按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
ficially celebrated at Rome on the twenty…fourth and twenty…fifth of March； the latter being regarded as the spring equinox； and therefore as the most appropriate day for the revival of a god of vegetation who had been dead or sleeping throughout the winter。 But according to an ancient and widespread tradition Christ suffered on the twenty…fifth of March； and accordingly some Christians regularly celebrated the Crucifixion on that day without any regard to the state of the moon。 This custom was certainly observed in Phrygia； Cappadocia； and Gaul； and there seem to be grounds for thinking that at one time it was followed also in Rome。 Thus the tradition which placed the death of Christ on the twenty…fifth of March was ancient and deeply rooted。 It is all the more remarkable because astronomical considerations prove that it can have had no historical foundation。 The inference appears to be inevitable that the passion of Christ must have been arbitrarily referred to that date in order to harmonise with an older festival of the spring equinox。 This is the view of the learned ecclesiastical historian Mgr。 Duchesne； who points out that the death of the Saviour was thus made to fall upon the very day on which； according to a widespread belief； the world had been created。 But the resurrection of Attis； who combined in himself the characters of the divine Father and the divine Son； was officially celebrated at Rome on the same day。 When we remember that the festival of St。 George in April has replaced the ancient pagan festival of the Parilia； that the festival of St。 John the Baptist in June has succeeded to a heathen midsummer festival of water： that the festival of the Assumption of the Virgin in August has ousted the festival of Diana； that the feast of All Souls in November is a continuation of an old heathen feast of the dead； and that the Nativity of Christ himself was assigned to the winter solstice in December because that day was deemed the Nativity of the Sun； we can hardly be thought rash or unreasonable in conjecturing that the other cardinal festival of the Christian churchthe solemnisation of Eastermay have been in like manner； and from like motives of edification； adapted to a similar celebration of the Phrygian god Attis at the vernal equinox。
At least it is a remarkable coincidence； if it is nothing more； that the Christian and the heathen festivals of the divine death and resurrection should have been solemnised at the same season and in the same places。 For the places which celebrated the death of Christ at the spring equinox were Phrygia； Gaul； and apparently Rome； that is； the very regions in which the worship of Attis either originated or struck deepest root。 It is difficult to regard the coincidence as purely accidental。 If the vernal equinox； the season at which in the temperate regions the whole face of nature testifies to a fresh outburst of vital energy； had been viewed from of old as the time when the world was annually created afresh in the resurrection of a god； nothing could be more natural than to place the resurrection of the new deity at the same cardinal point of the year。 Only it is to be observed that if the death of Christ was dated on the twenty…fifth of March； his resurrection； according to Christian tradition； must have happened on the twenty…seventh of March； which is just two days later than the vernal equinox of the Julian calendar and the resurrection of Attis。 A similar displacement of two days in the adjustment of Christian to heathen celebrations occurs in the festivals of St。 George and the Assumption of the Virgin。 However； another Christian tradition； followed by Lactantius and perhaps by the practice of the Church in Gaul； placed the death of Christ on the twenty…third and his resurrection on the twenty…fifth of March。 If that was so； his resurrection coincided exactly with the resurrection of Attis。
In point of fact it appears from the testimony of an anonymous Christian； who wrote in the fourth century of our era； that Christians and pagans alike were struck by the remarkable coincidence between the death and resurrection of their respective deities； and that the coincidence formed a theme of bitter controversy between the adherents of the rival religions； the pagans contending that the resurrection of Christ was a spurious imitation of the resurrection of Attis； and the Christians asserting with equal warmth that the resurrection of Attis was a diabolical counterfeit of the resurrection of Christ。 In these unseemly bickerings the heathen took what to a superficial observer might seem strong ground by arguing that their god was the older and therefore presumably the original； not the counterfeit； since as a general rule an original is older than its copy。 This feeble argument the Christians easily rebutted。 They admitted； indeed； that in point of time Christ was the junior deity； but they triumphantly demonstrated his real seniority by falling back on the subtlety of Satan； who on so important an occasion had surpassed himself by inverting the usual order of nature。
Taken altogether； the coincidences of the Christian with the heathen festivals are too close and too numerous to be accidental。 They mark the compromise which the Church in the hour of its triumph was compelled to make with its vanquished yet still dangerous rivals。 The inflexible Protestantism of the primitive missionaries； with their fiery denunciations of heathendom； had been exchanged for the supple policy； the easy tolerance； the comprehensive charity of shrewd ecclesiastics； who clearly perceived that if Christianity was to conquer the world it could do so only by relaxing the too rigid principles of its Founder； by widening a little the narrow gate which leads to salvation。 In this respect an instructive parallel might be drawn between the history of Christianity and the history of Buddhism。 Both systems were in their origin essentially ethical reforms born of the generous ardour； the lofty aspirations； the tender compassion of their noble Founders； two of those beautiful spirits who appear at rare intervals on earth like beings come from a better world to support and guide our weak and erring nature。 Both preached moral virtue as the means of accomplishing what they regarded as the supreme object of life； the eternal salvation of the individual soul； though by a curious antithesis the one sought that salvation in a blissful eternity； the other in a final release from suffering； in annihilation。 But the austere ideals of sanctity which they inculcated were too deeply opposed not only to the frailties but to the natural instincts of humanity ever to be carried out in practice by more than a small number of disciples； who consistently renounced the ties of the family and the state in order to work out their own salvation in the still seclusion of the cloister。 If such faiths were to be nominally accepted by whole nations or even by the world； it was essential that they should first be modified or transformed so as to accord in some measure with the prejudices； the passions； the superstitions of the vulgar。 This process of accommodation was carried out in after ages by followers who； made of less ethereal stuff