The Quartodeciman - Easter Controversy
By Dr. G. Reckart
Copyright All Rights Reserved
Trying to untangle the Catholic lies concerning the Asiatic Quartodeciman's is a difficult work. The problem is two-fold: correcting the interpolation of the name Easter for Passover; and the ability of those reading to understand.
The first is easy the second not so easy. But I will try in this study to present evidence of Catholic lies and distortions upon which many of the denominal churches establish their Lord Supper practices. In addition, the majority of Oneness Pentecostals and Apostolics follow the papacy in their own teachings and interpretations. It is my desire by this study to convert the Apostolic people back to the annual observance of the Lord's Supper on Passover evening just as Jesus instituted it. I will not go into a lengthily explanation of the words of Jesus "THIS DO," as a command to practice the Lord's Supper and also do it on the very night he did. I will say the doctrine of anytime Lord's Supper is not Apostolic. It is also not Biblical to celebrate the Lord's Supper on Easter sunday or on any other Sunday morning. By making these statements I am opening up the heated controversy of the papacy against the Quartodeciman Asiatic Apostolics.
What does Quartodeciman mean? It is a Latin name meaning 14th. It was used to describe those who observed the Lord's Supper on the evening of the 14th of Abib or Nisan at the same time the Jews celebrated their old Passover. They did not call themselves Quartodeciman. This was bestowed upon them by followers of the Western members of the Catholic church. In Church history the conflict between the Eastern Asiatic Apostolic Churches and the Western Romanish churches was called the Passover-Easter controversy.
Correcting lies and distortions:
I want to state a fact which so many are deceived about. The Quartodeciman Churches did not use the pagan name Easter to refer to the Lord's Supper Passover. Easter was a papacy name invented by Rome. You can do your own study to verify the name Easter comes from the name of a spring goddess and did not come from the Apostolic Church. The Eastern Asiatic Churches called the Lord's Supper Passover. It is distorted by the papacy that Passover and Easter are the same thing. This is false. The Passover is the celebration of the death of Jesus as the Passover Lamb. The resurrection was observed three days later. Both the Passover and the resurrection were observed no matter on what day of the week they fell. It was the papacy that wanted to fix the resurrection on Sunday mornings without any respect to the time of the annual Passover. To make this scheme work, the engineers of this falsehood turned Friday into Good Friday and changed the Lord's crucifixion from the 15th of Nisan to any day they chose to make Good Friday work. But this scheme also failed because there is not three days and three nights between Friday and Sunday morning. While this falsehood is easily recognized, many still cling to observing Good Friday and then Easter as the Resurrection of Jesus on days established by Rome. They reject observing the Lord's Supper on the annual day of Passover as Jesus said "THIS DO." Anyone who holds Easter is following Rome. You are Catholic if you observe the papacy manner of rejecting Passover on the 15th of Nisan and move it to celebrate the death of Jesus on Easter at the same time as the resurrection. Any person of reasonable intelligence knows Jesus did not institute his Lord's Supper as an Easter Sunday morning celebration of his resurrection.
The controversy began during the lives of Clement in Asia and Justin Martyr in Egypt. Clement passed on to the Asian Churches what they had learned from the Apostle Paul, Apostle John, and the Apostle Philip. Polycarp came into the Church under the Ministry of Clement. He held the same doctrine on the annual observance of the Lord's Supper on Passover. In fact, when Polycrates held a convention of the Asian Churches, not one of them followed the new inventions of the papacy that came from Justin Martyr. The observance of Easter for the Lord's Supper is claimed by Rome to come from Egypt and Justin Martyr. The papacy claims Sunday Lord's Supper is mentioned in the Didache and by Justin Martyr. They also claim Peter and Paul are the ones to establish the combined Easter Lord's Supper and resurrection observance.
