OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 05:06:36 AM *
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 208696 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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: 37,960



« Reply #2385 on: March 31, 2014, 12:47:32 PM »

You said that no local Orthodox Church broke communion with the new calendarists, and I produced a counter-example of ROCOR
ROCOR has never been, nor claimed to be, a local Orthodox Church.

As for ROCOR's claims of “solidarity with a mysterious, sinless, but also bodiless catacomb" (Alexander Solzhenitsyn), it makes a lot of claims.

I respect Solzhenitsyn, but he's not an authority on theology or church organization.
Maybe so - and he said as much - but he called this right.  In his letter to ROCOR in 1974, he reminded them of his previous sharp criticism of Patriarch Pimen and the Russian Church in the Soviet Union, and pointed out that since he had been exiled to the safety of the West, he had lost the right to make such criticisms.
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
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #2386 on: March 31, 2014, 12:56:52 PM »

You said that no local Orthodox Church broke communion with the new calendarists, and I produced a counter-example of ROCOR, which in the 1960s began the process of breaking communion, as evinced already in 1960 by the opinion of Fr Constantine (a learned theologian much admired by Fr Seraphim Rose, among others), and becoming complete by 1969, when ROCOR entered into communion with the Old Calendar church of Greece. I don't see why it matters whether ROCOR broke communion in the 1920s or the 1960s, since the fact remains that they did break communion.

It is true that ROCOR never represented the whole church of Russia, but the traditional position of ROCOR was that its counterpart in Russia was the Catacomb Church, i.e. those who hadn't signed the Declaration of Met Sergius, not the Moscow Patriarchate. I don't know if we have any evidence for the attitude of the Catacomb Church to the new calendarists, but I can't imagine it was positive, given their rejection of the "Living Church". They probably had more immediate things to worry about, though, like not being shot or sent to the gulag.

You could probably find examples of concelebration with new calendarists even after 1969 in Europe, which was under the jurisdiction of Abp Anthony of Geneva, who was the only member of the Synod who did not sign the act of communion with the GOC synod of Abp Auxentius of Athens. But that only shows that he was an outlier and not representative of ROCOR's position, which was of solidarity with the old calendarists.

If Bishop Gregory was so brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon, why didn't he join Fr Panteleimon and join HOCNA when they left ROCOR in the 1980s? It sounds rather that he had a mind of his own, as did Met Philaret. Was Fr Constantine also brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon in 1960, when Fr Panteleimon was still with the new calendarists? Or perhaps Fr George was brainwashed by Fr Constantine? These accusations of brainwashing are easy to make, hard to substantiate.

My point was that when some local Orthodox Churches adopted the New Calendar, no other local Orthodox Churches responded by considering them to be outside of the Church.  The consensus of the entire Church, far before the issues of Ecumenism seemed to come to a head in the 1960s, is that the calendar issue did not compromise the unity of the Church.  The fact that ROCOR started to pull away in the 1960s from other local Orthodox churches didn't have anything to do with the calendar issue.

I don't know why Bp. Gregory didn't join HTM/HOCNA when they left ROCOR.  He did his best to squelch the investigation of the moral accusations against them, filing away the claims against Panteleimon and failing to show them to Met Philaret when he was alive.  Bp. Gregory was also likely the one who informed them when they were all about to be suspended.  As you may recall, HTM claims that when ROCOR put the notice of suspension in the mail to HTM, HTM "unknowingly" sent out their letter of departure from ROCOR, and so since both notices "miraculously" crossed paths in the air at the same time, ROCOR's notice of suspension was "too late", so not valid.  This is actually what has been claimed by HTM/HOCNA for decades, as ridiculous as it sounds.  The real reason for this "miracle" is that they were informed by telephone that the notice of suspension was on its way so they could act fast to leave ROCOR before it arrive.  Bp. Gregory was likely the informant.  Bp. Gregory retired from ROCOR the same year that HTM left ROCOR, and HTM used to post on the internet a letter from Bp. Gregory to the Synod asserting his belief in their innocence.  Why Bp. Gregory didn't follow HTM into HOCNA, however, is unknown to me.  

The significant influence of Panteleimon in ROCOR in the 1960s, and the significant influence of Bp Gregory over Met Philaret (to the extent that Bp. Gregory wrote many of Met Philaret's encyclicals and statements for him) is well known.  If you read the book compiled by Fr. Alexey Young containing the letters of Fr. Seraphim (Rose) you will see that the role and influence of Panteleimon/HTM in ROCOR was very significant, particularly on the East Coast of the US and not quite so much on the West Coast or abroad.  It is interesting that even in the 1970s, Met Philaret was organizing dialogues with the OCA about reconciling.  HTM entered ROCOR in the 1960s, about the time that the views of Bp. Gregory and Met Philaret and others began to shift quite dramatically.  I'm not saying they were all brainwashed by Panteleimon, but I doubt that we would have seen ROCOR become as radicalized as it did, or involve itself with the Old Calendarists as it did, had Panteleimon not been in the picture.  
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,565


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #2387 on: March 31, 2014, 01:06:06 PM »

Oh, don't you know, our Old Calendarist friends believe the Julian Calendar was sanctified by its use by the church; they even refer to it as the "Church Calendar." (This is not my opinion.)

This is a funny opinion comment coming from someone who consistently refers to "Holy Orthodoxy", "Holy Orthodox Church", "Holy Autocephalous Orthodox Churches", "Holy Archdiocese", "Holy Monastery", "Great and Holy Council", "Holy and Sacred Synod", and so on.  Yet, the Calendar cannot even be considered "ecclesiastical", let alone "holy".  

Good point, Mor.

When did the Church Cycle of Feasts become secularized?

I wonder, given 90 years of use by several of the Holy Orthodox Churches, including the Ancient Patriarchates except the Church of Jerusalem, is the "Revised Julian Calendar" sanctified?

That depends whether you believe said churches are still part of the Orthodox Church after having adopted the new calendar.

:yawn

snoring....
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,565


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #2388 on: March 31, 2014, 01:08:12 PM »

You said that no local Orthodox Church broke communion with the new calendarists, and I produced a counter-example of ROCOR
ROCOR has never been, nor claimed to be, a local Orthodox Church.

