passion traditions reinterpreted One possible context where there would have been a need for such a
legitimization is the so-called “Easter controversy” that arose towards the
end of the second century between Asian and other dioceses (Eusebius,
Hist. eccl. .–). When Victor became the bishop of Rome, he tried
to excommunicate all the Asian churches who followed the Jewish prac-
tice and always celebrated Easter on the fourteenth of Nisan which could
be any day of the week. In the Jewish calendar, the fourteenth of Nisan
was the day when fasting ended and the lambs were slaughtered. Accord-
ing to Eusebius (Hist. eccl. .), several conferences and synods were
held because of the controversy. The bishops Theophilus of Caesarea and
Narcissus of Jerusalem presided over one of these conferences in Pales-
tine. They defended the majority view according to which the Easter fast
should always end on the day of the Savior’s resurrection (i.e., Sunday),
not on the fourteenth of Nisan. According to Eusebius, Irenaeus urged
Victor to be tolerant and pointed out that the dispute was not only about
the date of the Paschal festival but also about the correct practice of fast-
ing (Hist. eccl. .). Thus, we can be quite sure that the Quartodeciman
controversy was also about fasting. But is there something that would
make James the Just especially important in this debate?
Notably, Eusebius states (.) that the Palestinian bishops, Narcissus
and Theophilus, wrote a long defense of their practice, claiming that they
had received it from the apostolic succession. Since Narcissus was the
bishop of Jerusalem, in his case, the apostolic succession would naturally
go back to James, the brother of Lord, who was regarded as the first
bishop of Jerusalem. Thus, Narcissus would have had a good reason to
legitimate his non-Quartodeciman practice by referring to James the
Just. Moreover, Eusebius quotes a passage from Narcissus and Theophilus
where they point out that dioceses in Palestine and Alexandria exchange
letters in order to insure that Easter is celebrated at the same time in both
places. This shows that the congregations in Palestine and in Alexandria
had coordinated their calendars.
Eusebius’ information is significant for the interpretation of the pres-
ent passage in two respects. First, it presents a natural context for a
story about James the Just who did not end his “Paschal fast” on the
fourteenth of Nisan when the Paschal lambs were slaughtered but waited,
as he had vowed, until the day of the resurrection. Second, it shows how
the story about Jerusalem’s first bishop could have easily ended up in
Alexandria and with Origen. Although Narcissus and Theophilus worked
in Palestine, they were defending the “Christian” timing of Easter and
the Alexandrian dioceses belonged to the same faction. Since Origen