Christian Anti-Semitism, by Daniel Gruber, is a series of articles that examines the historical development of the anti-Semitism that has proceeded from the church. This reader, for one, has found the series very informative, and select articles from it are being presented that the reader may gain similar benefit. The studies are being presented in the sequence in which their historical content occurred. Therefore, it is recommended that they be read in the sequence in which links to them are found in our Library.

In 1 Corinthians 14:15, Paul said, I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also (ASV). It is the prayer of the Shofar board that the reader may grow in understanding in this matter and pray accordingly. ~ editor

Study 8: THE PASSOVER CONTROVERSY

"One issue that stands out in the reversal of the teaching of the apostolos/
ambassadors whom Yeshua appointed is the Passover controversy."

One issue that stands out in the reversal of the teaching of the apostolos/ambassadors whom Yeshua appointed is the Passover
controversy. It was settled at the Council of Nicea. To this day, almost all the Church follows the clearly erroneous decree which came forth from that council.

There were two main issues for the Council of Nicea. The first concerned the heretical writings of Arius and his followers.

When they assembled, Constantine greeted them with an admonition against disunity:

Constantine had united the Empire. Now he intended to deliver “the Church” as well from "internal sedition." Unity was the order of the day.

How did the Passover controversy arise? Yeshua had observed Passover on the fourteenth of Nisan because that is its Biblical date. He observed all the Levitical holy days on the days which God had decreed and for which He designed them to be observed. The ambassadors of the Lord and his first-century followers did much the same.

Sometime in the second century, some of the congregations in the west, among the Gentiles, began to celebrate Passover/Easter so that their commemoration of the Lord's resurrection would always take place on a Sunday regardless of the Biblical calendar. Towards the end of the second century, these western congregations, led by the bishops of Rome, Caesarea, and Jerusalem (where there were no longer Jewish “bishops”), began to agitate for all the congregations to keep the Passover on their fixed Sunday, rather than on the fourteenth of Nisan. They also were accustomed to using the Roman calendar, rather than the Biblical calendar.

There were others, like Irenaeus, who "with much severity" exhorted Victor to withdraw his decree. About 180 C. E., Irenaeus wrote a book Against Heresies, to safeguard the faith delivered by the ambassadors. It became a standard for judging different teachings.

Irenaeus reminded Victor of what had happened about fifty years earlier. Anicetus, the bishop of Rome at that time, had tried to persuade Polycarp. "For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe it, because he had always observed it with John the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of the apostles, with whom he associated . . . . " (6) In another section, Eusebius says this about Polycarp: "He always taught what he had learned from the apostles, what the church had handed down, and what is the only true doctrine." (7)

Apparently Victor withdrew his decree, but the controversy was not resolved. It was merely muted for a time. The church at Rome continued to press for its own supremacy. Jerusalem had already been physically destroyed, but it still had to be destroyed as a spiritual competitor. The issue, in a slightly altered form, was settled by the Council of Nicea in 325 C.E.

There it was decided that all the “churches” should celebrate the Passover, or actually Easter, on the ecclesiastically chosen Sunday rather than the Biblical date. All the “churches” were thus informed. The Emperor Constantine sent his personal exhortation to all the “churches” concerning the decision of the Council.

What the Emperor said had great weight. After all, Constantine was the one who had ended the persecution. He was the founder of the holy Roman Empire. He openly, personally professed the “Christian” faith. He had convened the council. The “churches,” therefore, were more than willing to hear whatever he had to say to them.

What he had to say to them is a clear presentation of the sentiment and theology that ruled in the Council of Nicea. It expresses what then became the nearly universal sentiment and theology of the Church. So, though the letter is long, it is well worthwhile to look at the complete text of the Emperor's personal exhortation to all the congregations. It was a major force in establishing the nature of the Church, which had a great impact on subsequent Western and world history. There are some very significant elements in it.

In this letter, Constantine officially established an anti-Judaic foundation for the doctrine and practice of the Church, and declared that contempt for the Jews, and separation from them, is the only proper Christian attitude.

Constantine attributed this anti-Judaic foundation to Jesus — "We have received another method from the Saviour. A more lawful and proper course is open to our most holy religion." — and commands, with all the authority of the Emperor, that all those who follow the Savior accept and promote such attitudes, doctrine, and practice, since whatever the bishops decide in council is the will of God. He threatens that any dissent from these views must be considered highly criminal.

All of this was written so that no Christian would celebrate Passover on the Biblically ordained day of the 14th of Nisan. (Eusebius apparently provided the new calendar for determining the day to be celebrated.) This is not an insignificant letter.

