Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Calendars: interaction of old and new


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#21 Michael Astley

Michael Astley

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 07:29 PM

The purpose of a calendar is to mark the seasons, to keep step with the celestial dance set in motion by God Himself. What does saying "I don't care what the universe does, we're gonna dance the way WE want to" say about our attitude to God? Just a thought, not a sermon.


Time is as much a part of creation as anything else, and is subject to the effects of the fall along with eveyrthing else in creation. I don't think we can take the current motions of the bodies of the universe and the resultant inconstant time as reflective of God's intention for his creation any more than we can look at death due to cancer as being reflective of God's will for his creation. Through the grace of God, of which the Church is a channel, fallen creation is redeemed and hallowed. That includes time. To my reckoning, the sacntification of time through a constant and harmonised calendar according to which the people of God celebrate the feasts, fasts, Saints and mysteries of salvation, is far preferable to one that slavishly follows a desire for astronomical accuracy based on an inconstant element of creation which, by its nature, can never be measured with absolute accuracy.

In Christ,
Michael

#22 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 07:31 PM

I understand your thought, Herman, but I don't see how this has worked out historically. There is more than one purpose to the Church calendar if we take all the canons and decisions of the Fathers into consideration. Here is what I am looking at:
When the Fathers determined the method for calculating the date of Pascha they gave us certain guidelines that they must have known would, given time, be in conflict with each other.

Not really. They were not mathmeticians, they were simply trying to get everyone in agreement at the time.

There is the issue of the equinox which relates to astronomical accuracy and also the strict injunction that our Pascha is not to be celebrated at the same time as or before the Jewish Passover since the Christian Pascha is the completion of the Jewish Passover.

A lot of people say that but I don't think that is quite correct. The spirit of what the council was trying to say is that we are NOT to use the same calculations as the Jews for Pascha because they had diverged from the Scriptural method.

Over the next millenium and more, the astronomical date of the equinox continued to drift about 11 days while the Jews retained their same method of calculating the timing of the Passover. Although everyone knew of the drift (having had to correct the civil calendar long before Nicea- was there already a drift by then?), the Church apparently gave priority in practice to the canons dealing with the spiritual significance of not celebrating before or with the Jewish Passover rather than the physical significance of the actual date of the equinox.


Well, interesting thing, is that the equinox has no relation to the "stars" but is merely determined by the Earth specifically passing a specific point in its orbit around the Sun, when the duration of the day and night are equal. Using the position of the stars to mark that particular time is more a convenience than a necessity. The equinox itself does not, in fact it cannot by definition, "drift". It is its relative position to the marking stars that drifts. The equinox is a dividing point of the seasons, and happens when it happens regardless of when we want it to happen or claim it happens. It will never happen in the "summer" or the "winter" because by definition it cannot. It is and always will be the midpoint between the two. So what happens when the artificial and arbitrary date picked for the Julian Paschalion drifts outside the orbit of the equinox (and it will happen eventually)? Why not face up to it now rather than leave it as an SEP (somebody else's problem)?

When approached with the opportunity to correct the calendar by the West, our Fathers unanimously rejected the Gregorian calendar for Church use for eccesiological rather than astronomical reasons.


I wonder. Perhaps it was more political than ecclesiological or are we conflating the two?

Since on this basis the reckoning for Pascha cannot be changed (unless the Jews change the way they date Passover?) and since the Pascalion and Menaion together constitute one integrated whole calendar, how can we change it?

See, that is the problem I have. We are specifically told NOT to reckon Pascha "with the Jews", so this very reasoning seems to violate the findings of the Council, since that means using the very calculation (with the Jews) they are telling us not to use! Tis a conundrum, it seems chono-illogical to this bear of little brain.

Herman the "just askin' the question" Pooh

#23 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 07:34 PM

Time is as much a part of creation as anything else, and is subject to the effects of the fall along with eveyrthing else in creation. I don't think we can take the current motions of the bodies of the universe and the resultant inconstant time as reflective of God's intention for his creation any more than we can look at death due to cancer as being reflective of God's will for his creation. Through the grace of God, of which the Church is a channel, fallen creation is redeemed and hallowed. That includes time. To my reckoning, the sacntification of time through a constant and harmonised calendar according to which the people of God celebrate the feasts, fasts, Saints and mysteries of salvation, is far preferable to one that slavishly follows a desire for astronomical accuracy based on an inconstant element of creation which, by its nature, can never be measured with absolute accuracy.

