• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Old vs. New Calendar?

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Keble,
Rather than do a lengthy "cut, paste, & quote" reply, let me state that I'm glad you are impressed with my efforts to interpret the offending word for you. Nevertheless, the translation is not bad; but how you choose to intrepret it is.
As to how I live my Faith, I am certain you know me even less than you know Orthodoxy.

Ebor,
Thanks for the lecture. If I have time I'll read the links, but I haven't played in that field since leaving training as an observer at Pitt's Allegheny Observatory.
You are correct - no equinoxes on the moon, despite its 6.5 degree axial tilt. Guess I should change my argument in this case to having no Pascha on the moon ;)

To you both, your good friend, anastasios, has got it right.

Demetri
 

Etienne

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I agree. No point having a knock-about session on the calendar when there are so many other 'issues' between us.

Now a lunar Pascha, that does conjure up images....................
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,624
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
62
Location
Maryland
anastasios said:
What I fail to see--and I am in no way trying to discourage Keble and Ebor, whom I count as personal friends, from posting on whatever subject they wish--is why they care what calendar Orthodox use? And why do Orthodox need to change their calendar to be involved in intra-church relations? If the Churches unite in one faith, fine, then we can talk calendars. Until then, what's the point?
Well, turn it around: if we can't resolve a pure praxis problem such as the calendar, what hope is there for any other issue?
 

Anastasios

Merarches
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,585
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Location
Reston, VA
Website
www.anastasioshudson.com
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Greek Old Calendarist
Keble said:
Well, turn it around: if we can't resolve a pure praxis problem such as the calendar, what hope is there for any other issue?
I see your point but I think we should be addressing the real issues that divide us first, instead of resolving other, more peripheral issues. We need to work out the filioque, apostolic ministry's nature, women's ordination, etc, etc, etc.

anastasios
 

DerekMK

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, turn it around: if we can't resolve a pure praxis problem such as the calendar, what hope is there for any other issue?
Because some of us have graduated from seeing things only superficially. Diversity of praxis existed in the Orthodox Church in early times, and even now there is a certain level of diversity. But you still fail to see that the main objection to the new calendar is because it was implemented for ecumenism - which denies one of the major points of the creed.
 

Etienne

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I do not want to be contentious for it's own sake, but just why a some people so very keen to have everyone on a single calendar?

Let those that are so very keen put forward an indepth and reasoned argument. What would it achieve, what benefits would it bring, etc, etc.........?
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Well, Mr. Keble, I wondered how long it would take you to again trot out the "Aleppo Solution" for a periodic airing.

Apparently your favored status as a personal friend of an owner of this forum insulates you from criticism. In the past many Roman Catholic participants here have been thoroughly censured for a display such as yours...
Orthodox arrogation?, Orthodox hardheads?, tradition of jackass-ism?.

The rules of this forum prevent me from typing here my real feelings about your input.

You don't like the explanation of "atheist" because you PREFER to be offended. Too bad. Why are you here?

Demetri
 

Anastasios

Merarches
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,585
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Location
Reston, VA
Website
www.anastasioshudson.com
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Greek Old Calendarist
Demetri, you wrote:

"Apparently your favored status as a personal friend of an owner of this forum insulates you from criticism."

This is hardly the case. I mentioned that he is my friend peripherally in one post *where I disagreed with him* because I believe in being polite and assuasing my posts in any way possible. That doesn't mean I don't totally disagree with Keble and find some of his posts to be arrogant as well. You can say anything you want to him, as long as you are polite. And if you think he is being rude, use the post-report system which practically speaking is the only way we see posts that are offensive to other posters unless we read each and every post, especially given that we can't read other people's minds and we don't always know what offends other people. For instance, does Keble really say "tradition of jackassism"? If I had seen that, I would have removed it.

anastasios
 

Anastasios

Merarches
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,585
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Location
Reston, VA
Website
www.anastasioshudson.com
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Greek Old Calendarist
OK I found the offensive comment in another thread (after searching for it) and edited it.

anastasios
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
anastasios said:
What I fail to see--and I am in no way trying to discourage Keble and Ebor, whom I count as personal friends, from posting on whatever subject they wish--is why they care what calendar Orthodox use?
anastasios
Well, frankly, the EO could use any calendar they care to for all of me. *I* don't, as they say, "have a dog in this fight". and I have no power to make anyone change calendars. I have not said once that the EO HAVE to be on the Gregorian Calendar.

