Edward Feser takes a fascinating trip down memory lane:
The Quartodeciman controversy of the second century A.D. had to do with the date on which the resurrection of Christ ought to be observed. Churches in Asia Minor preserved the custom of tying this observance to the date of the Passover, whatever day of the week that happened to fall on. The Roman practice was instead to observe it on a Sunday, since that was the day Christ was resurrected. The eastern practice was defended by St. Polycarp, who appealed to the authority of none other than his teacher St. John the Apostle. Pope St. Anicetus tried unsuccessfully to convince Polycarp to adopt the Roman practice, and they agreed to disagree.
Pope St. Victor I, who came along a few decades later, was not so accommodating. He tried to convince the eastern bishop Polycrates to adopt the Roman custom, just as Anicetus tried to convince Polycarp, and was equally unsuccessful. But unlike Anicetus, Victor decided to force the issue by excommunicating those who refused to conform. Whether the excommunications were ever rescinded is a matter of historical controversy. But Victor was criticized at the time for his intolerance even by some who agreed with the Roman practice, such as St. Irenaeus. Victor did what he did in the name of unity, yet the practice he forbade had a long precedent (indeed, one going back to the apostles themselves) and had been tolerated by his predecessors. So why act with such severity? Though they did not deny that Victor had, as pope, the right to do what he did, his critics questioned the wisdom and charity of his exercise of that right.
A pope who, in the name of unity, gravely offends much of his flock by needlessly and harshly curtailing ancient and legitimate liturgical practice that had been permitted by his predecessors. Sound familiar?
Go here to read the rest. Church history has much to teach us if we would only pay heed.
I must confess I do not understand how a Pope, any Pope, had the authority to impose the date of Resurrection is celebrated like that. To me, it actually sounds like the Roman custom may have been in error?
.
Passover and Easter both depend upon calculations. When math and theology collide the utility of a Pope to make a binding decision is seen.
https://quasar.as.utexas.edu/BillInfo/ReligiousCalendars.html
The Orthodox of course persist in using the Julian calendar for their calculations. None of this papist Gregorian calendar for them, although they use it every day of their secular lives.
I’m not sure the Roman custom could be said to be in error. But then, my general opinion on it is, “Why does it matter what day it’s celebrated?” All that really matters is that we celebrate his coming to save our souls, and the souls of those who came before and who will come after.
Matthew 18:20 says all we really need to know on the subject.
There is an excellent description of the theology behind the controversy in the works of St. Bede. It was a major issue in Anglo-Saxon England, because Northumbria was evangelized by Irish missionaries, who followed the older method of calculating Easter, before the Benedictines sent with St. Augustine of Canterbury (preaching the Roman method) came north. St. Bede spoke of the Irish without rancor and indeed with great respect for their sanctity and fervor.