OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 16, 2014, 12:40:27 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags CHAT 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 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Old vs. New Calendar?  (Read 191102 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,511



« Reply #1395 on: May 03, 2011, 02:45:56 PM »

No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess? 

Do you know which 13 days? I tried looking and couldn't find the exact dates. I'm only asking this out of personal curiosity.

Quote
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.

I can see the problem, but it doesn't do it this year. All saints is June 19 on the new calendar this year.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
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: 35,604



« Reply #1396 on: May 03, 2011, 02:49:31 PM »

No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess? 

Do you know which 13 days? I tried looking and couldn't find the exact dates. I'm only asking this out of personal curiosity.

Quote
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.

I can see the problem, but it doesn't do it this year. All saints is June 19 on the new calendar this year.
IIRC, the Church of Greece changed in October of whatever year they changed.  Its the only month without a Great Feast (except July, but that's nearly the end of the Church year).
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
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,511



« Reply #1397 on: May 03, 2011, 02:54:59 PM »

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.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1398 on: May 03, 2011, 03:02:19 PM »

No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess? 

Do you know which 13 days? I tried looking and couldn't find the exact dates. I'm only asking this out of personal curiosity.


I didn't understand this either. The year didn't become 13 days shorter, except in the first year it was adopted. (In 1582, when the most of the Catholic world adopted it, the difference was only 10 days. Britain made the change in 1752, by which time the difference had grown to 11 days.) It's been almost a hundred years since Russia and Greece made the change. So I'm reaching to understand the point.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1399 on: May 03, 2011, 03:03:58 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.  
The Church didn't have a common calendar until the 8th century, and you aren't using it.  And we call Old Calendarist only those who raise this issue to dogma.

Speaking of dogma, what other dogmas are up to a vote?  You keep up reciting this mantra (a Hindu practice, IIRC) of "75% of Orthodoxy" as if it means something.  Should we imitate the Jews and the Vatican and insist all the Orhtodox use Slavonic, as nearly "75% of Orthodoxy" now uses it?

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.
So do we slight St. John Cassian 3 out of every 4 years?

Fr. Schemann had interesting observations of the cluttering of the  liturgical calendar.

We fell behind in saint observances for St. Olaf, St. Patrick, St. Edmund etc. for nearly a millenium. That doesn't warrant anything 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.
Really? Pray tell, how so?

And as has been poiinted out ad nauseum, this occurs only because the Revision of the Julian Calendar wasnt' adopted in its entirety.

Conformity with the current secular calendar is no advantage to the Church at all.
But conformity with the Fathers calendar is.  Otherwise, they would not have insisted on it.

You don't see Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists or Jews throwing away their calendar to conform with Gregorian 'science'.
You place a great store in what Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Jews do. Very ecumenical.  As for us, we will worry about how the Fathers approached this issue, i.e. having a equinox with equal day and night.

Btw, can you tell us anything about the Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Jewish calendars?

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.
In the Soviet Union it was Happy New Year. And yet the Church there had the Old Calendar.

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.
We have, at least for the fixed feasts. Now we just have to finish the Paschalion.

("Revised Julian" - better to use that term in 2800 and stick with new for now").
We can go for "correct" now.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1400 on: May 03, 2011, 03:05:12 PM »

Christ is risen!
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.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1401 on: May 03, 2011, 03:16:30 PM »

Christ is risen!
No big deal to do away with 13 days of saints observances when the new calendarists started this mess? 

Do you know which 13 days? I tried looking and couldn't find the exact dates. I'm only asking this out of personal curiosity.


I didn't understand this either. The year didn't become 13 days shorter, except in the first year it was adopted. (In 1582, when the most of the Catholic world adopted it, the difference was only 10 days. Britain made the change in 1752, by which time the difference had grown to 11 days.) It's been almost a hundred years since Russia and Greece made the change. So I'm reaching to understand the point.
Which point exactly?

It would be 13 days to account for until 2100, after which it will be 14 days.

In the Egyptian Calendar (upon which the Ptolemaic, Julian, Coptic, Gregorian, Revised Julian calendars are based on in that order), there was no leap year.  As a result the Civil calendar processed 1,461 Egyptian years/1460 Julian years throughout the sidereal year, marked by the rising of the star Sirius on the first of the year (which showed the Nile was about to rise). The Julian calendar is doing the same through the Revised Julian and Gregorian calendars, at different rates, but at a slower rate because it has a leap year.
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
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,407


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #1402 on: May 03, 2011, 03:20:46 PM »

It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
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: 35,604



« Reply #1403 on: May 03, 2011, 03:24:55 PM »

Christ is risen!
It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Wasn't that the point of the altar "to the unknown god" in Athens, just to make sure you didn't p*@@ off a deity by omitting him by ignorance?
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
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,511



« Reply #1404 on: May 03, 2011, 03:34:07 PM »

Christ is risen!
It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Wasn't that the point of the altar "to the unknown god" in Athens, just to make sure you didn't p*@@ off a deity by omitting him by ignorance?