But there *are* people I've read who do care Very Much. This thread was started with a quote from a document and what comes across as a challege to "New Calendar" EO that could be construed as suggesting that N.C.s are disobedient to a long dead patriarch, possibly canon-breakers and so forth. It read like a gauntlet was being thrown at "N.C" Christians. I have read adherants of the Julian Calendar who said flatly that using the "N.C."/revised Julian was heretical or schismatic or without Grace. Well so much for "we don't know where the Church isn't." and they're therefore declaring, for example, that the EO church in Finland is without Grace because they (as I recall) are on a full Gregorian.

Are there any NC fulminations against some jurisdictions using the OC? Please point out any, if there are. I should be interested in reading their thoughts.

Well, I have seen no Creed that includes believing in the Julian Calendar. I do not understand how calendars which are man-made could be equal to believing in the Holy Trinity. I *have* seen many charitable, faithful, humble EO people (in real life) who are in jurisdictions on the Revised Julian and who don't decide that they know better then their bishops and Metropolitans for enacting it. But apparently there are other EO who would deem them heretical.

Yes, I questioned the use of "Atheist Astronomers" and why making astonomical observations is "ungodly". Why "ungodly" would mean outside the EO Church as opposed to against God? There's a lot of Universe out there that isn't the EO and I believe that God made all of it and it isn't meaningless.

To be blunt the passage reads to me as the Patriarch heard that some RC's found that *His* calendar was off and took deep offense at any suggestion that anything EO could be incorrect. Yes, I know it's part of a group of declarations. I read it. But it was the calendar point that started this thread.

I confess I was wondering at a declaration from a Patriarch on this subject seeming to be treated as "infallible" in someway. ("He said the Gregorian Calendar was Ungodly back then so it applies forever and can't be changed.") Being from the late 1500's is he included in "The Fathers"? (Nektarios' post early on in the thread spoke of throwing out the fathers if they're inconvenient.) If so, is there a cut-off date since it was a Patriarch who did the calendar change in the 1920's? Yes, I have read how it was done badly and in an autocratic manner. The 1584 Patriarch doesn't read as irenic either.

So I will question statements and ask for explainations.

I hope that this clarifies things, at least in part, Anastasios.

Respectfully,

Ebor


edited for spelling and punctuation
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
+æ-ü+¦-â-ä+++¦+++«-é said:
Ebor,
but I haven't played in that field since leaving training as an observer at Pitt's Allegheny Observatory.
Interesting. Did you work in the field? If you prefer to not swerve to that, I understand.

You are correct - no equinoxes on the moon, despite its 6.5 degree axial tilt. Guess I should change my argument in this case to having no Pascha on the moon ;)
Sure there could be. Why would the Moon use a different set of months? Inside the lunar day, time would be kept likely along the same hours and 'days' as on Earth. So when it's April 5th or whatever on Earth, it's the same on the Moon. That sort of thing has been covered in Science Fiction long ago. :)

To you both, your good friend, anastasios, has got it right.
For the record, I claim not any 'special' treatment from Anastasios or any of the other admins or mods. I try to always recall that there are other human beings on the other end of these posts. But, it is possible to disagree with them.

Ebor
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Lunar calculations are a bit more challenging, Ebor; Such as there would be a different set of months. Ask your partner Keble; I'm sure he can fill you in on how to account for the old "Blue Moon".

Sorry, I don't have much time for Fantasy or "Science" fiction.
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
Thanks, but I know about the "Blue Moon". :)

I think I"m capable of understanding a challenge now and again. Can you give a link for this idea that there would be different months on the moon? Since the Moon is in Earth orbit and the whole Earth is July right now (even on the Julian Calendar), it's July on the Moon. Once we're out of Earth orbit (like Mars with a Martian year of 687 Earth days or not quite 2 Earth years) things would be harder.

It's too bad you don't have the time. SF is different from Fantasy and I assure you that Science Fiction *can* have real science in it and the good works *do*. (It's not all schlock with ray guns ;D) Also, some interesting ideas from SF are now real. Robert Heinlein wrote of mechanical hands controlled by people in his short work "Waldo". That's why they're named 'waldoes' in real life. He also had a story with "slidewalks" and now those are real.

It's not just readings for nerdy teenage boys. ;)

Ebor
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,624
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
62
Location
Maryland
More calendar fun:

This page explains the current Jewish calculation. The Christian calculation is simple in comparison.

