OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 17, 2014, 01:57:07 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Old vs. New Calendar?  (Read 205757 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Online Online

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,425



WWW
« Reply #1350 on: April 30, 2011, 07:46:45 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.


You know what else the Church didn't use before 1923 (and even later)? 

The internet.  Yet here you are, in the devil's sandbox.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,639


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #1351 on: April 30, 2011, 08:03:28 PM »

Interesting that I almost never hear OO comment on this issue; calendar use in the OO Tradition is even more divided.

I wouldn't use the word "divided."  We just happen to be more accepting of diversity in matters like this.
Logged

deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #1352 on: April 30, 2011, 08:26:06 PM »

Interesting that I almost never hear OO comment on this issue; calendar use in the OO Tradition is even more divided.

I wouldn't use the word "divided."  We just happen to be more accepting of diversity in matters like this.

Why wouldn't division be proper terminology for going from celebrating a feast day on the same date to doing it on separate dates?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #1353 on: April 30, 2011, 08:49:17 PM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.

Personally I tend to favor switching to the the Gregorian calendar because a calendar is a form of measurement, and forms of measurement are supposed to be accurate. It reminds me of a joke I once heard about a KJV-Only Protestant: "If Elizabethan English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!" Anachronism for its own sake is not helpful.

Online I've read mystical rubbish about "the Church calendar is outside of time and space". If the Fathers had the technology we have today, they would have created the Gregorian calendar in the first place. They didn't make an inaccurate calendar to be mystical, they did it because it was the best they could do at the time. Today we see the calendars drift in relation to each other, and someday they will be 14 days apart, then 15, etc. Eventually maybe we could have a "Nativity-Pascha" because the Julian calendar will have drifted so much relative to the seasons. (Talk about innovation.)

Or we can go back to the Julian all together and have our heritage, if nothing else. But the Revised Julian is an example of a bad compromise that broke more than it fixed.
Could it be that what you call the Revised Julian Calendar is actually your misunderstanding? I see this all the time in calendar debates. In fact, someone else brought it up earlier on this thread. Celebration of the Menologion on the "Gregorian" Calendar and of the Paschalion on the Julian Calendar is NOT the definition of the Revised Julian Calendar. We New Calendarists already follow the Revised Julian Calendar for the Menologion; the REAL confusion is that we still use the old Julian Calendar for Pascha. Our hope is that we (as in all the Orthodox churches) will eventually switch to the Revised Julian Calendar, even for Pascha, and stop using this monstrous hybrid you mistakenly call the Revised Julian Calendar.

It was my understanding that the Revised Julian Calendar still contains the Julian Calendar's less-refined correctors (like leap years) which cause calendar drift versus the seasons. Is this incorrect?

What is the difference between the fully-implemented Revised Julian Calendar and the Gregorian Calendar?
« Last Edit: April 30, 2011, 08:49:41 PM by bogdan » Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,227


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #1354 on: April 30, 2011, 08:53:44 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.


You know what else the Church didn't use before 1923 (and even later)? 

The internet.  Yet here you are, in the devil's sandbox.

This makes no sense and digresses completely the point.
I didn't call the internet the devil's sandbox, and you put words in my fingers.

The internet in itself has nothing to do with the church, its traditions, or means of worship.   It's merely a source of information unless you are at the level of venerating icons on your computer screen.  The internet is a resource of information and good with communications.

However, calendar dates, nazirite oath (beards), head coverings, were all part of the church.
Worship with the non-Orthodox was completely forbidden & says so in the Canon of the Holy Apostles.

The internet has nothing to do with this.

By the way I drive too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go worship with Lutherans and say "It's okay, because I drive".
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,227


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #1355 on: April 30, 2011, 08:58:56 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.

Sounds like you're having trouble discerning small T traditions from big T.

Like small traditions of our Bible 1 Corinthians 11 (head coverings)?  Nazirite Oaths carried from Judaism?  Calendar that was used for many many centuries to figure dates?

Worship with the non-Orthodox forbidden as written in the Canon of the Holy Apostles?

I would say all these "traditions" are a very very VERY BIG T.
If they are just mere small things that I should brush off like crumbs..... I'd like to know why if you don't mind explaining.

Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,639


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #1356 on: April 30, 2011, 09:02:57 PM »

Interesting that I almost never hear OO comment on this issue; calendar use in the OO Tradition is even more divided.

I wouldn't use the word "divided."  We just happen to be more accepting of diversity in matters like this.

Why wouldn't division be proper terminology for going from celebrating a feast day on the same date to doing it on separate dates?

We've never all celebrated all the feast days on the same date.  For example, the Armenian Church has a liturgical calendar that has mostly movable dates.  I think something like only six of our feasts are on the same date every year.  The other OO's don't do that.  Also, pretty early on the other Churches stopped celebrating Christmas on the same day as Theophany and moved it to a separate date.  So for most of our history we haven't even celebrated Christmas at the same time.

It's not a cause for division, though.  Different communities have just always had different calendars.  The difference doesn't upset us.

