Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE GREEK MYSTERIES AND THE
GOSPEL NARRATIVE

CERTAIN events are recorded as having occurred in the life of Christ, the happening of some of which can scarcely be accounted for by any reference to the Jewish sacred writings; but when the religion of the Greeks is looked at, the reason for the occurrence of these events seems to be explained and their happening rendered intelligible and almost necessary. For the New Testament being a series of books written in Greek, presumably for the instruction of Greeks, a Greek might reasonably expect to find in them allusions to his own religion and the ritual which that religion enjoined.

In the first century after Christ, during the latter part of which the greater number of the books of the New Testament appear to have been written, the Greek mysteries in one form or another had become the recognised religion of the Greek world. These mysteries had been in existence as a system of worship for some six centuries before the advent of Christianity, and during those centuries had so increased their hold on the life and imagination of the Greeks that at this time every Greek city, whether in Europe or Asia, celebrated the mysteries.

The chief and most distinctive characteristic which marked every form of this cult or system of worship was its symbolism: that is to say, a large proportion of the ritual and ceremonial consisted of drama, or highly dramatic representations, as a means or method of teaching religious truth. This drama or dramatic action, sometimes extravagant and even terrifying, was only the symbol of a truth one thing was seen, but some other thing was signified and believed.

Another feature common to all the Greek mysteries, whether instituted in honour of Dionysus or established for the worship of Demeter and Persephoné, was the publicity with which they began and the secrecy in which they terminated: they commenced in the street, but finished behind the veil of the temple. Every Greek, therefore, would be familiar with the earlier ceremonies of the mysteries.

We can only notice here those known as the Eleusinian mysteries,

which, founded at Eleusis and Athens in Attica some six or seven centuries before the Christian era, had by this time spread to every city throughout the Greek colonies of Asia Minor. There were in each year two celebrations of these mysteries, known respectively as the lesser and the greater, the lesser being only a preparation for the greater mysteries.

[ocr errors]

The lesser, called also Tà v "Aypais from their place of origin at Agræ on the Ilissus, were held once a year, and consisted, among other ceremonies, of a public purification, or bathing in a stream, at the hands of a priest called the Hydranos'-the 'bather' or 'sprinkler'-by whom the candidates, thus purified, were exhorted to amend their life, and were given certain preliminary instruction as a preparation for the greater mysteries. But before any instruction was imparted, silence was strictly enjoined on each initiate, who was from that circumstance thereafter called a 'mystes' (μúσïns, pów, to 'close' the lips). No mystes was allowed to present himself for the full 'illumination' (pwraywyía) of the greater mysteries until after the lapse of at least a year from his initiation or purification at the lesser. The name of the sacred city of Eleusis or Eleusin (perhaps connected with evσopal, pxoμal, to come), seems to point to the coming light or illumination (pwraywyía) of the highest grade of the greater mysteries.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Now, on turning to the gospel narratives, we find at their commencement a priest called the Baptist performing a great purification in the river Jordan as a 'preparation' for some coming' event, although baptism formed no part of any authorised Jewish ceremony; and we are further told that Christ himself was baptized by John with a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins' (Mark i. 1, 9), although there was no need or reason in his case for any such purification. And the fourth Gospel seems to give as an explanation of John's preparatory baptism or purification that the true light, which illuminates (pwrite) every man, was coming into the world' (i. 9).

Would not a Greek recognise in this account of the Baptist a representation of the Hydranos' of the lesser mysteries preparing the initiate or mystes for the greater celebration? And if so, might not a Greek expect, on looking further into the narrative, to find references to the greater or true Eleusinian mysteries?

The greater mysteries were celebrated once every year, and occupied nine days with their rites and observances. No mystes, until he had completed a full year from his initiation into the lesser mysteries, could present himself for admission into the greater. Now, as regards the duration of Christ's ministry, the generally accepted view seems to be that it extended to one year only, and that he did not go up to Jerusalem during that year until within nine days of his death.