One should also note that the Jewish calendar is quite emphatic that the calculated calendar is an expedient. If, in 358, a more perfect calculation could have been devised, it might well have been used.
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Ebor said:
Thanks, but I know about the "Blue Moon". :)

I think I"m capable of understanding a challenge now and again. Can you give a link for this idea that there would be different months on the moon? Since the Moon is in Earth orbit and the whole Earth is July right now (even on the Julian Calendar), it's July on the Moon. Once we're out of Earth orbit (like Mars with a Martian year of 687 Earth days or not quite 2 Earth years) things would be harder.
I don't think anyone's seriously worried about lunar months -from the vantage of a Lunaite. Sure you COULD use terran months and have a moving day and month on the moon, but then one would be timing respective to earth-sun, not the moon-sun, relationship.
It's too bad you don't have the time. SF is different from Fantasy and I assure you that Science Fiction *can* have real science in it and the good works *do*. (It's not all schlock with ray guns ;D) Also, some interesting ideas from SF are now real. Robert Heinlein wrote of mechanical hands controlled by people in his short work "Waldo". That's why they're named 'waldoes' in real life. He also had a story with "slidewalks" and now those are real.

It's not just readings for nerdy teenage boys. ;)

Ebor
Shoot, Ebor, I'm so old my nerdy boy days were spent reading Tom Swift...as in "senior", not Tom Swift, Junior. SF writers are very creative and I imagine if they weren't writing SF they would still have novel, useful ideas.
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
Well, I suppose part of it would be that humans are used to running on a 24 hour (roughly) clock for awake/sleep modes. So within any Lunar day would be some demarkation of that 'days' inside a Day as it were. I'd quess that someone would decide what time zone the moon was on for marking midnight/'day' changes. Or have 'shifts' since some people would sleep while others were working.

Or eventually if they really *had to have* a separate calendar for 'loonys" (see "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" Robert Heinlein for the sobriquet iirc) there would be a converstion program. But now the thread has wandered so I should stop the speculations for now.

Well, I looked at your profile, Demetri and we're not so far apart then. I'm 48 you're 54 according to it. I'm not one of the youngsters on this forum. I knew some of the old "Tom Swift"s, too.

You don't like SF, and that's OK. I've heard an old Irish saying "If we all liked the same things, there wouldn't be enough to go around." :)


Ebor
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Stop, why stop?

We'll need a new term for "lunatic" as I'm sure our fellow members here figure we're already "loony"...
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
What, exactly, is a "Sigillon" to begin with? It sounds like some snooty French food, as in "Sigillon au vin" or something.
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
I've looked for a definition online but haven't found one. I'll check the OED next.

Frankly, it reads like it's supposed to be a Significant Document of Instruction, something along the lines of a Papal Bull, but that's just an impression. More research is needed.

Ebor
 

Augustine

High Elder
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
565
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.beyondnihilism.blogspot.com
There seem to be many people who believe (or at least try to justify) the new calendar on the grounds of scientific accuracy, or for purely pragmatic, secular reasons (the "when in Rome" argument - after all, it is the modern western world, which is on the Gregorian calendar, which is the hub of commerce, no?)

However, either argument is found wanting in the extreme.

Scientific Accuracy - No calendar can claim to be 100% "scientifically accurate". This is true of both the Gregorian calendar, and it's sophistically titled clone, the "revised Julian calendar." Also the question should be asked, "just how important is this 'accuracy' to begin with?, particularly for an obviously ecclessiastical calendar? Particularly within the degrees of "accuracy" which we are told the adoption of the "revised calendar" will bring us all?

Commerce Argument - How does the current arrangement/dominion of the western nations in such matters have a thing to do with an ecclessiastical calendar? Since when do such things have anything to do with the celebration of fixed feasts? Orthodox Christians would not be the only religious people finding themselves with a religious calendar that differs from the secular one - how are Jews and Muslims suffering, by using the secular calendar for business matters, while using another for religious purposes?

However, what ultimatly needs to be recognized is that both arguments (scientific accuracy, and commerce) point to reasons which had nothing to do with why the EP (and a few others, later on) adopted the "new calendar" to begin with. If one reads the Patriarchal Enyclical of the EP from 1920, it is very clear why this disruption was introduced into the life of the Church - to facillitate the ecumenical movement. This document sets into motion a line of thinking which has caused nothing but chaos in the Orthodox world, a bad momentum which is still "snow balling" so to speak.

