JESUS
378
JESUS
years of actual Ijuikling, the Pasch of Christ's first year
of public life must have fallen in 778 A.u.c. Third,
the Gospel of St. Luke (iii, 1) assigns the beginning of
St. John the Baptist's mission to the " fifteenth year of
the reign of Tiberius Caesar". Augustus, the prede-
cessor of Tiberius, died 19 .-^ug., 767 a.u.c, so that
the fifteenth year of Tiberius's independent reign is
782 A. u. c; but then Tiberius began to be the associ-
ate of Augustus in A. u. c. 764, so that the fifteenth
year reckoned from this date falls in A. u. c. 778. Jesus
Christ's public life began a few montlis later, i. e. about
A. IT. c. 779.
(.3) The Year of the Death of Christ. — According to the Evangelists, Jesus suffered under the high-priest Caiphas (a.u.c. 772-90, or a. d. 1S-.36), during the governorship of Pontius Pilate (a. u. c. 7S0-90). But this leaves the time rather indefinite. Tradition, the patristic testimonies for which have been collected by Patrizi (De Evangeliis), places the death of Jesus in the fifteenth (or sixteenth) year of Tiberius, in the con- sulship of the Gemini, forty-two years before the de- struction of Jerusalem, and twelve years before the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles. We have al- ready seen that the fifteenth year of Tiberius is either 778 or 782, according to its computation from the be- ginning of Tiberius's a-ssociate or sole reign; the consul- ship of the Gemini (Fufius and Rubellius) fell in A. u. c. 782; the forty-second year before the destruction of Jerusalem is A. D. 29, or again A.u.c. 782; twelve years before the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles brings us to the same year, A. D. 29, or A. u. c. 782, since the conversion of Cornelius, which marks the opening of the Gentile missions, fell probably in A. D. 40 or 41.
(4) Jesus died on Friday, the fifteenth day of Nisan. That Jesus died on Friday is clearly stated by Mark (xv, 42), Luke (xxiii, 54), and John (xix, 31). The few writers who assign another day for Christ's death are practically lost in the multitude of authori- ties who place it on Friday. What is more, they do not even agree among themselves: Epiphanius, e. g., places the Crucifixion on Tuesday; Lactantius, on Saturilay; Westcott, on Thursday; Cassiodorus and Gregory of Tours, not on Friday. The first three Evangelists are equally clear about the date of the Crucifixion. They place the Last Supper on the four- teenth day of Nisan, as may be seen from Matt., xxvi, 17-20; Mark, xiv, 12-17; Luke, xxii, 7-14. Nor can there be any doubt about St. John's agreement with the Synoptic Evangelists on the question of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion. The Supper was held "before the festival day of the pasch" (John, xiii, 1), i. e. on 14 Nisan, since the sacrificial day was com- puted according to the Roman method (Jovino, 123 sqq., 139 sqq.). Again, some disciples thought that Judas left the supper table because Jesus hatl said to him: " Buy those things which we have need of for the festival day: or that he should give something to the poor" (John, xiii, 29). If the Supper had been held on 13 Nisan this belief of the disciples can hardly be understood, since Judas might have made his pur- chases and distributed his alms on 14 Nisan; there would have been no need for his rushing into the city in the middle of the night. On the day of Christ's Crucifixion the Jews " went not into the hall, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the pasch" (John, xviii, 28). The pasch which the Jews wished to eat could not ha\'e been the paschal laml), which was eaten on 14 Nisan, for the pollution con- tracted by entering the hall would have ceased at sun- down, so that it would not have prevented them from sharing in the paschal siipper. The pasch which the Jews had in view must have been the sacrificial offer- ings (('lirit/iijh(ili), which were cnlli'd also /xisrh and were eaten on \!) Nisan. Hence lliis inissii^'c ))l;ices the <leath of .Jesus Christ on the fifteenlli d:iy of Nisan. Again, .Jesus is said to have suffered and died on the
"para.sceve of the pasch", or simply on the "para-
sceve" (John, xix, 14, 31); as "parasceve" meant Fri-
day, the expression "parasceve of the pasch" denotes
the Friday on which the pasch happened to fall, not
the day before the pasch. Finally, the day following
the parasceve on which Jesus died is called " a great
sabbath day" (John, xix, 31), either to denote its oc-
currence in the paschal week or to distinguish it from
the preceding pasch, or day of minor rest.
B. Relative Chronology. — No student of the life of Jesus will question the chronological order of its prin- cipal divisions: infancy, hidden life, pulilic life, pas- sion, glory. But the order of events in the single divi- sions is not always clear beyond tlispute.
(1) The Infancy of Jesus. — The history of the in- fancy, for instance, is recorded only in the First Gospel and in the Third. Each Evangelist contents himself with five pictures: St. Matthew descrilies the birth of Jesus, the adoration of the Magi, the fliglit into Kgyjit, the slaughter of the Holy Innocents, antl the return to Nazareth. St. Luke gives a sketch of the birth, of the adoration of the shepherds, of the circumcision, of the purification of the Virgin, and of the return to Naza- reth. The two Evangelists agree in the first and the last of the.se two series of incidents (moreover, all scholars place the Iiirth, the adoration of the shep- herds, and the circumcision Ijefore the Magi), but how are we to arrange the intervening three events related by St. Matthew with the order of St. Luke? We indi- cate a few of the many ways in which the chronologi- cal sequence of these facts has been arranged.
(a) The birth, the adoration of the shepherds, the cir- cumcision, the adoration of the Magi, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Innocents, the pmifica- tion, the return to Nazareth. This order implies that either the purification was delayetl l)cyontl the fortieth day, which seems to contratlict Luke, ii, 22 sqq., or that Jesus was born shortly before Herod's death, so that the Holy Family could return from Egypt within forty days after the birth of Jesus. Tradition does not seem to favour this speedy return.
(b) The birth, the adoration of the shephenls, the circumcision, the adoration of the Magi, the purifica- tion, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Inno- cents, the return to Nazareth. According to this order the Magi either arrived a few days before the purification or they came on 6 Jan. ; but in neither case can we understand why the Holy Family should have offered the sacrifice of the poor, after receiving the of- ferings of the Magi. Moreover, the first Evangelist intimates that the angel appeared to St. Joseph soon after the departure of the Magi, and it is not at all probable that Herod should have waited long before inquiring concerning the whereabouts of the new-born king. The difficulties are not overcome by placing the adoration of the Magi on the day before the purifi- cation; it would be more unlikelj' in that case that the Holy P'araily shoukl offer the sacrifice of the poor.
(c) As Luke, ii, 39, appears to exclude the possi- bility of placing the adoration of the Magi l^etween the presentation and the return to Nazareth, there are interpreters who have located the advent of the wise men, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Inno- cents, and the return from I'^gypt after the events as told in St. Luke. They agree in the opinion that the Holy Family returned to Nazareth after the purifica- tion, and then left Nazareth in order to make their home in Bethlehem. Eu.sebius, Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers are willing to place the adora- tion of the Magi about two years after Christ's l)irth; Papebroch and his followers allow about a year and thirteen days between the birth and the advent of the Magi; while Patrizi agrees with those who fi.x the advent of the Magi at about two weeks after the ])uri- fieation. The text of Matt., ii, 1, 2, hardly permits an interval of more th.an a year t)etween the purification and the coming of the wise men; Patrizi's o|>iMion
