ancient Councils: The Disciplinary Work of the First Four

Ecumenical Councils. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996.

Lieu, Judith. Image and Reality: The Jews in the World of the Christians in the Second Century.

Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996.

Levine, Baruch. Leviticus. The JPS Torah Commentary. New York: The Jewish Publication Society,

1989.

Lohse, Bernhard. Das Passafest der Quartadecimaner. Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie

54. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1953.

Martin, Troy. ‘Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes in Gal. 4.10 and Col. 2.16.’ New

Testament Studies 42 (1996): 105-19.

__________. ‘Apostasy to Paganism: the Rhetorical Stasis of the Galatian Controversy.’ Journal of

Biblical Literature 114 (1995): 437-61.

Martyn, J. Louis. Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible

33A. New York: Doubleday, 1997.

Metzger, Bruce. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. London: United Bible Societies,

1975.

Nanos, Mark D. The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First-Century Context. Minneapolis: Fortress,

2002.

_____________. The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress,

1996.

Niehoff, Maren R. Philo on Jewish Identity and Culture. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2001.

Odom, Robert L. Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald,

1977.

Oster, Richard E. ‘Christianity in Asia Minor.’ Pages 938-54 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary I. Edited

by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Parkes, James. The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue: A Study in the Origins of Antisemitism.

New York: Atheneum, 1985.

Petersen, William L. ‘Eusebius and the Paschal Controversy.’ Pages 311-25 in Eusebius, Christianity,

and Judaism. Edited by Harold W. Attridge and Gohei Hata. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Richard, Marcel. ‘La lettre de Saint Irénée au Pape Victor.’ ZNW 56 (1965): 260-82.

_____________. La question pascale au Iie siècle.’ L’orient syrien 6 (1961): 179-212.

Richardson, Cyril C. ‘A New Solution to the Quartodeciman Riddle.’ Journal of Theological Studies 24

(1973): 74-84.

________________. ‘The Quartodecimans and the Synoptic Chronology.’ Harvard Theological Review

33 (1940): 177-90.

Rordorf, Willi. ‘Zum Ursprung des Osterfestes am Sonntag.’ Theologische Zeitschrift 18 (1962): 167-

89.

Rosner, Brian S. Paul, Scripture & Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5-7. Leiden: Brill, 1994.

Ross, J. M. ‘The Extra Words in Acts 18:21.’ Novum Testamentum 34 (1992): 247-49.

Rouwhorst, G. A. M. ‘The Quartodeciman Passover and the Jewish Pesach. Questions Liturgiques 77

(1996) 152-173.

_________________. Les hymnes Pascales d’Ephrem de Nisibe. Analyse théologique et recherche sur

l’évolution de la fête pascale chrétienne à Nisibe et à Édesse et dans quelques Églises voisines

au quatrième siècle. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1989.

Saldarini, Anthony J. Jesus and Passover. New York: Paulist, 1984.

9

Schlatter, Adolf. Die Korintherbriefe. Schlatters Erläuterungen zum Neuen Testament 6.

Stuttgart: Calwer Berlag, 1950.

Schrage, Wolfgang. Der erste Brief an die Korinther 2. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum

Neuen Testament. Düsseldorf: Benziger, 1995.

Shulam, Joseph and Hilary Le Cornu. A Commentary on the Jewish Roots of Romans. Baltimore:

Lederer, 1997.

Stewart-Sykes, Alistair, trans. On Pascha: With the Fragments of Melito and Other Material Related to

the Quartodecimans. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001.

___________________. The Lamb’s High Feast: Melito, Peri Pascha and the Quartodeciman Paschal

Liturgy at Sardis. Leiden: Brill, 1998.

Strand, Kenneth A. ‘John as Quartodeciman: A Reappraisal.’ Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965):

251-58.

Talley, Thomas J. The Origins of the Liturgical Year. New York: Pueblo, 1986.

Thiselton, Anthony C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

Thornton, T. C. G. ‘Problematical Passovers: Difficulties for Diaspora Jews and Early Christians in

Determining Passover Dates during the First Three Centuries A.D.’ Studia Patristica 20 (1989):

402-408.

Tomson, Peter J. ‘Paul’s Jewish Background in View of His Law Teaching in 1 Cor 7.’ Pages 251-70 in

Paul and the Mosaic Law. Edited by James D. G. Dunn. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.

_____________. Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakha in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles.

Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.