This is being discussed here:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,35740.msg562659/boardseen.html#top
« Last Edit: April 30, 2011, 09:04:40 PM by Salpy » Logged

Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #1357 on: April 30, 2011, 09:07:28 PM »

I know this has been mentioned in many threads, but is there a link to clear discussion of the calendar controversy? To a relatively new inquirer and a newbie, it sort of sounds like fighting over which end of the egg to open at breakfast. Does communion with each other really hinge on this issue?
Logged
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #1358 on: April 30, 2011, 09:10:19 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.


The Church didn't have iconostases for centuries.

The Church didn't have the hymn "Only-Begotten Son" for centuries.

The Church didn't have the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom for centuries.

The [Eastern] Church didn't universally accept Apocalypse as scripture for centuries.

The Church didn't celebrate St Gregory Palamas on a Sunday in Lent for centuries.

I could go on, but you get the point. All of these could be considered pretty major changes, and as far as I know none of them required an ecumenical council. Because these changes are not points of dogma, but points of praxis. Important points, but like the calendar, but not dogmatic or requiring a quick fix.

The calendar will sort itself out in the decades (hopefully not centuries) to come. It has no impact on your salvation or mine, so let's not make the mistakes of Patriarch Nikon, forcing people to change things that really don't matter.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,803



« Reply #1359 on: April 30, 2011, 09:18:46 PM »

Fwiw, most people who consider the calendar issue to be an important and divisive issue say that you can't just look at the calendar change, but you have to consider the whole spirit or movement that led to it--that spirit or movement being the "pan-heresy of ecumenism". So while some people really have/would/do split or divide over the calendar issue, even those people usually say that the calendar is just one issue among many to consider. The following articles might be of some interest...

Anti-Patristic: The Stance of the Zealot Old Calendarists
Why the True Orthodox Are Truly Orthodox
Statement on the Supposed “Anti-Patristic” Nature of Our Ecclesiology of Resistance
Logged

Yes, yes, youth is wasted on the young. And so is accumulated experience wasted on the old, the positives of modernism wasted on moderns, the beauty of Christianity wasted on Christians, the utility of scholarship wasted on scholars, and on and on.
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 888


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #1360 on: April 30, 2011, 09:21:02 PM »

The Old Calendar did not drop out of the sky on Pentecost, just as the New Testament didn't.  The Old Calendar was adopted because it was the civil calendar in use at that time.  It is not the calendar in use now. 

To say that it has changed the Orthodox faith is to make a mountain out of a mole hill or to focus on things that don't really matter instead of focusing on what is truly important.  I am sure that Satan laughs his head off seeing us dividing over a calendar of all things, as though which calendar we use is the center of the Orthodox faith, instead of Christ.
Logged
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Online Online

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,425



WWW
« Reply #1361 on: April 30, 2011, 09:29:44 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.


You know what else the Church didn't use before 1923 (and even later)? 

The internet.  Yet here you are, in the devil's sandbox.

This makes no sense and digresses completely the point.
I didn't call the internet the devil's sandbox,

No, I called it the "devil's sandbox".

Quote
and you put words in my fingers.

See above, but clever turn of phrase there.

Quote
The internet in itself has nothing to do with the church, its traditions, or means of worship.   It's merely a source of information unless you are at the level of venerating icons on your computer screen. The internet is a resource of information and good with communications.
And a calendar is merely a method of marking the passage of years.  Like many of the New Calendarists on the board, I believe it was the intent of the Fathers to keep the Paschal celebration close to the Spring Equinox.  If the calendar doesn't do this then it's the internet equivalent of browsing cute cat pictures when you're supposed to be doing research into your phD.


Quote
However, calendar dates, nazirite oath (beards), head coverings, were all part of the church.
Worship with the non-Orthodox was completely forbidden & says so in the Canon of the Holy Apostles.

Worship with non-Orthodox has about as much to do with the Calendar as the internet does.  In fact, I would say the internet contributes more to worship with the non-Orthodox than any calendar- any Protestant or Catholic can post a prayer request here and get a "Lord have mercy" while if we celebrate holidays on the same day then they are all in their churches and we in ours.

Quote
The internet has nothing to do with this.
As I said, it has as much to with what calendar we're using as burkas, beards, and breaking bread with heretics.

Quote
By the way I drive too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go worship with Lutherans and say "It's okay, because I drive".

Of course not, being able to drive means you can make it the extra 25 miles to the nearest Orthodox Church.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #1362 on: April 30, 2011, 09:33:40 PM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.



Can you better define this "mess"? Despite being a slightly different calculation from the Gregorian, how does the Revised Julian become a "mess" and the Gregorian your preference?
« Last Edit: April 30, 2011, 09:34:07 PM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #1363 on: April 30, 2011, 09:49:31 PM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.

For someone who lists their faith as Orthodoxy blended with anabaptism (heretical), and Messianic Judaism (heretical), you don't quite seem to be one who should telling others that they are following heresy because they use a different calander (never authoritatively anathematized or forbidden).


That said, in spite of using the NC, I do have some issues with a Calendar formula that was designed to be as accurate as possible without using the same formulas as the Gregorian (still the most accurate). I don't see a big deal with different calendars as long as we all celebrate the most important feast of the year together, but I think that ideally it should be all or nothing.
Logged
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #1364 on: April 30, 2011, 09:50:14 PM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.



Can you better define this "mess"? Despite being a slightly different calculation from the Gregorian, how does the Revised Julian become a "mess" and the Gregorian your preference?