The text embodies the very sort of "bad ecumenism", if only in seed form, which would come to be recognized as an ecclessiological heresy by any number of 20th century Orthodox confessors, including those who for their own reasons did not opt to cease commemorating the EP or refuse communion with him and those with him (thus to avoid the conclusion of some that only "schismatic" nut jobs think in this way.) It's precisely this heretical ecumenism which would decades later, after much suffering and admonishment, would be anathematized by the Holy Synod of the ROCOR in 1983.

The text is addressed to the "Churches of Christ everywhere" in it's title, yet is clearly addressed to all heterodox bodies of every degree of estrangement, thus creating a stated equivelency between schisms and heresies with the Orthodox Church which is simply not a reflection of reality. The document also reduces the seperation of these groups from the Orthodox Church to a break down of charity and nastiness on all sides, rather than state the truth that fundamentally these divisions persist because of dogmatic differences.

Indeed, the change of the calendar is the first thing suggested by this unfortunate document, in pursuing this misguided agenda. So there should be no mistake; the new calendar was hatched, and imposed on many Orthodox faithful, to pursue a movement whose Orthodox participation from the begining was imbued with falsehood.

Besides the more fundamental "muddying" of the real distinctions which exist between the Orthodox Church and those outside of Her, the document takes for granted that unity can be achieved by "pretending" everyone is closer than they really, objectively are - that somehow the indulgence of anti-canonical activities (and they are so for a reason - they were not simply the bigotry of the ancients), or "going through the motions" would of itself help solve dogmatic differences, rather than simply cast them into the oblivion of lukewarm neglect. Sadly, if anything, the non-Orthodox parties involved in the various ecumenical congresses since that time, have if anything moved further away from the truth, not closer to it in the course of these dialogues, joint prayers, co-liturgizing, etc.

I also dare say, with a great deal of sadness, that it can also be said that many who pride themselves as being in the canonical unity of the Orthodox Church have also themselves "moved away" from the truth, from the clarity and purity of the Orthodox confession, in the time that they have associated themselves with this movement. This is precisely why the Holy Fathers and our Canons have forbidden the activities which play such an important part of the ecumenical movement - because such equivocating and comprimises endager Orthodox Christians themselves, and as bad, do nothing to motivate the heterodox to get their affairs in order, and return to the unity of the one Church of Christ. If anything, they are legitimized by such activities.

So it is this rotten ecumenism, which explains the calendar change - not scientific scruples, or commerce related issues. And this is precisely why no luminary of the Church in the 20th century that I'm aware of had a good thing to say about it, including those who chose to remain in communion with the EP.

 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,624
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
62
Location
Maryland
Augustine said:
Scientific Accuracy - No calendar can claim to be 100% "scientifically accurate". This is true of both the Gregorian calendar, and it's sophistically titled clone, the "revised Julian calendar." Also the question should be asked, "just how important is this 'accuracy' to begin with?, particularly for an obviously ecclessiastical calendar? Particularly within the degrees of "accuracy" which we are told the adoption of the "revised calendar" will bring us all?
Two answers:

First, I don't agree with the statements about accuracy. Setting a standard of 100% accuracy, first of all, is unscientific on its face. The best accuracy that can possibly be achieved astronomically is to keep all the astronomical events on the dates on which they actually occur and derive everything else accordingly.

Accuracy is, when all is said and done, a relative measurement. In the case of the paschalion, it can be measured against the date of Passover, or it can measured against its astronomical predictions. Both paschalions have failures against the Passover standard because they use a different astronomical basis than the Passover calculation. But as far as the astronomical basis itself is concerned, the Gregorian formula is more accurate than the Dionysian formula. And one can (as the Aleppo solution itself recommends) dispense with the approximate calculations entirely and, in this age, use astronomy directly. It is easy enough to show that this gives dates much closer to the Gregorian pattern than the Dionysian pattern.

As to why accuracy matters, well, it obviously mattered enough to go to the trouble of working out the paschalion in the first place.

I'm tired of antiecumenism fulminations, so I'm just not going to bother with that part.
 

Etienne

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Augustine, have you got your kevlar helmet and jacket on? You have set out a very coherent answer to this 'vexed' question. For me there is simply the Church calendar and other calendars. As has already been written the so-called revised Julian calendar sees the Apostles Fast virtually disappear some years. This novel innovation has born precisely what fruit? Has unity been promoted? NO!

