Author Topic: Old vs. New Calendar?  (Read 591563 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RaphaCam

  • Hyperdox kid
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,761
  • The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan!
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Re: Old vs. New Calendar?
« Reply #2925 on: May 30, 2016, 12:22:15 PM »
[The foundations of Pascha are pretty far from a Spring Full Moon celebration.
The foundations of Easter are closely liked to the season, the equinox, and the lunar phase.  In a way, the season, the sun, and the moon can be deemed to be celebrating Easter.  Some early fathers considered the season and the luminaries to be connected to the resurrection from the time of their creation.  The earth was created in springtime, since it "brought forth" vegetation.  The moon was created full because God would not make anything imperfect.  The night and the day, or for some, the sun and the moon, were created at equinox because God would not make them unequal.  The passion and the resurrection inaugurate the new creation, so its season recapitulates the first creation.
This is very interesting. I don' t think there is any reason, however, to be stuck to the initial foundations of the feast, which are relevant but IMO belong to history. They would make things more confusing, wouldn't make the celebration more special, significant or holy, and the average parishioner would be very far from acknowledging this particularity. Maybe if people had done it as soon as Pascha crossed the Equator it would be nice, but now it's been 500 years of Christianity and 200 of Orthodoxy.
But the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him. (Holy Habakkuk 2:20)

Offline Mockingbird

  • Mimus polyglottos
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 235
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Episcopal Church
Re: Old vs. New Calendar?
« Reply #2926 on: August 05, 2016, 08:41:58 PM »
[The foundations of Pascha are pretty far from a Spring Full Moon celebration.
The foundations of Easter are closely liked to the season, the equinox, and the lunar phase.  In a way, the season, the sun, and the moon can be deemed to be celebrating Easter.  Some early fathers considered the season and the luminaries to be connected to the resurrection from the time of their creation.  The earth was created in springtime, since it "brought forth" vegetation.  The moon was created full because God would not make anything imperfect.  The night and the day, or for some, the sun and the moon, were created at equinox because God would not make them unequal.  The passion and the resurrection inaugurate the new creation, so its season recapitulates the first creation.
This is very interesting. I don' t think there is any reason, however, to be stuck to the initial foundations of the feast, which are relevant but IMO belong to history. They would make things more confusing, wouldn't make the celebration more special, significant or holy, and the average parishioner would be very far from acknowledging this particularity. Maybe if people had done it as soon as Pascha crossed the Equator it would be nice, but now it's been 500 years of Christianity and 200 of Orthodoxy.
I hold that the festival should continue to be linked to the Spring season in one of two ways.  Either:

(1) The Paschal full moon for everyone should fall when "the sun is in [the astrological sign of] Aries", as Josephus wrote; in other words, when the sun's ecliptic longitude is between 0 and 30 degrees inclusive, or:

(2) Christians north of the tropic of Capricorn should celebrate as in policy (1) above, while Christians south of the Tropic of Capricorn should set the Paschal full moon to fall when the sun is in the astrological sign of Libra.
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