Easter Controversy

• Cause of Controversy

• Definition of Controversy

• Differences in Early Commemoration of Easter

• Earlier Tolerance of Differences in Practice

• Earliest Contender for Sunday

• Eastern Insistence on Nisan 14 (Polycarp)

• Roman Bishop (Victor) Excommunicates Observers of Nisan 14

• Constantine’s Report of Settlement at Council of Nicaea

Cause of Controversy

Source: James F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland, Vol. 1, pp. 211, 212. Copyright 1929 by Columbia University Press, New York. Used by permission.

[p. 211] It is probable that the primitive Christians kept the Pasch on the [p. 212] 14th of Nisan as determined by the Jewish authorities, and regarded it as the anniversary of the crucifixion. But they also observed the first of every seven days, the Jewish week, as a holy day in commemoration of the resurrection. It would seem that gradually a shifting of emphasis took place until in the second century it was generally accepted that the great annual solemnity of the Pasch was the commemoration not of the crucifixion but of the resurrection. Accordingly the majority of Christians celebrated the Pasch not on the 14th of Nisan but on the Sunday which fell on, or first after, that date. The churches of the Roman province of Asia, however, followed the older custom, keeping the Pasch on the 14th of Nisan, whatever the day of the week. The controversy became acute towards the end of the second century, and the observants of the 14th of Nisan, hence called Quartodecimans [Fourteenthers], were finally excommunicated.

[Editors’ note: The word Pasch is from the Hebrew word for Passover, pesach. The name of the Christian Easter festival in some European languages is derived from this Hebrew root. For the nature of the Easter controversy see No. 651.]

Definition of Controversy

Source: Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity, 1st ed., p. 137. Copyright 1953 by Harper & Brothers, New York. Used by permission.

An acute early controversy, one which ran concurrently with those aroused by Gnosticism, Marcionism, and Montanism, was over the time for the celebration of Easter. Although our first certain notice of Easter is from the middle of the second century, that festival, commemorating the resurrection of Christ, was presumably observed by at least some Christians from much earlier times.

Differences arose over the determination of the date. Should it be fixed by the Jewish passover and be governed by the day of the Jewish month on which that feast was set regardless of the day of the week on which it fell? This became the custom in many of the churches, especially in Asia Minor. In contrast, many churches, including that of Rome, celebrated Easter on the first day of the week, Sunday. It was the first day of the week when Christ rose from the dead and which because of that fact was early observed as the Lord’s Day. Disputes also developed over the length of the fast which was to be observed preceding Easter in commemoration of the crucifixion and as to whether Christ’s death occurred on the fourteenth or on the fifteenth day of the Jewish month of Nisan.

In various parts of the Empire, probably not far from the end of the second century, synods met to decide the issue. In general the consensus was for Sunday, but in Asia Minor the bishops held to the other method of reckoning. Thereupon Victor, Bishop of Rome in the last decade of the second century, sought to enforce uniformity by breaking off communion with the dissenting bishops and churches. Irenaeus expostulated with Victor on the ground that the differences in practice had long existed without causing a breach in unity. Ultimately the observance of Easter on Sunday prevailed and probably the prestige of Rome was thereby enhanced. Yet the controversy, called Quartodecimanian from the fourteenth day of Nisan, long remained an unpleasant memory.

Differences in Early Commemoration of Easter

Source: Jules Lebreton and Jacques Zeiller, The History of the Primitive Church, trans. by Ernest C. Messenger, Vol. 2, bk. 3, chap. 17, sec. 1, pp. 718, 719. Copyright 1946, 1947 by The Macmillan Company, New York. Used by their permission and that of Burns and Oates Ltd., London.

[p. 718] The Asiatics commemorated Easter on the 14th Nisan, whatever the day of the week; the Romans celebrated it on the Sunday which followed the 14th Nisan. This diversity of dates involved a diversity of rites and of feasts: Easter was for the Asiatics the day of the death of the Lord; they fasted on that day, even if it fell on a Sunday, and broke bread only in the evening, the solemnity ending with the Eucharist and the agape. The Romans, on the contrary, devoted three days to the memory of the death and resurrection of Christ, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the two first being days of mourning and fasting; the vigil between Saturday and Sunday prepared them for the feast of the Resurrection, celebrated on the Sunday.