Then again, we have "all saints" as a commemoration of every saint. Not comparing it to the altar to the unkown god, just saying we technically wouldn't "miss" or "ignore" anyone.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
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: 35,604



« Reply #1405 on: May 03, 2011, 03:41:02 PM »

Christ is risen!
It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Wasn't that the point of the altar "to the unknown god" in Athens, just to make sure you didn't p*@@ off a deity by omitting him by ignorance?

Then again, we have "all saints" as a commemoration of every saint. Not comparing it to the altar to the unkown god, just saying we technically wouldn't "miss" or "ignore" anyone.
Actually, that is a different point: as I point out to my sons, we cannot despair of anyone's salvation because the Church doesn't glorify them all, and anyone can be in All Saints, as they are known to God alone.
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
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,511



« Reply #1406 on: May 03, 2011, 03:52:31 PM »

Christ is risen!
It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Wasn't that the point of the altar "to the unknown god" in Athens, just to make sure you didn't p*@@ off a deity by omitting him by ignorance?

Then again, we have "all saints" as a commemoration of every saint. Not comparing it to the altar to the unkown god, just saying we technically wouldn't "miss" or "ignore" anyone.
Actually, that is a different point: as I point out to my sons, we cannot despair of anyone's salvation because the Church doesn't glorify them all, and anyone can be in All Saints, as they are known to God alone.

I know, jut saying noone is really purposely "neglected" in a year in which such a change would be made.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
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: 35,604



« Reply #1407 on: May 03, 2011, 03:55:02 PM »

Christ is risen!
It also seems rather pagan to me to think that God (or the saints) will be upset at us for missing commemorations of saints in order to correct something that we screwed up in the first place.  God must be appeased for this slight against x number of saints or there will be hell to pay!!
Wasn't that the point of the altar "to the unknown god" in Athens, just to make sure you didn't p*@@ off a deity by omitting him by ignorance?

Then again, we have "all saints" as a commemoration of every saint. Not comparing it to the altar to the unkown god, just saying we technically wouldn't "miss" or "ignore" anyone.
Actually, that is a different point: as I point out to my sons, we cannot despair of anyone's salvation because the Church doesn't glorify them all, and anyone can be in All Saints, as they are known to God alone.

I know, jut saying noone is really purposely "neglected" in a year in which such a change would be made.
Ah. Gotcha.
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
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1408 on: May 03, 2011, 03:56:57 PM »

Quote
Which point exactly?

The point that the 13 days were "lost" quite awhile back. We can stop worrying about them now.

The Fathers used the civil calendars in force at the time. Except (possibly) at the very beginning of the church, when most Christians were also Jews, there has never been complete unanimity as to how Pascha ought to be reckoned. Pick any year in the last 2000, and you will find at least two different ways of calculating the "correct" date.
Logged
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Offline Offline

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,217


Fear the Tooth


« Reply #1409 on: May 03, 2011, 04:04:54 PM »

Sounds like something out of a sci-fi book... these powerful people don't just make people disappear... they can make time itself disappear!
Logged
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1410 on: May 03, 2011, 04:33:46 PM »

ialmsry,

I noticed you posted without answering my questions.  I was hoping you would respond.

 Undecided

I admit these discussion are easier over beer or coffee.
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 #1411 on: May 03, 2011, 04:57:13 PM »

Christ is risen!
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.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.

The Church fathers chose a method of dating Easter to unify the Church.  What you seem to be saying is that the method should trump the purpose.  IIRC, Nicaea did *not* issue a method of dating Easter,but established the principle that all Christians should celebrate it on the same day, independent of Jewish calculations for Passover.  The calculations came later from Alexandria.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1412 on: May 03, 2011, 05:02:51 PM »

Christ is risen!
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?).
No. It is not an issue at all in Antioch, nor really Egypt and All Africa.

Btw, in Egypt, switching to the Old Calendar would be ecumenist by most Old Calendarist definitions: in Egypt the Coptic OO are on their Old Calendar (similar, but not identifcal to the Julian), who outnumber us EO  20-40x.

Now it doesn't seem to be an issue of any consequence in Albania, Romania nor Bulgaria, and perhaps Poland and Cyprus. I welcome any correction on that.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2011, 05:04:06 PM 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: 35,604



« Reply #1413 on: May 03, 2011, 05:07:03 PM »

Christ is risen!
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.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.

The Church fathers chose a method of dating Easter to unify the Church.  What you seem to be saying is that the method should trump the purpose.  IIRC, Nicaea did *not* issue a method of dating Easter,but established the principle that all Christians should celebrate it on the same day, independent of Jewish calculations for Passover.  The calculations came later from Alexandria.
No, the calculations came them from Alexandria, as it was known that they were the most accurate, the Fathers seeing accuracy as a firm foundation for unity.

Btw, there are Old Calendarists who strenously deny that it is to be indepent of Jewish calculations, insisting that Pascha much be delayed if the Jews celebrate Passover later.  They are wrong on that too.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1414 on: May 03, 2011, 05:25:22 PM »

Christ is risen!
ialmsry,

I noticed you posted without answering my questions.  I was hoping you would respond.

 Undecided

I admit these discussion are easier over beer or coffee.
This?
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.
Disunity with the pagans as well, as I quoted. And as the Old Calendarists say is a virtue that must be insisted on:what did they do this year, since the Gregorian Easter fell on the same date as the Julian Pascha (though it would seem the Revised Julian would be April 17 in Chicago, but the moon is observed for that in Jerusalem, so I'm not sure).  Make a rule to do it the next week?

It takes very little time to read the book

Yes, I've read it a few hundred, if not thousand, times.

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.
You are mixing your apples with your oranges.

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!
The weaker were told to get used to uncircumcized Christians, and they told them not to eat food offered to idols.

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,
That wasn't an issue brought up. St. James was proactive and addressed.

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.
The gnostics had not yet appeard. So they were not around to agree with.

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.
And some decided the Calendar was a dogma and went into schism over it.

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.
Both of which point out that the idols are not really gods, and that circumcision doesn't save.  Accuracy was a firm foundation for the Fathers to build on.

Your jabs at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates are silly and appear mean spirited and lacking in charity.
I haven't taken a single jab at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates, both of which I am fond of. Just their self appointed defenders.

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.

Condemning the Revised calendar as inaccurate, and promoting the Old Calendar as the "Calendar of the Fathers" isn't going to make that happen.

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?
Why can't you all manage to do things like we do in Antioch.  We don't have these calendar problems.
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
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Offline Offline

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,217


Fear the Tooth


« Reply #1415 on: May 03, 2011, 05:53:15 PM »

The gnostics had not yet appeard. So they were not around to agree with.

That depends on who you believe. The Sethian gnostics were around before Jesus Christ, and influenced later groups during the first and second centuries AD. The Valentians claim that Theudas was a follower of Paul, but became a gnostic. Others claim that Simon Magus was a gnostic, and that he had various followers (such as someone named Menander). Admittedly, gnosticism is a fairly wide umbrella term...
Logged
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,378



« Reply #1416 on: May 03, 2011, 07:30:40 PM »

One problem with the use of the Julian Calendar is that amongst those whose Church uses it, the ordinary "I attend church only when my grandmother insists" Orthodox Christian is firmly convinced that his/her Church celebrates Christmas on January 7 - not on December 25. They have only the vaguest concept of what the calendar difference is all about. If it's that important to have a calendar that sets them apart, why aren't they better taught? I can see schisms coming in AD 2100 when some bishops try to change Christmas to January 8.
Logged
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #1417 on: May 03, 2011, 07:33:48 PM »

Disunity with the pagans as well, as I quoted. And as the Old Calendarists say is a virtue that must be insisted on:what did they do this year, since the Gregorian Easter fell on the same date as the Julian Pascha (though it would seem the Revised Julian would be April 17 in Chicago, but the moon is observed for that in Jerusalem, so I'm not sure).  Make a rule to do it the next week?

I'm not sure how to respond, as the entire paragraph appears to be a list of non sequiturs.  I don't think St. Paul was advocating unity with pagans.  The rest is a litany of things having nothing to do with anything remotely related to my argument.


You are mixing your apples with your oranges.

I assume you are trying to make that case below.


The weaker were told to get used to uncircumcized Christians, and they told them not to eat food offered to idols.

Yes.  The example given was eating the food offered to idols.  It sets a principle.  I'm unsure as to whether you are claiming the Holy Fathers superseded this principle at some time, the principle of caring for your brother does not exist . . .

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,
That wasn't an issue brought up. St. James was proactive and addressed.

What??? Which issue "wasn't brought up?"  The issue of meat to idols was most certainly brought up, as I quoted the scripture which you have (apparently) read "thousands" of times.  I contend that *why* the issue was decided the way it was is discussed by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 8.  You may say that St. Paul's reasoning differs from that of the council.  That would not negate the efficacy of St. Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians. 

Further, I find it difficult to believe you can divine what was or was not discussed at a council occurring nearly 2000 years ago, at which I assume you will admit you were not personally present.  How, precisely, would you be able to speak with such certainty about what was and was not "brought up?"

The gnostics had not yet appeard. So they were not around to agree with.

Nonsense.  There were Jewish gnostics that predated Christ's birth.

This decision *clearly* agrees with my interpretation of the events discussed in 1 Corinthians 8 and not yours. 

And some decided the Calendar was a dogma and went into schism over it.

Yes.  They fell from the Church.  Some would not have left the church had others not imposed the NC.  That is what I am discussing.  You appear here to be setting a straw man claiming I am an OC schismatic.

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.
Both of which point out that the idols are not really gods, and that circumcision doesn't save.  Accuracy was a firm foundation for the Fathers to build on.

Accuracy?  So because idols are not gods (accurate), it therefore follows that Easter must be celebrated on the day you and your mates decide because it is more accurate, regardless of the actual consequences to the Church or your brothers.  Is that what you are saying?  If it is, I highly recommend you read 1 Corinthians your 1001th time.  This time pay attention.

Your jabs at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates are silly and appear mean spirited and lacking in charity.
I haven't taken a single jab at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates, both of which I am fond of. Just their self appointed defenders.

If this is intended to be an ad hominem against me, it's not a very good one.  I do not need to "defend" either patriarchates, nor was I "defending" them or Old Calendarist schismatics.  What I *am* arguing is that it is charitable to use the OC as it keeps others from falling into sin. 

