I will have to go with Peter and OzGeorge. I should point out a typo in the postings of Oz where the average length of the Gregorian year should be 365.2425 (not 355.2425). Nonetheless, it seems to me that (a) the Revised Julian calendar is more accurate than the Gregorian (which itself was the first revision of the Julian) and (b) the Milankovic rule on calculating leap years was largely responsible for this.

Recalling earlier exchange between Peter and me regarding many Orthodox folks' sensibilities on anything Papal, is this not wonderful news! The most accurate calendar was created by the Orthodox Church!!! It is we and not the Romans who are more in sync with God's time!!!

And the Serbs, if they adopted Milankovic's calendar which is out one day in every 48,000 years rather than the Revised Julian which is out 1 day in every 14,400, would have the wonderful grace of being more in synch with God's celestial creation than the rest of the Orthodox. Indeed, after 48,000 years or so the other Orthodox will be behind the Serbs by 3 days!

The Revised Julian was a compromise to bring the Orthodox into synch with the Catholics.

I would have to respectfully disagree. Along with the 14,400/48,000 figures provided by you, let us consider the following from the Wiki:

"The Gregorian calendar improves the approximation made by the Julian calendar by skipping three Julian leap days in every 400 years, giving an average year of 365.2425 mean solar days long,[38].

**This approximation has an error of about one day per 3300 years with respect to the mean tropical year, but less than half this error with respect to the vernal equinox year of 365.24237 days. **With respect to both solstices the Gregorian Calendar gives an average year length that is actually shorter than the true length. By any criterion,

**the Gregorian calendar is substantially more accurate than the one day in 128 years error of the Julian calendar** (average year 365.25 days)."

So the error rates are:

Julian: One day in 128 years (Source: Wiki)

Gregorian: One day in 3300-6600 years (Source: Wiki)

Revised Julian: One day in 14,400-48,000 years (Source: Father Ambrose)

You can see immediately that the Revised Julian is much more accurate than the Gregorian, whether or not we consider the purported Milankovic variant. Thus, it is impossible that "The Revised Julian was a compromise to bring the Orthodox into synch with the Catholics." The only synchronization that was made was the correct the Julian calendar, which meant that it would be essentially the same as the Gregorian from 1923 to 2800. After that, the two diverge as shown by the error rates.

Regardless of the outcome of the issue of whether the Milankovic variant would have improved the Revised Julian's accuracy (from one day drift in 14,400 versus one day drift in 48,000 years), it is probable that the Revised Julian included the leap year rules proposed by Milankovic. I must also point out that the problem with drift has been the way that leap years were calculated in all three calendars. This fact alone adds extra weight to OzGeorge's argument that the Milankovic "variant" is indeed the Revised Julian calendar. Even if it is not, the Revised Julian (at 14,400) is still more than 2 times more accurate than the Gregorian (at 6,600) which is 52 times more accurate than the Julian (at 128), making Revised Julian 113 times more accurate than the original Julian.

No, dear Father Ambrose, it is a logical impossibility for the Revised Julian to be an attempt to sync us with the Roman Catholics.