In Christ,
Michael


But doesn't God Himself use His creation to proclaim His greatness? Where not those who studied the stars taught by a star to worship the Orient on high? It is God's dance, we are simply trying to keep the beat. I still cannot see why that is a bad thing.

Herman the "keep on dancin'" Pooh

#24 Michael Astley

Michael Astley

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 07:51 PM

Exactly, Herman! The Church calendar did not spring from nothing, but is based on those stars, planets, and moons in their orbits. Yet it does not stop there. It brings harmony where they cannot. Indeed, they that worshipped the stars were taught by a star to worship the Sun of Righteousness, not to remain fixated on the stars.

At least that is how I understand the application of the tropar to our present discussion.

In Christ,
Michael

#25 David Hawthorne

David Hawthorne

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 08 December 2009 - 08:21 PM

Not really. They were not mathmeticians, they were simply trying to get everyone in agreement at the time.


A lot of people say that but I don't think that is quite correct. The spirit of what the council was trying to say is that we are NOT to use the same calculations as the Jews for Pascha because they had diverged from the Scriptural method.



Well, interesting thing, is that the equinox has no relation to the "stars" but is merely determined by the Earth specifically passing a specific point in its orbit around the Sun, when the duration of the day and night are equal. Using the position of the stars to mark that particular time is more a convenience than a necessity. The equinox itself does not, in fact it cannot by definition, "drift". It is its relative position to the marking stars that drifts. The equinox is a dividing point of the seasons, and happens when it happens regardless of when we want it to happen or claim it happens. It will never happen in the "summer" or the "winter" because by definition it cannot. It is and always will be the midpoint between the two. So what happens when the artificial and arbitrary date picked for the Julian Paschalion drifts outside the orbit of the equinox (and it will happen eventually)? Why not face up to it now rather than leave it as an SEP (somebody else's problem)?


I wonder. Perhaps it was more political than ecclesiological or are we conflating the two?

See, that is the problem I have. We are specifically told NOT to reckon Pascha "with the Jews", so this very reasoning seems to violate the findings of the Council, since that means using the very calculation (with the Jews) they are telling us not to use! Tis a conundrum, it seems chono-illogical to this bear of little brain.

Herman the "just askin' the question" Pooh


On my way to an appointment but I do appreciate you thoughtful responses, Herman-
A brief (hopefully not rude reply):
The ancients were mathematician enough to come up with the calendar so I am not sure what you were getting at with the first point...
You are right about the definition of the equinox, sorry I was using the wrong terminology, there.
The phrase "with the Jews" means "at the same time as" rather than "in the same manner as". With the Gregorian Paschalion Easter does sometimes occur before or at the same time as the Passover which is in contradiction of our canons.
Many Orthodox believe that the acceptance of the New Calendar was originally more political (ecumenism) and its rejection in the 16th century by all the Orthodox was more ecclesiological (maintaining the integrity of the complete Typicon).
Out of curiousity, though, why do the New Calendar jurisdictions keep the Old Calendar Paschalion if the reason is not canonical?

Edited by Herman Blaydoe, 08 December 2009 - 11:49 PM.
removed extraneous formatting


#26 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 08:24 PM

Exactly, Herman! The Church calendar did not spring from nothing, but is based on those stars, planets, and moons in their orbits. Yet it does not stop there. It brings harmony where they cannot. Indeed, they that worshipped the stars were taught by a star to worship the Sun of Righteousness, not to remain fixated on the stars.

At least that is how I understand the application of the tropar to our present discussion.

In Christ,
Michael


But it DOES "stop" there, since you are not allowing any further adjustments, you are trying to "stop" time. What is time, if not the measurement of change? The Julian calendar was not ordained by God. It was not the calendar that our Lord Himself actually used. It was chosen at the time as the best solution for the time. The Church took a calendar instituted by a pagan emperor and used it to order the Church. They took the civil calendar and adapted the cycle of services to it. Why iis what was right then wrong now?

Herman the dizzy Pooh

#27 Michael Astley

Michael Astley

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 08:36 PM

But it DOES "stop" there, since you are not allowing any further adjustments, you are trying to "stop" time. What is time, if not the measurement of change? The Julian calendar was not ordained by God. It was not the calendar that our Lord Himself actually used. It was chosen at the time as the best solution for the time. The Church took a calendar instituted by a pagan emperor and used it to order the Church. They took the civil calendar and adapted the cycle of services to it. Why iis what was right then wrong now?