As for ROCOR's claims of “solidarity with a mysterious, sinless, but also bodiless catacomb" (Alexander Solzhenitsyn), it makes a lot of claims.

And I just have to point out, that subsequently, they have seen the error of their ways. While not abandoning Julius Caesar's Alexandrian Calendar, they have since resumed communion with the local churches following the Revised Julian Calendar.
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #2389 on: March 31, 2014, 01:10:22 PM »

BTW, perhaps the moderators could send these out once in a while.  I think there are many threads where this award could apply:



After how many pages does a thread become so cumbersome that it is useless?
« Last Edit: March 31, 2014, 01:11:25 PM by jah777 » Logged
DeniseDenise
Tiredness personified
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catechumen no more!
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,348


What curls do on a bad hair day!


« Reply #2390 on: March 31, 2014, 01:11:32 PM »

Horse needs a lot of tenderizing to be paletable.....
Logged

Please secure your own oxygen mask before assisting other passengers.
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,456


« Reply #2391 on: March 31, 2014, 01:27:58 PM »

I know there at least used to be a "cheval mort" tag.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,638


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #2392 on: March 31, 2014, 03:47:22 PM »

I know there at least used to be a "cheval mort" tag.
There still is. Wink
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA catechumen
Posts: 323



« Reply #2393 on: March 31, 2014, 04:05:57 PM »

What calendars do the various Oriental churches use?
I know Mor Ephrem said that the Indian Orthodox are on the Gregorian, but does that include the calculation of Easter?
Logged

"I give praise to your holy Nature, Lord, for you have made my nature a sanctuary for your hiddenness and a tabernacle for your holy mysteries, a place where you can dwell, and a holy temple for your Divinity." --Venerable St. Isaac of Nineveh
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,070



« Reply #2394 on: March 31, 2014, 04:59:22 PM »

Oh, don't you know, our Old Calendarist friends believe the Julian Calendar was sanctified by its use by the church; they even refer to it as the "Church Calendar." (This is not my opinion.)

This is a funny opinion comment coming from someone who consistently refers to "Holy Orthodoxy", "Holy Orthodox Church", "Holy Autocephalous Orthodox Churches", "Holy Archdiocese", "Holy Monastery", "Great and Holy Council", "Holy and Sacred Synod", and so on.  Yet, the Calendar cannot even be considered "ecclesiastical", let alone "holy". 

Good point, Mor.

When did the Church Cycle of Feasts become secularized?

I wonder, given 90 years of use by several of the Holy Orthodox Churches, including the Ancient Patriarchates except the Church of Jerusalem, is the "Revised Julian Calendar" sanctified?

That depends whether you believe said churches are still part of the Orthodox Church after having adopted the new calendar.

For those who believe in the unity and catholicity of the Church it is not a question.  No local Orthodox Church that served on the Old Calendar broke communion with any local Orthodox Church that adopted the New Calendar. 

ROCOR did in the 1960s.

Metropolitan Vitaly's former Cathedral in Montreal followed the Revised Julian Calendar.

Recall Metropolitan Philaret's "Sorrowful Epistles;" ROCOR's leadership adopted an unwarranted, paranoid fear of the "Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism," having succumb to the fanatical raging of Fr. Pantelimon's (Holy Transfiguration Monastery), expressed incessantly through his newspaper columns. No one alleged that Metropolitan Philaret was "brainwashed."
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #2395 on: March 31, 2014, 05:17:34 PM »

Oh, don't you know, our Old Calendarist friends believe the Julian Calendar was sanctified by its use by the church; they even refer to it as the "Church Calendar." (This is not my opinion.)

This is a funny opinion comment coming from someone who consistently refers to "Holy Orthodoxy", "Holy Orthodox Church", "Holy Autocephalous Orthodox Churches", "Holy Archdiocese", "Holy Monastery", "Great and Holy Council", "Holy and Sacred Synod", and so on.  Yet, the Calendar cannot even be considered "ecclesiastical", let alone "holy". 

Good point, Mor.

When did the Church Cycle of Feasts become secularized?

I wonder, given 90 years of use by several of the Holy Orthodox Churches, including the Ancient Patriarchates except the Church of Jerusalem, is the "Revised Julian Calendar" sanctified?

That depends whether you believe said churches are still part of the Orthodox Church after having adopted the new calendar.

For those who believe in the unity and catholicity of the Church it is not a question.  No local Orthodox Church that served on the Old Calendar broke communion with any local Orthodox Church that adopted the New Calendar. 

ROCOR did in the 1960s.

Metropolitan Vitaly's former Cathedral in Montreal followed the Revised Julian Calendar.

Recall Metropolitan Philaret's "Sorrowful Epistles;" ROCOR's leadership adopted an unwarranted, paranoid fear of the "Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism," having succumb to the fanatical raging of Fr. Pantelimon's (Holy Transfiguration Monastery), expressed incessantly through his newspaper columns. No one alleged that Metropolitan Philaret was "brainwashed."

It is important to recognize that there really was a since of foreboding and fear in ROCOR in those days due to the atrocities occurring in Russia under the Soviets, fear of KGB infiltration, etc.  Many within Russia and in ROCOR truly wondered whether they were in the very last days and if the time of the Antichrist was quite close.  Articles along the theme of the Antichrist became increasingly common, with Abp Averky even compiling a commentary on the Apocalypse.  ROCOR trusted Panteleimon's commentary on what was transpiring on the Greek side because he was Greek and spoke Greek, the ROCOR Synod were not and did not.  This sense of fear and foreboding was taken advantage of by Panteleimon who admired the Old Calendarist sects and hoped to make ROCOR more like them.  This is how ROCOR was gradually tricked into believing that these groups were just like ROCOR, and so ROCOR involved itself with these groups without really knowing who they were and why they were cut off from their Mother churches.  Gradually, as things took a turn in Russia with the fall of Communism, the rejection of the Branch Theory, the glorification of the New Martyrs, and as the ecumenical movement began to wane; joy and hope began to replace this fear and paranoia, and with the veil lifted, ROCOR could see more clearly its place in the Church and how they must proceed. 
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #2396 on: March 31, 2014, 05:51:37 PM »

You said that no local Orthodox Church broke communion with the new calendarists, and I produced a counter-example of ROCOR, which in the 1960s began the process of breaking communion, as evinced already in 1960 by the opinion of Fr Constantine (a learned theologian much admired by Fr Seraphim Rose, among others), and becoming complete by 1969, when ROCOR entered into communion with the Old Calendar church of Greece. I don't see why it matters whether ROCOR broke communion in the 1920s or the 1960s, since the fact remains that they did break communion.

