Liturgy 11:20 - 13:00 Thursday, 22Nd August, 2019 Room 9 Presentation Type Short Communications

Liturgy 11:20 - 13:00 Thursday, 22nd August, 2019 Room 9 Presentation type Short Communications 843 Beyond Diabasis Alone: Philo’s Alternative Liturgical Theology of Pascha as Received in Early Christian Computus Maria Theotokos Adams, SSVM Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA Abstract Drawing on Philo of Alexandria, Origen famously promoted a corrective etymology for pascha as meaning “crossing” (diabasis) from the transliterated Hebrew word fasek, as opposed to “suffering” (paschein) from the homophone Greek verb. Many early Christian authors readily accepted and shared this view including Eusebius of Caesarea, Gregory Nazianzus, Jerome, Maximus of Turin, and Augustine. Philo seems to interpret feast of pascha as a memorial emphasizing the crossing of the Red Sea (diabasis) over and above the slaughter of the lamb and the miracle of its protection for the Hebrew families on 14 Nisan. However, a more comprehensive reading of Philo’s etymologies and references to pascha reveals that he equally used diabateria as a second term to explain the meaning of the feast. His choice of this expression meaning “the sacrifice before a crossing” suggests a daring Classical allusion to Spartan practice which recasts the two poles of the Exodus events – sacrifice and passage – into a new harmonic whole. Anatolius of Laodicea and Eusebius of Caesarea demonstrate how the alternative etymology diabateria was preferred within the context of the technical and theological challenges of paschal computus. Like Origen they invoke the antiquity and authority of the Jewish scholars to defend their methods, but they depart from Origen in his nearly exclusive use of diabasis in favor of a balanced solution between sacrifice on 14 Nisan (diabateria) and victorious passage on “the third day” (diabasis). 911 Liturgy in ancient amulets - a part of the conversation Nils H. Korsvoll University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway Abstract Scholars have typically understood liturgical phrases and topics in ancient amulets as identity markers or as elements borrowed from public ritual to legitimize their claim to power. Recent revisions, however, both in liturgical studies and the study of ancient amulets, challenge this interpretation and its notion of a unilateral exchange from liturgy to magic. Building on these insights, I use a selection of late antique amulets from Egypt and Iraq to show how amulets in fact appear to be a part of the negotiations and development of liturgy. This observation is not only important for the study of ancient amulets, placing them within the wider developments of ritually efficacious language in Antiquity, but also for expanding the scope and source material for the study of early liturgy. 629 What Does Lazarus Have to Do with the Epiphany? Unraveling a Mystery in the Early Jerusalem Lectionary Hugo Mendez University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Abstract Every year on the sixth day of the Epiphany octave (Epiphany VI/11 January), the residents of Jerusalem gathered in Bethany and read the account of Jesus’ miraculous raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-46). This paper reconstructs the meaning of this celebration from the extant homilies of Hesychius of Jerusalem, a fifth-century presbyter in the city. First, the paper determines that Hesychius’ Hom. 12, In S. Lazarum, is an artifact of the celebration—that is, a sermon preached on Epiphany VI. Secondly, the paper determines from the homily that Epiphany VI had a double significance for the residents of Jerusalem. Like other days in the Epiphany octave, the festivity commemorated Jesus’ birth, but it also – and even primarily – served as the city’s primary celebration of the raising of Lazarus. Lastly, the paper revisits the origins and evolution of this festival. It concludes that the celebration was the partial continuation of an older and more complex memorial on the Saturday immediately before Holy Week – one that commemorated all of Jesus’ encounter with Mary, the raising of Lazarus, and a later supper shared in the home of Lazarus. Evidence of this older celebration persists in Cyril of Jerusalem’s Catechetical Lectures, the Itinierarium Egeriae, and perhaps also Hesychius’ Hom. 11. By the mid-fifth century, however, the church of Jerusalem limited the focus of this feast to the supper at Lazarus’ home; simultaneously, it moved the account of Lazarus’ raising to the only other date on which it held a public liturgy in Bethany, Epiphany VI..

Load more