Van Goudoever. J. Biblical Calendars. Second Revised Edition. Leiden: Brill, 1961.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament

3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Wilson, S. G. ‘Passover, Easter, and Anti-Judaism.’ Pages 337-55 in ‘To See Ourselves as Others See

Us’: Christians, Jews, ‘Others’ in Late Antiquity. Edited by Jacob Neusner and Ernest S.

Frerichs. Chico: Scholars, 1985.

Witulski, Thomas. ‘Galatians IV 8-20 Addressed to Pisidian Antioch. Pages 61-66 in Actes du 1er

Congrès International sur Antioche de Pisidie. Edited by T. Drew-Bear, Mehmet Taslialan and

Christine M. Thomas. Collection Archeologie et Histoire de L’Antiquite Universite LumiereLyon 2, 5. Lyon: Université Lumière, 2002.

_______________. Die Adressaten des Galaterbriefes: Untersuchungen zur Gemeinde von Antiochia

ad Pisidiam. FRLANT 193. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000.

Yuval, Israel J. ‘Easter and Passover As Early Jewish-Christian Dialogue.’ Pages 98-124 in Passover

and Easter: Origin and History to Modern Times. Edited by Paul F. Bradshaw and Lawrence

A. Hoffman. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1999.

Zernov, N. ‘Eusebius and the Paschal Controversy at the End of the Second Century.’ Church

Quarterly Review 116 (1933): 24-41.

The Enigmatic Jerusalem Bolshevik: The Memoirs of Najati Sidqi – Salim Tamari

The subject of these memoirs, Najati Sidqi (1905-1979), is almost forgotten in the annals of the Palestinian national movement: even within the Left, there are few who remember him. Yet at one point, Sidqi was a foremost figure within Palestinian and Arab communism. A leader within the trade union movement, he represented the Palestinian Communist Party (PCP) in the Comintern, was one of the few Arab socialists to join the anti-fascist struggle in Spain, and contributed significantly to the political and cultural journalism of the Left in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine. 

Now, thanks to Hanna Abu Hanna’s meticulous editing-and his extensive annotations and glossary– we possess a valuable record of what went on behind the scenes of Syrian and Palestinian partisan activities and a vivid account of how Arab socialists and communists lived in the Soviet Union during the Stalin era. 

At various stages of his career, Sidqi was privy to personal (and sometime intimate) contacts with Joseph Stalin, Nicolai Bukharin (author of the Soviet Constitution) and one of the founders of the Comintern), Jorge Dimitrov (the leader of Bulgarian communists), Dolores Ibaruri (the legendary leader of the Spanish Republican movement), George Marchais (leader of the French Communist Party), and with Khalid Bagdash (the Kurdish leader of Syrian Communist Party with whom Sidqi had chronic and bitter disputes over their divergent assessments of Islam and Arab nationalism). He witnessed the arrest and execution of Gregory Zinoviev and Bukharin, the fall of Madrid to Franco’s forces, and the rise of the Nazi movement in Berlin. He was also an eyewitness to the entry of the British army to Palestine, the exile of King Faisal from Damascus, and the exit of the French army from Syria and Lebanon. 

An important significance of these memoirs is that they shed light on an overlooked aspect of political life in Jerusalem. During the Mandate period, the city was known for the factional rivalries between the two leading Jerusalem families (the Nashashibis and the Husseinis) and their respective political parties, as well as for being the seat of the colonial government. But, in general, political life was the domain of Haifa and Jaffa, with their trade union activities, radical politics and left-wing journalism. 

Sidqi sheds light on the earliest appearance of left-wing politics in Jerusalem – and his own participation in it, first in the context of attempts by Jewish radical groups to break with the Zionist movement and then in the attempt by Arab socialists to ‘infiltrate’ traditional groupings such as the quasi-religious Nebi Musa processions (see excerpts below). Sidqi also highlights the degree of mobility with which left-wing activists, and presumably other militants, moved from one city to another and the relative ease with which they smuggled themselves across the border to Syria and Lebanon. Only four years before the setting of these memoirs, Syria, Mount Lebanon, Palestine, and Transjordan were part of one Ottoman domain with no borders between them. 