Herman the dizzy Pooh


I ask forgiveness for prolonging this tangent. I would only say that I disagree with your assertion that those of us who retain the use of the Church calendar are trying to stop time. I would simply say that we are measuring time in a harmonious fashion.

My own personal feelings surrounding the Meletian calendar aren't really based on questions of astronomical accuracy or the rightness or wrongness thereof. If asked to present an argument for the continued use of the Julian calendar, that is not the reasining that I would give, (although I may mention what I said above as a supporting aside). I was merely trying to respond to your question in this post.

As I said earlier, my reasons needn't be gone into here (because they do not relate directly to the main topic of this thread) but they may be read on my blog, to which I linked earlier. I hope not to derail the conversation any more.

In Christ,
Michael

#28 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 10:43 PM

On my way to an appointment but I do appreciate you thoughtful responses, Herman-
A brief (hopefully not rude reply):
The ancients were mathematician enough to come up with the calendar so I am not sure what you were getting at with the first point...


Except that they did not "come up with" the calendar. They used the one they had, then picked a formulaic date that everyone agreed with. Not much math involved really.

You are right about the definition of the equinox, sorry I was using the wrong terminology, there.
The phrase "with the Jews" means "at the same time as" rather than "in the same manner as". With the Gregorian Paschalion Easter does sometimes occur before or at the same time as the Passover which is in contradiction of our canons.

Are you sure? Perhaps a careful reading of the canon itself is in order? Just askin'.

Many Orthodox believe that the acceptance of the New Calendar was originally more political (ecumenism) and its rejection in the 16th century by all the Orthodox was more ecclesiological (maintaining the integrity of the complete Typicon).

I am not convinced that politics did not play on both sides of the issue.

Out of curiousity, though, why do the New Calendar jurisdictions keep the Old Calendar Paschalion if the reason is not canonical?

Convenience? Not willing to fight over it? Taking the easy way out? I do think that today's Church, if it had half the courage and spirit-filled wisdom of the early Church, could solve this problem in a God-pleasing manner and I am not convinced that manner requires the continued use of a pagan calendar, but it doesn't and that makes me sort of sad.

Herman the melancholy Pooh

#29 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 December 2009 - 11:16 PM

If I may be indulged...

My understanding of the New Calendarists' retention of the Church calendar for the paschalion while using the Meletian calendar for the solar cycle is that it is reflective of the same sort of legalism.When the Gregorian calendar was anathematised, this was accompanied by a strong focus on the condemnation of the departure from the Church paschalion.

What is legalism and what is rationalizing? Here is the little semantic hand grenade I shall toss into the discussion. The Gregorian calendar was NOT, I repeat, NOT anathematized, the Gregorian Paschalion was. You even say so in your blog. So we do not use the Gregorian paschalion, so that is not legalism. Fact is, even the western churches are willing to admit that their paschalion is in need of correction. So why not simply come up with a CORRECT Paschalion that simply incorporates the corrected calendar? Why is this so hard to figure out?

To each his own I suppose, but when you claim legalism, I counter rationalization: keep it so that we don't have to deal with it. The Church of the first council was more courageous than that.

My own view on this sort of approach to Orthodox Church life is probably clear from the wording I have used so I needn't make it explicit here. However, that's my understanding of the answer to your question. I am open to correction.

In Christ,
Michael


Sorry if I have stepped on some toes with my little questioning dance, but I think the real answer requires Truth, honesty, and courage, and not merely opinion and personal preference and avoiding hard questions.

Herman the steel-toed Pooh

#30 Michael Astley

Michael Astley

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 09 December 2009 - 12:48 AM

My toes, for one, are all intact, Herman. :-)

I agree with your assessment of what is needful in these matters but would add faithfulness and obedience to the list.

In Christ,
Michael

#31 Kosta

Kosta

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 09 December 2009 - 08:34 AM

One thing is clear, astronomical accuracy is not the intention of a liturgical calendar. Three pan-orthodox councils made that clear. What was anathemized was the papal paschalion, a menologion based on the papal calendar and a belief that astronomical accuracy is needed for a viable liturgical calendar. Ecumenists who are wordly-minded and want to create some kind of pan-european christian religion have fueled this heresy for an astronomical correctness based on the pope's calendar and nobody elses .