Involved in the controversy are Polycarp bishop of Smyrna and Polycrates the bishop of Ephesus. But these represent a host of unnamed Pastors, Ministers, and Church members. In fact, the saints from the time of the Apostles all the way to the Council of Nicaea are often ignored. What the papacy did was claim these Churches and members were practicing the Lord's Supper on a false day. That doing it on Passover as Jesus had done was false. Rome has wanted to convince the world that observing the Lord's Supper on Easter Sunday morning was the original Apostolic practice. It is the papacy and its agents who have perverted history to make the Asian Apostolic Churches look like rogues and heretics for observing the Lord's Supper on Passover evening.
Enter Eusebius, the man who betrayed his Church and signed the Nicene Creed. He was also there at the Council and changed from being a Monarchian to a Trinitarian and from being a Quartodeciman to accepting the Council's decision to observe the Lord's Supper on Easter and no more on Passover evening. It is Eusebius who concocted the story of Polycarp going to Rome and visiting Pope Anicetus. Claiming when Polycarp could not convince him to celebrate the Lord's Supper on Passover evening, he compromised and celebrated it with the Pope on Easter Sunday morning. The lies of Eusebius had but one purpose, to break down the resolve of the Eastern Churches and suggest they compromise with Rome as Polycarp had done. After all, if one of their great Bishops had compromised and celebrated the papacy Easter, they could do the same and not feel they had sinned. The papacy agents then cooked up some other pseudo writings to support the annual Easter observance of the Lord's Supper.
What is missing in the whole of the New Testament is an annual Easter or Resurrection observance. The practice of the Apostolic Church was to observe the resurrection each time a convert was risen with Christ in water baptism. The whole Easter Resurrection Lord's Supper observance doctrine is absent from the Scriptures. And even if Polycarp did compromise it would change nothing since one man's sin would and could not alter Apotolic doctrine or practice.
Hate of Jews and Antisemitisim Against The Lord's Supper On Passover:
Now, why were some observing the Lord's Supper on Passover evening and some rejected this and held it on Easter Sunday morning? It is all centered around hatred of Jews and antisemitism. Here are a few quotes to prove my point:
Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in the mid-4th century, "... the emperor ... convened a council of 318 bishops ... in the city of Nicea. ... They passed certain ecclesiastical canons at the council besides, and at the same time decreed in regard to the Passover that there must be one unanimous concord on the celebration of God's holy and supremely excellent day. For it was variously observed by people ..." (Epiphanius, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III (Sects 47-80), De Fide. Section VI, Verses 1,1 and 1,3. Translated by Frank Williams. EJ Brill, New York, 1994, pp.471-472).
The Nicene council assumed the task of regulating these differences, in part because some dioceses wanted the Christian calendar to be independent of the Jewish calendar. "The festival of the resurrection (Lord's Supper) was thenceforth required to be celebrated everywhere on a Sunday, and never on the day of the Jewish passover, but always after the fourteenth of Nisan, on the Sunday after the first vernal full moon. Some commentators have concluded that the desire for an independent Christian calendar was motivated by bitterness towards Judaism" (Schaff, Philip. "History of the Christian Church, Volume III: Nicene and Post-Nicene).
A circular letter of Emperor Constantine issued during the Council with strong anti-Jewish language lends weight to the charge of anti-Judaism, stating that that: "... it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy festival we should follow the practice of the Jews, 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" (Eusebius of Caesaria. "Life of Constantine (Book III)").
Theodoret recorded the Emperor as saying: "It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. … Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews" (Jackson, Blomfield. "The Ecclesiastical History, Dialogues, and Letters of Theodoret).
The attack against the Lord's Supper on Passover evening is totally packaged within antisemitism. Anyone who claims Passover is not the exclusive day to observe the Lord's Supper, following the papacy with hate of Jews and accepts other days or Easter Sunday morning to observe the Lord's Supper and his Resurrection, are apostates and two-fold children of the devil.
Is Observing the Lord's Supper On Passover Going Back To Law keeping?
Now it is claimed that the Asian Apostolic Churches had fallen back to Law keeping by observing the Lord's Supper on Passover evening. This accusation is false. Those who make it know it is false. But it is such a nice distortion it will deceive millions and that is all the better to keep them away from the night those evil Christ killing Jews observe their Passover. Rome uses the latent diseased minds of antisemites to champion the Easter Resurrection Lord's Supper false doctrine.
