Étienne Nodet, «On Jesus’ Last Week(s)», Vol. 92 (2011) 204-230
Five conclusions allow us to explain Jesus last days and to assess the significance of the actual Gospel narratives. Firstly, his last Passover meal (Synoptics, solar calendar) took place on one Tuesday evening; secondly, the origin of the Eucharistic rite on the Lord’s day has nothing to do with Passover; thirdly, a feast of Passover-Easter (Pa/sxa) on a specific Sunday emerged somewhat late in the IInd century; fourthly, before this date, the Synoptics did not have their final shape; fifthly Josephus provides us with a clue to understand Jesus’ double trial before Pilate in the Passion narrative of John.
209
ON JESUS’ LAST WEEK(S)
safe conclusion is that the Troas vigil was held in a Jewish house,
but this fact is hardly relevant to the meaning of the episode, for it
has been shaped into a kind of Eucharistic story: in the middle of
the night, Eutychus falls down and dies in a way that parallels the
breaking of the bread. This can be interpreted as a sign of death,
but Paul says he is not dead. However, he is seen alive only at
daybreak, after Paul’s departure. So the sign of resurrection
appears on the first day around sunrise. Thus, the story of Eu-
tychus gives an illustration of the meaning of the Eucharist: the
rite leads to a special dawn, which can be understood as the be-
ginning of a new Creation, so that the lunar calendar reference
loses any significance. In fact, instead of “lampsâ€, the Western
Text (WT) has ypolampadev “ high windows, skylightsâ€, a device
Ω ¥
useless by night, but meaningful if the group is waiting for
dawn. A similar piece of evidence is given by the Younger Pliny in
a letter to Trajan in 112 CE (Ep. 10.96) : he writes that the sole
crime to which the christiani admit is to meet for prayer on certain
days, before dawn.
If the rite was a weekly custom, we should again invoke the
rule already stated: if such an orderly feature is mentioned casually
without a trace of discussion, it should be viewed as an established
tradition. Of course, the institution of the Eucharist during the Last
Supper looks like an innovation, but the context would indicate
that the rite is to be performed once a year, close to the Jewish
Passover. This was indeed what the Quartodecimans did, but it
does not account for a weekly rite on the first day of the week —
the Lord’s Day. Some links are missing.
In fact, the Synoptic stories of the institution display at least
two notable features: firstly, they have the conciseness of a litur-
gical formula, in contrast to the context, where the disciples react
and speak; secondly, there is no instruction to repeat it 9. It was ob-
served, many years ago 10, that the material rite itself must have ex-
So Matt, Mark as well as Luke (WT), which does not have the words
9
over the wine, in keeping with the mere “breaking of the bread†elsewhere in
Luke-Acts. There are grounds to surmise that the longer form of the usual
Luke, which includes the repetition order, has been harmonized with 1 Cor 11.
A l r e a d y E. RENAN i n his Life of Jesus ( Fr e n c h original, 1860).
10
A. SCHWEITZER, The Lord’s Supper in Relation to the life of Jesus and the
History of the Early Church (ed. J. REUMANN) (Macon, GA 1982), observes