#32 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 09 December 2009 - 01:13 PM

One thing is clear, astronomical accuracy is not the intention of a liturgical calendar.

Astronomical accuracy is the only point of a calendar, liturgical or otherwise, by definition. Astronomical events are what a calendar tracks, it is what it is based on. Otherwise it is really not a calendar. A day is a complete rotation of the Earth on its axis. That is an astronomical event. A year is how long it takes the Earth to rotate around the Sun. Counting how many times the Earth rotates around its axis and how many times it circles the Sun and where the moon happens to be is the method by which we keep track of when to plant crops, how much interest we have earned, and when to celebrate Pascha. Astronomical events are the convenient yet arbitrary way we have decided to mark the time because it consists of easily observable, repeating, countable, cycles. Unfortunately, God did not syncronize the rotation of the Earth in its orbit around the Sun, or perhaps because of sin and certainly due to tidal deceleration, they are no longer in sync, and we have to make adjustments from time to time to keep them harmonized.

Three pan-orthodox councils made that clear. What was anathemized was the papal paschalion, a menologion based on the papal calendar and a belief that astronomical accuracy is needed for a viable liturgical calendar.

Perhaps we are not reading what they actually said carefully enough? I am not sure they said what you think they said and I can only wonder if they really meant to be the absolute final and last word on the subject.

Ecumenists who are wordly-minded and want to create some kind of pan-european christian religion have fueled this heresy for an astronomical correctness based on the pope's calendar and nobody elses.

I find this argument ad hominem and baseless. I don't care about a pope's calendar, I only want an accurate calendar and I have yet to read a cogent and reasonable argument that an accurate calendar is against God's will, it generally boils down to "we don't want to be Catholic". Sorry, but that is not much of an argument.

I still do not know why what the early Church did before as good is evil now, just because the Catholics happened to do it first. I don't know why the Church HAS to use a separate and anachronistic calendar, instituted by a pagan empire. So other religions have their own calendars, so what? We are not "another religion", we are the True Faith, I don't care what they do. Using a calendar that does not do what a calendar is supposed to do is not "truth". It smacks of the reasoning of the ecclesiology of a retreating army. It is a policy of retreat and retrenchment, not advancement and victory in a martial and spiritual sense. Perhaps it is time to illuminate the darkness rather than avoid it. In the great cycle of time, perhaps it is time for the Church once again to engage and confront the world, rather than run and hide from it. But then, that might just be me.

Herman the obstreperous Pooh

#33 Dimitris

Dimitris

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 09 December 2009 - 06:42 PM

In this whole discussion, why don't we look on the intentions of the first Ecumenical Council regarding the date of Pascha? I think it is valuable to read the letter from emperor Constantine to those who where not present at the synod:

They [the Jews] do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error?

http://www.ccel.org/...f214.vii.x.html, bold markings by me

Of course, emperor Constantine was no authorative teacher, not a bishop nor a synod, but he was highly respected and it can in my opinion be assumed that he describes the intentions of the Ecumenical Council in the right way. Most obviously, it was without even doubting frowned upon and considered unacceptable to remain on old facts when they have been proven wrong. So when this was the intention of the synod then, why is this such a big deal now for decades and centuries within the Orthodox Church?

#34 Michael Stickles

Michael Stickles

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 1,438 posts

Posted 09 December 2009 - 08:15 PM

What was anathemized was the papal paschalion, a menologion based on the papal calendar and a belief that astronomical accuracy is needed for a viable liturgical calendar.


I did a little digging and came up with a question on this. The specific anathema from the 1583 pan-Orthodox council reads:

7) That whoever does not follow the customs of the Church as the Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils decreed, and Holy Pascha, and the Menologion with which they did well in making it a law that we should follow it, and wishes to follow the newly-invented Paschalion and the New Menologion of the atheist astronomers of the Pope, and opposes all those things and wishes to overthrow and destroy the dogmas and customs of the Church which have been handed down by our fathers, let him suffer anathema and be put out of the Church of Christ and out of the Congregation of the Faithful.


The decrees of the councils regarding Pascha are easy enough to find, but I haven't found anything there "making it a law that we should follow it" regarding the Menologion. Only one of the canons I found regarding commemoration of the saints addresses anything with respect to dates, and that was a note that martyrs are not to be commemorated on weekdays during Lent. Does anyone know what, specifically, the "law" referred to by the anathema actually is?

In Christ,
Michael

#35 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 09 December 2009 - 10:54 PM

I did a little digging and came up with a question on this. The specific anathema from the 1583 pan-Orthodox council reads:



The decrees of the councils regarding Pascha are easy enough to find, but I haven't found anything there "making it a law that we should follow it" regarding the Menologion. Only one of the canons I found regarding commemoration of the saints addresses anything with respect to dates, and that was a note that martyrs are not to be commemorated on weekdays during Lent. Does anyone know what, specifically, the "law" referred to by the anathema actually is?

In Christ,
Michael


Some inconvenient yet interesting information some people would rather overlook can be found here: Date of Pascha.

Herman the inconvenient Pooh

#36 Kosta

Kosta

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 10 December 2009 - 03:22 AM

I did a little digging and came up with a question on this. The specific anathema from the 1583 pan-Orthodox council reads:



The decrees of the councils regarding Pascha are easy enough to find, but I haven't found anything there "making it a law that we should follow it" regarding the Menologion. Only one of the canons I found regarding commemoration of the saints addresses anything with respect to dates, and that was a note that martyrs are not to be commemorated on weekdays during Lent. Does anyone know what, specifically, the "law" referred to by the anathema actually is?

In Christ,
Michael


The menologion is basically the feast days of the saints. The revised julian calendar does not violate the Sigillon of 1583, but it is an anomaly. There wasnt really a reorganization of the saints feast days by the adoption of this hybrid calendar to synchronize with the west.

When St George's feast day falls on Lent it is moved till after Pascha, in the traditional calendar this feast is strictly an immoveable feast day. This is what makes the revised hybrid calendar an anomaly, soon after thousands of years many saints feasts and the festal menaion would have to all become moveable feast days to avoid so overlapping. If we adopt the papal calendar on the other hand we fall on this anathema. I read the condemnation of the other pan-orthodox council in the 1590's and the mention of the menologion was dropped (unfortunately i can no longer find it, if someones knows of the decree please post it), probably because our saints feast days are very different with rome and was no longer seen as a concern. Any input i would like also.

What was the reason for devising the nicene formula for Pascha? First off so the asian dioceses celebrate Pascha on a Sunday like everyone else (aka quartodeciman controversy). Secondly there can be a uniform date for all and not rely on the jews who at that time erred frequently in their calculations. Sometimes they would celebrate passover after the equinox and the next year before the equinox, some jews didnt agree with each other. Following these jewish errors made Pascha to be celebrated twice in one calendar year. Nicea decreed Pascha always fall after a FIXED date for the equinox, eliminating this problem and at the same time not interfere with immoveable feast days. The privelege of calculating pascha fell on the alexandrian patriarch, never was the actual equinox used only a fixed date using the 19 year metonic cycle Thirdly to follow the timeline of the gospels that the ressurection of Christ happened after the start of passover not before. So if the first full moon (start of passover) fell on a sunday, Pascha is celebrated the following sunday.

Now as i said before, the drifting of the julian calendar is only a problem because the ecumenists tell us so, and the adherents of such an argument border on falling on this anathema of 1583: " ...and wishes to follow the newly invented paschalion and the new menologion of the atheist astronomers of the pope..." When i meant astronomical accuracy i mean the neccesity for some that the calendar drift is a major problem and should be rectified even if it means disrupting the liturgical cycle and fasting periods etc. The Sigillon is saying that the astronomical accuracy of the "atheist astronomers" are to be disregarded. By the way even the gregorian has some drift but only like 10 seconds a year.

The most harsh condemnation of the papal calendar comes from the sigillon of 1756:

Cyrill, by the Grace of God Archbishop of Constantinople - New Rome and OEcumenical Patriarch
Due to new abominations, created by papists in regard to the question of changing our Pascha and Calendar.