The most revealing question to ask is, "When did God give Constantine such authority to define the Church?" It is a question that was not really articulated at that time nor in most of the seventeen centuries since. The relationship of Church and State which began under Constantine was seen by many as a great blessing of God. There was an end to what had seemed like endless persecution. But with that end of persecution and the beginning of a new alliance came great compromises which removed “the Church” from its foundation and have distorted its nature to this day.

At the conclusion of the Council of Nicea, Constantine held a banquet which vividly demonstrated what had happened to the Church of the One despised and rejected of men. At the banquet, Eusebius greatly praised the Emperor before the assembled leaders of the Church.

Eusebius himself describes the proceedings:

Eusebius is somewhat misleading. It is true that some of the Church leaders were brought into close relationship to the emperor, his private apartments, and his table — in time, such privileges became a measure of religious success — but it is highly doubtful that all the men of God walked through the circle of guards and soldiers without fear. The emperor intended the drawn swords to teach a lesson.

In fact, Eusebius was more than misleading on issues related to the emperor or to the Jews.

On the Passover controversy, the Council of Nicea had chosen an anti-Biblical course and demanded conformity to it. The swords were a way of indicating the necessity of conforming to the official decree.

In convening the council, Constantine had already declared that whoever would disturb the unity of the Church was a "malignant foe" motivated by a "malevolent demon," exposing God's law to "slander and detraction." He had already declared that, "an internal sedition in the Church is, in my apprehension, more dangerous and formidable than any war, in which I can be engaged . . . and hoping that by my interference, a remedy might be applied to the evil, I sent for you all, without delay."

Constantine had achieved political victory, professing it to be in the name of the Lord, by the sword. He was not about to trade in his weapons. He intended to use what had brought him victory in the Empire to achieve victory in the Church.

From that point on, Church doctrine was to be enforced by the sword of the State. Those who would not conform were to be exiled or put to death. The books of heretics — those who taught what was contrary to the accepted teaching — were to be burned and exterminated from the earth. After all, as Constantine had written, "no pretence was left for dissension or controversy respecting the faith."

The “Church” ceased to be the community of Yeshua, and became the consort of Constantine. It was no longer the bride of Messiah. It had become the bride of Caesar.

The light within turned to darkness. Instead of being a means of salvation, the Church became a means of destruction. It poisoned the waters of eternal life, turning them into an everflowing fountain of death. Through the centuries, the Constantinian Church has sought and brought the death of millions and millions of people throughout the world. Many of them have been Jewish.

Yeshua had warned His followers, The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called 'Benefactors.' But not so with you, but let him who is the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as the servant (Lk. 22:25-26). Constantine presented himself as the Benefactor of the Church, having ended the persecution, and therefore expected the Church to conform to his will. The prophetic voice of the Lord vis-a-vis the State was silenced, and, instead, a hierarchical structure was imposed upon the Church.

That Constantine should reign over the earth for God was seen as a high spiritual truth. That Yeshua, the King of kings, should reign over all the earth from Jerusalem was derided as carnal and unspiritual. Under Constantine, Eusebius wrote a history of the Church that pointedly eliminated any positive reference to the restoration of Israel and the earthly reign of Jesus. The only place that remained for the Jews in the plan and purpose of God was to serve as the earthly, temporal representation of the eternal misery and condemnation that awaited all who were outside the Church.

The Church was now officially Contra Judaeos and Adversus Judaeos - set against and set in opposition to the Jews. Thus was established the anti-Judaic foundation on which both doctrine and practice were then built. The historical and theological eradication of the Jews prepared the way for the "lawful" attempts to physically eradicate them.

The "holy councils" to which Constantine referred produced a new "divine will." The Church itself replaced the power of God with the might of the Roman Empire. The Church became its own kingdom. The Church, which had been persecuted for so long by "the cruelty of the devil," was soon to become the persecutor.

At that time, it seems that there was no one to contest such a decision in the Holy Roman Empire. Gone were the days of the prophets and apostles. Gone were men like Polycarp and Polycrates, who were willing to tell the religious authorities in the Church, as Peter and John had told the religious authorities in the Sanhedrin, We must obey God, rather than men.

The Church was then officially built on a significantly different doctrine and way in which doctrine was to be established. As Constantine wrote "to the Catholic Church of Alexandria," "For what was approved by 300 bishops can only be considered as the pleasure of God, especially as the Holy Spirit, dwelling in the minds of so many and such worthy men, has clearly shown the divine will." (13) God's Truth was to be determined by Church councils, and not by the Word of God. Consequently, the teaching which was a blasphemous heresy to Justin Martyr became the new, unchallengeable orthodoxy. (14)

It is remarkable that this change was made over such a clear, but seemingly insignificant issue as when Passover should be celebrated. The Bible sets the date for Passover as the fourteenth of Nisan. That is when Yeshua celebrated the Passover. His ambassadors and followers did the same.