The unity the so-called ecumenists are so active to promote seems far more appropriate to international trade, politics and diplomacy. Chambesy has more in common with the UN and international institutions like the World Trade organisation.

First, we as Orthodox must embrace Christ and our brother Orthodox. If we cannot or will not do this we will not be able to embrace anyone else.

To embrace others we need to be clear and united. Anglicanism is riven with splits and division. Rome has the 'facade' of unity but in reality is not united. Other groups have their own 'difficulties, too. Many of these appear to be moving further and further away from anything one might see as Christianity, based on Sacred Tradition and Scripture.

There are out there good and genuine people, seeking or yearning for 'something'. All the division and pseudo 'ecumenical' activity robs them of a chance to encounter an answer, a pathway toward the God-man, Jesus Christ, who was born of a virgin, suffered and was crucified and rose again on the third day.

Oddly, I know Moslems who have no problem acknowledging the concept of a virgin birth, but many so called 'Christians'. Like many supposed 'Christians' who do not believe the earthly Christ was both God and man. Others still who do not believe in the resurrection.

We can and should be good neighbours, and peoples with different beliefs, different holy days and calendars may live together in a neighbourly way. This has happened and should continue. I simply do not see what so-called 'ecumenism' is meant to achieve other than to lay down the foot-work for either a delusion and/or the church of the anti-Christ!
 

Pedro

Archon
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
2,833
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
San Antonio, TX
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
OCA Diocese of the South
Augustine said:
Scientific Accuracy - No calendar can claim to be 100% "scientifically accurate".
True, yet this does not mean that we are therefore to stay with one that is less accurate. Insisting on being more accurate does not logically lead to a claim to be completely so. The GC may not make room for a floating equinox, yet overall, it is off only by about 20 seconds/yr, compared to about 11 minutes (JC).

Orthodox Christians would not be the only religious people finding themselves with a religious calendar that differs from the secular one - how are Jews and Muslims suffering, by using the secular calendar for business matters, while using another for religious purposes?
Not too much, as this is a "Christian nation" (supposedly), and no one's shutting things down for a nationwide holiday on Yom Kippur or Ramadan. There's no social awareness, really, of these religious festivals as there is for Christmas, so to determine these dates is really left up to the religious community itself, with little or no ramifications outside it. Not the same animal, I'm afraid.

However, what ultimatly needs to be recognized is that both arguments (scientific accuracy, and commerce) point to reasons which had nothing to do with why the EP (and a few others, later on) adopted the "new calendar" to begin with.
Agreed. Neither of these reasons were the reasons for its initial adoption. Some OC-ists are therefore willing to overlook the reasons for the calendar based on this reason alone. Well and good. Would it therefore be reasonable to insist that NC-ists be taken seriously in their insistence that ecumenism and the seeking of an admittedly false, superficial union with heterodox churches is no longer our main reason -- indeed, not a reason at all, AFAIK -- for using the calendar, but rather the former two that were mentioned above? As Keble said:

As to why accuracy matters, well, it obviously mattered enough to go to the trouble of working out the paschalion in the first place.
Here, here. If we're going to use the Julian reckonings, fine. But let's at least do something to stop the slipping further and further back in the year. No sense in "planting our crops in January"!
 

Pedro

Archon
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
2,833
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
San Antonio, TX
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
OCA Diocese of the South
<places tongue firmly in cheek>

Of course, we all COULD just switch to the Aztec calendar -- said to be the most accurate calendar ever made -- but then the world would end in 2012. Never mind.

<removes tongue from cheek>
 

Ebor

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 11, 2002
Messages
6,492
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
66
Location
Maryland
Pedro said:
<places tongue firmly in cheek>

Of course, we all COULD just switch to the Aztec calendar -- said to be the most accurate calendar ever made -- but then the world would end in 2012. Never mind.

<removes tongue from cheek>
LOL!! Pedro. In my explaination to Anastasios, I'd thought of writing "the EO can use the Mayan Calendar, if they like" but didn't. Thanks for a laugh.

Ebor
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Tikhon29605 said:
What, exactly, is a "Sigillon" to begin with? It sounds like some snooty French food, as in "Sigillon au vin" or something.
LOL! The simplest questions...