Removal from the Church

The most honorable clerics of our Great Church of Christ, other most God-fearing Hierarchs and most saintly hieromonks, singers in churches of our city, followers of Paul, who says: "If someone would annunciate contrary to what we annunciated to you, even that be an angel from heavens, anathema on him"; if he is a hierarch or a faithful one, to be removed from God, dammed, and after death not to rot but to dwell in eternal torment. Let stone and iron scatter and decay - they never and by no means. Let them inherit Giza's leprosy and Judas's hanging; let them dwell on earth like Cain, moaning and shivering; and let the wrath of God be on their heads and their share be with the traitor Judas and god-fighting Judeans; let the earth open and swallow them, like once Dathan and Abiron; let the Angel of God chase them with a sward in all the days of their lives, and let them succumb to all the damnations of the Patriarch and the Synod under the eternal removal and in torment of eternal fire.

Amen.

#37 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 10 December 2009 - 12:57 PM

The menologion is basically the feast days of the saints. The revised julian calendar does not violate the Sigillon of 1583, but it is an anomaly. There wasnt really a reorganization of the saints feast days by the adoption of this hybrid calendar to synchronize with the west.


Thank you. It is good when misinformation is corrected.

When St George's feast day falls on Lent it is moved till after Pascha, in the traditional calendar this feast is strictly an immoveable feast day. This is what makes the revised hybrid calendar an anomaly, soon after thousands of years many saints feasts and the festal menaion would have to all become moveable feast days to avoid so overlapping.


Oops. Sorry but there is more misinformation here. While there is indeed an anomaly, the reason will be discussed in another post but the last sentence is simply wrong as will come clear later.

If we adopt the papal calendar on the other hand we fall on this anathema. I read the condemnation of the other pan-orthodox council in the 1590's and the mention of the menologion was dropped (unfortunately i can no longer find it, if someones knows of the decree please post it), probably because our saints feast days are very different with rome and was no longer seen as a concern. Any input i would like also.


Sorry but this too is a subtle twist that is wrong. The calendar is not under the anathema as has already been made clear. It is the Paschalion that is the issue not the calendar. Can we stick to the facts please?

What was the reason for devising the nicene formula for Pascha? First off so the asian dioceses celebrate Pascha on a Sunday like everyone else (aka quartodeciman controversy). Secondly there can be a uniform date for all and not rely on the jews who at that time erred frequently in their calculations. Sometimes they would celebrate passover after the equinox and the next year before the equinox, some jews didnt agree with each other. Following these jewish errors made Pascha to be celebrated twice in one calendar year. Nicea decreed Pascha always fall after a FIXED date for the equinox, eliminating this problem and at the same time not interfere with immoveable feast days. The privelege of calculating pascha fell on the alexandrian patriarch, never was the actual equinox used only a fixed date using the 19 year metonic cycle Thirdly to follow the timeline of the gospels that the ressurection of Christ happened after the start of passover not before. So if the first full moon (start of passover) fell on a sunday, Pascha is celebrated the following sunday.


No argument with that.

Now as i said before, the drifting of the julian calendar is only a problem because the ecumenists tell us so, and the adherents of such an argument border on falling on this anathema of 1583: " ...and wishes to follow the newly invented paschalion and the new menologion of the atheist astronomers of the pope..."


You know, this is not an argument, merely an ad hominem. Name-calling and character assassination are not practices appropriate for Christians. Let us simply avoid them, shall we?

When i meant astronomical accuracy i mean the neccesity for some that the calendar drift is a major problem and should be rectified even if it means disrupting the liturgical cycle and fasting periods etc. The Sigillon is saying that the astronomical accuracy of the "atheist astronomers" are to be disregarded. By the way even the gregorian has some drift but only like 10 seconds a year.


I will deal with this issue in another post, but I warn you, you will not like the answer.

The most harsh condemnation of the papal calendar comes from the sigillon of 1756:

Cyrill, by the Grace of God Archbishop of Constantinople - New Rome and OEcumenical Patriarch
Due to new abominations, created by papists in regard to the question of changing our Pascha and Calendar.

Removal from the Church

The most honorable clerics of our Great Church of Christ, other most God-fearing Hierarchs and most saintly hieromonks, singers in churches of our city, followers of Paul, who says: "If someone would annunciate contrary to what we annunciated to you, even that be an angel from heavens, anathema on him"; if he is a hierarch or a faithful one, to be removed from God, dammed, and after death not to rot but to dwell in eternal torment. Let stone and iron scatter and decay - they never and by no means. Let them inherit Giza's leprosy and Judas's hanging; let them dwell on earth like Cain, moaning and shivering; and let the wrath of God be on their heads and their share be with the traitor Judas and god-fighting Judeans; let the earth open and swallow them, like once Dathan and Abiron; let the Angel of God chase them with a sward in all the days of their lives, and let them succumb to all the damnations of the Patriarch and the Synod under the eternal removal and in torment of eternal fire.