One of the most noticeable features of the greater mysteries was the number of public processions from Athens to the sacred city of Eleusis, and from Eleusis to Athens, when great crowds of people accompanied the myste with songs and shouts of triumph. On the first day the mystæ assembled at Athens; on the second day there was a great procession and a purification. In Matthew (xxi. 9) we read that multitudes went before and followed after' Christ on his entry into the sacred city, and cried Hosanna to the Son of David!' and that shortly afterwards Christ 'purified,' or cleansed, the temple, Mark (xi. 16) adding this expression-which is omitted by all the later gospels' He would not suffer that any man should carry a vessel (σKavos) through the temple.' Now, the mystes, during or before the last act of the drama, ' carried a vessel' called a Kéρvos, to the temple of Demeter and repeated a sacred formula containing the word ἐκερνοφόρησα, ‘I carried the vessel, or κέρνος. Only the candidate for the highest grade, the priesthood, of the mysteries carried the Képvos; this formula and ceremony will be presently referred to. The writers of the later gospels seem not to have understood the meaning of Mark's phrase, and have therefore omitted it altogether.

The third day of the mysteries was in an especial degree a fastday, and the fourth day seems to have been known as the kaλáľov κálodos, the 'return-journey of the fruit-basket.' Matthew (xxi. 18, 19) tells us, 'In the morning as he returned to the city he hungered, and seeing a fig-tree by the wayside he came to it. . . and he saith unto it, Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever.' At Athens there was a sacred fig-tree at which one of the processions always halted to offer sacrifices and perform certain mystic rites.

Purification was another essential ceremony of the mysteries. So in John (xiii. 4-11) we read of the washing of the disciples' feet, with the words 'He who has been bathed has no need to wash, but is wholly purified' (κaðapós). No mention of this washing of the disciples' feet occurs in any of the other gospels, but in Mark and Luke there is the man bearing a pitcher of water.'

It was after a purification, on the evening of the fifth or sixth day of the celebration, that the mystæ partook together of a meal called the KUKEάv, a 'mixture' which was both food and drink, being a thickened liquid compounded of barley-meal, mint, and water. This partaking of the KUKɛóv by all the mystæ in common was the Eleusinian sacramental meal, and was an essential and necessary rite before any mystes could pass to the higher grade. The parallel between this common meal' of the mysteries and the last supper' of the gospels is especially noticeable in Luke's account (xxii. 14-20). As regards the substance of the KUKEάv, it seems to have been a mixture of such consistence as to be considered either food or drink. Had the writer of John vi. 55 the κukɛóv in his mind when he

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

represents Christ as saying, 'My flesh is true food and my blood is true drink'? for there was nothing in his allusion to the manna in the wilderness (v. 49) to suggest the idea of drink, whereas the KUKEάV partook of the nature of both food and drink.

[ocr errors]

The next ceremony in the mysteries was the most solemn of all the rites which preceded the last scene in the drama, and was known as the waрádoσis тŵv iepŵv, the handing over of the holy things,' or the 'giving in turn of the consecrated objects.' In this ceremony, which took place after the partaking of the KUKEάV in common, the mystæ were admitted one by one to touch, to kiss the holy things, to lift them from the cist, to put them into the basket, to taste them, to replace them in the cist, and to pronounce the sacred formula' (Ramsay). Now one of the ispá or consecrated objects was a sesame cake. In Mark we are told (xiv. 22), ‘And as they were eating he took (aßáv) the bread (or unleavened cake) and having blessed it he broke it and gave (dwxɛv) to them and said, Take ye (λáßɛTE).' In Matthew (xxvi. 26) the word 'eat' is added after 'take.'