As soon as I saw a transliterated, instead of a translated, word I knew there'd be trouble ahead. As near as I can figure, it's a Greek word with no English equivalent (alas, there are so many).
Its apparent root words, -â-à ++ and +¦++++++-å++-é, do not even lend much help. Sort of "a bill (or document) together" , but that's not quite right; or "agreed opinion", but that's just a description and not a translation at all, or , er,...sigillon. Sorry.
It still would help to read it in Greek, including, now, the title, so I can better check the word.

Just for you, I'll name some of our vinting product this year "Sigillon of Punxsutawney-2004" :D

Demetri
 

JoeS

OC.Net Guru
Site Supporter
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,122
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
81
Location
Abington, PA USA
Ah, the Druids, now thats a calendar. Or, maybe the Mayans.

Hmmmm. Which one will save me?

JoeS ???
 

Etienne

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2004
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Come on, let's be a bit more up to date. Perhaps, the French revolutionary calendar........................ ;)
 

Jennifer

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
1,154
Reaction score
0
Points
0
So what exactly is the deal with the 'calendar' controversy? Are all of the SCOBA jurisdictions on the new calendar?

 

Jennifer

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
1,154
Reaction score
0
Points
0
No actually I'm serious. I really don't get it.

Edited to add that when I say that I don't "get it." I don't mean that I think it's a stupid controversy. I mean that I honestly don't get it. I've been reading Orthodox stuff for years but have totally ignored the calendar issue. I suppose as an RC, it didn't make any sense to me so I never concerned myself with it.

When did the calendar change? Why did the old calendarists object to it? And what does it mean exactly? When did the old calendar originate? Was it secular at one time?

And am I spelling calendar correctly? It looks weird but I'm the world's worst speller so am not sure of how to spell this 5th grade word. :(
 

Pravoslavbob

Protokentarchos
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,826
Reaction score
85
Points
48
Location
Canada
Faith
Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction
OCA

Anastasios

Merarches
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,585
Reaction score
47
Points
48
Location
Reston, VA
Website
www.anastasioshudson.com
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Greek Old Calendarist
It's important, but can be blown out of proportion. I believe the New Calendar leaves much to be desired for the following reasons:

(Sources:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ea_calendar.aspx)

Note: I do not always agree with the polemics. But the arguments are in my opinion sound. They include:

1) The Revised Calendar (aka New aka Revised Julian) creates a problem with the fixed feasts being set according to the Gregorian and the Paschal cycle being set according to the Julian. In around the year 8000, for instance, Pascha will actually fall on Christmas on the Revised Julian Calendar.

2) The Revised Calendar creates some feast day possibilities that are unforseen in the typikon.

3) The Revised Calendar is not historically accurate; all saints' feast days were moved by 13 days, whether they died in 1800 or 300; this is not a proleptic correction (saints dying in the 19th century should be adjusted by 12 days, saints dying in the 18th century by 11 days, etc., IF we are trying to be "accurate").

4) The adoption of the Revised Calendar created disunity in the Orthodox world and was originally condemned by the Patriarchates of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria when it occurred.

5) The Revised Calendar destroys the unity of the Solar and Lunar cycles that are perfectly harmonized in the Julian Calendar, and also destroys the indiction cycles.

6) A miracle, which can't be used by itself for proof but which is interesting: when Jerusalem switched to the New Calendar in 1969, the Paschal fire did not come at Pascha in 1970. Hence, it switched back.

And many other issues that can be learned about from that website.

:)

Anastasios
 

Pravoslavbob

Protokentarchos
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,826
Reaction score
85
Points
48
Location
Canada
Faith
Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction
OCA
Anastasios,

It may be ill-advised, but I will dive into this murky pool.

1) The Revised Calendar (aka New aka Revised Julian) creates a problem with the fixed feasts being set according to the Gregorian and the Paschal cycle being set according to the Julian. In around the year 8000, for instance, Pascha will actually fall on Christmas on the Revised Julian Calendar.

So you`re suggesting that the Julian calendar will need no adjustments over the next 6,000 years? May I point out that the Julian calendar has a problem similar to this right now, albeit much less spectacular. You are no doubt aware that every so often the feast of the Annunciation falls in Holy Week or at Pascha itself in churches that use the old calendar.

3) The Revised Calendar is not historically accurate; all saints' feast days were moved by 13 days, whether they died in 1800 or 300; this is not a proleptic correction (saints dying in the 19th century should be adjusted by 12 days, saints dying in the 18th century by 11 days, etc., IF we are trying to be "accurate").