Sidqi published a fragment of his ‘public’ memoirs in 1968.1 The current memoirs are supposed to expose the ‘secret’ and clandestine aspect of his political history. Yet they leave many questions unanswered and several issues unresolved, that the editor, himself a veteran of Palestinian socialism, could have clarified. For example, why did the young Sidqi join the communist movement in the 1920s when his sympathies were clearly nationalist? And why was he expelled from the movement in the 1940s? Why did his older brother Ahmad, a party militant who lived with him in Moscow, become a state witness against Sidqi when he was arrested by the British Police during the Mandate – a crucial factor in his imprisonment? But, above all, the personal dimension in Sidqi’s life is missing from the memoirs. 

In Abu Hanna’s introduction, we learn in a schematic manner about Sidqi’s biography, but the diarist’s own rendition of the memoirs remains wooden and enigmatic. It is as if his clandestine Bolshevik militant life style kept him from disclosing his intimate thoughts for fear of posthumous exposure. Sidqi was born to a middle class Jerusalemite family in 1905. His father, Bakri Sidqi, was a teacher of Turkish who later joined Prince Faisal in Hijaz in the campaign against the Wahhabi movement. His mother was Nazira Murad, from a prominent mercantile family in Jerusalem. Najati spent his childhood in Jeddah and Cairo, later moving with his family to Damascus when Faisal was proclaimed king. In the early 1920s, he returned to Jerusalem and worked in the Department of Post and Telegraph where he joined the nascent PCP, at the time dominated by Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe and leftist Zionists. 

In 1921, he was sent by the Party to study in Moscow at the KUTV (the Communist University of Toilers of the Orient), where he became acquainted with the Turkish poet Nazim Hikmat and members of the Nehru family. His university thesis was on the Arab national movement from the Unionist Rebellion against the Ottoman State to the formation of the National Bloc. This short dissertation, which is attached to the memoirs, sheds some light on the kind of scholarship that was conducted at KUTV, and etablishes Sidqi as a minor Marxist scholar (although it is quite possible to surmise, as Abu Hanna suggests in his introduction, that the available manuscript–which he collected in fragments from three different sources–is incomplete). 

In Moscow, Siqdi married a Ukrainian communist who remains nameless, faceless, and voiceless throughout the diaries. Paradoxically, the only time we hear her in the memoirs is when she is arrested by Lebanese gendarmes during one of the family’s escapades, when she is veiled in disguise and only bows her head in answer to their questioning. Similarly his son and daughters – one of whom became a prominent doctor in the Soviet Union — are mentioned only in passing. 

Having completed his academic training, Sidqi returned to Palestine – or rather was sent to participate in Arabizing what was essentially a Jewish party. During the thirties, he was arrested by the British police and spent three years incarcerated in Jerusalem, Jaffa, and Akka. The Comintern had him smuggled out of the country in the thirties to Paris where he edited the Comintern’s Arabic journal The Arab East, which was distributed clandestinely in North Africa and the Mashriq. Eventually, the French authorities closed the journal, presumably because of its anti-colonial tone in Algeria. In 1936, the Comintern sent Sidqi to mobilize Moroccan soldiers against Franco. (In the early days of the fascist rebellion, it must be recalled, a significant section of Franco’s army that landed in Malaga was formed of Moroccon mercenaries, while the bulk of the International Brigades that fought on the side of the republic were European leftist volunteers. It was against this background that the communist movement had a movement had an interest in approaching the Moroccans). Siqi lived within the ranks of the Republican movement in Barcelona and Madrid, disseminating leaflets in Arabic to the North African militias of the fascist movement. (One can imagine how ineffective these leaflets were, given Sidqi’s Palestinian Arabic and the low level of literacy among Franco’s rural Moroccan troops). At the beginning of 1937, he was sent to Algeria to set up an Arabic radio station, his own idea, to broadcast anti-Franco propaganda to the Moroccan fighters – a mission that failed for some inexplicable reasons. At this stage, the Comintern ordered Sidqi to relocate to Lebanon where his journalistic career in the left-wing newspapers flourished. 

It was in this period that his relations with Khalid Bagdash became so strained that Sidqi was eventually expelled from the party. Abu Hanna suggests that the main reason for the expulsion was his opposition to the Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact in August 1939, but this is not clear from Sidqi’s own narrative. In fact the author’s assessment of his differences with the Bagdash supporters is symptomatic of a striking political naivete that prevails throughout the diaries. He claims, for example, that the pact was welcomed by the party loyalists because it signified a rapprochement between international communism and German national socialism; he opposed the treaty because it was ‘a fake agreement, meant to gain time [for Stalin]’ (page 165-166). It is more likely that the opposite was true: the pro-Soviet Arab communists supported the agreement, perhaps with some hesitation, because they wanted to give the Russians a reprieve from their global isolation. It is extremely unlikely, as Sidqi claims, that they were sympathetic to the ideological affinity between the two movements. 