"Mess" because it's not implemented fully, and causes the issues around Pascha. And as far as I know it still has the precision problems that caused the original Julian calendar to drift by 13 days. (I could be wrong on that point.) In any case, the Gregorian does a better job of preventing drift.

But I could be persuaded to suggest Universal Coordinated Time as the basis for our calendar. It's more accurate yet. Leap-Seconds and all that. Grin
« Last Edit: April 30, 2011, 09:50:42 PM by bogdan » Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #1365 on: April 30, 2011, 09:52:56 PM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.

Personally I tend to favor switching to the the Gregorian calendar because a calendar is a form of measurement, and forms of measurement are supposed to be accurate. It reminds me of a joke I once heard about a KJV-Only Protestant: "If Elizabethan English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!" Anachronism for its own sake is not helpful.

Online I've read mystical rubbish about "the Church calendar is outside of time and space". If the Fathers had the technology we have today, they would have created the Gregorian calendar in the first place. They didn't make an inaccurate calendar to be mystical, they did it because it was the best they could do at the time. Today we see the calendars drift in relation to each other, and someday they will be 14 days apart, then 15, etc. Eventually maybe we could have a "Nativity-Pascha" because the Julian calendar will have drifted so much relative to the seasons. (Talk about innovation.)

Or we can go back to the Julian all together and have our heritage, if nothing else. But the Revised Julian is an example of a bad compromise that broke more than it fixed.
Could it be that what you call the Revised Julian Calendar is actually your misunderstanding? I see this all the time in calendar debates. In fact, someone else brought it up earlier on this thread. Celebration of the Menologion on the "Gregorian" Calendar and of the Paschalion on the Julian Calendar is NOT the definition of the Revised Julian Calendar. We New Calendarists already follow the Revised Julian Calendar for the Menologion; the REAL confusion is that we still use the old Julian Calendar for Pascha. Our hope is that we (as in all the Orthodox churches) will eventually switch to the Revised Julian Calendar, even for Pascha, and stop using this monstrous hybrid you mistakenly call the Revised Julian Calendar.

It was my understanding that the Revised Julian Calendar still contains the Julian Calendar's less-refined correctors (like leap years) which cause calendar drift versus the seasons. Is this incorrect?

What is the difference between the fully-implemented Revised Julian Calendar and the Gregorian Calendar?
I can't remember the formulas, but due to a slight difference in the calculation of leap year, the Revised Calendar will have one in 2800, while the Gregorian will not, causing a new, though slower, drift.
Logged
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #1366 on: April 30, 2011, 11:47:28 PM »

Thanks, I will read the link you sent. On a side note, I thought the calendar change was just to align the Church with the secular world like th use of C.E. Instead of A.D. Which still I don't like because even christian publications use it.
Logged
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,387



« Reply #1367 on: May 01, 2011, 12:03:03 AM »

Good explaination.  To many of us "old calendarists", the calendar change is not in and of itself a problem, but rather a symptom of a deeper and more serious problem.

Fwiw, most people who consider the calendar issue to be an important and divisive issue say that you can't just look at the calendar change, but you have to consider the whole spirit or movement that led to it--that spirit or movement being the "pan-heresy of ecumenism". So while some people really have/would/do split or divide over the calendar issue, even those people usually say that the calendar is just one issue among many to consider. The following articles might be of some interest...

Anti-Patristic: The Stance of the Zealot Old Calendarists
Why the True Orthodox Are Truly Orthodox
Statement on the Supposed “Anti-Patristic” Nature of Our Ecclesiology of Resistance

Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #1368 on: May 01, 2011, 12:40:38 AM »

I think my head is going to explode! So if I am correct, a new calendarist church would accept a convert by Chrismation while an old Calendarist church would rebaptize? Where is a list of which Churches follow which calendar? also it would seem that an illiterate or blind person is lost because they can't read all the needed documents. Even if they are willing to most people don't speak the languages the documents are written in. I am sensitive to this as my wife who is also RC, has macular degeneration and cannot read well anymore. I know I have asked several questions, but a year ago I thought a decision to convert was easy but now I have decisions to make, old vs. New calendar, western rite vs eastern rite or stay RC where at least I know what the church teaches. I will stay put until I can resolve some of these issues In my mind. Please don't try to get off easy by telling me to pray about it even though I will. I am sure that people on both side have prayed and came to a conclusion that someone else on this site will scream "heretic" about. Ghana for any help you can give to clarify.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1369 on: May 01, 2011, 12:46:34 AM »

Christ is risen!
I know this has been mentioned in many threads, but is there a link to clear discussion of the calendar controversy? To a relatively new inquirer and a newbie, it sort of sounds like fighting over which end of the egg to open at breakfast. Does communion with each other really hinge on this issue?
No. Jerusalem, Russia, Georgia, and Serbia are on the Old Calendar, and they have been at all times in communion with everyone else on the New Calendar.

