Dogs tied to candles... what is the origin of this?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Dogs tied to candles... what is the origin of this?

Post by GakuseiDon »

I've pulled out the references from the link provided by Andrew Criddle:

Fathers of the World: Essays in Rabbinic and Patristric Literatures by Burton L. Visotzky, 1995
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/ ... frontcover

First is a passage in Origen's Contra Celsus, Book 6:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... en166.html

Celsus, however, appears to have had in view in employing these expressions, not a rational object, but one of a most irrational kind, arising out of his hatred towards us, which is so unlike a philosopher. For his aim was, that those who are unacquainted with our customs should, on perusing his treatise, at once assail us as if we called the noble Creator of this world an "accursed divinity." He appears to me, indeed, to have acted like those Jews who, when Christianity began to be first preached, scattered abroad false reports of the Gospel, such as that "Christians offered up an infant in sacrifice, and partook of its flesh;" and again, "that the professors of Christianity, wishing to do the 'works of darkness,' used to extinguish the lights (in their meetings), and each one to have sexual intercourse with any woman whom he chanced to meet." These calumnies have long exercised, although unreasonably, an influence over the minds of very many, leading those who are aliens to the Gospel to believe that Christians are men of such a character; and even at the present day they mislead some, and prevent them from entering even into the simple intercourse of conversation with those who are Christians.

So Origen blames the Jewish critics of Christianity for the origin of the calumny.

The other two references are to later Christian writers accusing Christian heretics of similar antics. Here is Epiphanius of Salamis, writing late Fourth Century CE, condemning the Basilides gnostic heretics of having of 'love feasts' that culminate in a 'perfect passover', though not referring to lamps being overturned to start proceedings. I do find the extra details on what happens during the 'love feast' interesting:

Still, I should not be ashamed to say what they are not ashamed to do, to arouse horror by every means in those who hear what obscenities they are prepared to perform. (5) For after having made love with the passion of fornication in addition, to lift their blasphemy up to heaven, the woman and man receive the man’s emission on their own hands. And they stand with their eyes raised heavenward but the filth on their hands and pray, if you please—(6) the ones they call Stratiotics and Gnostics—and offer that stuff on their hands to the true Father of all,23 and say, “We offer thee this gift, the body of Christ.” (7) And then they eat it24 partaking of their own dirt, and say, “This is the body of Christ; and this is the Pascha, because of which our bodies suffer and are compelled to acknowledge the passion of Christ.”

4,8 And so with the woman’s emission when she happens to be having her period—they likewise take the unclean menstrual blood they gather from her, and eat it in common. And “This,” they say, “is the blood of Christ.” (5,1) And so, when they read, “I saw a tree bearing twelve manner of fruits every year, and he said unto me, “This is the tree of life,” in apocryphal writings,25 they interpret this allegorically of the menstrual flux.

5,2 But although they have sex with each other they renounce procreation.26 It is for enjoyment, not procreation, that they eagerly pursue seduction, since the devil is mocking people like these, and making fun of the creature fashioned by God. (3) They come to climax but absorb the seeds of their dirt, not by implanting them for procreation, but by eating the dirty stuff themselves.

5,4 But even though one of them should accidentally implant the seed of his natural emission prematurely and the woman becomes pregnant, listen to a more dreadful thing that such people venture to do. (5) They extract the fetus at the stage which is appropriate for their enterprise, take this aborted infant, and cut it up in a trough with a pestle. And they mix honey, pepper, and certain other perfumes and spices with it to keep from getting sick, and then all the revellers in this < herd > of swine and dogs assemble, and each eats a piece of the child with his fi ngers.27 (6) And now, after this cannibalism, they pray to God and say, “We were not mocked by the archon of lust, but have gathered the brother’s blunder up!” And this, if you please, is their idea of the “perfect Passover.”

Finally, Clement of Alexandria refers to heretics who "overturn the lamps":

Clement of Alexandria, Strom 3, Chapter 2:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... glish.html

These then are the doctrines of the excellent Carpocratians. These, so they say, and certain other enthusiasts for the same wickednesses, gather together for feasts (I would not call their meeting an Agape), men and women together. After they have sated their appetites (" on repletion Cypris, the goddess of love, enters,"21 as it is said), then they overturn the lamps and so extinguish the light that the shame of their adulterous "righteousness" is hidden, and they have intercourse where they will and with whom they will.

The article by Visotzky concludes:

What, then, did it mean in antiquity when one was accused of overturning the lamp? From the evidence it seems it meant many things, but one suspects that they may be sorted into some sensible order. I would conjecture that at the earliest stage the phrase quite simply meant doing wrong, straying from the path... So overturning the lamp meant plunging one's immediate world into darkness. It meant heresy. This helps us understand the nature of the threefold charge of cannibalism (preceded by ritual murder), sexual depravity and overturning the lamp. One is tempted to equate this list with the three 'cardinal sins' of rabbinic Judaism, those for which one should rather die than commit: spilling blood (let alone eating it!), incestuous sex and idolatry.

In due time, the phrase 'overturning the lamp' was taken rather literally. When this occurred, one could only conjecture as to its meaning. The simplest guess was to tie the phrase to the sexual activity. One overturned the lamp and then committed wrongful pleasures in the dark.

It looks look the use of dogs had no particular significance in 'overturning the lamp.'

I tend to think that there were early Christian groups that had 'love feast' orgies, ate human flesh and drank human blood during nightly rituals. Not because those things were part of early Christian rites, but that there have always been weirdos who would have used degenerative practices to attract degenerates. Such sensationalist rites would have attracted attention from authorities.
Post Reply