According to a number of ecclesiastical historians, primarily
Eusebius, bishop
Polycarp of Smyrna, by tradition a disciple of
John the Evangelist, disputed the computation of the date with bishop
Anicetus of Rome in what is now known as the
Quartodecimanism controversy. Anicetus became bishop of the church of Rome in the mid second century (c. A.D. 155). Shortly thereafter, Polycarp visited Rome and among the topics discussed was when the pre-Easter fast should end. Those in
Asia held strictly to the computation from the
Hebrew calendar and ended the fast on the 14th day of
Nisan, while the Roman custom was to continue the fast until the Sunday following. Neither Polycarp nor Anicetus was able to convert the other to his positionaccording to a rather confused account by
Sozomen, both could claim Apostolic authority for their traditions
[1]but neither did they consider the matter of sufficient importance to justify a
schism, so they parted in peace leaving the question unsettled. However, a generation later bishop
Victor of Rome excommunicated bishop Polycrates of
Ephesus and the rest of the Asian bishops for their adherence to 14 Nisan. The excommunication was rescinded and the two sides reconciled upon the intervention of bishop
Irenaeus of Lyons, who reminded Victor of the tolerant precedent that had been established earlier. In the end, a uniform method of computing the date of Easter was not formally settled until the
First Council of Nicaea in 325 (
see below), although by that time the Roman timing for the observance had spread to most churches.
A number of early bishops rejected the practice of celebrating Easter, or more accurately Passover, on the first Sunday after Nisan 14. This conflict between Easter and Passover is often referred to as the "Paschal Controversy". The bishops dissenting from the newer practice of Easter favored adhering to celebrating the festival on Nisan 14 in accord with the Biblical Passover and the tradition passed on to them by the Apostles. The problem with Nisan 14 in the minds of some in the Western Church (who wished to further associate Sunday and Easter) is that it was calcuated by the moon and could fall on any day of the week.
An early example of this tension is found written by Theophilus of Caesarea (c. 180 A.D.; 8.774 "Ante-Nicene Church Fathers") when he stated, "Endeavor also to send abroad copies of our epistle among all the churches, so that those who easily deceive their own souls may not be able to lay the blame on us. We would have you know, too, that in Alexandria also they observe the festival on the same day as ourselves. For the Paschal letters are sent from us to them, and from them to usso that we observe the holy day in unison and together."
Polycarp, a disciple of John, likewise adhered to a Nisan 14 observance. Irenaeus, who observed the "first Sunday" rule notes of Polycarp (one of the Bishops of Asia Minor), "For Anicetus could not persuade Polycarp to forgo the observance [of his Nisan 14 practice] inasmuch as these things had been always observed by John the disciple of the Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant." (c. 180 A.D.; 1.569 "Ante-Nicene Church Fathers"). Irenaeus notes that this was not only Polycarp's practice, but that this was the practice of John the disple and the other apostles that Polycarp knew.
Oy VEy!!!