Btw, the Vatican has a similar mix, just perhaps more overwhelmingly Gregorian.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2011, 12:48:09 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1370 on: May 01, 2011, 12:47:41 AM »

Christ is risen!
Thanks, I will read the link you sent. On a side note, I thought the calendar change was just to align the Church with the secular world like th use of C.E. Instead of A.D. Which still I don't like because even christian publications use it.
C.E. Now THAT's heresy for sure!
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #1371 on: May 01, 2011, 12:52:11 AM »

Btw, if any real strange words appear in my posts like Ghana for thanks it is because if you mistype anything my idiot iPad guesses what you are trying to say. I am not smart enough to know how to stop it.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1372 on: May 01, 2011, 12:54:26 AM »

Christ is risen!
Btw, if any real strange words appear in my posts like Ghana for thanks it is because if you mistype anything my idiot iPad guesses what you are trying to say. I am not smart enough to know how to stop it.
Ah! Technology.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Rdunbar123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 161


« Reply #1373 on: May 01, 2011, 12:54:56 AM »

Christ is risen!
Thanks, I will read the link you sent. On a side note, I thought the calendar change was just to align the Church with the secular world like th use of C.E. Instead of A.D. Which still I don't like because even christian publications use it.
C.E. Now THAT's heresy for sure!
It might be heresy but was used in an inquiry class I took at a local GO church
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1374 on: May 01, 2011, 01:00:59 AM »

Christ is risen!
Thanks, I will read the link you sent. On a side note, I thought the calendar change was just to align the Church with the secular world like th use of C.E. Instead of A.D. Which still I don't like because even christian publications use it.
C.E. Now THAT's heresy for sure!
It might be heresy but was used in an inquiry class I took at a local GO church
Unfortunately not everyone knows better.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1375 on: May 01, 2011, 01:06:37 AM »

ha-mashiiaH qaam!
I'm with ya OP.  How can somebody make 13 days vanish into thin air?
Poof.
What happends to February 29th?

Then so many hold feast days as significant and calculate days of some of the feasts with it.

I'm not trying to be crude, but I truly feel the issue here is people do not want to address certain issues within their church "jurisdictions".  It's too difficult, too hard to convince others, and many are happy in the warm cushy spot.

The question is if Orthodoxy is the "One true church" that can be relied on as "unchanged" since the 7th council?
13 Days vanishing into thin air sounds like change to me.  My opinion of course.

New calendar churches even celebrate Pascha at the wrong time for most years.  That's change.  
Will it do any good to tell others?  Not if they can't see past the bricks and mortar blocking their comfort zone.

You want to know the sad part about it?  All it would take is for New Calendar Bishops to simply say "enough is enough", take out their pens, and go back to the way it was originally.  The churches would go right back where they should be and fall in line immediately.  It's really a much simpler solution than most think.
And what would that solve?

Then the New Calendar churches could celebrate Pascha all the time with the rest of the Orthodox in the world.  That would be nice.  Instead they will be celebrating Pascha at the same time with Roman Catholics most of the time.  It hurts & it's true.
The Old Calendarists celebrated this year with the Vatican and the Protestants, the Finnish and Estonian Orthodox, and the New Calendar Orthodox, and trught be told, it didn't hurt a bit.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2011, 01:07:29 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1376 on: May 01, 2011, 01:25:00 AM »

New Calendar... Old Calendar...

The church used the old calendar for centuries.

1923, that changed.
Like it did in 537. And 325. And 297. And 30-190. And 26 B.C.  And 45 BC. And 238 B.C. and any other number of other dates of adjusting the calendar which went into the calendar we now use.

I don't know how much more clear this can be.

I guess if some believe that the church "evolves" in our modern day without a complete council, that's why we have women worshiping without head coverings (1st Corinthians 11 anybody?), New calendar, priests not keeping Nazirite Oaths (beards), and now... why not.... Let's start worshiping with RC's and Protestants.... or how about pagan tribes (Go to youtube and search "NWO ecumenism" without quotes).  Sure I see evolution.  Straight into complete heresy.

Sorry if I offend, I'm speaking with a sincere heart.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,34670.msg562541/topicseen.html#msg562541
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,803



« Reply #1377 on: May 01, 2011, 01:31:49 AM »

I think my head is going to explode! So if I am correct, a new calendarist church would accept a convert by Chrismation while an old Calendarist church would rebaptize? Where is a list of which Churches follow which calendar? also it would seem that an illiterate or blind person is lost because they can't read all the needed documents. Even if they are willing to most people don't speak the languages the documents are written in. I am sensitive to this as my wife who is also RC, has macular degeneration and cannot read well anymore. I know I have asked several questions, but a year ago I thought a decision to convert was easy but now I have decisions to make, old vs. New calendar, western rite vs eastern rite or stay RC where at least I know what the church teaches. I will stay put until I can resolve some of these issues In my mind. Please don't try to get off easy by telling me to pray about it even though I will. I am sure that people on both side have prayed and came to a conclusion that someone else on this site will scream "heretic" about. Ghana for any help you can give to clarify.

Well, a few things here. First, the old calendarist wouldn't consider it rebaptism, but would say that it was the first real or valid baptism. Also, a note about terminology: "old calendarist" and "those on the old calendar" do not always mean the same thing. Often old calendarist, or traditionalist, are terms that describe certain groups which are not in communion with most of Orthodoxy, or "world Orthodoxy" as they might call them. The majority of the Orthodox world uses the old Calendar (thanks to Russia), but these Churches should not be confused with "old calendarists" who are not in communion with Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, etc.

