Luke set the date of Christmas?

[Digitonomy]

On another thread, Cardinal Ratzinger’s book “The Blessings of Christmas” was quoted as crediting Luke with pegging the date of Christmas to December 25.

In the Jewish Calendar, December 25th was (and remains) the feast of Hannukah, the feast of lights which recalls how on this day in 165, BC, Judas Maccabeus removed the altar of Zeus–which tradition called the “abomination of desolation in the holy place”-from the Temple in Jerusalem. It was on the same date that the Syrian King Antiochus, who was worshipped as “Zeus” had set up the pagon idol in the Temple, designating Decemer 25 as his own feast day. Now it became the date of the cleansing of the Temple, the day on which the glory of God, which had been trampled underfoot, was reestablished and God began to be honored anew in thei proper manner.

…As early as around 100 BC, the birth of the messainic child was expected on this day. People hoped that the Messiah would teach them how to honor God aright and that he would thereby indicate the new time of freedom.

…In his infancy narrative, Luke unfolds a chronology with a profound symbolic meaning, dating it in such a way that the birth of Jesus occurs during the feast of Hannukah, on the night of lights, which thus became the Christian feast of Christmas…The birth of Christ is the true reform of worship, and all our attempts at liturgical reform must ultimately aim to correspond to this reform, this true new beginning.

Apparently Ratzinger cites “Jahresfeier und Zeitenwende im Judentum und Christentum der Antike” by Bö Riecke as a source for this point.

I have never heard of the date of Christmas being established early, certainly not in the Gospels. If it were widely accepted, I would have expected at least a mention in Wikipedia (though its absence doesn’t prove anything). While the article does suggest a much earlier date than I had been aware of, nothing is said about Luke or Hannukah.

Tertullian does not mention it as a major feast day in the Church of Roman Africa. In 245, the theologian Origen denounced the idea of celebrating Christ’s birthday “as if he were a king pharaoh”. He contended that only sinners, not saints, celebrated their birthdays. Sextus Julius Africanus popularized the idea that Christ was born on December 25 in his Chronographiai, a reference book for Christians written in AD 221.

This blogger took considerable time analyzing possible origins for the date of Christmas, but makes no mention of Luke (although his particular blog page on scripture comes up blank).

Likewise, the old Catholic Encyclopedia makes no mention of a biblical origin for the date.

Can anyone give any further insight (e.g. particular verses) into the rather remarkable claim by our current pontiff that Luke established December 25 as the date for Christmas?

 

[benedictgal]

On another thread, Cardinal Ratzinger’s book “The Blessings of Christmas” was quoted as crediting Luke with pegging the date of Christmas to December 25.Apparently Ratzinger cites “Jahresfeier und Zeitenwende im Judentum und Christentum der Antike” by Bö Riecke as a source for this point.

I have never heard of the date of Christmas being established early, certainly not in the Gospels. If it were widely accepted, I would have expected at least a mention in Wikipedia (though its absence doesn’t prove anything). While the article does suggest a much earlier date than I had been aware of, nothing is said about Luke or Hannukah.This blogger took considerable time analyzing possible origins for the date of Christmas, but makes no mention of Luke (although his particular blog page on scripture comes up blank).

Likewise, the old Catholic Encyclopedia makes no mention of a biblical origin for the date.

Can anyone give any further insight (e.g. particular verses) into the rather remarkable claim by our current pontiff that Luke established December 25 as the date for Christmas?

Perhaps the one who can answer this will be Pope Benedict, himself, when he finishes the sequel to “Jesus of Nazareth.” From what I understand, it will focus on the Infancy Narratives and the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus.

But, I would like to know if any folks out there know how to read German and if the book the Holy Father cited is still in print (and if an English translation exists). Why are all of the good theological books in German?

P.S.: I’ve been leery of Wikepedia ever since the Chris Benoit episode. Since it seems that anyone can go in and change things at will, I don’t know if the website even checks their sources.

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Magisterium has no teaching on the historical date of Christmas, neither on the year, nor the month, nor the day. It is theological speculation.

Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich stated, from private revelation, that the date was Nov. 25th.

St. John Chrysostom argued from Luke’s Gospel that the date was Dec. 25th.

Other dates have been suggested. My own work in the area of Biblical chronology concludes that the date was in late November or early December, and could not have been as late as Dec. 25th.

Ron

 

[benedictgal]

The Magisterium has no teaching on the historical date of Christmas, neither on the year, nor the month, nor the day. It is theological speculation.

Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich stated, from private revelation, that the date was Nov. 25th.