This difference in liturgical usage was the more awkward because of the fact that there were a fair number of Asiatics in the Roman community…

[p. 719] The Church could not maintain indefinitely a duality of usages which involved not only a diversity of dates but also a divergence in interpretation of the paschal festival. As Baumstark has said, "on the one hand Easter Sunday was lacking, on the other, Good Friday; in Asia the Pasch was the crucifixion of Christ, in Rome it was his Resurrection."

Earlier Tolerance of Differences in Practice

Source: Irenaeus, Letter to Victor, quoted in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24. 12–15; translated by Kirsopp Lake, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949), pp. 509, 511. Reprinted by permission of the publishers and The Loeb Classical Library.

[p. 509] The controversy is not only about the day, but also about the actual character of the fast; for some think that they ought to fast one day, others two, others even more, some count their day as forty hours, day and night. And such variation of observance did not begin in our own time, but much earlier, in the days of our predecessors who, [p. 511] it would appear, disregarding strictness maintained a practice which is simple and yet allows for personal preference, establishing it for the future, and none the less all these lived in peace, and we also live in peace with one another and the disagreement in the fast confirms our agreement in the faith… Among these too were the presbyters before Soter, who presided over the church of which you are now the leader, I mean Anicetus and Pius and Telesphorus and Xystus. They did not themselves observe it, nor did they enjoin it on those who followed them, and though they did not keep it they were none the less at peace with those from the dioceses in which it was observed when they came to them, although to observe it was more objectionable to those who did not do so. And no one was ever rejected for this reason, but the presbyters before you who did not observe it sent the Eucharist to those from other dioceses who did.

Earliest Contender for Sunday

Source: The Book of the Popes (Liber Pontificalis), trans. by Louise R. Loomis, Sect. XI, Pius I, pp. 14, 15. Copyright 1916 by Columbia University Press, New York. Used by permission.

[p. 14] While he [Pope Pius I, c. 142–c. 154] was bishop [of Rome], his brother Hermas wrote a book in which he set forth the commandment which the angel of the Lord delivered to him, coming to him in the garb of a shepherd and commanding him that [p. 15] the holy feast of Easter be observed upon the Lord’s day.

Eastern Insistence on Nisan 14 (Polycarp)

Source: Polycrates, Letter to Victor, Bishop of Rome, quoted in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24. 2–8; translated by Kirsopp Lake, Vol. I (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, Press, 1949), pp. 505, 507, 509. Reprinted by permission of the publishers and The Loeb Classical Library.

[p. 505] Therefore we keep the day undeviatingly, neither adding nor taking away, for in Asia [Minor] great luminaries sleep, and they will rise on the day of the coming of the Lord, when he shall come with glory from heaven and seek out all the saints. Such were Philip … and two of his daughters… [p. 507] There is also John, who lay on the Lord’s breast… And there is also Polycarp at Smyrna, both bishop and martyr, and Thraseas, both bishop and martyr, from Eumenaea… [Also] Sagaris, … Papirius, … and Melito… All these kept the fourteenth day of the passover according to the gospel, never swerving, but following according to the rule of the faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, live according to the tradition of my kinsmen, and some of them have I followed. For seven of my family were bishops and I am the eighth, and my kinsmen ever kept the day when the people put away the leaven. Therefore, brethren, I who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord and conversed with brethren from every country, and have studied all holy Scripture, am not afraid of threats, for they have said, who were greater than I, "It is better to obey God rather than men." …

And I could mention the bishops who are present whom you required me to summon, and I did so. If I should write their names they would be many multitudes; and they knowing my feeble [p. 509] humanity, agreed with the letter, knowing that not in vain is my head grey, but that I have ever lived in Christ Jesus.

Source: Irenaeus, Letter to Victor, quoted in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24, 16, 17; translated by Kirsopp Lake, Vol. 1 (Campbridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949), pp. 511, 513. Reprinted by permission of the publishers and The Loeb Classical Library.