Eventually, Sidqi comes out as an Arab nationalist with socialist sympathies. His break with the Comintern and Bagdash did not turn him against the Left. Rather, he pursued a successful career in literary criticism and broadcasting in Lebanon and Cyprus. By the time of his death in Athens in 1979, he had produced a dozen books on Russian literature, plays, and volumes of literary criticism. One of his books An Arab who Fought in Spain about his experience in the anti-fascist struggle was falsely published under Bagdash’s name – an episode that inflamed Sidqi against both Bagdash and the Party. Another work Nazism and Islam, which he published to mobilize traditional Muslims against the Nazi movement, was translated to English and received citations from the French and British Governments. The book became a decisive factor in his expulsion from the party (p. 167) since – according to Sidqi– it relied too much on Islamic texts for the tastes of his secular party colleagues. Notwithstanding these reservations the Najati Sidqi Memoirs make a significant contribution to Palestinian biographic literature and present historians with a valuable glimpse into the formative stages of Arab and Palestinian socialism of the pre-war period.

Bolshevism Arrives in Jerusalem 

In the following translated excerpts from the diaries, Sidqi traces his own involvement with the Bolshevik movement in Jerusalem in the 1920s when he was a civil servant in the Mandatory Government. 

The Jewish immigration to Palestine brought to this country ideologies, customs, and a life-styles that was at variance with the Arab Palestinian environment. At the beginning of the 1920s we began to hear about Bolshevism, anarchism, Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, and Hertzl. We also encountered workers movements among those Jewish immigrants, such as the Histadrut – the trade union of Jewish workers – the ‘Fraktsia’, the left opposition inside the Histadrut, the Poaleh Tsion Party, and the Kibbutzim, the quasi-socialist encampments of new immigrants. 

Leftist immigrants began to agitate among the Arabs. One of the first demonstrations they led was in the streets of Jaffa during the May Day parade of 1921. They raised red flags in the Manshiyyeh quarters, and shouted slogans in Hebrew and [broken] Arabic. The Arab inhabitants stared at them in wonderment, unable to figure out what these workers were shouting, or what they were wanted from them. 

I was at the time [1921] a young man employed in the department of Post and Telegraph in Jerusalem, which was located in the old compound of the Italian Consulate, across the street from Barclays Bank today [1939], that is, it was located at the borders separating the Arab areas from the Jewish areas outside the city walls. 

The Postal Department included employees from both groups, and a variety of ethnicities and life-styles. You would observe local inhabitants wearing Arab dress, Ashkenazi Jews wearing coloured velvet coats, and fur hats; Halutsim (‘pioneer’ Jewish immigrants), males and females, wearing shorts; Sephardim (Arabized Jews who originally came from Spain); and Kurgis – the remnants of Babylonian exiled Jews from the eighth century BC. 

In the department we used to associate with Jewish immigrants either as work mates or through socializing. Many of us patronized a small café behind the building where Barclays Bank is located today. It was owned by a Russian Jew of robust build, who always wore white trousers with a black shirt on top, with its buttons opened on the left shoulder. He used to shave his head with a razor to keep his head cool during the summer, and had a trimmed beard and huge moustache curled in the Russian manner. The waitress was a blonde and attractive Polish woman with reddish cheeks, and blue eyes. 

In this café my mates and I would congregate in the evening, and socialize with its foreign customers. I recall from those days a Tsarist captain with a white beard, who claimed that the Bolsheviks seized his ship in Odessa; and a young municipal employee whose father was Russian, and his mother was Arab; an immigrant painter who used to sketch the customers for few piasters; an elegant lady who always dwelled about her lost real estate in the Ukraine, and scores of immigrant youth who would buy soda water to dampen their thirst in the summer. 

I remember in this environment the frequent debates that revolved around Jewish immigration and Arab resistance; of Jabotinsky’s rebellion, of Tell Hai in northern Palestine… ; of the rebellion in Jaffa [1921]; and of armed clashes between Jews and Arabs in Jerusalem after Jabotinsky led his followers to the Wailing Wall. Many of these debates where accompanied by ideological discussions which were translated to us by those immigrants who knew colloquial Arabic. I learned that socialism aims at establishing the authority of workers’ councils, and that anarchism does not recognize the authority of the state, and that it aims at the self-government of people through syndicates. I also learned that Bolshevism (we did not use the Arab word for communism – shuyu’iyya – in those days) established a socialist state in Russia through revolution and the Red Army. 