St. John Chrysostom argued from Luke’s Gospel that the date was Dec. 25th.

Other dates have been suggested. My own work in the area of Biblical chronology concludes that the date was in late November or early December, and could not have been as late as Dec. 25th.

Ron

Of course, because it is private revelation, we aren’t obligated to follow Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich’s assertion. However, that still doesn’t quite explain what the Holy Father wrote in his book, other than the fact that he got it from a German theologian.

I am still very curious. Short of asking Benedict myself (Swiss Guards would probably shoo me away ), the next best thing is to find someone who can read German and explain to us what is in the book the Holy Father used for his reference.

 

[Digitonomy]

St. John Chrysostom argued from Luke’s Gospel that the date was Dec. 25th.

Now we’re getting somewhere… Here is a blog that discusses St John Chrysostom’s approach:

Chrysostom had a further argument…

Luke 1 says Zechariah was performing priestly duty in the Temple when an angel told his wife Elizabeth she would bear John the Baptist. During the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, Mary learned about her conception of Jesus and visited Elizabeth “with haste.”

The 24 classes of Jewish priests served one week in the Temple, and Zechariah was in the eighth class. Rabbinical tradition fixed the class on duty when the Temple was destroyed in A.D. 70 and, calculating backward from that, Zechariah’s class would have been serving Oct. 2-9 in 5 B.C. So Mary’s conception visit six months later might have occurred the following March and Jesus’ birth nine months afterward.

I would guess that Ratzinger used the same argument, although his wording is a bit misleading, implying that Luke makes specific reference to Hannukuh.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Chrysostom’s approach is from his ‘birthday sermon’. The approach is analyzed in Jack Finegan’s Handbook of Biblical Chronology. It is a well-known approach and was likely part of the basis for this idea.

 

[Digitonomy]

Chrysostom’s approach is from his ‘birthday sermon’. The approach is analyzed in Jack Finegan’s Handbook of Biblical Chronology. It is a well-known approach and was likely part of the basis for this idea.

Is Hannukah somehow a part of this theory to your knowledge, or is it just an apparent coincidence?

 

[Ron_Conte]

Is Hannukah somehow a part of this theory to your knowledge, or is it just an apparent coincidence?

Hannukah has nothing to do with it. The argument starts with Luke’s description of Zechariah’s service in the Temple, attempts to deduce the timing for that service. Elizabeth conceived shortly after that service, and so many months later, Mary was told of Elizabeth’s pregnancy (being in her sixth month). Then adding nine months to that date give a range of dates for the Birth of Christ.

Chrysostom used this argument to support that Christ was born about Dec. 25th, but the argument itself does not result in an exact date.

 

[benedictgal]

Hannukah has nothing to do with it. The argument starts with Luke’s description of Zechariah’s service in the Temple, attempts to deduce the timing for that service. Elizabeth conceived shortly after that service, and so many months later, Mary was told of Elizabeth’s pregnancy (being in her sixth month). Then adding nine months to that date give a range of dates for the Birth of Christ.

Chrysostom used this argument to support that Christ was born about Dec. 25th, but the argument itself does not result in an exact date.

I’m now confused. It seems as though as Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope Benedict seems to tie both Hannukah and Christmas. When I get home, I’ll re-read the meditation and post it. Since it’s not available online, I’ll have to retype it in chunks so that way you and Digitonomy will get the complete texts.

 

[ChadS]

I have Pope Benedict’s book “The Blessing of Christmas” in front of me. Unless I am looking at the wrong section (I can’t be sure since none of the quotes contain page numbers) Hanukkah doesn’t seem to be mentioned specifically in the book.

Here’s what Pope Benedict wrote in “The Blessing of Christmas,” on pages 66-67.

Bo Reicke, formerly professor of exegesis in Basel, has also pointed to the festal calendar that lies behind the chronological link made in the Gospel of Luke between the birth of John the Baptist and the birth of Jesus. This would mean that Luke himself assumes that Jesus was born on December 25, the day on which the feast of the dedication of the Temple (introduced by Judas Maccabeus in 164 B.C.) was celebrated. Hence, the date of Jesus’ birth would also symbolize the fact that when he appeared as God’s light in the winter night, the true dedication of the Temple – the arrival of God in the heart of this earth – took place.

Pope Benedict notes in a footnote that other than Reicke’s article other liturgical scholars haven’t paid any attention to the perspectives opened in the essay, “which overturns the existing scholarly consensus about the genesis of Christmas and Epiphany” ("The Blessing of Christmas, n. 2, p 67).