The Julian calendar isn't accurate, period, as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the calendar used to be a rotating calendar, and was stopped dead in its tracks in 1903. ( With the exception of determining the date for Pascha, of course. ) Do you know why?

4) The adoption of the Revised Calendar created disunity in the Orthodox world and was originally condemned by the Patriarchates of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria when it occurred.

Up until now, the way in which the new calendar was adopted by some is the only reason why I have felt sympathy for some old-calendarist groups, particularly Greek ones. So I see your point here.

5) The Revised Calendar destroys the unity of the Solar and Lunar cycles that are perfectly harmonized in the Julian Calendar, and also destroys the indiction cycles.

How can they be "perfectly harmonized" if the rotating calendar was stopped dead in its tracks in 1903?

6) A miracle, which can't be used by itself for proof but which is interesting: when Jerusalem switched to the New Calendar in 1969, the Paschal fire did not come at Pascha in 1970. Hence, it switched back.

It's hard to take issue with this point.


Bob
 

Pravoslavbob

Protokentarchos
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,826
Reaction score
85
Points
48
Location
Canada
Faith
Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction
OCA
Of course, one thing that all Orthodox can agree about is that it's a bad thing that the Finnish Church celebrates Pascha at the same time as the Western Church every year. I heard that this is because of a law in Finland that basically makes it impossible to celebrate it at a different time. Anyone have any info about that?
 

Brendan03

High Elder
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
544
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
54
Location
Northern Virginia
Jennifer said:
When did the calendar change?
The Pope changed the calendar in the middle ages. The change was made to make it more accurate in terms of the astrological data that was available at the time. The secular Western calendar was then based on this papal or "gregorian" calendar.

The Orthodox remained on the old, or "Julian", calendar until the 20th Century. The change was first made in Greece. Old calendarists objected to it because (1) the Julian calendar was adopted by a church council and there was no church council held to change that and (2) the change resulted in adopting the papal calendar for fixed feasts (that is, feasts tied to a certain date), and of course "papal = bad" for many ueberdox.

In North America, the SCOBA churches are mixed. The GOA is new calendar as is, I believe, the AA. The OCA is mixed -- the Bishop can allow parishes to be on the old calendar, and I know of a couple of old calendar OCA churches here in the DC area.

The calendar issue doesn't impact Pascha. All Orthodox (other than the Church of Finland, I believe, which was made to change it in order to retain ecclesiastical status there) observe Pascha and the related movable feasts (Pentecost, Lent etc.) on the same calendar, the old calendar or Julian calendar. As Anastasios points out, this creates anomalies for churches that follow the new fixed calendar, such as the practical elimination, in some years, of the Apostles Fast because Pentecost season can fall very late vis-a-vis the new fixed feasts calendar. Over time, the anomalies will worsen because Pascha will tend to creep forward because the two calendars (old for Pascha, new for fixed feasts) are out of synch. That is not an issue for today, but it will eventually become an issue.

When did the old calendar originate? Was it secular at one time?
Yes, it was the secular Roman imperial calendar.

And now my editorial: Nothing has served to divide Orthodox from each other more effectively than this calendar issue. The Greeks should have known that, and they should not have changed the calendar. It was a big, big mistake. Having said that, the reaction of those Orthodox who used the calendar to rush into an ill-advised schism is only an indication of one of our greatest temptations as Orthodox: the tendency to make mountains out of molehills. From the Old Believer schism about how many fingers to use when crossing oneself to this silly schism about the calendar we seem to be very prone to divide ourselves from ourselves based on issues that are not weighty ones, and not questions of faith. We should recognize this tendency in ourselves and resist it, because it is surely the will of the evil one that we divide ourselves, and the fact that we allow ourselves to be divided over issues like this one must make him LOL. These days it seems practically hopeless to heal this schism because the "Old Calendar Resistance" movement has now made the calendar itself into an icon of their more general dispute with the modern world and their desire to create an alternative reality. It's no longer about the calendar itself, but about what the calendar represents to these people. The only good thing is that the Old Calendar Resisters are a very small group, while the remainder of the Orthodox Church (which outside of North America is mostly on the Old Calendar) moves along in communion with different churches using different calendars. That situation is far from ideal, but it is far better than rushing into schism over an issue like the church calendar.

B
 
Top