Paul, who was Yeshua’s ambassador to the Gentiles, observed the Biblical dates. The book of Acts records, simply in passing, that Passover (Acts 20:7), Shavuos/Pentecost (Acts 20:16), and Yom Kippur/the Day of Atonement (Acts 27:9) were fixed, significant dates for Paul. The community built by the ambassadors knew when Passover was. From the Council of Nicea on, the Church over which Constantine presided would no longer observe the Biblical date, because it was too Jewish.

The Bible itself was too Jewish. The doctrines of men, on the other hand, could be whatever men wanted them to be.

As a final note on the Council of Nicea, Canon VII speaks of the Bishop of Aelia. "Aelia" is the name that the Roman Emperor Hadrian had given to Jerusalem after the end of the Bar Kokhba rebellion.

"Canon VII: Since custom and ancient tradition require that the bishop of Aelia be held in veneration, let him have the next degree of honor to the metropolitan [the bishop of Caesarea], without prejudice to the appropriate authority of the latter." (15) Jerusalem had her name taken away, and she was placed in subjection to the church that had embraced Origen.

Constantine and Eusebius institutionalized many serious errors. They made changes that were to plunge the Church and the world into a literal thousand years of darkness. They laid a different foundation than Yeshua and His ambassadors had laid. A new era in the history of his followers had begun. In actuality, a new Church had begun.

Constantine sought bones and buildings as the focus of worship. Worship that focused on a building naturally neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. Those are indispensable parts of the worship that God seeks. In the new order, worship gained a form, an appearance, without life, light, or service.

Yeshua had said, those who worship God must worship in spirit and truth. It was not the building, but the people. It was not the city, but the Spirit. Constantine built buildings which were called churches, and people who did not know the Lord began to fill them. They "went to church," but they did not seek to be disciples of Messiah.

Rome was to become the new "holy city," geographically defining and confining worship. In many ways, Constantine laid the new foundation for the new Church. To this day, the Church bears his image. That is what he intended.

Paul had warned the Gentile believers in Rome, "Don't be arrogant towards the natural branches. Don't be ignorant of God's faithfulness to the Jewish people." There were three things that especially characterize the theology and practice of the Constantinian church, the church built on an anti-Judaic foundation:
1. Arrogance towards the Jews;
2. Ignorance of God's plan for Israel and the transformation of the world; and
3. A leadership that has acted as lord and not as servant.

FOOTNOTES

1. "A Historical View of the Council of Nice," Isaac Boyle, The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, translated by Christian Frederick Cruse, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1989, Pp.9-10 of section following the ecclesiastical history.
2. ibid., P.16, quoting Theodoret, I.7.
3. Les Juifs dan l'empire romain I, Paris 1914, P.308ff, quoted in "A Note on the Quartodecimans," C.W. Dugmore, Studia Patristica, Vol. IV, Berlin, 1961, P.412.
4. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, op. cit., Bk. 5, Ch. 23, P.207.
5. ibid., Bk.5, Ch.24, Pp.208-209.
6. ibid., Bk. 5, Ch. 24, Pp.210-211.
7. ibid., Bk.4 , Ch.14, P.141.
8. ibid., Pp.51-54, following the ecclesiastical history.
9. ibid., "A Historical View of the Council of Nice," Isaac Boyle, P.27.
10. H.A. Drake, In Praise of Constantine, A Historical Study and New Translation of Eusebius’ Tricennial Orations, op. cit., P. 8.
11. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, op. cit., "A Historical View of the Council of Nice," Isaac Boyle, Pp.22-23.
12. ibid., P.26.
13. ibid., P.51, following the ecclesiastical history.
14. “For even if you yourselves have ever met with some so-called Christians, who yet do not acknowledge this, but even dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. . . . But I, and all other entirely orthodox Christians, know that there will be a resurrection of the flesh, and also a thousand years in a Jerusalem built up and adorned and enlarged, as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah, and all the rest, acknowledge.’” Justin Martyr, The Dialogue with Trypho, translated by A. Lukyn Williams, S.P.C.K., London, 1930, P.169, Sec. 80.1-5.
15. Ecclesiastical History, P. 56, following the ecclesiastical history.
16. J. Stevenson, A New Eusebius, P.395, quoted in The Search for the Twelve Apostles, William Steuart McBirnie, Tyndale House, Wheaton, IL., 1977, P.19.
17. John Holland Smith, Constantine the Great, Pp.301-302, quoted in The Search for the Twelve Apostles, William Steuart McBirnie, Pp.19-20.
18. The Search for the Twelve Apostles, P. 20.