ChadS

 

[paidion]

The Hannukah connection doesn’t make much sense because Hannukah is not celebrated on December 25th every year. Sometimes Hannukah is as early as the end of November. It could also begin anytime through mid and late December - due to the Hebrew calendar being based on a lunar cycle. It is also celebrated eight days, not just one.

It’s my understanding that the Messiah could have been born in Sept/Oct to coincide with the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot). This feast was to commemorate G-d dwelling with His people (Ex.23:16) - all tying in with the idea of Emmanuel/ G-d with us.

 

[benedictgal]

I have Pope Benedict’s book “The Blessing of Christmas” in front of me. Unless I am looking at the wrong section (I can’t be sure since none of the quotes contain page numbers) Hanukkah doesn’t seem to be mentioned specifically in the book.

Here’s what Pope Benedict wrote in “The Blessing of Christmas,” on pages 66-67.

Pope Benedict notes in a footnote that other than Reicke’s article other liturgical scholars haven’t paid any attention to the perspectives opened in the essay, “which overturns the existing scholarly consensus about the genesis of Christmas and Epiphany” ("The Blessing of Christmas, n. 2, p 67).

ChadS

I’ve been sidelined with a migraine for most of this weekend. I’ll be re-reading my copy of “The Blessings of Christmas.” Digitonomy, I know I promised to post the section and, as soon as I can thumb through the whole thing, I’ll do it. I’m still kind of fuzzy in the brain, but, I’ll get it done tomorrow.

 

[benedictgal]

Okay, boys and girls, benedictgal found Pope Benedict’ s missing link to Hannukah and Christmas (Chad, I don’t think you were looking hard enough–pg. 105):

In the Jewish Calendar, December 25th was and remains the feast of Hannukah, the feast of lights, which recalls how, on this day in 165 B.C., Judas Maccabeus removed the altar of Zeus-which tradition called the “abomination of desolation in the holy place”–from the Temple in Jerusalem…it became the date of the cleansing of the Temple, the day on which the Glory of God, which had been trampled underfoot, was reestablished and God began to be honored anew in the proper manner…

From page 107
Since the week from December 25 to 31 was also the week before the New Year, this resotration took on an even deeper significance. It protrayed the new beginning of creation, the new time of freedom for which men hoped. This is why, as early as around 100 B.C., the birth of the messianic child was expected on this date. Poeple hoped that the Messiah would teach them how to honor God aright and that he would thereby initiate the new tikme of freedom. During Jesus’ own lifetime, this feast was already celebrated as the feast of lights, in keeping with the prophet Isaiah’s words, “The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light.”

From page 108
In his infancy narrative, Luke unfolds a chronology with a profound symbolic meaning, dating it in such a way that the birth of Jesus occurs during the feast of Hannukah, on the night of lights, which thus became the Christian feast of Christmas.

Now, if someone can find an English translation of the article from which the Holy Father quoted, then we’ll be in business.

 

[BibleSteve]

It’s my understanding that the Messiah could have been born in Sept/Oct to coincide with the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot). This feast was to commemorate G-d dwelling with His people (Ex.23:16) - all tying in with the idea of Emmanuel/ G-d with us.

I believe you are correct.

In the book of Daniel, chapter9, there is a prophecy regarding the Messiah. It describes both his coming and his being cut off in death, which provided a ransom sacrifice to atone for sin and establish a basis for obedient mankind to gain “righteousness for times indefinite.” (Daniel 9:24-27; compare Matthew 20:28.) According to this prophecy, all of this would be accomplished within a period of 70 weeks of years, beginning in the year 455B.C.E., when the command went forth to rebuild Jerusalem. (Nehemiah 2:1-11) From the time division in this prophecy, it can be discerned that the Messiah would appear at the beginning of the 70th week of years. This occurred when Jesus presented himself for baptism in 29*C.E., officially beginning his Messianic role. “At the half of the week,” or after three and a half years, the Messiah would be cut off in death, thereby bringing an end to the value of all sacrifices under the Mosaic Law covenant.—Hebrews 9:11-15; 10:1-10.

This prophecy reveals that the length of Jesus’ ministry was three and a half years. Jesus died on Passover, Nisan14 (according to the Jewish calendar), in the spring of 33C.E. The equivalent date for that year would be April1. (Matthew 26:2) Counting back three and a half years places his baptism in 29C.E. at the beginning of October. Luke informs us that Jesus was about 30 years old at his baptism. (Luke 3:21-23) This would mean that Jesus’ birth also was near the beginning of October. In harmony with Luke’s account, the shepherds would at that time of year still be “out of doors and keeping watches in the night over their flocks.”—Luke 2:8.