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.
Condemning the Revised calendar as inaccurate, and promoting the Old Calendar as the "Calendar of the Fathers" isn't going to make that happen.

Where have I condemned the revised calendar?  This is just another straw man.

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?
Why can't you all manage to do things like we do in Antioch.  We don't have these calendar problems.
 

Why can't you answer two simple questions?  Why 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?

So now that's three questions.  Do your best to answer at least one, preferably one of the last two.
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: 35,604



« Reply #1418 on: May 03, 2011, 07:45:36 PM »

Christ is risen!
One problem with the use of the Julian Calendar is that amongst those whose Church uses it, the ordinary "I attend church only when my grandmother insists" Orthodox Christian is firmly convinced that his/her Church celebrates Christmas on January 7 - not on December 25. They have only the vaguest concept of what the calendar difference is all about. If it's that important to have a calendar that sets them apart, why aren't they better taught? I can see schisms coming in AD 2100 when some bishops try to change Christmas to January 8.
Indeed. Were it not that 2000 is diviided by 4, we could have this solved already, as it would be fully exposed.

Btw, the different date does tend to make it only an ethnic holiday.  I remember my Ukrainian girlfriend marking "Ukrainian New Year" without a clue as to why Ukrainians had a different New Year date.

I can't say it better:
Quote
Another pastoral problem is the tendency of some local American media to focus attention each year on the 7 January (N.S.) / 25 December (O.S.) celebration of Christmas, even in localities where most Orthodox parishes are following the new calendar. So too, in all likelihood, do certain non-Orthodox churches profit from the Orthodox remaining Old Style, since the 7 January observance of Christmas among the Orthodox tends to focus attention on ethnic identifications of the feast, rather than on its Christian, dogmatic significance; which, in turn, tends to foster the impression in the public mind that for the Orthodox, the feast of Christ's Nativity is centered on the observance of the Julian date of that feast, rather than on the commemoration of Christ's birth. Such a focus appears to the defenders of the Revised Julian Calendar and to many non-Orthodox as well, as a practice that is charming and quaint, but also anachronistic, unscientific and hence ultimately unreasonable and even cultish.
and even better
Quote
Some Orthodox themselves may unwittingly reinforce this impression by ignorance of their own faith and by a consequential exclusive, or excessive, focus on the calendar issue: it has been observed, anecdotally, that some Russians cannot cite any difference in belief or practice between their faith and the faith of western Christians, except for the 13-day calendar difference....

According to the defenders of the new calendar, the argument that the 25 December (N.S.) observance of Christmas is a purely secular observance and is therefore an unsuitable time for Orthodox Christians to celebrate Christ's Nativity, is plainly inaccurate, since the 25 December observances of Christ's birth among western Christians (and today, among many Orthodox Christians) obviously occur overwhelmingly in places of worship and involve hymns, prayers, scripture readings, religious dramas, liturgical concerts, and the like. Defenders of the new calendar further note that, to the extent that 25 December is a secular observance in the western world, 7 January (i.e. 25 December O.S.) appears to be becoming one as well, in Orthodox countries that continue to follow the Old Calendar. In Russia, for example, 7 January is no longer a spiritual holiday for Orthodox Christians alone, but has now become a national (hence secular) holiday for all Russians, including non-Orthodox Christians, people of other religions, and nonbelievers. Where this will lead in the end remains to be seen.... Some defenders of the new calendar argue that the celebration, in any way or form, of two feasts of Christ's Nativity within the same liturgical year is not possible, since according to the faith there is only one celebration of that feast in a given year. On this basis, they argue that those who prefer to observe a "secular" feast of the Nativity on 25 December and a "religious" one on 7 January, err in respect of the truth that there is but one feast of the Nativity each year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Julian_Calendar#Defense
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: 35,604



« Reply #1419 on: May 03, 2011, 08:04:10 PM »

Christ is risen!
Disunity with the pagans as well, as I quoted. And as the Old Calendarists say is a virtue that must be insisted on:what did they do this year, since the Gregorian Easter fell on the same date as the Julian Pascha (though it would seem the Revised Julian would be April 17 in Chicago, but the moon is observed for that in Jerusalem, so I'm not sure).  Make a rule to do it the next week?

I'm not sure how to respond, as the entire paragraph appears to be a list of non sequiturs.  I don't think St. Paul was advocating unity with pagans.
Exactly.

The rest is a litany of things having nothing to do with anything remotely related to my argument.
Those weaker brethren you speak of are horrified with the thought of celebrating on the same day as the heretics, and give this as a reason for the Old Calendar. So, what did they do this year for Pascha?

You are mixing your apples with your oranges.

I assume you are trying to make that case below.


The weaker were told to get used to uncircumcized Christians, and they told them not to eat food offered to idols.

Yes.  The example given was eating the food offered to idols.  It sets a principle.  I'm unsure as to whether you are claiming the Holy Fathers superseded this principle at some time, the principle of caring for your brother does not exist . . .
First, show where the Apostolic Council was convened over the eating of food offered to idols.

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,
That wasn't an issue brought up. St. James was proactive and addressed.

What??? Which issue "wasn't brought up?"  The issue of meat to idols was most certainly brought up, as I quoted the scripture which you have (apparently) read "thousands" of times.  I contend that *why* the issue was decided the way it was is discussed by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 8.  You may say that St. Paul's reasoning differs from that of the council.  That would not negate the efficacy of St. Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians.

I Corinthians isn't in Acts, nor in Galatians for that matter, and that is the only Scriptural record we have of the Apostolic Council, unless you can show otherwise.

Further, I find it difficult to believe you can divine what was or was not discussed at a council occurring nearly 2000 years ago, at which I assume you will admit you were not personally present.  How, precisely, would you be able to speak with such certainty about what was and was not "brought up?"
Simple. I read the Bible.

The gnostics had not yet appeard. So they were not around to agree with.

Nonsense.  There were Jewish gnostics that predated Christ's birth.
Yes, so they claimed. Alas, the historical record doesn't support that.

This decision *clearly* agrees with my interpretation of the events discussed in 1 Corinthians 8 and not yours. 

And some decided the Calendar was a dogma and went into schism over it.

Yes.  They fell from the Church.  Some would not have left the church had others not imposed the NC.  That is what I am discussing.  You appear here to be setting a straw man claiming I am an OC schismatic.
I claimed no such thing. That you choose to defend them is your choice.

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.
Both of which point out that the idols are not really gods, and that circumcision doesn't save.  Accuracy was a firm foundation for the Fathers to build on.

Accuracy?  So because idols are not gods (accurate), it therefore follows that Easter must be celebrated on the day you and your mates decide because it is more accurate, regardless of the actual consequences to the Church or your brothers.  Is that what you are saying?  If it is, I highly recommend you read 1 Corinthians your 1001th time.  This time pay attention.
Its Paschaltide. Do brush up on your Acts, escpecially Chapter 15.  Leaving them in their ignorance is not doing them any favors.

Your jabs at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates are silly and appear mean spirited and lacking in charity.
I haven't taken a single jab at the Russian and Serbian patriarchates, both of which I am fond of. Just their self appointed defenders.

If this is intended to be an ad hominem against me, it's not a very good one.  I do not need to "defend" either patriarchates, nor was I "defending" them or Old Calendarist schismatics.  What I *am* arguing is that it is charitable to use the OC as it keeps others from falling into sin.
Then the heck with Acts and Galatians, and we should all be circumcized. (some of us already are, and yes, a lot of Old Calendarists find that heretical as well).

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.
Condemning the Revised calendar as inaccurate, and promoting the Old Calendar as the "Calendar of the Fathers" isn't going to make that happen.

Where have I condemned the revised calendar?  This is just another straw man.
Those weaker brethren you speak of are identified by their condemnation of the New Calendar.

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?
Why can't you all manage to do things like we do in Antioch.  We don't have these calendar problems.
 
Why can't you answer two simple questions?  Why is your New Calendar so precious as to be more important than preventing schism? 
We don't have schism in Antioch. Or Alexandria.  Why can't you follow our lead?

What principle leading to your position on the calendar trumps unity and brotherly love?
When someone can celebrate on the 15 Nisan, I'll buy your argument.

So now that's three questions.  Do your best to answer at least one, preferably one of the last two.
As always, I answered all of them.  That you do not like the answers doesn't change 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
ilyazhito
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 742



« Reply #1420 on: May 09, 2011, 12:59:42 PM »

This is moot. Unfortunately, Old Calendarists have had problems with their NC peers. I believe that the New Calendar would be the easiest way, to integrate, but I don't really care.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1421 on: May 09, 2011, 01:48:37 PM »

This is moot. Unfortunately, Old Calendarists have had problems with their NC peers. I believe that the New Calendar would be the easiest way, to integrate, but I don't really care.

Curious...
What if all the Old Calendar Orthodox Did Change to The New Calendar including Pascha on the same day the Catholics and  Protestants celabrate....Will the Holy Fire  Appear On NC Pascha .....It does appear every four or five yrs when both Easter and Pascha fall on the same Day on the old calendar...But what about the year after since hypothetically we changed Pascha to fall every year on same time as the latins will the Holy Fire Appear..........

I don't know if I'm willing to take the risk, to test to see if it does or doesn't, Plus Scripture does say test not the Lord Your God...It's best to leave things as they are I'm all for Keeping the Old Calendar and hope and pray the New Calendar follow suite.... police
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 02:01:39 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Offline Offline

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,217


Fear the Tooth


« Reply #1422 on: May 09, 2011, 02:18:33 PM »

This is moot. Unfortunately, Old Calendarists have had problems with their NC peers. I believe that the New Calendar would be the easiest way, to integrate, but I don't really care.

Schism and heresy is indeed, many times, the "easiest way"  police
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,511



« Reply #1423 on: May 09, 2011, 02:46:01 PM »

This is moot. Unfortunately, Old Calendarists have had problems with their NC peers. I believe that the New Calendar would be the easiest way, to integrate, but I don't really care.

Curious...
What if all the Old Calendar Orthodox Did Change to The New Calendar including Pascha on the same day the Catholics and  Protestants celabrate....Will the Holy Fire  Appear On NC Pascha .....It does appear every four or five yrs when both Easter and Pascha fall on the same Day on the old calendar...But what about the year after since hypothetically we changed Pascha to fall every year on same time as the latins will the Holy Fire Appear..........

I don't know if I'm willing to take the risk, to test to see if it does or doesn't, Plus Scripture does say test not the Lord Your God...It's best to leave things as they are I'm all for Keeping the Old Calendar and hope and pray the New Calendar follow suite.... police

I don't believe "observation of the Holy Fire" is the method called for in Nicea for calculating Pascha. It's like saying that my OCA church doesn't have a real Eucharist because they celebrate the Liturgy an hour and a half earlier than the Antiochian church here.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Cymbyz
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 495



« Reply #1424 on: May 09, 2011, 08:19:42 PM »

No proposal I have seen for the Orthodox to adopt the New Calendar has ever involved a new calculation for Pascha; they just readjust the formula, and Orthodox Pascha continues to fall where it ought to, so the miracle of the Holy Fire is not affected.  The other sina qua non for the Holy Fire is the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem (Chalcedonian persuasion), and if that Patriarchate were ever eliminated...
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 08:21:53 PM by Cymbyz » Logged

The end of the world
is as near as the day of your death;
watch and pray.
 
 Yahoo! & WLM ID: Owen
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Offline Offline

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,217


Fear the Tooth


« Reply #1425 on: May 09, 2011, 08:24:59 PM »

Finland, Romania, Greece...
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,865



« Reply #1426 on: May 10, 2011, 12:53:08 AM »

Re.: Reply No. 1424

To clarify, the churches which use the Revised Julian Calendar, actually revert to use of the Julian Calendar for purposes of the Paschal cycle, the Triodion period, the 40 Day Great Fast, etc.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #1427 on: May 10, 2011, 02:11:54 AM »

Why do some Old Calendar Orthodox slander the Gregorian calendar as the "Papist/Popes Calendar" when in reality the decision of Gregory 13the to adopt the new style was not based on theology, but on astronomical advice?  I could see a major argument being made for the Julian calendar based on tradition or the failure of an Ecumenical Council to implement the new style, but not an argument that the Gregorian is "heretical" simply because the Pope of Rome was the first to order its implementation.

Unfortunately I hear this argument being made a lot by Old Calendar Orthodox.  If someone could show my references or statements indicating that adoption of the Gregorian/New Style Calendar indicates acceptance of Papal supremacy or other RC beliefs then please do so?

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1428 on: May 10, 2011, 02:37:08 AM »

I thought you were a convert to Holy Orthodoxy, Under your Name i see that you Changed it to read R C......O well
we still love here on this Forum... Grin



Why do some Old Calendar Orthodox slander the Gregorian calendar as the "Papist/Popes Calendar" when in reality the decision of Gregory 13the to adopt the new style was not based on theology, but on astronomical advice?  I could see a major argument being made for the Julian calendar based on tradition or the failure of an Ecumenical Council to implement the new style, but not an argument that the Gregorian is "heretical" simply because the Pope of Rome was the first to order its implementation.

Unfortunately I hear this argument being made a lot by Old Calendar Orthodox.  If someone could show my references or statements indicating that adoption of the Gregorian/New Style Calendar indicates acceptance of Papal supremacy or other RC beliefs then please do so?


« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 02:38:59 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1429 on: May 10, 2011, 02:49:34 AM »

I've called it the gregorianski Calender  , or the latin Calendar in english..,also in serbian we say latinski kalendar...or even  rimski kalendar.....never called it the way you mentioned below.... Huh

romski could be used to describe gypsies.so i edited it out...


Why do some Old Calendar Orthodox slander the Gregorian calendar as the "Papist/Popes Calendar" when in reality the decision of Gregory 13the to adopt the new style was not based on theology, but on astronomical advice?  I could see a major argument being made for the Julian calendar based on tradition or the failure of an Ecumenical Council to implement the new style, but not an argument that the Gregorian is "heretical" simply because the Pope of Rome was the first to order its implementation.

Unfortunately I hear this argument being made a lot by Old Calendar Orthodox.  If someone could show my references or statements indicating that adoption of the Gregorian/New Style Calendar indicates acceptance of Papal supremacy or other RC beliefs then please do so?


« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 02:55:46 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,599


« Reply #1430 on: May 10, 2011, 08:38:22 AM »

If someone could show my references or statements indicating that adoption of the Gregorian/New Style Calendar indicates acceptance of Papal supremacy or other RC beliefs then please do so?


The Sigillion of the 1583 Pan-Orthodox Council condemns the adoption of the Gregorian Paschalian and Menologian along with Papal supremacy and other Papal heresies.  Regarding the New Calendar/Revised Julian adopted by some local Orthodox Churches, there is some debate regarding the condemnation by this Council of those who wish “to follow the newly-invented Paschalion and the New Menologion of the atheist astronomers of the Pope”.  It is debated whether 1) the words “and the New Menologion” were inserted later and were not part of the original, and whether 2) one falls under condemnation only for adopting *both* the New Paschalian and New Menologion.  The text reads “newly-invented Paschalian and the New Menologion of the atheist astronomers of the Pope”, and not the “newly-invented Paschalian or the New Menologion of the atheist astronomers of the Pope”.