It is true that ROCOR never represented the whole church of Russia, but the traditional position of ROCOR was that its counterpart in Russia was the Catacomb Church, i.e. those who hadn't signed the Declaration of Met Sergius, not the Moscow Patriarchate. I don't know if we have any evidence for the attitude of the Catacomb Church to the new calendarists, but I can't imagine it was positive, given their rejection of the "Living Church". They probably had more immediate things to worry about, though, like not being shot or sent to the gulag.

You could probably find examples of concelebration with new calendarists even after 1969 in Europe, which was under the jurisdiction of Abp Anthony of Geneva, who was the only member of the Synod who did not sign the act of communion with the GOC synod of Abp Auxentius of Athens. But that only shows that he was an outlier and not representative of ROCOR's position, which was of solidarity with the old calendarists.

If Bishop Gregory was so brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon, why didn't he join Fr Panteleimon and join HOCNA when they left ROCOR in the 1980s? It sounds rather that he had a mind of his own, as did Met Philaret. Was Fr Constantine also brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon in 1960, when Fr Panteleimon was still with the new calendarists? Or perhaps Fr George was brainwashed by Fr Constantine? These accusations of brainwashing are easy to make, hard to substantiate.

"Fr." Pantelemon was definitely a bad influence on ROCOR. I went to his monastery several times while I was a seminarian at nearby Holy Cross. I always felt that there was something wrong there. The vibes were not right.  It was good for ROCOR and for Orthodoxy in general after Pantelamon and his followers left ROCOR and went their separate way.
ROCOR actually had parishes that used the New Calendar under St. John of San Francisco.
ROCOR had no choice but to break with Moscow after Metropolitan Sergius demanded that every Priest under Moscow, even those serving outside of Russia,  take an oath of loyalty to the Soviet Union in 1927.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: March 31, 2014, 05:56:09 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Anglican (Episcopal Church)
Posts: 132



« Reply #2397 on: March 31, 2014, 11:30:49 PM »

Have you never heard of the Festal Letters of St. Athanasius?
You must have missed my reply #2288 above in which I mentioned them.  

St. Athanasius did fulfill the mandate of the council and sent Festal Letters to inform the other Churches when to celebrate Pascha.
No, he didn't.  The festal letters were written to the bishops of Egypt, Libya, and Cyrenaica, and nowhere else.  In the words of the Aramaic index to the letters, "he sent [them] year by year to the several cities and all the provinces subject to him; that is, from Pentapolis, and on to Libya, Ammoniaca, the greater and the lesser Oasis, Egypt, and Augustamnica, with the Heptanomis and the upper and middle Thebais." Map:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Dioecesis_Aegypti_400_AD.png

The conflict between Rome and the Churches in Asia Minor was over when to celebrate Pascha led to the decision of the 1st Ecumenical Council, Nicaea I in 325.  Rome celebrated Pascha on the Sunday after the Jewish Passover which fell on the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox. The Churches in Asia Minor celebrated Pascha on the day of the Jewish Passover regardless of the day of the Week.
So you keep saying, but the source documents say otherwise.  The controversy at Nicea had nothing to do with the churches of the Province of Asia.  Athanasius is quite clear on who the hold-outs for the old custom were:  "They of Syria, Cilicia, and Mesopotamia  differed from us, and kept the feast at the same season as the Jews" (Ad Afros 2).  The Province of Asia is not mentioned.  And the controversy is about the "season", not the weekday.  Apostolic Canon 7, which you quote, corroborates Athanasius's statement that the controversy at Nicea was about the "season":  "If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon, shall celebrate the holy day of Easter before the vernal equinox, with the Jews, let him be deposed."   At that time there was no unified Jewish calendar.  Jews in at least some places would sometimes identify as Nisan a lunar month whose full moon fell before the equinox.  Christian critics said they were not "observing the month of the new" (Deut. 16.1) because they were holding their Matzoth in the last month of the old year.  Those Christians who celebrated "at the same season as the Jews" would therefore necessarily sometimes have Easter before the equinox as well.

The consensus reached by the Eastern Orthodox after the Aleppo proposal of 1997 by a committee of the World Council of Churches that all Christians celebrate Pascha on the Sunday following the first full moon following the actual Spring Equinox was that the proposal was unacceptable because failed to include a provision following this canon which according to the consensus of Orthodox scholars requires that Pascha be celebrated after the Jewish Passover. The Gregorian calculation of Pascha allows the Western Easter to take place during or before the Jewish Passover.

But earlier, you wrote
According to Nicaea I, Pascha must follow the Jewish Passover, which was celebrated on the 14 of Nissan, which was the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox.
If the "Jewish Passover" that Easter must "follow" is "the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox", then the Gregorian Easter always follows the "Jewish Passover" defined in this way.  Yet elsewhere you contradict yourself and state that the Gregorian Easter can come before what you call the "Jewish Passover"  Why are you inconsistent in your definition of "Jewish Passover"?

Rome did not accept the Alexandrian calculations until 457.
In the mid-5th century, Rome began using the Victorian computus, which was a 19-year cycle that sometimes differed from the Alexandrian.  Only in the 6th century, after receiving the report written by Dionysius Exiguus, did Rome adopt the Alexandrian computus.