There are Christians who do not hate Jews just because some were involved in the crucifixion of Jesus. These were the Apostolic Passover keepers. They did not use antisemitism to fashion their doctrine of the Lord's Supper celebration. One thing that cannot be laid at the feet of the Asian Apostolic Churches and that is hate of Jews. This came from the Council of Nicaea and the Western churches associated with Rome and the papacy. Why would the Asian Christians hate Jews? They were not taught this by Paul, by John, or by the Apostle Philip. For 300 years these Apostolic believers held the Lord's Supper each year on the evening of the Passover. There is no record they held an annual Easter Sunday Resurrection celebration. If they did hold a resurrection day, it would have been on the third day after the Lord's Supper just as it occurred in Jerusalem.
The Calendar And Its Distortions:
The calendar in the time of Jesus for Passover was the Jewish one. The papacy wanted to switch to the Roman calendar. In fact, Rome has controlled the calendar since the Nicene Council. Pope Gregory changed the first of the year from March to January. The question came up was Jesus resurrected on Sunday? The answer is yes. The Eastern Asian Churches did not dispute this. But they did dispute this should be a fixed observance on an annual Sunday. They held the Lord's Supper on the evening of the Passover and it did not matter what day of the week it fell upon. There was no ancient practice to schedule Passover to fall upon a certain day of the week. It floated throughout the week days in the same manner a person's birthday would. If my birthday is November 9th then it will always be November 9th no matter what day of the week it falls upon. It would be silly to say November 9th was the second Friday of November when I was born and so regardless of the date, I will celebrate my birthday on the second Friday each November. This is what the issue is with setting Sunday as the day of the resurrection regardless of the date according to the Jewish calendar. It is just as stupid but millions have fallen for the deception.
Jesus was resurrected on Sunday morning. This was also the third day according to the testimony of Jesus and two disciples (see Luke 24:21 and verse 46). So, Jesus was in the grave three nights and two days and arose early on the third day. All you have to do is back work this and you will see that if he was resurrected on Sunday the third day, then saturday night was the third night; Saturday was the second day; Friday night would be the second night; Friday would have been the first day; Thursday night would have been the first night; therefore Jesus was crucified on Thursday. Now Thursday would have been the 15th of Abib or Nisan. Jesus observed the Lord's Supper the night before. So we count the days: Thursday night, Friday day, Friday night, Saturday day, Saturday night, and then Sunday third day. The Resurrection took place on the 18th of Nisan, the third day after Passover. Any other doctrine is false.
To be accurate, a person would say I am going to celebrate the Lord's Resurrection every Nisan 18th regardless of what day it fell upon. This is going by the Jewish calendar. But now switch to the Roman Calendar and the papacy and say, regardless of the Jewish date, and regardless of the day of the week, it first came on Sunday and we are going to fix it that way forever. So they invented Easter and the Resurrrection to fall on the first sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox. How is that for distortion? If this scheduled Easter and Lord's Supper happened to fall on the Jewish Passover, well the Catholic engineers would fudge and move it to the next Sunday. This is antisemitism at its best. They claim they could not celebrate the death and resurrection on the same day. So they will not hold Easter and the Lord's Supper on a Jewish Passover. They claim there is a great conflict. But they do that anyway when they moved the Lord's Supper to Easter Sunday morning. What is the purpose for this grand deception by Rome and many Christians? It is antisemitism. What other purpose is there to reject the Jewish calendar that Jesus used to celebrate the old Passover and institute his own new one?
The Peter And Paul Lies By Rome:
What about Peter and Paul establishing Easter Sunday morning Lord's Supper? Is it true? I do not accept it. Paul never established it in his Asian Churches, the same ones that observed Passover to hold the Lord's Supper. The claim about Peter and Paul is not backed up by the historical record.
