Sadducees

SADDUCEES. - Members of a Jewish political-religious party from the time of Christ. The name Σαβδοπούζα seems to derive from the proper name Zadok ([v.]; Heb. Ṣādhōq), transcribed by the Septuagint as Σαβδοῦα (ten times). By assuming this title the S. prided themselves, it seems, on being descended from the high priest Zadok; according to others, from a namesake leader of the party.

According to St. Epiphanius (Haer., 14; PG 41, 240) and St. Jerome (In Mt., 3, 23; PL 26, 163) the name would derive from the Heb. Ṣaddīq "righteous." In the rabbinic writings the S. (ṣaddīqim) are sometimes called Boethusians, from Boethus (v.), progenitor of a priestly family. Although Flavius Josephus attributes to the S., to the Pharisees (v.) and to the Essenes (v.) very ancient origins (Antiq. Jud., XVIII, 1, 2) and although the "sons of Zadok" (Σαβδοῦα) are already mentioned in Ez. 40, 46; 44, 15; 48, 11 as priests in the new Temple (cf. Eccli. Heb. 51, 12), the S. enter history as a party, or sect, only at the time of the Maccabees (v.), in opposition to the Pharisees, and disappear with the fall of Jerusalem (A.D. 70). Among the causes that would have favored the rise and development of the party are listed the love of Hellenism (J. Klausner), opposition to the Pharisaic usurpation of the religious magisterium belonging to the priests (J. Bonsirven), the insufficiency of the political predominance of the Pharisees at the time of John Hyrcanus (M.-J. Lagrange).

Few in number, but powerful, especially in the political field, inasmuch as they constituted the wealthy priestly aristocracy of the nation, the S. favored the Hasmoneans John Hyrcanus (135-104 B.C., after he had gone over to their sect), Alexander Jannaeus (103-76), Aristobulus II (67-63). At the time of Christ and the Apostles they occupied the first places among the "high priests" of the Sanhedrin.

The doctrine of the S. stands out through its contrast with that of the Pharisees. However, no writings of the S. are extant from which it might be drawn directly. The S. accepted only Sacred Scripture (according to some only the Pentateuch), and rejected "the traditions of the fathers" emphasized by the Pharisees. They admitted "neither the resurrection (cf. Mk. 12, 28; Lk. 20, 27), nor angel, nor spirits" (Acts 23, 8) apart from God. According to Flavius Josephus they also denied "the survival of the soul, as well as punishment and rewards down there in Hades" (Bell. Jud., II, 8, 14). Also from the "case" of the woman who had successively married seven husbands, put by the S. to Jesus (Mt. 22, 29-33 and parallels), it seems that they denied not only the resurrection of bodies, but also the immortality of souls. While the Essenes were fatalists and the Pharisees followed the middle way in reconciling divine action with human freedom, the S. "flatly deny fate (εὐαγγέλτος) and exclude that God does or looks upon anything evil" (Fl. Josephus, ibid., II, 8, 14). In criminal law the S., who applied the Mosaic Law rigidly, were more severe than the Pharisees, especially in inflicting the penalty of retaliation (Fl. Josephus, Antiq. Jud., XIII, 10, 6). In the liturgy the S. diverged from the Pharisees on many points, among them the day on which the first sheaf was to be offered to the Temple, which according to Lev. 23, 11 and the S. had to be the first day (Sunday) following the sabbath of the paschal octave, whereas the Pharisees understood that sabbath to be the feast of the Jewish Passover itself (15 nīśān), and offered the sheaf on 16 nīśān, whatever the day of the week; the difference had repercussions also on the date of Pentecost (v.), to be celebrated on the 50th day from the presentation of the sheaf: for the S. this always fell on the 1st day of the week, while for the Pharisees it could fall on any day between the 5th and the 7th of the month nīśān. These calendar divergences sometimes induced the different parties to shift by one day the beginning of the lunar months (especially of nīśān); it seems that for this reason the accusers of Jesus (S.) had not yet eaten the paschal lamb, already consumed the previous evening by Jesus and the Pharisees (cf. Jn. 18, 28). Other liturgical differences concerned the rites to be performed on the feast of atonement, the hour of the immolation of the paschal lamb, which according to Ex. 12, 6 and the S. had to be "between the two evenings," that is, after sunset, during twilight, while the Pharisees brought it forward to the 9th hour (about 3 p.m. today).

John the Baptist stigmatized Pharisees and S. "as a brood of vipers" (Mt. 3, 7). The parable of the rich man (Lk. 16, 19-31) presents the type of the S. Enemies of one another, Pharisees and S. vied in putting captious questions to Jesus (Mt. 16, 1, and cf. 23, 29-33), and agreed in wanting his death. As much as the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles recount of the trials of Jesus and the Apostles (Peter, John, Paul) and of the deacon Stephen before the Sanhedrin, concerns especially the S., who held the highest offices in it.

The so-called "ṣādhōqite document" does not concern the S., but a faction of Pharisees.

Pietro de Ambroggi