The difference was that Alexandria used a 19 year cycle, while Rome used an 84 year cycle.  The British clung to the older Roman 84 year cycle until the Synod of Whitby in 664.
The churches of Britain and Ireland used the Celtic-84, a fifth-century variant of the Roman-84, not the original Roman-84 itself.  The Synod of Whitby applied only to the northern English, who had been taught the Celtic-84 by their Irish teachers--not to anyone else in Britain.  The southern English were already using the Dionysian/Alexandrian computus.  The inhabitants of Britain who were not subject to the English, or some of them, as well as the northern Irish, continued using the Celtic-84 for some time thereafter.

The Eastern Orthodox Church continues to obey the First Ecumenical Council and uses the Alexandrian tables for the date of Pascha.
The Alexandrian tables no longer work as they were intended to.  Slavish adherence to them is nothing but hollow legalism.  If a hand-calculator gave a value of 37.6713 for the sine of some angle, would you not deem it broken and replace it?  Your Alexandrian tables are a broken calculator.  It is the Gregorian calendar that sets Easter where the fathers of the 3rd and 4th centuries intended it to be.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2014, 11:37:12 PM by Mockingbird » Logged

Forþon we sealon efestan þas Easterlican þing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, þaet we magon cuman to þam Easterlican daege, þe aa byð, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.--Byrhtferth of Ramsey
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,125


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #2398 on: March 31, 2014, 11:40:52 PM »

You said that no local Orthodox Church broke communion with the new calendarists, and I produced a counter-example of ROCOR, which in the 1960s began the process of breaking communion, as evinced already in 1960 by the opinion of Fr Constantine (a learned theologian much admired by Fr Seraphim Rose, among others), and becoming complete by 1969, when ROCOR entered into communion with the Old Calendar church of Greece. I don't see why it matters whether ROCOR broke communion in the 1920s or the 1960s, since the fact remains that they did break communion.

It is true that ROCOR never represented the whole church of Russia, but the traditional position of ROCOR was that its counterpart in Russia was the Catacomb Church, i.e. those who hadn't signed the Declaration of Met Sergius, not the Moscow Patriarchate. I don't know if we have any evidence for the attitude of the Catacomb Church to the new calendarists, but I can't imagine it was positive, given their rejection of the "Living Church". They probably had more immediate things to worry about, though, like not being shot or sent to the gulag.

You could probably find examples of concelebration with new calendarists even after 1969 in Europe, which was under the jurisdiction of Abp Anthony of Geneva, who was the only member of the Synod who did not sign the act of communion with the GOC synod of Abp Auxentius of Athens. But that only shows that he was an outlier and not representative of ROCOR's position, which was of solidarity with the old calendarists.

If Bishop Gregory was so brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon, why didn't he join Fr Panteleimon and join HOCNA when they left ROCOR in the 1980s? It sounds rather that he had a mind of his own, as did Met Philaret. Was Fr Constantine also brainwashed by Fr Panteleimon in 1960, when Fr Panteleimon was still with the new calendarists? Or perhaps Fr George was brainwashed by Fr Constantine? These accusations of brainwashing are easy to make, hard to substantiate.

"Fr." Pantelemon was definitely a bad influence on ROCOR. I went to his monastery several times while I was a seminarian at nearby Holy Cross. I always felt that there was something wrong there. The vibes were not right.  It was good for ROCOR and for Orthodoxy in general after Pantelamon and his followers left ROCOR and went their separate way.
ROCOR actually had parishes that used the New Calendar under St. John of San Francisco.
ROCOR had no choice but to break with Moscow after Metropolitan Sergius demanded that every Priest under Moscow, even those serving outside of Russia,  take an oath of loyalty to the Soviet Union in 1927.

Fr. John W. Morris

Monk Panteleimon confessed to his horrible sins, which the ROCOR knew about. He was defrocked in 2012, and he now lives in a private hermitage away from the rest of the monks as he supposedly prepares for death. He is said to have terminal cancer.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,125


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #2399 on: March 31, 2014, 11:43:03 PM »


The Eastern Orthodox Church continues to obey the First Ecumenical Council and uses the Alexandrian tables for the date of Pascha.
The Alexandrian tables no longer work as they were intended to.  Slavish adherence to them is nothing but hollow legalism.  If a hand-calculator gave a value of 37.6713 for the sine of some angle, would you not deem it broken and replace it?  Your Alexandrian tables are a broken calculator.  It is the Gregorian calendar that sets Easter where the fathers of the 3rd and 4th centuries intended it to be.

With changes in the earth's orbit due to wobbles, of course the Alexandrian tables would no longer be accurate.

Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #2400 on: March 31, 2014, 11:58:52 PM »

Have you never heard of the Festal Letters of St. Athanasius?
You must have missed my reply #2288 above in which I mentioned them.  

St. Athanasius did fulfill the mandate of the council and sent Festal Letters to inform the other Churches when to celebrate Pascha.
No, he didn't.  The festal letters were written to the bishops of Egypt, Libya, and Cyrenaica, and nowhere else.  In the words of the Aramaic index to the letters, "he sent [them] year by year to the several cities and all the provinces subject to him; that is, from Pentapolis, and on to Libya, Ammoniaca, the greater and the lesser Oasis, Egypt, and Augustamnica, with the Heptanomis and the upper and middle Thebais." Map:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Dioecesis_Aegypti_400_AD.png

The conflict between Rome and the Churches in Asia Minor was over when to celebrate Pascha led to the decision of the 1st Ecumenical Council, Nicaea I in 325.  Rome celebrated Pascha on the Sunday after the Jewish Passover which fell on the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox. The Churches in Asia Minor celebrated Pascha on the day of the Jewish Passover regardless of the day of the Week.
So you keep saying, but the source documents say otherwise.  The controversy at Nicea had nothing to do with the churches of the Province of Asia.  Athanasius is quite clear on who the hold-outs for the old custom were:  "They of Syria, Cilicia, and Mesopotamia  differed from us, and kept the feast at the same season as the Jews" (Ad Afros 2).  The Province of Asia is not mentioned.  And the controversy is about the "season", not the weekday.  Apostolic Canon 7, which you quote, corroborates Athanasius's statement that the controversy at Nicea was about the "season":  "If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon, shall celebrate the holy day of Easter before the vernal equinox, with the Jews, let him be deposed."   At that time there was no unified Jewish calendar.  Jews in at least some places would sometimes identify as Nisan a lunar month whose full moon fell before the equinox.  Christian critics said they were not "observing the month of the new" (Deut. 16.1) because they were holding their Matzoth in the last month of the old year.  Those Christians who celebrated "at the same season as the Jews" would therefore necessarily sometimes have Easter before the equinox as well.

The consensus reached by the Eastern Orthodox after the Aleppo proposal of 1997 by a committee of the World Council of Churches that all Christians celebrate Pascha on the Sunday following the first full moon following the actual Spring Equinox was that the proposal was unacceptable because failed to include a provision following this canon which according to the consensus of Orthodox scholars requires that Pascha be celebrated after the Jewish Passover. The Gregorian calculation of Pascha allows the Western Easter to take place during or before the Jewish Passover.

But earlier, you wrote
According to Nicaea I, Pascha must follow the Jewish Passover, which was celebrated on the 14 of Nissan, which was the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox.
If the "Jewish Passover" that Easter must "follow" is "the day of the first full moon following the Spring Equinox", then the Gregorian Easter always follows the "Jewish Passover" defined in this way.  Yet elsewhere you contradict yourself and state that the Gregorian Easter can come before what you call the "Jewish Passover"  Why are you inconsistent in your definition of "Jewish Passover"?

Rome did not accept the Alexandrian calculations until 457.
In the mid-5th century, Rome began using the Victorian computus, which was a 19-year cycle that sometimes differed from the Alexandrian.  Only in the 6th century, after receiving the report written by Dionysius Exiguus, did Rome adopt the Alexandrian computus.

The difference was that Alexandria used a 19 year cycle, while Rome used an 84 year cycle.  The British clung to the older Roman 84 year cycle until the Synod of Whitby in 664.
The churches of Britain and Ireland used the Celtic-84, a fifth-century variant of the Roman-84, not the original Roman-84 itself.  The Synod of Whitby applied only to the northern English, who had been taught the Celtic-84 by their Irish teachers--not to anyone else in Britain.  The southern English were already using the Dionysian/Alexandrian computus.  The inhabitants of Britain who were not subject to the English, or some of them, as well as the northern Irish, continued using the Celtic-84 for some time thereafter.

The Eastern Orthodox Church continues to obey the First Ecumenical Council and uses the Alexandrian tables for the date of Pascha.
The Alexandrian tables no longer work as they were intended to.  Slavish adherence to them is nothing but hollow legalism.  If a hand-calculator gave a value of 37.6713 for the sine of some angle, would you not deem it broken and replace it?  Your Alexandrian tables are a broken calculator.  It is the Gregorian calendar that sets Easter where the fathers of the 3rd and 4th centuries intended it to be.

I would not throw the calculator away because I do not know what a sine of an angle is. I admit that I am mathematically illiterate. My field is history which is what we are discussing. According to the history of the Easter controversy, the fight was between Rome and the Churches in Asia Minor. The first Ecumenical Council made the Roman practice universal in the Church, and gave Alexandria the responsibility of determining the date of Pascha. You learn that in church history 101.
The Gregorian Calendar also gets the date of the Vernal Equinox wrong. Therefore, technically both calendars are wrong according to modern astronomy.
Until the equivalent of an Ecumenical Council changes it, the Alexandrian calculations still have authority in the Eastern Orthodox Church. We do not recognize the authority of a Pope to change the decisions of an Ecumenical Council.
Why do you care? According to your information, you are an Episcopalian. Since you are not Eastern Orthodox why are you making such a big deal of arguing with us about when  we celebrate Pascha?

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #2401 on: April 01, 2014, 01:53:11 AM »

Why do you care? According to your information, you are an Episcopalian. Since you are not Eastern Orthodox why are you making such a big deal of arguing with us about when  we celebrate Pascha?
This is an ad hominem argument. You are questioning the person and his intentions rather than responding to the issue at hand. A few of us may be interested in investigating what the Orthodox Church teaches because we are not 100% satisfied with some issues in our own Church, and there may have occurred to us the possibility that we are in the wrong Church. So I don't see any point in insulting non-Orthodox Christians who are inquiring into the calendar issue or other teachings of the Orthodox Church.   
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,456


« Reply #2402 on: April 01, 2014, 08:44:06 AM »

The relationship between ROCOR and the GOC extended beyond Fr Panteleimon and HTM. Bishop Petros of Astoria was close to ROCOR, especially Abp Averky, and even joined ROCOR for a brief period in the 1990s, but he did not get along with the Boston crowd at all.
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #2403 on: April 01, 2014, 12:47:30 PM »

Why do you care? According to your information, you are an Episcopalian. Since you are not Eastern Orthodox why are you making such a big deal of arguing with us about when  we celebrate Pascha?
This is an ad hominem argument. You are questioning the person and his intentions rather than responding to the issue at hand. A few of us may be interested in investigating what the Orthodox Church teaches because we are not 100% satisfied with some issues in our own Church, and there may have occurred to us the possibility that we are in the wrong Church. So I don't see any point in insulting non-Orthodox Christians who are inquiring into the calendar issue or other teachings of the Orthodox Church.   

