And Corinthians was a letter from St. paul dealing with early gnostic heresy and pagan sacrifices and not Christian worship.
That is so incomplete as to be incorrect. 1 Corinthians deals primarily with disunity. It takes very little time to read the book and St. Paul makes the theme extremely clear. It is about unity. I am *not* taking any part of 1 Corinthians out of context, as you contend.
Btw, read Acts 15 and the opinion of St. James and the Apostolic Council on this matter of liberty to eat meat offered to idols.
How was the issue decided? On the side of the liberty to eat meat or on the side of protecting the weaker Christians? They decided to protect the weaker! They did not expostulate on theological arguments for and against eating the meat. They simply state, "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols . . ."
You seem to believe St. Paul is arguing against those who say "no" to meat offered to idols, as they are gnostics. Yet the council clearly agreed with those who opposed eating the meat, even though St. Paul himself states that he has the liberty to eat it. Did this first council, then, agree with the gnostics? Of course not. This decision *clearly* agrees with my interpretation of the events discussed in 1 Corinthians 8 and not yours.
You assume that the Quartodecimans were not in agreement with the changing of the date. Obviously some were not. However, once the Council had met and issued its decree, it became an entirely different matter theologically. Even then, most Quartodecimans were left alone, with some notable exceptions. It would have been the same for those Christians who defied the council in Acts 15 and continued to eat meat offered to idols.
Unity is explains Acts 15. Unity is why the Church defined a single date for Easter, not to fulfill some scientific curiosity about the precise moment of the equinox. Yes, that was how they determined how to calculate the date, but the *reason* behind choosing *one* calculation was to ensure all Christians were unified on the celebration of the Resurrection. This is clearly in the spirit of 1 Corinthians and Acts 15.
Your jabs at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates are silly and appear mean spirited and lacking in charity. We are in communion with you. It doesn't scandalize us. We are not so weak as to believe we are saved by a calendar. Some in our jurisdictions would be scandalized and would leave. We choose to protect our weaker brothers and sisters with the hope they will mature.
Why, may I ask, is your New Calendar so precious as to be more important than preventing schism? What principle leading to your position on the calendar trumps unity and brotherly love?