[ocr errors]

The sacred formula which was pronounced by each mystes during or immediately after the πаρádoσis тŵv ispov is thus given by Clement of Alexandria: ἐνήστευσα, ἔπιον τὸν κυκεῶνα, ἔλαβον ἐκ κίστης, ἐγγευσάμενος, ἀπεθέμην εἰς κάλαθον καὶ ἐκ καλάθου εἰς Kioτην'I fasted, I drank the KUKEV, I took from the chest, I tasted, I placed in the basket and from the basket into the chest.' The kioτn was the sacred box or chest in which the iɛpá or' holy things,' wrapped in linen cloths, were preserved: yyevσáμevos signifies having tasted' the iɛpá, or some of them, such as the sesame cake and the pomegranate, which seem to be too sacred to be mentioned by name. In reference to this formula, in which the KUKEV is regarded as a drink and not as food, we may notice that Luke (xxii. 17) says: 'And he received a cup and . . said, Take this and divide it among yourselves,' where it is plain that the cup of v. 17 was an earlier cup than that mentioned in v. 20-and the cup in like manner after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant'; that is to say, there seems to have been a second Tapádoσis or 'handing over' of the cup by Christ. Now in some celebrations of the mysteries there was a second πapádoσis тŵv iɛpov which appears to have been reserved for those myste who proceeded to the highest grade. In these cases something was eaten, not merely tasted, and something was drunk which was not the κυκεών ; this seems clear from the formula then used: ἐκ τυμπάνου ἔφαγον, ἐκ κυμβάλου ἔπιον, ἐκερνοφόρησα, ὑπὸ τὸν παστὸν ὑπέδυον -'I ate from a drum, I drank from a cymbal, I carried the vessel, the Képvos, I went in under the curtain.' The Képvos was a large earthen vessel or dish in which were placed the fruit offerings, and the curtain (aσтós) was the variegated veil in the temple of

Demeter. Only those mystæ or epoptæ who proceeded to the highest grade-probably to the priesthood-of the mysteries performed the ceremonial acts mentioned in this formula.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Now it seems that, though the essential words of these two formulæ of the mysteries appear in the gospel narrative of the 'handing over' of the bread and the cup-'take,' 'eat,' 'drink' (Matthew xxvi. 26-29), the word πapádoσis is not used of the ceremony itself, but it is remarkable that the word occurs in the verses immediately preceding the handing over' of the bread and the cup (21-25) in the form of a verb- one of you will hand me over '— πаρаdwσε (v. 21), he that dipped his hand with me in the dish, this man shall hand me over' (wapadwσei μɛ, v. 23). For the true meaning of Tapadidwμi is to hand over' from one to another, as a torch in the torch-race, podídwμt being the usual word to express 'betrayal'; and it is plain that if Christ uttered the words recorded in v. 21, the Aramaic verb used by him must have been indefinite in meaning and suggestive of treachery only by reference to subsequent events, otherwise it would have been impossible that all— every one-(v. 22) of the disciples should have asked Is it I? Am I the traitor ?' In Luke, though the order of the narrative is reversed, the connection between the rapádoσis of the bread and cup and the use of the word mapadidwμi is quite as close, for (Luke xxii. 21) as Christ hands over the cup to the disciples he breaks off, saying, • But the hand of him who is handing me over (τοῦ παραδιδόντος με is with me at the table'; and in 1 Corinthians xi. 23 the connection is closer still: The Lord Jesus in the night in which he was handed over (Tapedidoтo) took (λaßev) bread.' So again, just as the ispá in the mysteries were kissed during the apádocis, or while they were being handed over, so we read in Matthew (xxvi. 48), 'He who handed him over (ó napadidóvs) gave them a sign saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that is he.' And in John xx. 17, we meet with the word 'touch' in the expression, 'touch me not,' that is 'do not hold me' now, for my napádoσis is over and completed.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Returning for a moment to the question asked by the disciples -'Is it I?'' Am I to hand you over?' it is to be noticed that in the mysteries the ceremony of handing over' the holy things was necessarily performed by the mystæ one at a time, one by one,' and in Mark (xiv. 19), the earliest known gospel, we find these words occur: They began to be sorrowful and to say to him one by one, Is it I?' The expression one by one' is not to be found in any of the later gospels-the phrase is changed in Matthew (xxvi. 22), it is almost gone from Luke (xxii. 23), and has quite disappeared from John (xiii. 21-26). This seems to indicate that the later writers did not recognise the source from whence the words one by one' came, or that they wished to conceal it. The phrase in Mark, els кað’ ɛis, 'one after one,' 'one after the other,' is remarkable for the pecu

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »