When one looks at the calendar, it becomes clear that the Orthodox often celebrate the Resurrection of Christ on a different date than the the Catholic and Protestant churches in the West. This year, April 4, 2021 was Easter Sunday in much of the Western world, while May 2 was the date of Orthodox Easter.  

Yet if we were to look at the announcements or bulletins of many Orthodox Churches, we would have found that it seemed that something different is going on.  While they were still commemorating the Feast of the Resurrection of Our Lord, many Orthodox sources would tell us that  instead of commemorating Easter, they are celebrating the feast of Pascha.  

Now at first we might be inclined to think that the two words are merely synonyms of each other, and can be used interchangeably.  Yet there are some Orthodox who would argue that this is not the case.  They believe that to use the title Easter for the feast day is actually not proper or legitimate.  They feel that Pascha is the only accurate title, and therefore it is the only one we should be using as Orthodox Christians. 

So why is this? How did the the use of different words come about?  Why do some of the Orthodox have reservations about using the title Easter to label the feast?  Is the use of the word Pascha the correct choice?  And if so, is it the only valid option available to us?

Let us start out by defining the word Pascha.  Pascha is a transliteration, or conversion from the Greek, which is itself a transliteration of the Aramaic word pascha. It comes from the Hebrew pesach, and is defined as Passover.  

Pascha came to be the common title of the Feast of Resurrection of Christ, in both Latin and Greek, and through them has become normal use in most of the world’s languages. To show examples as to how it is used; in the West, the time between Maundy Thursday to Easter Saturday is known as the Paschal Triduum.  In the East, what is known as the Paschal Office, is read during Bright Week, the week after the Sunday of the Resurrection.  

However, the Germanic languages, which includes English, came to to use a different word for Resurrection feast. The English word Easter, has a similar origin with the modern Dutch ooster, and the German Ostern.   It developed from an Old English word which usually appears in the form Ēastrun, but is also rendered as Ēastru, Ēastre, or Ēostre.

The actual origins of this word are unclear. There is a citation from the Venerable Bede which attributes it to the name of a pagan goddess, whose feast  was celebrated at the time of the Vernal Equinox by Pre-Christian Anglo Saxons.  There are few other citations from the time period, thus this example is often accepted as fact by some. It is sometimes used as a justification for the unsuitability of the word Easter, due to a claimed pagan origin.  

Yet things are not quite as simple as that.  The Oxford English Dictionary acknowledges the citation from Bede. However, it notes that oddly, Bede’s citation is not confirmed by any other source, and there are a number of scholars who do not accept his explanation.  Bede is usually considered a reliable source, however this does not make him infallible. In this case, the fact that this citation was never confirmed anywhere certainly brings things into question.

A counter argument states the it is derived from the Old High German word eostarum.  Although it is is not certain, it  may have developed from the Christian designation of Easter week as in albis, a Latin phrase that was understood as the plural of alba (“dawn”).

Whatever the origins of the word, it is true that Easter has become the common use in describing the Feast of the Resurrection in the English speaking Roman Catholic and Protestant communities.  Yet many in the English speaking Orthodox community still insist on using Pascha alone.  Why is this?

In many cases,  Pascha was the normative use of their mother church, whether that church was Greek, Russian or Arab.  When the words of the Divine Liturgy were being translated into English, it was natural to render the word as it had always been done in their native language.  

However, for English speaking converts this may provide a difficulty.  For most of their lives. they have been identifying the feast day as Easter. To change over to Pascha now requires an adjustment in their thinking.  Yet many do change, and in fact some are these converts are the  ones who insist the most on only using Pascha.  What is the logic of their actions?

Some are merely accepting the terminology of the Church they have converted to.  For them, it just becomes another part of the conversion experience.  It may allow them to believe they are breaking  from their Western (Easter) way of thinking, and transforming it to a more Eastern (Pascha) spiritual pattern. Some even begin to refer to the Western date  as Easter, the Orthodox date as Pascha, allowing them to differentiate between the two. 

Others have been taught and accept the arguments regarding the supposed pagan origin of Easter. They think the the use the word is somehow tainted, and believe that the use of Pascha is more wholesome and accurate.  Therefore it is the only one they use.

Ultimately, the question is, Does it really matter?  The use of Pascha is the norm in most of the world, there is no reason why we should not make use of it.  Yet should we totally reject the use the word Easter, in our devotions?  Does it have a place as well? I would argue that it does.

The word Easter has been the usage of the English speaking world since at least the 8th Century and probably earlier. Most English speaking people know exactly what you are referring to when you use it, even if they are not church-goers. If we truly wish  to missionize to English speaking people, we must be willing to use terms they are familiar and comfortable with. 

The argument regarding a possible pagan origin of Easter should also be considered a non issue, for reasons we have already discussed.  And even if the origin of the word is pagan, the Orthodox church has a history of taking pagan things and turning them to a Christian purpose.  For example, the Parthenon, a temple to Athena built 400 years before Christ, was converted into a Christian Church in the 6th Century and dedicated to the Virgin Mary. 

Even the idea of using Pascha alone as part of the conversion experience has some flaws.  By assigning different words to different expressions of the the same event, we risk subconsciously portraying that one version is somehow the “superior” expression of that event.  There obviously are expressions of the faith we must hold fast to at all costs, however this not one of them.  We should acknowledge that the difference between Easter and Pascha is largely cultural, and not risk isolating ourselves from our fellow man for the sake of pride in a word, rather than trying to bring that man to the truth of what the word represents.

In his book The Orthodox Church, Bishop Kallistos Ware states; “The Orthodox Church has never been rigid on the matter of language; its normal policy is to hold services in the language of the people.”   Easter is the common word of the English speaking people. If we reject using it we are rejecting our own tradition of reaching out to all men. Pascha is certainly an appropriate expression of the Resurrection of Christ, and we should encourage the use of it.  Yet we must make sure we are not also rejecting the word Easter in some unnecessary mistaken quest for spiritual purity.