Quote
Sigillion of the 1583 Pan-Orthodox Council
http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/Sigillion_of_1583

To all the genuine Christian children of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ of the East residing in Trigovysti and throughout the world, be grace and peace and mercy from God Almighty.

No small turbulence overtook that ancient Ark, when, violently beset by billows, it floated upon the surface of the waters, and had not the Lord God remembered Noah and seen fit to still the water, there would have been no hope for it at all. Thus also in regard to the New Ark of our Church, against which misbelievers have launched an implacable war upon us, by means of these presents we have decided to leave a note that you may have in what is herein written the means of upholding and defending your Orthodoxy against such enemies more safely and surely.

But, lest the composition as a whole be weary to the simpler folks, we have decided to embody the matter in common language, wording it as follows: In Common Language From old Rome have come certain persons who learned there to wear Latin habits. The worst of it is how, from being Romans of Rumelia bred and born, they not only have changed their faith, but they even wage war upon the Orthodox dogmas and truths of the Eastern Church which have been delivered to us by Christ and the divine Apostles and the Holy Councils of the Holy Fathers.

Therefore, cutting off these persons as rotten members, we command:

1) That whoever does not confess with heart and mouth that he is a child of the Eastern Church baptized in Orthodox style, and that the Holy Spirit proceeds out of only the Father, essentially and hypostatically, as Christ says in the Gospel, shall be outside of our Church and shall be anathematized.

2) That whoever does not confess that at the Mystery of the Holy Communion the laity must also partake of both kinds, of the Precious Body and Blood, but instead says that he will partake only of the body, and that that is sufficient because therein is both flesh and blood, when as a matter of fact Christ died and administered each separately, and they who fail to keep such customs, let all such persons be anathematized.

3) That whoever says that our Lord Jesus Christ at the Mystic Supper had unleavened bread (made without yeast), like that of the Jews, and not leavened bread, that is to say, bread raised with yeast, let him depart far away from us and let him be anathema as one having Jewish views and those of Apollinarios and bringing dogmas of the Armenians into the Church, on which account let him be doubly anathema.

4) Whoever says that our Christ and God, when he comes to judge us, does not come to judge souls together with bodies, or embodied souls, but instead comes to sentence only bodies, let him be anathema.

5) Whoever says that the souls of Christians who repented while in the world but failed to perform their penance go to a purgatory of fire when they die, where there is flame and punishment, and are purified, which is simply an ancient Greek myth, and those who, like Origen, think that hell is not everlasting, and thereby afford or offer the liberty or incentive to sin, let him and all such persons be anathema.

6) That whoever says that the Pope is the head of the Church, and not Christ, and that he has authority to admit persons to Paradise with his letters of indulgence or other passports, and can forgive sins as many as a person may commit if such person pay money to receive from him indulgences, i.e. licences to sin, let every such person be anathema.

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

8. That ye pious and Orthodox Christians remain faithful in what ye have been taught and have been born and brought up in, and when the time calls for it and there be need, that your very blood be shed in order to safeguard the Faith handed down by our Fathers and your confession: and that ye beware of such persons as have been described or referred to in the foregoing paragraphs, in order that our Lord Jesus Christ may help you and at the same time may the prayer of our mediocrity be with all of you: amen.

Done in the year of the God-man 1583 (MDLXXXIII), year of indiction 12, November 20 [O.S.]

Jeremiah of Constantinople
Silvester of Alexandria
Sophronius of Jerusalem
In the presence of the rest of the prelates at the Council.
 

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: 35,604



« Reply #1431 on: May 10, 2011, 09:25:33 AM »

Christ is risen!
No proposal I have seen for the Orthodox to adopt the New Calendar has ever involved a new calculation for Pascha; they just readjust the formula, and Orthodox Pascha continues to fall where it ought to, so the miracle of the Holy Fire is not affected.  The other sina qua non for the Holy Fire is the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem (Chalcedonian persuasion), and if that Patriarchate were ever eliminated...
...the Church would go on.  It seems the Romanians are teaching that lesson now.
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
Jonathan Gress
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 2,632


« Reply #1432 on: May 10, 2011, 12:03:33 PM »

@jah77: Well, the Catholics don't say Christ is not the head of the Church. They say that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, i.e. he exercises Christ's authority on earth. Since the sigillion only says we must reject the teaching that the Pope is the head of the Church and not Christ, it clearly follows that we may accept the RC teaching that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.
Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1433 on: May 10, 2011, 12:24:07 PM »

Lets just go back to the Old Calendar, both Paschalian and Menologion. The center of our years and lives should be Christ and church tradition not what some scientists deduct from the stars. Who cares if its more 'accurate'? Accurate to what? To who? All it has served to do is divide the faithful, create bickering, and water down the church. Can anyone provide a spiritual reason for changing? No, its all politics and back slapping. Considering the times we live in doesn't it make more sense to hold stronger to our traditions rather than change them? Volatility calls for us to buckle down, not revamp. What do I know though.
Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,402


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1434 on: May 10, 2011, 12:31:32 PM »

The center of our years and lives should be Christ and church tradition not what some scientists deduct from the stars.
But why set the two in opposition to each other?
Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1435 on: May 10, 2011, 12:43:57 PM »

The center of our years and lives should be Christ and church tradition not what some scientists deduct from the stars.
But why set the two in opposition to each other?