Amen.


1. This was not an Ecumenical Council.

2. Nobody is avocating using a "papal" paschalion, and as will come clear, not even the "papists" are doing so, much less these mysterious bug-a-boo "ecumenists" whoever they are.

Herman the bug-a-boo Pooh, more to follow when I have a little time

#38 Herman Blaydoe

Herman Blaydoe

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,157 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 10 December 2009 - 01:52 PM

Those with weak constitutions, high-blood pressure or a low tolerance for facts that conflict with their current world-view should not read any further. The following may well exceed the maximum recommended daily dose of irony and could cause irrational anger, headache, increased heart-rate, confusion, and for those with heart conditions, may result in apoplexy, or at the very least, a questioning of their world-view which may prove painful.

In the year 2100, those who follow the Julian calendar will have a problem to deal with. They will have to tell their people that the date of Christmas has changed. Instead of being celebrated on January 6th, as has been done since all who are alive can remember, it will be celebrated on January 7th. Many people will complain, "wait a minute, you said the Church does not change and here you go changing things! We ALWAYS have celebrated on January 6, and now you are changing it!" They will explain that it isn't "really" changing, it is still on December 25th (OC), but December 25th has changed and is now on January 7th because of the calendar drift. And many people will say " but you said the drift isn't important! Accuracy doesn't matter! So why are you changing the date? Why can't we still celebrate on Jauary 6th like we always have?"

And here is the ironic part. The western traditions freely acknowledge that their method for calculating Pascha needs correction and would happily work with us to come up with a better method, but the Orthodox refuse to discuss the issue. The only reason we keep to an archaic and flawed calculation because those who follow the Julian calendar refuse to allow it to be fixed. The "fix" does NOT require us to use the anathemized "papal" Paschalion because nobody (not even the Pope) really wants to use it anymore. But forcing everybody to use a calendar that nobody actually uses is problematic.

And the method we Orthodox currently use actually VIOLATES the spirit of the canon as set forth by the Ecumenical Council!? By artificially bending our calculation to avoid "celebrating with the Jews" we are actually accomodating and using the offensive modern Jewish calculation which is exactly what the canon tells us NOT to do!

And guess what, to the average rank and file parishioner, it would make no difference whatsoever. Pascha changes every year! And many, if not most, Orthodox do not know (or even care) HOW it is calculated, as long as it happens on a Sunday 47 days after the start of Great and Holy Lent.

So, in reality, it has nothing to do with masons, "ecumenists", Illuminati, Templars, or {insert favorite conspiracy theory here}. If we were to have the courage to do what the early Church did, we would:
1) Use the calendar used by most of the world
2) Establish the reckoning of Pascha in a manner that will actually obey rather than violate the spirit of the Ecumenical Councils
3) Re-establish the harmony of the liturgicon because everyone would be using the same calendar not a "hybrid"

This would NOT use the "Gregorian" paschalion because the "Gregorians" acknowledge that it is flawed and want to fix it, but can't because their Orthodox brethren refuse to help.

Those who use the Julian reckoning WILL eventually have to "change" what they do because the day they celebrate Christmas will no longer be January 6 on the calendar even their people use day-to-day. Change cannot be avoided. But nobody will be upset if Pascha "changes" because it "changes" every year anyway!!! The "how" is opaque to most people, so revising it would make no difference in that respect.

And for the person who is going to throw in the "Holy Fire" argument: The miracle of the Holy Fire happens based on when the Orthodox celebrate Pascha. We don't celebrate Pascha due to the miracle. I will make you a deal. If we correct the reckoning of Pascha, and if the Holy Fire does not occur, then I, for one, will happily go back to the Julian reckoning and not say another word. But if the Holy Fire still comes down, expect a great big loud "I told you so!" from a certain Pooh.

Herman the ironic Pooh

#39 David Hawthorne

David Hawthorne

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 10 December 2009 - 02:49 PM

Those with weak constitutions, high-blood pressure or a low tolerance for facts that conflict with their current world-view should not read any further. The following may well exceed the maximum recommended daily dose of irony and could cause irrational anger, headache, increased heart-rate, confusion, and for those with heart conditions, may result in apoplexy, or at the very least, a questioning of their world-view which may prove painful.