It is not meant to be an insult. It was a question. Why would someone who is not Orthodox make such a big deal about why we celebrate Pascha when we do? That is still a valid question. We are arguing about historical facts. My studies disagree with his conclusions.  This person continues to argue for the sake of argument. Once again the Paschal Controversy was between Rome and the Churches of Asia Minor. Rome celebrated Pascha on the Sunday after the Jewish Passover which falls on the first full moon following the Spring Equinox. The Church in Asia Minor celebrated Pascha on the day of the Jewish Passover. At the first Ecumenical Council, Nicaea I in 325 the Church decided to follow the Roman practice, but also decided to make its own calculations independent of the Jews. The council gave Alexandria the responsibility to prepare the tables calculating the date of Pascha. One can read that in any basic study of early Christian history. After some confusion caused by the fact that Rome used a 84 year table, while Alexandria used a 19 year table, Rome adopted the Alexandrian tables and there was a common celebration Pascha between East and West, beginning in the 6th century when Rome adopted the Alexandrian tables. This agreement lasted until the introduction of the Gregorian Calendar in 1582. Eastern Orthodox still obey the decision of the First Ecumenical Council and follow the tables produced by Alexandria. Neither method of calculation relies of the actual Spring Equinox as determined by modern astronomers. Since both East and West are actually inaccurate because they base their calculation of the date of Pascha on an inaccurate date for the Vernal Equinox, why should the East give up its traditions? At least we follow the decision of the 1st Ecumenical Council that gave the responsibility to calculate the date of Pascha to Alexandria. As those who have read my other writings, I am anything but an Old Calendarist because the 1st Ecumenical Council did not mandate that we follow the Julian Calendar for anything else but the date of Pascha. However since the Council gave the authority to Alexandria to determine the date of Pascha according to the Julian Calendar, I feel that only an authority equal to an Ecumenical Council can change the date of Pascha. Thus Pope Gregory XIII lacked the authority to change the calculations for the date of Pascha by abandoning the tables prepared by Alexandria.
In the Middle East, they have worked out a compromise that seems to me to be the best way to resolve this dispute. Everyone, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant celebrates Pascha according to the Eastern Orthodox or actually Alexandrian calculations, but celebrates the other feasts according to the New Calendar.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA catechumen
Posts: 323



« Reply #2404 on: April 01, 2014, 01:18:02 PM »

Although I have read that celebrating Pascha on the Old Calendar and everything else on the New creates the additional problem that Pascha can happen so late that it overwrites the entire Apostles' Fast (as well as making it impossible for a Kyriopascha to happen). Do either of these things happen when the New Calendar is exclusively used?
Logged

"I give praise to your holy Nature, Lord, for you have made my nature a sanctuary for your hiddenness and a tabernacle for your holy mysteries, a place where you can dwell, and a holy temple for your Divinity." --Venerable St. Isaac of Nineveh
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,726


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #2405 on: April 01, 2014, 01:21:29 PM »

Although I have read that celebrating Pascha on the Old Calendar and everything else on the New creates the additional problem that Pascha can happen so late that it overwrites the entire Apostles' Fast (as well as making it impossible for a Kyriopascha to happen). Do either of these things happen when the New Calendar is exclusively used?

No. 

I'm not so concerned about the loss of Kyriopascha as I am about the Apostles' Fast. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,865



« Reply #2406 on: April 01, 2014, 01:59:05 PM »

Why do you care? According to your information, you are an Episcopalian. Since you are not Eastern Orthodox why are you making such a big deal of arguing with us about when  we celebrate Pascha?
This is an ad hominem argument. You are questioning the person and his intentions rather than responding to the issue at hand. A few of us may be interested in investigating what the Orthodox Church teaches because we are not 100% satisfied with some issues in our own Church, and there may have occurred to us the possibility that we are in the wrong Church. So I don't see any point in insulting non-Orthodox Christians who are inquiring into the calendar issue or other teachings of the Orthodox Church.  

It is not meant to be an insult. It was a question. Why would someone who is not Orthodox make such a big deal about why we celebrate Pascha when we do? That is still a valid question. We are arguing about historical facts. My studies disagree with his conclusions.  This person continues to argue for the sake of argument. Once again the Paschal Controversy was between Rome and the Churches of Asia Minor. Rome celebrated Pascha on the Sunday after the Jewish Passover which falls on the first full moon following the Spring Equinox. The Church in Asia Minor celebrated Pascha on the day of the Jewish Passover. At the first Ecumenical Council, Nicaea I in 325 the Church decided to follow the Roman practice, but also decided to make its own calculations independent of the Jews. The council gave Alexandria the responsibility to prepare the tables calculating the date of Pascha. One can read that in any basic study of early Christian history. After some confusion caused by the fact that Rome used a 84 year table, while Alexandria used a 19 year table, Rome adopted the Alexandrian tables and there was a common celebration Pascha between East and West, beginning in the 6th century when Rome adopted the Alexandrian tables. This agreement lasted until the introduction of the Gregorian Calendar in 1582. Eastern Orthodox still obey the decision of the First Ecumenical Council and follow the tables produced by Alexandria. Neither method of calculation relies of the actual Spring Equinox as determined by modern astronomers. Since both East and West are actually inaccurate because they base their calculation of the date of Pascha on an inaccurate date for the Vernal Equinox, why should the East give up its traditions? At least we follow the decision of the 1st Ecumenical Council that gave the responsibility to calculate the date of Pascha to Alexandria. As those who have read my other writings, I am anything but an Old Calendarist because the 1st Ecumenical Council did not mandate that we follow the Julian Calendar for anything else but the date of Pascha. However since the Council gave the authority to Alexandria to determine the date of Pascha according to the Julian Calendar, I feel that only an authority equal to an Ecumenical Council can change the date of Pascha. Thus Pope Gregory XIII lacked the authority to change the calculations for the date of Pascha by abandoning the tables prepared by Alexandria.
In the Middle East, they have worked out a compromise that seems to me to be the best way to resolve this dispute. Everyone, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant celebrates Pascha according to the Eastern Orthodox or actually Alexandrian calculations, but celebrates the other feasts according to the New Calendar.

Fr. John W. Morris

Technically speaking, the First Council did not mandate the use of any calendar but a trio of astronomical phenomena--to wit, the Vernal Equinox, the first full moon following the Vernal Equinox and the Sunday following that first full moon. I am assuming here the observations were to be made at Alexandria. The tables and the setting of the Vernal Equinox on a fixed date came later. The calendar used in the Roman Empire at that time was indeed the Julian and we know that, at that point in time,  it correctly reflected the conjunction of those three astronomical phenomena mandated by the First Ecumenical Council. Pope Gregory had the honesty, power and courage to try to conform the calendar to First Council's mandate for Pascha. For many reasons, we did not until 1923. I suspect that it was anti-Catholic animus and ignorance that drove our late entry into the business of basing the calendar on the order that God has established on our solar system. I suspect that it is hubris that is holding back the entire Orthodox world to make the necessary revisions and just dump a calendar that no longer reflects Apostolic understanding of the Paschal date.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2014, 02:00:19 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,440


« Reply #2407 on: April 01, 2014, 02:03:29 PM »

Although I have read that celebrating Pascha on the Old Calendar and everything else on the New creates the additional problem that Pascha can happen so late that it overwrites the entire Apostles' Fast (as well as making it impossible for a Kyriopascha to happen). Do either of these things happen when the New Calendar is exclusively used?