I believe we started on the Old Calendar for a reason. Though I don't know why the Holy Spirit led that way, he did. So lets keep it how it was. We can use the OC without being in opposition to scientific advance. We had a system that worked, the non-Christian world has a system they like, lets keep it at that. We are getting into a pattern of the Church conforming to the cultures of the world rather than the Church transforming cultures to center them around Christ.
Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,378



« Reply #1436 on: May 10, 2011, 12:47:16 PM »

Lets just go back to the Old Calendar, both Paschalian and Menologion. The center of our years and lives should be Christ and church tradition not what some scientists deduct from the stars. Who cares if its more 'accurate'? Accurate to what? To who? All it has served to do is divide the faithful, create bickering, and water down the church. Can anyone provide a spiritual reason for changing? No, its all politics and back slapping. Considering the times we live in doesn't it make more sense to hold stronger to our traditions rather than change them? Volatility calls for us to buckle down, not revamp. What do I know though.
It's not just scientists. Consider Genesis Chapter one:
Quote
14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven for illumination to divide day from night. Let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years. 15 Let them be for illumination in the firmament of heaven to give light on the earth.” It was so. (SAAS)
It seems to me that we should base our calculations on what God (to refer to what you wrote: Christ) set in place Himself rather than on the well-meaning efforts of men doing their best to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit (again from your words: church tradition) yet whose works are open to error. You were quite right to not capitalize "tradition".
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,599


« Reply #1437 on: May 10, 2011, 12:52:46 PM »

@jah77: Well, the Catholics don't say Christ is not the head of the Church. They say that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, i.e. he exercises Christ's authority on earth. Since the sigillion only says we must reject the teaching that the Pope is the head of the Church and not Christ, it clearly follows that we may accept the RC teaching that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.


Good try Jonathan!   Grin


All it has served to do is divide the faithful, create bickering, and water down the church. Can anyone provide a spiritual reason for changing? No, its all politics and back slapping. Considering the times we live in doesn't it make more sense to hold stronger to our traditions rather than change them? Volatility calls for us to buckle down, not revamp. What do I know though.

Yes, the local churches should all return to the Old Calendar.  Pray that we may see the day!     
Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1438 on: May 10, 2011, 01:16:20 PM »

Lets just go back to the Old Calendar, both Paschalian and Menologion. The center of our years and lives should be Christ and church tradition not what some scientists deduct from the stars. Who cares if its more 'accurate'? Accurate to what? To who? All it has served to do is divide the faithful, create bickering, and water down the church. Can anyone provide a spiritual reason for changing? No, its all politics and back slapping. Considering the times we live in doesn't it make more sense to hold stronger to our traditions rather than change them? Volatility calls for us to buckle down, not revamp. What do I know though.
It's not just scientists. Consider Genesis Chapter one:
Quote
14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven for illumination to divide day from night. Let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years. 15 Let them be for illumination in the firmament of heaven to give light on the earth.” It was so. (SAAS)
It seems to me that we should base our calculations on what God (to refer to what you wrote: Christ) set in place Himself rather than on the well-meaning efforts of men doing their best to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit (again from your words: church tradition) yet whose works are open to error. You were quite right to not capitalize "tradition".

I get where you're coming from but why didn't the councils that wrote the anathemas against the new calendar see it that way? Why didn't they think that verse meant we needed to change? Its this striving to have the world pat us on the back that I can't stand. If it doesn't hold up to scientific muster then it's useless. Didn't Christ say to expect the opposite of acceptance by the world for real Christians? Isaiah 47:13 gets it right. Why bog our minds with all this useless knowledge? The Fathers even tell us to calm our curiosity and try to learn only what we need to know. All this extra new calendar business is superfluous in my mind. I just don't see the justification for it.
Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
Jonathan Gress
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 2,632


« Reply #1439 on: May 10, 2011, 02:27:01 PM »

@jah77: Well, the Catholics don't say Christ is not the head of the Church. They say that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, i.e. he exercises Christ's authority on earth. Since the sigillion only says we must reject the teaching that the Pope is the head of the Church and not Christ, it clearly follows that we may accept the RC teaching that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ.


Good try Jonathan!   Grin


All it has served to do is divide the faithful, create bickering, and water down the church. Can anyone provide a spiritual reason for changing? No, its all politics and back slapping. Considering the times we live in doesn't it make more sense to hold stronger to our traditions rather than change them? Volatility calls for us to buckle down, not revamp. What do I know though.

Yes, the local churches should all return to the Old Calendar.  Pray that we may see the day!     


Thanks. Isn't this fun? We can maybe have a whole thread devoted to this game of making various conciliar decisions mean the opposite of what they were obviously supposed to mean.
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 »   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 0.208 seconds with 73 queries.