These three varying rules created a plentiful source of dissension ; the Church was long unconscious of the coming evil, but while men slept the tares were sown. At first the bond of charity was known to be stronger than all— the difference of calendar made no alteration in the Gospel law of love. Thus Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, " having had occasion to visit Rome (A.D. 160) to confer with pope Anicetus on other matters, found that the Asi- atic rule differed essentially from that of Rome. Both could claim apostolic authority, and therefore each rev- erently forbore from pressing a rival claim; while Ani- cetus assigned to his guest as his senior the privilege of consecrating the holy elements. But immediately after- wards a change came over the spirit of Rome; for the heretical Quartodeciman rule had been introduced there by Blastus — " His omnibus {Marconi et Taiiano, etc.) etiam Blastus accedens, qui latentur Judaismum vult in- troducere" {Pseudo - Test, de Prcescr. Her. p. 53), and with it the whole sweep of Ebionitish perversion. Vic- ' tor, bishop of Rome, therefore knew the Quartodeciman ' practice only in conjunction with a pestilential error, ' and never dissociated the two in his mind. With a-
PASCHAL CONTROVERSY 722 PASCHAL CONTROVERSY
keen perception of the truth of liis own position, he was blind to all that might be advanced by others, and threatened with excommunication (A.D. 180) all those churches which commemorated their Lord's death on the first day of the week. It was the first germ of that svstera of aggression which reached its climax in the liildebrandine theory and jiractice of the papacy. Syn- ods were immediately held by his order (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. V, 23) in Palestine, I'ontus, Gaul, Alexandria, Corinth, and Rome, and the more Catholic rule was everywhere pronounced to be binding. It was also de- termined that the feast of the resurrection was the true close of the paschal fast, and that the Lord's-day and no other should be the day for its celebration. The Asiatics remained unconverted and unconvinced, and continued to observe the 14th of Nisan as a day of mixed character, fasting till the ninth hour, and then rejoicing for the achieved work of man's redemption. In opposition to a somewhat crushing array of names, not of individuals, but of churches, Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, and a friend of Polycarp, put forth a writ- ing in the name of the Asiatic bishops claiming the authority of John and Philip, whose tombs were still at Ephesus' and Hierapolis, and urging the precedent of Polycarp, Melito, and other venerable bishops, in favor of their own apostolic tradition. Still Victor pronounced them "heterodox," and not only essayed to cut them off from communion, ctTroTEnrnv riiQ fvwa'iwg Trtiparai, as Hefele limits the words of Eusebius, but authoritatively pronounced them excommunicate, aniXirii ti itd ypo/u- (.iciTiiiv, aKOivwvi]TOVQ apoi]V ndvrag rot'C tKHcrt dvuKi}- pvTTwv dSiXipovQ (Euseb. Bist. Eccles. v, 24). The vio- lent decree, however, was a mere "brutum fulmen," for none of the other churches assented to it, and Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, wrote a letter of expostulation to Victor on the subject. The result was that Rome stood alone in its extreme antagonism to the churches of Ephesine communion.
Hitherto the paschal controversy had turned upon two points: (1) the proper day for the memorial of our Lord's death, and (2) the day on which the paschal fast should be resolved in the joyful commemoration of East- er. A third difficulty, of an Ebionitish complexion, arose (A.D. 170) at Laodicea, the capital of Phr}'gia Pa- catiana, in Asia Minor ; it was stated that our Lord in- stituted the holy Eucharist on the 14th, and was put to death on the 15th of Nisan, the Jewish method of com- puting the commencement of the day from sunset hav- ing been apparently ignored (Euseb. Bist. Eccles. iv, 2G). The paschal feast of these schismatics combined the eucharistic with the paschal rite, and was essen- tially of a Jewish ordinance. The Church of course affirmed that the passovcr, like any typical observance, had only a temporary character, and that it was merged in the Christian commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross. It was an entirely new phase of the Quartodeciman theory, and caused an evil report of Judaizing notions to be attached to the orthodox following oi" John and Philip and Polycarp. But the writers of the Asiatic Church at once denounced it as wholly inconsistent with Christian principle ; and frag- ments still exist of writings that were put forth against it by Melito, bishop of Sardis, and ApoUinaris, bishop of Hierapolis, both of whom followed the more orthodox Asiatic ride. " They err," says this latter writer, " who affirm that our Lord ate the passover on the 14th of Nisan with his disciples, and that he died on the great day of unleavened bread (i. e. on the 15th of Nisan). They maintain that Matthew records the event as they have imagined it; but their notion agrees not with the law; and thereby the (Jospcls are made to wear a con- tradictory appearance" {Chronicon J'aschale, i, 13, in Dundorfs Byzant. Bist. ^Script, xvi). Tiiis was the phase of the Quartodeciman which was introduced into Rome by Blastus, and was denounced at once by Ire- naeus (luiseb. Bist. Eccles. v, 20) in his treatise Be Schismate. His follower, Hippolytus, took an active