Regarding finding the truth amongst the piles of competing claims and documents... yeah, I understand, I've been struggling with that and other issues for years now. I don't think God will judge someone for innocently choosing wrong, if they happen to be wrong, and they were sincere and pious. But then, it has always been this way. Imagine being in the fourth century, or fifth century, when they were arguing over an iota, or the intricacies of christology. I'm sure many people said "who cares? what does it matter? So what if Christ has one nature or two, etc.? Why does God care what we believe, as long as we love him?" Yet the Church thought that such things were important... of salvific importance, at least if you decided to delve into such things, and understood them, and understood the truth and could really decide between truth and falsehood.

I can't say what you should do. I don't even know what I'm going to do. But I wish you and your family well on your spiritual journey. I apologize if I've added to muddying the waters.
Logged

Yes, yes, youth is wasted on the young. And so is accumulated experience wasted on the old, the positives of modernism wasted on moderns, the beauty of Christianity wasted on Christians, the utility of scholarship wasted on scholars, and on and on.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,172


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #1378 on: May 01, 2011, 01:58:50 AM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.



Can you better define this "mess"? Despite being a slightly different calculation from the Gregorian, how does the Revised Julian become a "mess" and the Gregorian your preference?

"Mess" because it's not implemented fully, and causes the issues around Pascha. And as far as I know it still has the precision problems that caused the original Julian calendar to drift by 13 days. (I could be wrong on that point.) In any case, the Gregorian does a better job of preventing drift.
According to this article, http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/orthodox-reform.html, the Gregorian Calendar's average year length differs from the present length of the tropical year by 26 seconds. The Revised Julian Calendar average year length differs from the length of the same tropical year by only 2 seconds. This makes the Revised Julian Calendar MORE precise than the Gregorian, not less.

The principle of this leap-year rule is very simple. In the Julian calendar every fourth year was a leap-year, which gave an average length to the calendar year of 365 days 6 hours, which is more than 11 minutes greater than the length of the tropical year. On this account the Gregorian calendar counts as leap-years only those century years whose first two figures are exactly divisible by four. Of the following century years only the years 2000, 2400, 2800, etc., will be leap-years. In this way during the space of 800 years six days are left out—contrary to the Julian calendar—and thus an average length of the calendar-year is obtained which differs by twenty-six seconds from the length of the tropical year. The new leap-year rule of the orthodox churches, on the contrary, is laid down as follows. Of the century-years only those shall remain leap-years whose first two figures when divided by nine give a remainder of two or six. Hence of the following century-years only the years 2000, 2400, 2900, etc., will be leap-years. First, one can see from this that a deviation from the Gregorian calendar will first occur after 877 years; second, that by this leap-year rule during the space of 900 years seven days are removed from the Julian calendar. This gives an average length for the calendar year of 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 48 seconds, which differs by only 2 seconds from the present length of the tropical year.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2011, 02:01:24 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,172


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #1379 on: May 01, 2011, 02:03:41 AM »

I know this has been mentioned in many threads, but is there a link to clear discussion of the calendar controversy? To a relatively new inquirer and a newbie, it sort of sounds like fighting over which end of the egg to open at breakfast. Does communion with each other really hinge on this issue?
Yes. There's a sticky at the top of the Faith Issues section: Old vs. New Calendar?

This thread is our definitive debate of the great Calendar Controversy.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #1380 on: May 01, 2011, 06:23:47 AM »

The only logical ways to resolve this is either:

1) Use the Julian calendar for historical reasons, or
2) Use the Gregorian calendar for accuracy reasons

The Revised Julian calendar is a mess.

Personally I tend to favor switching to the the Gregorian calendar because a calendar is a form of measurement, and forms of measurement are supposed to be accurate. It reminds me of a joke I once heard about a KJV-Only Protestant: "If Elizabethan English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me!" Anachronism for its own sake is not helpful.

Online I've read mystical rubbish about "the Church calendar is outside of time and space". If the Fathers had the technology we have today, they would have created the Gregorian calendar in the first place. They didn't make an inaccurate calendar to be mystical, they did it because it was the best they could do at the time. Today we see the calendars drift in relation to each other, and someday they will be 14 days apart, then 15, etc. Eventually maybe we could have a "Nativity-Pascha" because the Julian calendar will have drifted so much relative to the seasons. (Talk about innovation.)

Or we can go back to the Julian all together and have our heritage, if nothing else. But the Revised Julian is an example of a bad compromise that broke more than it fixed.
Could it be that what you call the Revised Julian Calendar is actually your misunderstanding? I see this all the time in calendar debates. In fact, someone else brought it up earlier on this thread. Celebration of the Menologion on the "Gregorian" Calendar and of the Paschalion on the Julian Calendar is NOT the definition of the Revised Julian Calendar. We New Calendarists already follow the Revised Julian Calendar for the Menologion; the REAL confusion is that we still use the old Julian Calendar for Pascha. Our hope is that we (as in all the Orthodox churches) will eventually switch to the Revised Julian Calendar, even for Pascha, and stop using this monstrous hybrid you mistakenly call the Revised Julian Calendar.

It was my understanding that the Revised Julian Calendar still contains the Julian Calendar's less-refined correctors (like leap years) which cause calendar drift versus the seasons. Is this incorrect?

What is the difference between the fully-implemented Revised Julian Calendar and the Gregorian Calendar?

The Revised Julian Calendar is actually a bit (slightly, mind you) more correct astronomically than even the Gregorian Calendar, a circumstance that will only be fully revealed in 2800.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,249



« Reply #1381 on: May 01, 2011, 09:25:40 AM »

Can I mention that this isn't a day-to-day issue in normal parish life?

I won't say it's unimportant or that the issues behind the calendar change don't need to be addressed, but it seems to this poor fool that the calendar controversy is much more of a controversy on the Internet than on the ground.

And I say this as someone with a full appreciation for the old calendar and what it has come to stand for.
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1382 on: May 01, 2011, 05:25:36 PM »

Christ is risen!
Can I mention that this isn't a day-to-day issue in normal parish life?

I won't say it's unimportant or that the issues behind the calendar change don't need to be addressed, but it seems to this poor fool that the calendar controversy is much more of a controversy on the Internet than on the ground.

And I say this as someone with a full appreciation for the old calendar and what it has come to stand for.
Don't you realize that we have solved all other problems and so can worry about such things?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1383 on: May 02, 2011, 06:46:08 PM »

1 Corinthians 8:4-13 answers the question on whether the New Calendar should be used.

Like it or not, the principle is clear and clearly there.  There is nothing inherently wrong with the New Calendar.  Insofar as it causes otherwise strong Christians to become schismatics, it fails the meat to idols test. 

Seriously, is celebrating the commercialized Catholic Christmas with your co-workers really as important as causing your brothers to stumble?  If it really isn't a big deal, then why not use the calendar that unites all Orthodox Christians?  Arguments to astronomical accuracy means less to me than causing disunity for a few days difference.
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1384 on: May 02, 2011, 07:00:32 PM »

Christ is risen!
1 Corinthians 8:4-13 answers the question on whether the New Calendar should be used.

Like it or not, the principle is clear and clearly there.  There is nothing inherently wrong with the New Calendar.  Insofar as it causes otherwise strong Christians to become schismatics, it fails the meat to idols test. 

Seriously, is celebrating the commercialized Catholic Christmas with your co-workers really as important as causing your brothers to stumble?  If it really isn't a big deal, then why not use the calendar that unites all Orthodox Christians?  Arguments to astronomical accuracy means less to me than causing disunity for a few days difference.
They meant a lot to the Fathers. Old Calendarist arguments fail the Colossians 2:16 test. They appeal to the ruling against the Quartedecimians, then they are judged by it. Judge not, lest you be judged.  Someone said that.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1385 on: May 02, 2011, 10:00:15 PM »

Christ is risen!
1 Corinthians 8:4-13 answers the question on whether the New Calendar should be used.

Like it or not, the principle is clear and clearly there.  There is nothing inherently wrong with the New Calendar.  Insofar as it causes otherwise strong Christians to become schismatics, it fails the meat to idols test. 

Seriously, is celebrating the commercialized Catholic Christmas with your co-workers really as important as causing your brothers to stumble?  If it really isn't a big deal, then why not use the calendar that unites all Orthodox Christians?  Arguments to astronomical accuracy means less to me than causing disunity for a few days difference.
They meant a lot to the Fathers. Old Calendarist arguments fail the Colossians 2:16 test. They appeal to the ruling against the Quartedecimians, then they are judged by it. Judge not, lest you be judged.  Someone said that.

Not so!  Colossians was a letter from St. Paul dealing with an early gnostic heresy in which gnosis, and thus salvation, was achieved through ritual and not by Christ.  Are you suggesting that I, a Serbian Orthodox Christian, believe I am saved by virtue of the Old Calendar and not Christ?  Do you claim this to be true of *any* Old Calendarist? 

Indeed, you have taken a particular verse out of context in the same manner my Protestant brother does in order to prove that the Divine Liturgy is a meaningless tradition of man.  He takes this scripture, as you have, entirely out of context. 

The point of 1 Corinthians 8 is that, although St. Paul is at liberty to eat meat offered to idols, he would not do it if it causes his brother to sin.  He gives up his right because "knowledge puffs up but love edifies."  He voluntarily gives up his liberty for the love of his brothers' souls.  He states, ". . . there is not in everyone that knowledge . . . But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak."

It doesn't matter if the New Calendar is "okay."  The Old Calendarists are *not* teaching that their rituals, and not Christ, brings salvation.  Therefore, because the Old Calendar is *not* heresy and the New Calendar is *clearly* a stumbling block to your brother, you should give up the New Calendar out of love for your brother.

Regarding judgement, I am not judging you.  I have never said the New Calendar is inherently evil.  If your liberty of using the New Calendar causes your otherwise good brother to commit some sin of judgement, then we are back to 1 Corinthians 8. 
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1386 on: May 02, 2011, 10:14:29 PM »

I realized I didn't address your argument about the quartodecimans. 

For the first several centuries the rule was tolerance.  It was not until after the 1st Ecumenical Council that the dating of Easter became so serious (the pope's actions notwithstanding, as the popes have always wanted to tell everyone how to do everything).

I would also point out this deals with the dating of Easter, not the solar calendar.  Do you propose we change that date as well?  Those who are dogmatic about the Old Calendar issue are wrong.  We know they are wrong.  However, we gain *nothing* by using the New Calendar and our brothers and sisters risk losing *everything* by the insistence of using it.  Out of love we should use the Old Calendar.
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1387 on: May 02, 2011, 10:45:55 PM »

Christ is risen!
1 Corinthians 8:4-13 answers the question on whether the New Calendar should be used.

Like it or not, the principle is clear and clearly there.  There is nothing inherently wrong with the New Calendar.  Insofar as it causes otherwise strong Christians to become schismatics, it fails the meat to idols test. 

Seriously, is celebrating the commercialized Catholic Christmas with your co-workers really as important as causing your brothers to stumble?  If it really isn't a big deal, then why not use the calendar that unites all Orthodox Christians?  Arguments to astronomical accuracy means less to me than causing disunity for a few days difference.
They meant a lot to the Fathers. Old Calendarist arguments fail the Colossians 2:16 test. They appeal to the ruling against the Quartedecimians, then they are judged by it. Judge not, lest you be judged.  Someone said that.

Not so!  Colossians was a letter from St. Paul dealing with an early gnostic heresy in which gnosis, and thus salvation, was achieved through ritual and not by Christ.
And Corinthians was a letter from St. paul dealing with early gnostic heresy and pagan sacrifices and not Christian worship.

Are you suggesting that I, a Serbian Orthodox Christian, believe I am saved by virtue of the Old Calendar and not Christ?  Do you claim this to be true of *any* Old Calendarist?
The Serbian Church is on the Old Calendar, but is not Old Calendarist.  And yes, many Old Calendarists equate Christ with the outdated calendar: if you claim those on the New Calendar are going to hell because of it (and yes, that claim is made) then you are claiming that you are saved by the Old Calendar.

Indeed, you have taken a particular verse out of context in the same manner my Protestant brother does in order to prove that the Divine Liturgy is a meaningless tradition of man.  He takes this scripture, as you have, entirely out of context.
It seems the apple doesn't fall far from the tree: I was just following your lead.

The point of 1 Corinthians 8 is that, although St. Paul is at liberty to eat meat offered to idols, he would not do it if it causes his brother to sin.  He gives up his right because "knowledge puffs up but love edifies."  He voluntarily gives up his liberty for the love of his brothers' souls.  He states, ". . . there is not in everyone that knowledge . . . But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak."
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.

It doesn't matter if the New Calendar is "okay."  The Old Calendarists are *not* teaching that their rituals, and not Christ, brings salvation.  Therefore, because the Old Calendar is *not* heresy and the New Calendar is *clearly* a stumbling block to your brother, you should give up the New Calendar out of love for your brother.

Then we should have left the Quartedecimans alone, as the whole Church decdided in the second century, and we should give up the rules of the fourth century set up when the Fathers of Nicea overturned that decision.

Regarding judgement, I am not judging you.  I have never said the New Calendar is inherently evil.
There are plenty of Old Calendarists who do.

If your liberty of using the New Calendar causes your otherwise good brother to commit some sin of judgement, then we are back to 1 Corinthians 8. 
Then if Patriarch Kirill and Patriarch Irinej are so weak, perhaps they shouldn't be running the Russian and Serbian Churches.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1388 on: May 02, 2011, 10:46:11 PM »


Prepovedaj Brate...... Grin
Preach  Brother..... Grin

Let them that have Ears , Hear...... police


I realized I didn't address your argument about the quartodecimans.  

For the first several centuries the rule was tolerance.  It was not until after the 1st Ecumenical Council that the dating of Easter became so serious (the pope's actions notwithstanding, as the popes have always wanted to tell everyone how to do everything).

I would also point out this deals with the dating of Easter, not the solar calendar.  Do you propose we change that date as well?  Those who are dogmatic about the Old Calendar issue are wrong.  We know they are wrong.  However, we gain *nothing* by using the New Calendar and our brothers and sisters risk losing *everything* by the insistence of using it.  Out of love we should use the Old Calendar.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2011, 11:03:38 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,604



« Reply #1389 on: May 02, 2011, 10:54:22 PM »

Christ is risen!
I realized I didn't address your argument about the quartodecimans. 

For the first several centuries the rule was tolerance.  It was not until after the 1st Ecumenical Council that the dating of Easter became so serious (the pope's actions notwithstanding, as the popes have always wanted to tell everyone how to do everything).
Actually no, it wasn't until the 8th century that all the compti got lined up all on the same date.

I would also point out this deals with the dating of Easter, not the solar calendar.  Do you propose we change that date as well?  Those who are dogmatic about the Old Calendar issue are wrong.  We know they are wrong.  However, we gain *nothing* by using the New Calendar and our brothers and sisters risk losing *everything* by the insistence of using it.  Out of love we should use the Old Calendar.
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1390 on: May 03, 2011, 07:04:35 AM »

Quote
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.

Quote
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?
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #1391 on: May 03, 2011, 07:17:27 AM »

The Old Calendar did not drop out of the sky on Pentecost, just as the New Testament didn't.  The Old Calendar was adopted because it was the civil calendar in use at that time.  It is not the calendar in use now.  

To say that it has changed the Orthodox faith is to make a mountain out of a mole hill or to focus on things that don't really matter instead of focusing on what is truly important.  I am sure that Satan laughs his head off seeing us dividing over a calendar of all things, as though which calendar we use is the center of the Orthodox faith, instead of Christ.
You say the calendar is not the issue - Jesus Christ is, and yet it is a minority of Orthodoxy who obstinately follow the new calendar in whatever version you call it who changed the calendar without Council authority and to this day denigrate 75% of Orthodoxy as "Old Calendarist" as if we are wrong to keep using the same calendar that the Church has always used.  

No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess?  A big big deal I warrant in the eyes of God.  No matter that in your new calendar the Apostles Fast sometimes becomes non-existant when Pascha falls after 21 April like this year? Yes it matters if you believe in the Church's teachings on fasting.

Conformity with the current secular calendar is no advantage to the Church at all.  You don't see Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists or Jews throwing away their calendar to conform with Gregorian 'science'.

Christmas in the West is now secularised "happy holidays", turkey and consumer excess without reference to the Lord and nothing like the Nativity Fast or observances.  Separating ourselves in time and space from such occasion to sin is worthwhile for the Orthodox faithful.

If the calendar is no big deal to 25% of Orthodoxy then for the sake of charity to the majority renounce the new calendar and return to the calendar of the Fathers.

("Revised Julian" - better to use that term in 2800 and stick with new for now").

« Last Edit: May 03, 2011, 07:23:36 AM by SubdeaconDavid » Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,113


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #1392 on: May 03, 2011, 07:47:19 AM »

I have a quick question, how frequently is this question actually raised in the "old country" (places such as Russia, Greece, the Holy Land, etc.)?  I only ask because - given that the OO celebrate various things on different days and don't seem to care - I am wondering if possibly the issue being so big in America (or at least VERY big on this forum) might stem from the fact that we have old calendar and new calendar jurisdictions together with Bishops ruling over the same territories, given that we have the Greeks, the OCA, Moscow, ROCOR, the AOCA, the Serbians, and until recently Jerusalem (I believe their parishes are now under Greece?).
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1393 on: May 03, 2011, 08:34:02 AM »

I have a quick question, how frequently is this question actually raised in the "old country" (places such as Russia, Greece, the Holy Land, etc.)?  I only ask because - given that the OO celebrate various things on different days and don't seem to care - I am wondering if possibly the issue being so big in America (or at least VERY big on this forum) might stem from the fact that we have old calendar and new calendar jurisdictions together with Bishops ruling over the same territories, given that we have the Greeks, the OCA, Moscow, ROCOR, the AOCA, the Serbians, and until recently Jerusalem (I believe their parishes are now under Greece?).

It is an issue in all the jurisdictions where the new calendar was implemented.  There may be an exception or two (Finland?).
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1394 on: May 03, 2011, 02:31:37 PM »

The Old Calendar did not drop out of the sky on Pentecost, just as the New Testament didn't.  The Old Calendar was adopted because it was the civil calendar in use at that time.  It is not the calendar in use now.  

To say that it has changed the Orthodox faith is to make a mountain out of a mole hill or to focus on things that don't really matter instead of focusing on what is truly important.  I am sure that Satan laughs his head off seeing us dividing over a calendar of all things, as though which calendar we use is the center of the Orthodox faith, instead of Christ.
You say the calendar is not the issue - Jesus Christ is, and yet it is a minority of Orthodoxy who obstinately follow the new calendar in whatever version you call it who changed the calendar without Council authority and to this day denigrate 75% of Orthodoxy as "Old Calendarist" as if we are wrong to keep using the same calendar that the Church has always used.  

No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess?  A big big deal I warrant in the eyes of God.  No matter that in your new calendar the Apostles Fast sometimes becomes non-existant when Pascha falls after 21 April like this year? Yes it matters if you believe in the Church's teachings on fasting.

Conformity with the current secular calendar is no advantage to the Church at all.  You don't see Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists or Jews throwing away their calendar to conform with Gregorian 'science'.

Christmas in the West is now secularised "happy holidays", turkey and consumer excess without reference to the Lord and nothing like the Nativity Fast or observances.  Separating ourselves in time and space from such occasion to sin is worthwhile for the Orthodox faithful.

If the calendar is no big deal to 25% of Orthodoxy then for the sake of charity to the majority renounce the new calendar and return to the calendar of the Fathers.

("Revised Julian" - better to use that term in 2800 and stick with new for now").



I understand the issue--at least, I believe I do. And it seems to me since we've learned to live with celebrating Pascha on a different calendar than the rest of the Christian world we ought to be able to make the other accommodations, as well. As you point out, Buddhists, Hindus, and Jews seem to do just fine with their own calendars. I will go with whatever the Holy Synod of my church decides.

What I don't understand is the level of passion the issue arouses. Neither calendar is "orthodox" in origin, the one having been devised by the chief priest of the pagans (aka Julius Caesar) and the other by a Renaissance pope. To insist on the Julian as the "calendar of the Fathers" is a little like insisting on papyrus as a writing material. It was what was available at the time, but there's no particular theological reason for preferring it, as far as I'm aware.
Logged
Tags: old calendar New Calendar calendar computus paschalion ecclesiastical moon nomikon faska cheval mort 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.202 seconds with 72 queries.