[p. 511] When the blessed Polycarp was staying in Rome in the time of Anicetus, though they disagreed a little about some other things as well, they immediately made peace, having no wish for strife between them on this matter [Easter]. For neither was Anicetus [bishop of Rome c. 157–c. 168] able to persuade Polycarp not to observe it [on Nisan 14], inasmuch as he had always done so in company with John the disciple of our Lord and the other apostles with whom he had associated; nor did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, for he said that he ought to [p. 513] keep the custom of those who were presbyters before him. And under these circumstances they communicated with each other, and in the church Anicetus yielded the celebration of the Eucharist to Polycarp, obviously out of respect and they parted from each other in peace, for the peace of the whole church was kept both by those who observed and by those who did not.

Roman Bishop (Victor) Excommunicates Observers of Nisan 14

Source: Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24, 9–11; translated by Kirsopp Lake, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949), p. 509. Reprinted by permission of the publishers and The Loeb Classical Library.

Victor, who presided at Rome, immediately tried to cut off from the common unity the dioceses of all Asia [Minor], together with the adjacent churches, on the ground of heterodoxy, and he indited letters announcing that all the Christians there were absolutely excommunicated. But by no means all were pleased by this, so they issued counter-requests to him to consider the cause of peace and unity and love towards his neighbours. Their words are extant, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them too Irenaeus, writing in the name of the Christians whose leader he was in Gaul, though he recommends that the mystery of the Lord’s resurrection be observed only on the Lord’s day, yet nevertheless exhorts Victor suitably and at length not to excommunicate whole churches of God for following a tradition of ancient custom [that is, the observance of Easter on Nisan 14 instead of consistently on Sunday].

Constantine’s Report of Settlement at Council of Nicaea

Source: Constantine’s Letter to the Churches Respecting the Council at Nicaea, quoted in Eusebius. The Life of Constantine, bk. iii, chaps. 18, 19, trans. in NPNF, 2d series, Vol. I, pp. 524, 525.

[ch. 18, p. 524] At this meeting the question concerning the most holy day of Easter was discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present, that this feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day. For what can be more becoming or honorable to us than that this feast from which we date our hopes of immortality, should be observed unfailingly by all alike, according to one ascertained order and arrangement? And first of all, it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews [that is, by celebrating it at the time of the Jewish Passover, on a Jewish calendar date, Nisan 14], who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul… Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way. A course at once legitimate and honorable lies open to our most holy religion. Beloved brethren, let us with one consent adopt this course [that is, the celebration of the resurrection, always on a Sunday], and withdraw ourselves from all participation in their baseness. For their boast is absurd indeed, that it is not in our power without instruction from them to observe these things… Being altogether ignorant of the true adjustment of this question, they sometimes celebrate [p. 525] Easter twice in the same year [because the Jewish calendar year, being lunar, is slightly shorter than the solar year]… How grievous and scandalous it is that on the self-same days some should be … present at banquets and amusements, while others are fulfilling the appointed fasts. It is, then, plainly the will of Divine Providence (as I suppose you all clearly see), that this usage should receive fitting correction, and be reduced to one uniform rule…

[ch. 19] Since, therefore, it was needful that this matter should be rectified, so that we might have nothing in common with that nation of parricides who slew their Lord: and since that arrangement is consistent with propriety which is observed by all the churches of the western, southern, and northern parts of the world, and by some of the eastern also: for these reasons all are unanimous on this present occasion in thinking it worthy of adoption. And I myself have undertaken that this decision should meet with the approval of your Sagacities, in the hope that your Wisdoms will gladly admit that practice which is observed at once in the city of Rome, and in Africa; throughout Italy, and in Egypt, in Spain, the Gauls, Britain, Libya, and the whole of Greece; in the dioceses of Asia and Pontus, and in Cilicia, with entire unity of judgment… In fine, that I may express my meaning in as few words as possible, it has been determined by the common judgment of all, that the most holy feast of Easter should be kept on one and the same day.