Polycarp claimed the Asian Churches always observed this faith of the Lord's Supper on Passover. If Paul held something different, he would have mentioned it. These claims of Peter and Paul are all bogus. Peter never was in Rome. The claim that Babylon means cryptically Rome is nothing but manipulation. Babylon is the real Babylon and Peter went there because there were more Jews living there then in Israel. Paul was to go to the Gentiles and Peter was to go to the circumcision. There is no record Peter went to Rome except that manufactured by the agents of the papacy. One thing that has always intrigued me is why these names were not brought up at the Council of Nicae and presented to Constantine as proof the Western practice was the original practice from the beginning? It is missing. Would these enemies of the Lord's Supper on Passover miss such an opportunity to declare this? Agents of the papacy in their monasteries over the centuries cooked up several pseudo writings and passed them off as those from earlier ages. Even the Constantine donation letter is a contrived fraud. The papacy sits on stolen property today. And it is guilty of perverting all of the major doctrines of the New Testament Church including the most important one of all, the Lord's Supper on Passover.
The Eastern Apostolic Asiatics were not bothering anyone. But Rome wanted control over the whole world and over all Churches. So they invented the Passover-Easter controversy to get Emperor Constantine to issue a decree placing all Churches under the authority of those Bishops who agreed with the Nicene Council. Rome won out by force and threats from the Emperor himself. The Asian Churches were overthrown. They had to adopt the Easter Sunday morning Lord's Supper and Resurrection or be deprived of their churches their homes and their property. Any Bishop who refused was to be replaced by a Bishop who joined the papacy. Within a few generations of Nicaea, the Apostolic Churches of Asia had been taken over and fell into the annual Easter Sunday observance of the Lord's Supper and the Rsurrection. The Eastern Orthodox Catholic church maintains this control over all the Churches of these ancient cities. They claim they are orthodox but this is false. They have joined Rome on a false day and continue to oppose celebration of the Lord's Supper on Passover. Antismeitism remains alive and well.
What does Jesus have to do with Easter? Nothing! He has nothing to do with rabbits, easter eggs, bonnets, and bunny trails. He has nothing to do with sun-rise services. Was Jesus resurrected on a Sunday? Yes. But he was not resurrected on Easter Sunday according to the calculations of the engineers of the papacy. The sunday he was resurrected was not called Easter. This was an embellishment place on the day by later pagans who came into the Catholic church.
Should the day of his resurrection be observed? You can if you want but there is no command to do so by Jesus or his Apostles. We believe each time a person is risen with Christ in water baptism they have celebrated the resurrection of Jesus. At the Last Supper Jesus gave no memorial of his resurrection. He gave only the memorial of his death. It is this observance that was to be held each and every Passover until his second coming, the papacy perverted and made into an Easter Sunday resurrection falsehood.
Is there a command to observe the Lord's Supper on Passover, the same evening Jesus did? Yes, when Jesus said "This Do." He was issuing an ordinance that the Apostles were to follow everything they had just done on the next Passover and all others until he comes.
What if the book of Acts and the Epistles do not say it is to be held on Passover, dosen't this mean we should not take the words of Jesus to mean each Passover "this do?"
Some have tried to claim that the words of Jesus "this do" are not to be followed or obeyed unless there is a back-up verse or verses in the books of Acts or the Epistles. This is not only idiotic this is a form or blasphemous reprobation. To speak against the words of Jesus, to correct his intent, and to demand his statement have the back-up of men is insane.
What about the Catholic doctrine that breaking of bread in Luke 24:35, Acts 2:42, and 20:7, is observing the Lord's Supper? This is false. The Passover Feast for 1400 years was never referred to as the breaking of bread. The Lord’s Supper is no where mentioned as the breaking of bread. The breaking of bread is a meal and the bread is leavened. The texts Luke 24:35, Acts 2:42, and 20:7 do not describe the Lord’s Supper at all and any attempts to claim this are all false. There is no such thing as breaking bread and this alone is the Lord’s Supper. The breaking of bread in the texts is nothing but eating a meal. No mention is made that this bread was unleavened in order to comply with the Lord’s Supper. No mention of the Cup or feet washing. Any attempt to make these the Lord’s Supper is false. The Peshito Version shows again Catholic manipulation using the word Eucharist to rename the Lord’s Supper from Passover to a new non Jewish name. The old Passover NEVER was called the Eucharist. What does Eucharist mean? It is the blessing prayer said over all the emblems of the Passover. The "thanks" (eulogia) prayer is not the Passover and it is not the Lord’s Supper. The use of the word Eucharist is part of the total antisemitism package scheme of the Catholic church against the Lord’s Passover celebration on Passover.
