P.S: If the claim being made here that Saint Victor did not have the authority to excommunicate the Quartodecimans was correct, then it would follow that his act of excommunication would have been in violation of canon law. There is no record of anyone from the period suggesting that Saint Victor had violated canon law by his excommunication.
Yes, the usual Ultamontanist attempt to avoid the obvious. As the link I provided says:
"Suppose it had been Irenaeus who had rashly broken communion with the Asiatic Churches; suppose that Victor had then written a letter to Irenaeus, sharply rebuking him, and had written also to other bishops, warning them not to separate from those who had been unwarrantably excommunicated; and suppose that in consequence of this action of Victor’s the threatened schism had been averted, would not that have been paraded as a decisive proof of Papal Supremacy?" (The Infallibility Of The Church [London, England: John Murray, 1914], p. 386)
And it's worth noting that Eusebius tells us that Victor attempted to cut off the Asian churches. His effort failed. Even bishops who agreed with Victor's position on the issue under dispute "sharply rebuked" him (5:24). In his letter to Victor, the Ephesian bishop Polycrates mentions that the synod in Asia Minor had been held at Victor's request (5:24), so it seems that Victor had more of an interest in settling the issue than other bishops had. They were satisfied with allowing the disagreement to continue, but Victor wasn't.
Throughout this account, Eusebius speaks of Victor as one church leader among others, never referring to him as a Pope. (The concept of the papacy is, in fact, absent from Eusebius' entire church history.) He refers to Victor as one local church leader holding a synod in his region while other local church leaders held synods in other regions (5:23). He refers to him as "Victor, who presided over the church at Rome" (5:24). The same could be said of a Pope. But why only mention Victor's regional authority if he had universal jurisdiction and was the infallible foundation of the church? Why would Eusebius repeatedly refer only to such regional authority? Eusebius goes on to say that Irenaeus "conferred by letter about this mooted question, not only with Victor, but also with most of the other rulers of the churches" (5:24). Again, Victor is referred to as one ruler of a church among others. He made himself prominent in this dispute over the celebration of Easter, both by initiating the discussion and by trying to cut off the Asian churches from the common fellowship when they disagreed with his position. But he was a regional church leader among other regional church leaders, not a Pope, despite his prominence in this particular dispute.
and to make the case that "rebuke" means "rebuke"-and does not undergo semantic shift when the obeject of this verb is the Pope of Rome (or, for that matter, St. Peter Gal. 2:11)-more clear:
As an illustration of the variety of potential meanings Eusebius' account could have, consider another incident I mentioned in an earlier response to Dave. The Catholic scholar Klaus Schatz wrote the following about responses to the doctrinal inconsistencies of the Roman bishop Vigilius in the sixth century:http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/03/apostolic-succession-part-8-irenaeus.html
"The emperor in turn called a council at Constantinople (the Second Council of Constantinople, 553) made up only of opponents of the three chapters. It not only condemned those three chapters but even excommunicated the pope. This was a unique case of an ecumenical council setting itself clearly against the pope and yet not suffering the fate of Ephesus II. Instead, over time it was accepted and even recognized as valid by the pope. The council got around the papal opposition by referring to Matthew 18:20 ('Where two or three are gathered in my name. . .'): no individual [including the Pope] could therefore forestall the decision of the universal Church. This kind of argument was invalid, of course, because the pope was not alone; the entire West was behind him, and yet it was not represented at the council. Broken in spirit, Vigilius capitulated after the end of the council and assented to its condemnation of the three chapters. The result was a schism in the West, where the pope was accused of having surrendered Chalcedon. A North African synod of bishops excommunicated the pope, and the ecclesial provinces of Milan and Aquileia broke communion with Rome. (Milan returned to communion only after fifty years; for Aquileia the breach lasted one hundred and fifty years, until 700)." (Papal Primacy [Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1996], p. 53)
Presumably, Dave would argue that Second Constantinople was claiming authority over the Pope, but didn't have it, and that the synod in North Africa was breaking fellowship with the Pope without claiming to have an office of jurisdiction over him. If he wants us to believe that papal authority was involved in the case of Victor, he ought to argue for that conclusion rather than just assuming it. And if he wants us to believe that other churches agreed with such an assertion of papal authority on Victor's part, despite the negative reaction to Victor that I've outlined above, Dave would need a further argument to that effect.
rebuke: transiive vb. 1 a : to criticize sharply : reprimand b : to serve as a rebuke to 2: to turn back or keep down "the father was forced to rebuke his son for the spendthrift ways he had adopted since arriving at college." "strongly rebuked the girl for playing with matches." [rather odd to argue that the prodigal son and the pyromaniac girl didn't violate some norm, or that the father wasn't denying that they had the right to spendthrift ways and playing with fire]. <Middle English, from Anglo-French rebucher, rebouker to blunt, check, reprimand.
Synonyms: admonish, chide, reprimand, reproach, reprove, tick off, burn one's ears, get after, get on
Antonyms: cite, commend, endorse (also indorse)
Related Words: berate, castigate, chew out, dress down, flay, harangue, jaw, keelhaul, lambaste (or lambast), lecture, rail (at or against), rate, scold, score, upbraid; abuse, assail, attack, bad-mouth, blame, blast, censure, condemn, criticize, crucify, denounce, dis (also diss) [slang], excoriate, fault, knock, lash, pan, reprehend, slam; belittle, deprecate, disparage, minimize, mock, put down; deride, ridicule, scoff, scorn
Near Antonyms: approve, endorse (also indorse), OK (or okay), sanction; applaud, extol (also extoll), hail, laud, praise, salute, touthttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rebuke
webster gives the following interesting synonym discussion:
reprove, rebuke, reprimand, admonish, reproach, chide mean to criticize adversely. reprove implies an often kindly intent to correct a fault <gently reproved my table manners>. rebuke suggests a sharp or stern reproof <the papal letter rebuked dissenting clerics>.
reprimand implies a severe, formal, often public or official rebuke <reprimanded by the ethics committee>. admonish suggests earnest or friendly warning and counsel <admonished by my parents to control expenses>. reproach and chide suggest displeasure or disappointment expressed in mild reproof or scolding <reproached him for tardiness> <chided by their mother for untidiness>.http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reprove
so, the dissenting clerics weren't breaking any rule?