No. 

I'm not so concerned about the loss of Kyriopascha as I am about the Apostles' Fast. 

Thanks for not latching onto the Kyriopascha "myth".  I say "myth" since some seem to think magic will happen or the Second Coming will happen.  Even if you are alive during one, you could just get sick and miss one. 
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,440


« Reply #2408 on: April 01, 2014, 02:04:33 PM »

...

I suspect that it was anti-Catholic animus and ignorance that drove our late entry into the business of basing the calendar on the order that God has established on our solar system. I suspect that it is hubris that is holding back the entire Orthodox world to make the necessary revisions and just dump a calendar that no longer reflects Apostolic understanding of the Paschal date.

+1
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #2409 on: April 01, 2014, 03:26:29 PM »

Why would someone who is not Orthodox make such a big deal about why we celebrate Pascha when we do?
Because we are interested in what the Orthodox Church teaches.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,726


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #2410 on: April 01, 2014, 03:43:59 PM »

Thanks for not latching onto the Kyriopascha "myth".  I say "myth" since some seem to think magic will happen or the Second Coming will happen.  Even if you are alive during one, you could just get sick and miss one. 

Smiley

The Kyriopascha objection always seemed rather odd.  It's such a "liturgy geek" thing to worry about: you don't lose either feast, you just lose the celebration of both on one day.  People don't complain about the loss of the Ambrosian Liturgy in the Orthodox Church nearly as much as Kyriopascha. 

Anyway, if everyone moved to the Gregorian calendar by 2034, we could celebrate Kyriopascha the following year.  Tongue
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #2411 on: April 01, 2014, 06:14:13 PM »

...

I suspect that it was anti-Catholic animus and ignorance that drove our late entry into the business of basing the calendar on the order that God has established on our solar system. I suspect that it is hubris that is holding back the entire Orthodox world to make the necessary revisions and just dump a calendar that no longer reflects Apostolic understanding of the Paschal date.

+1

Count me in as well here, +2

It seems some just cannot admit that the pope got one right (mostly).
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Anglican (Episcopal Church)
Posts: 132



« Reply #2412 on: April 07, 2014, 10:58:55 AM »

Why do you care?

Father John, I have no issue with the date on which your jurisdiction fixes its Easter.  My preference, of course, would be that you would adopt either the Gregorian or Milankovic paschalion and so agree with us most or all the time.  

However, the reasons you give for not adopting the Gregorian or Milankovic  reckoning are mis-characterizations of our approach.  Anglicans have used the Gregorian calendars, solar and lunar, since the mid-1700s.  I think I may defend the integrity of our tradition.

You claim the Gregorian computus is defective because (a) its equinox is "not accurate", and (b) it allows Easter to precede, or coincide with, what you call the "Jewish Passover."  The second of these you claim is a defect in the Milankovic paschalion as well.  Both these propositions:

(a) that the Gregorian calendar's equinox is not accurate;
(b) that the Gregorian and Milankovic calendars allow Easter to precede or coincide with the Jewish Passover;

can be true statements.  In the context of this thread, however, I deem them distortions.  In light of the history of the paschalion, the definition of "accurate" that is required to make (a) to be a true statement cannot be deemed to be a necessary part of the calculation, though it may be desirable.  Pope Gregory merely restored the level of accuracy that the Julian paschalion was intended to have, but had lost by A.D. 800, if not before.    The definition of "Jewish Passover" required to make (b) to be a true statement also has no precedent in the history of the Alexandrian paschalion.

I have also taken issue with your characterization of the 3rd-4th century Paschal controversy that was discussed at the Nicene council. This is for two reasons:  First, I think your characterization is wrong; and second, because I think a right understanding of the issues involved in the 3rd-4th century Paschal controversy helps illuminate why your statements about the Gregorian calendar are mischaracterizations:  The history, rightly read, indicates why the definition of "accurate" presupposed by proposition (a) above, and the definition of "Jewish Passover" presupposed by proposition (b) above, are anachronistic when applied to the paschalion.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2014, 11:01:08 AM by Mockingbird » Logged

Forþon we sealon efestan þas Easterlican þing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, þaet we magon cuman to þam Easterlican daege, þe aa byð, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.--Byrhtferth of Ramsey
ilyazhito
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 916



« Reply #2413 on: April 08, 2014, 05:24:37 PM »

By the way, this is an important development. The Polish Orthodox Church will return to the Old Calendar beginning with the Feast of All Saints. http://byztex.blogspot.ru/2014/03/polish-orthodox-church-returns-to-old.html This is unprecedented, for a new calendar body to return to the old calendar.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,456


« Reply #2414 on: April 08, 2014, 05:29:26 PM »

By the way, this is an important development. The Polish Orthodox Church will return to the Old Calendar beginning with the Feast of All Saints. http://byztex.blogspot.ru/2014/03/polish-orthodox-church-returns-to-old.html This is unprecedented, for a new calendar body to return to the old calendar.

Not quite. Jerusalem briefly joined the New Calendar around 1970, I believe, and also the monastery of Vatopaidi on Mt Athos was on the New Calendar from 1924 to 1971.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,638


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #2415 on: April 08, 2014, 07:02:39 PM »

By the way, this is an important development. The Polish Orthodox Church will return to the Old Calendar beginning with the Feast of All Saints. http://byztex.blogspot.ru/2014/03/polish-orthodox-church-returns-to-old.html This is unprecedented, for a new calendar body to return to the old calendar.
That's not news. We've been discussing this topic now for the last two weeks.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,57573.0.html
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,266


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #2416 on: April 08, 2014, 09:30:24 PM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,726


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #2417 on: April 08, 2014, 10:07:00 PM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".