Those discussions struck me as strange, and rather divorced from our local concerns. We were preoccupied then with the unknown future, with British occupation, and with the Balfour Declaration. From our parents we learned that the British and the French had arrived ostensibly to liberate us [from Ottoman rule], and that Lawrence was the friend of the Arabs, and that the rebellion of [Sherif] Hussein ben Ali was aimed at establishing a unified Arab state. We grew up in this atmosphere… the colonial and Zionist hordes where seizing Palestine, while international doctrines where permeating our impressionable thoughts. We were ready to hear anything, and accept any preposition to lift the nightmare of the new occupation that succeeded Turkish rule. 

In the Postal Café I befriended a group of Russian new immigrants who belonged to the Fraktsia, and to the Palestine Workers Party. Their propaganda was centered around the following themes: 

First, that British colonialism was the enemy of both Jews and Arabs, and that its policy was based on the principle of ‘divide and rule.’ 

Second, those Jewish immigrants were composed of a well-off bourgeoisie and of poor workers, and that Zionism was a bourgeois movement, which benefits wealthy Jews only. Jewish workers have an interest in allying themselves with international socialism, and will eventually get rid of their masters. 

Third, that Arab effendis are opportunists who collaborate with the colonial authorities, and are undependable as allies. 

Fourth, Only a workers’ party for all Palestinians will be able to reconcile the interests of working people from both peoples, and to radically solve the Palestinian problem. 

Those were new and intriguing notions to me, which led me to reflect on them deeply. Some of these immigrants would invite me to their club behind the German hospital in Jerusalem. There I learned about the arrest of their comrades in Egypt, and the death of one of the militants, a Lebanese Arab, in prison after a prolonged food strike. They used to distribute an Arabic newspaper – al-Insaniyya – published in Beirut by Yusif Yazbek. They also gave me a pamphlet in Arabic by Prince Kropotkin on anarchism. 

We used to meet alternatively in the club, and the Shniller forest. Occasionally we met in the hills of Ratzbone. One day, at the end of 1924, when I was only 19, my comrades asked me if I would be interested in travelling to Moscow to study at the university without paying for travel, education, or my living expenses. I did not hesitate for a moment in accepting this offer. They asked me to prepare for travel within six months. 

I started by taking private lessons in elementary Russian from a young Russian immigrant who knew some Arabic. He taught me the alphabet, and some basic rudimentary conversational skills. During this period the group invited me to their youth conference in Haifa, where I was elected to the central committee of the Party’s Youth section. That was my formal initiation into the Bolshevik movement in Palestine. Since that day I was expected to attend all the clandestine meeting of the movement, and to distribute the party’s leaflets and brochures. 

In that period I became active in the Nebi Musa festival. This celebration was originally established by Salah ed Din al Ayyubi, together with the festival of Nebi Rubin in Jaffa, hoping that it will remind people of the Islamic conquests. Party supporters raised me on their shoulders. I had a kuffiyyeh and iqal as headgears, and wore dark glasses. I was elevated among the banners of the religious sects, in the midst of drums and trumpets, and village songs and dabkes. I shouted some slogans that came to my mind. The comrades raised the Red Flag, and a huge slogan saluting the struggle for independence. The demonstrators were delirious with excitement, and the word spread: The Arab Bolsheviks have arrived!! 

This event led the British authorities to instigate a campaign to arrest me. Informants were spreading conflicting information about me. Some claimed that they saw me covered in a woman’s abaya, with a black veil on my face; another claimed that he saw me in the Christian quarter dressed as an orthodox priest with a longish beard; a third one said that the beggar who sleeps in the Dark Gate leading to the Haram compound is also another disguise, and so on. All these rumors compelled the CID to look for an up to date picture of me. They brought in a young acquaintance of mine and had him describe my features to a police artist. They distributed copies of the sketch to security personnel. Within days they had arrested a schoolteacher, a real estate broker, and a travelling textile peddler. They eventually released them all.

Salim Tamari is the research director at the Institute of Jerusalem Studies and chairman of the JQF Advisory Board.

collectif for an active conscience of Islam