There are many books where the word Easter is used instead of Passover. This confuses the entire issue. Let me show you an encyclopedia entry and how it was revised.
Original Entry:
''Quartodecimanism''' (derived from the Vulgate Latin: ''quarta decima'', meaning fourteen) refers to the custom of some Early Christians celebrating Easter beginning with the 14th day of Nisan 14th of Abib in the Hebrew Bible's Hebrew Calendar, Lev 23:5, which at dusk, is said to be the "LORD's passover."
Revision:
Quartodecimanism (derived from the Vulgate Latin: quarta decima, meaning fourteen) refers to the custom of some Early Christians celebrating the Lord's Supper on the Passover on the same evening the Jews celebrated their Passover. The Passover lamb is slain at sundown on the 14th Deu 16:6. Passover falls on the evening of the 14th day of Nisan 14th of Abib in the Hebrew Bible's Hebrew Calendar, Lev 23:5, which at light of the first star, is said to be the beginning of the "LORD's passover."
Notice how the writer claimed the Quartodeciman Churches were at issue about Easter. That is false. The Quartodeciman Churches held Passover as the evening to celebrate the Lord's Supper. There was no issue about Easter at all. Easter was a later Catholic invention for the Sunday observance of the Resurrection. The Lord's Supper and the Resurrection are two different events taking place on two different days. The Quartodeciman Churches did not hold an annual Easter Resurrection observance. They held only the Lord's Supper on the night of the Jew's Passover.
It is this confusion, of claiming the Quartodeciman Churches were practicing Easter wrong on the Jew's Passover. That is false. They never did it. They NEVER observed the Resurrection of Jesus on the Jew's Passover. To call the Lord's Supper held on Passover by the name of Easter is wrong and false.
When should the Lord's Supper be observed?
It should be observed at evening time only, after sundown, on Nisan 15th according to the Jewish calendar regardless of what day of the week it falls. You can observe when the Jews will hold their Passover and hold the Lord's Supper on the same night. You will be observing the Lord's Supper exactly as he did on Passover. Since he is our Passover Lamb, and did die for us on Nisan 15th, what greater way to show our love and respect, then to honor the same day he instituted his memorial?
Is it commanded?
Yes, when Jesus said "THIS DO" it was a command. It certainly was not a suggestion. And he did not leave it up to the Apostles to vote or decide to hold it on whim days when ever they chose to do so.
Since there is no direct command by the Apostles to observe the Lord's Supper on the Passover dosen't this mean we can do it when we want?
No. The Lord's Supper is an ordinance. Paul said he had delivered the ordinances that he had received and they were to keep them by practice. In these ordinances was also the annual observance of the Lord's Supper on Passover. This is why all these Asian Churches held this observance all the way up to the Council of Nicaea when it was declared illegal and to be stopped.
What about the breaking of bread, dosen't this mean they had a Lord's Supper?
No, breaking of bread is a meal. It is leavened bread. It is not the Lord's Supper since the bread needs to be unleavened and also there needs to be wine and also foot washing. Anyone can break bread with others at a meal like Jesus did in Luke 24:35, but this is not the Lord's Supper. The first time breaking of bread is mentioned in Luke 24 it is not the Lord's Supper. This shows and proves breaking of bread is just a meal where leavened bread is eaten.
Conclusion:
Any observance of the Lord's Supper that is not on Passover evening is not Biblical.
Other Passover Study Links
Jesus Our Passover (An indepth study on Passover)
Passover In The Church
Name Of The Last Supper