Still didn't read that book I recommended, huh?
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,266


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #2418 on: April 08, 2014, 10:58:46 PM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".

Still didn't read that book I recommended, huh?

I have not.  You are speaking of the Origins of Feasts by Bradshaw and Johnson right?   I *do* intend on reading it.  I am very interested in doing so.  I can't say it will convince me but I'm actually a seeker of truth so who knows.

I would also suggest a book back to you, called Martyr's Mirror.   In particular the section and history of the Waldenses, Albigenses, and the lineage of these groups.  It is mind blowing to see alternate succession through scripture following Christians.  It is a huge book and reasonably priced for its  size.  It also includes some saints that the EO revere so it may hold interest for EO Christians.

Wow this netbook... Every other key I have to mash twice on they keyboard to get it to type. :S    Waiting for some goat's to kid in the barn... TTYL
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,638


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #2419 on: April 09, 2014, 01:10:22 AM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".
You do realize that the Quartodecimans were condemned as heretics? Or, in your fascination with those alternate "successions" in  groups the Church has also condemned for heresy, does that fact really matter to you?
« Last Edit: April 09, 2014, 01:31:17 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,266


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #2420 on: April 10, 2014, 10:12:37 PM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".
You do realize that the Quartodecimans were condemned as heretics? Or, in your fascination with those alternate "successions" in  groups the Church has also condemned for heresy, does that fact really matter to you?
What about EO St. Polycarp, he argued for the passover?
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
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: 37,960



« Reply #2421 on: April 10, 2014, 10:52:11 PM »

By the way, this is an important development. The Polish Orthodox Church will return to the Old Calendar beginning with the Feast of All Saints. http://byztex.blogspot.ru/2014/03/polish-orthodox-church-returns-to-old.html This is unprecedented, for a new calendar body to return to the old calendar.
since 97% of the Church was on the Old Calendar before, it hardly left to return.
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
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,638


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #2422 on: April 11, 2014, 10:13:21 AM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".
You do realize that the Quartodecimans were condemned as heretics? Or, in your fascination with those alternate "successions" in  groups the Church has also condemned for heresy, does that fact really matter to you?
What about EO St. Polycarp, he argued for the passover?
Seeing that the Church didn't condemn the Quartodecimans retroactively but chose only to condemn those who held obstinately to their contrary practice even when the Church solidified its stance against them, I'm not sure this is a problem.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2014, 10:15:13 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
hecma925
Non-clairvoyant
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 6,271


Pray for me, a sinner.


WWW
« Reply #2423 on: April 11, 2014, 10:28:08 AM »

Horse needs a lot of tenderizing to be paletable.....

Fortunately, it doesn't!

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,53263.0.html
Logged

Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,456


« Reply #2424 on: April 11, 2014, 10:30:37 AM »

By the way, this is an important development. The Polish Orthodox Church will return to the Old Calendar beginning with the Feast of All Saints. http://byztex.blogspot.ru/2014/03/polish-orthodox-church-returns-to-old.html This is unprecedented, for a new calendar body to return to the old calendar.
since 97% of the Church was on the Old Calendar before, it hardly left to return.

Sure, if you accept highly inflated figures for the numbers of Russian Orthodox members.
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,865



« Reply #2425 on: April 11, 2014, 12:12:01 PM »

If we really want to get technical about events such as Pascha on the calendar, perhaps we should examine what EO St. Polycarp celebrated, which is the passover feast - not the Sunday after.  That is the true "old calendar".
You do realize that the Quartodecimans were condemned as heretics? Or, in your fascination with those alternate "successions" in  groups the Church has also condemned for heresy, does that fact really matter to you?
What about EO St. Polycarp, he argued for the passover?
Seeing that the Church didn't condemn the Quartodecimans retroactively but chose only to condemn those who held obstinately to their contrary practice even when the Church solidified its stance against them, I'm not sure this is a problem.

Great point. BTW, let me post a link to what I think is the definitive analysis of how the Church set the date of Pascha. It may be found at the OCA.org and is by perhaps one of the few true canonists we have had on North America, Archbishop Peter (L'Huillier). It is from the chapter, “The Council of Nicea,” in The Church of the Ancient Councils: The Disciplinary Work of the First Four Ecumenical Councils, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996, Crestwood, NY.

https://oca.org/holy-synod/statements/archbishop-peter/concerning-the-date-of-pascha-and-the-1st-ecumenical-council
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,070



« Reply #2426 on: April 16, 2014, 04:01:07 AM »

Laying in bed tonight (April 15-16, 2014), light was emanating through a crack in my window blinds. I arose to see from where was the cause of the light because I'd never noticed such a crack in the year, to the day, I have lived in this apartment. The moon was very bright and full.

The evening of "Holy and Great Wednesday" 2014 is "the first full moon following the Vernal Equinox."
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Anglican (Episcopal Church)
Posts: 132



« Reply #2427 on: April 16, 2014, 07:29:35 PM »

The evening of "Holy and Great Wednesday" 2014 is "the first full moon following the Vernal Equinox."
Except that, in your church, the moon is not full until Friday.  Smiley
Logged

Forþon we sealon efestan þas Easterlican þing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, þaet we magon cuman to þam Easterlican daege, þe aa byð, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.--Byrhtferth of Ramsey
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,070



« Reply #2428 on: May 09, 2014, 09:01:41 PM »

Has anyone ever heard that the Church of Jerusalem ever converted to the Revised Julian Calendar? I've never read that anywhere, and I am aware it advised the Pan-Orthodox Congress of 1923 via telegram that that it could not convert because of their long standing agreement for use of the Shrines with the Roman Catholics and several Oriental Orthodox Churches. A guy on facebook is telling me this about the Church of Jerusalem. He claims it converted to the Revised Julian Calendar for one year and the Holy Light did not manifest that year, has anyone ever heard of this?
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,916



« Reply #2429 on: May 09, 2014, 11:52:15 PM »

Old Calenda 4 LIFE.
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 0.183 seconds with 72 queries.