In the year 2100, those who follow the Julian calendar will have a problem to deal with. They will have to tell their people that the date of Christmas has changed. Instead of being celebrated on January 6th, as has been done since all who are alive can remember, it will be celebrated on January 7th. Many people will complain, "wait a minute, you said the Church does not change and here you go changing things! We ALWAYS have celebrated on January 6, and now you are changing it!" They will explain that it isn't "really" changing, it is still on December 25th (OC), but December 25th has changed and is now on January 7th because of the calendar drift. And many people will say " but you said the drift isn't important! Accuracy doesn't matter! So why are you changing the date? Why can't we still celebrate on Jauary 6th like we always have?"

And here is the ironic part. The western traditions freely acknowledge that their method for calculating Pascha needs correction and would happily work with us to come up with a better method, but the Orthodox refuse to discuss the issue. The only reason we keep to an archaic and flawed calculation because those who follow the Julian calendar refuse to allow it to be fixed. The "fix" does NOT require us to use the anathemized "papal" Paschalion because nobody (not even the Pope) really wants to use it anymore. But forcing everybody to use a calendar that nobody actually uses is problematic.

And the method we Orthodox currently use actually VIOLATES the spirit of the canon as set forth by the Ecumenical Council!? By artificially bending our calculation to avoid "celebrating with the Jews" we are actually accomodating and using the offensive modern Jewish calculation which is exactly what the canon tells us NOT to do!

And guess what, to the average rank and file parishioner, it would make no difference whatsoever. Pascha changes every year! And many, if not most, Orthodox do not know (or even care) HOW it is calculated, as long as it happens on a Sunday 47 days after the start of Great and Holy Lent.

So, in reality, it has nothing to do with masons, "ecumenists", Illuminati, Templars, or {insert favorite conspiracy theory here}. If we were to have the courage to do what the early Church did, we would:
1) Use the calendar used by most of the world
2) Establish the reckoning of Pascha in a manner that will actually obey rather than violate the spirit of the Ecumenical Councils
3) Re-establish the harmony of the liturgicon because everyone would be using the same calendar not a "hybrid"

This would NOT use the "Gregorian" paschalion because the "Gregorians" acknowledge that it is flawed and want to fix it, but can't because their Orthodox brethren refuse to help.

Those who use the Julian reckoning WILL eventually have to "change" what they do because the day they celebrate Christmas will no longer be January 6 on the calendar even their people use day-to-day. Change cannot be avoided. But nobody will be upset if Pascha "changes" because it "changes" every year anyway!!! The "how" is opaque to most people, so revising it would make no difference in that respect.

And for the person who is going to throw in the "Holy Fire" argument: The miracle of the Holy Fire happens based on when the Orthodox celebrate Pascha. We don't celebrate Pascha due to the miracle. I will make you a deal. If we correct the reckoning of Pascha, and if the Holy Fire does not occur, then I, for one, will happily go back to the Julian reckoning and not say another word. But if the Holy Fire still comes down, expect a great big loud "I told you so!" from a certain Pooh.

Herman the ironic Pooh


The first point simply does not make sense to an Old Calendarist. We know the dates have been growing further apart for centuries. No one will be shocked in 2100 when another day of separation occurs.
As for the last paragraph concerning the Holy Fire, been there, done that (in 1969-1970). I hope this inconvenient truth does not pooh-pooh the Pooh but check out the third paragraph in this link. Afterwards check your local Old Calendar parish for service times as promised :-)
http://www.holyfire....oc_LitHavoc.htm

#40 Fr. Michael L.

Fr. Michael L.

    Regular Poster

  • Validating
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 10 December 2009 - 03:11 PM

In the year 2100, those who follow the Julian calendar will have a problem to deal with. They will have to tell their people that the date of Christmas has changed. Instead of being celebrated on January 6th, as has been done since all who are alive can remember, it will be celebrated on January 7th. Many people will complain, "wait a minute, you said the Church does not change and here you go changing things! We ALWAYS have celebrated on January 6, and now you are changing it!" T
Herman the ironic Pooh


Am I missing something? My church calendar already has the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus scheduled for January 7th 2010 not January 6th!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users