|
1 members (razin),
208
guests, and
72
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,461
Posts417,217
Members6,102
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
Old Calendarists - 13 days late and a dollar short. You gotta love them. They are like a religious version of the Society for Creative Anachronism.  Was it Gregorian Calendar in 19th Century Russia? It was not! Is outrage!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,723 Likes: 2 |
Oh, wait! Is it 13 days late or 13 days early? Thoroughly confusing. I liked the post about focusing on Christ, not the calendar.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
Aside from the reflexive anti-Romanism, just what is the objection to the Gregorian Paschalion? Is it that sometimes it allows the Jewish Pesach to fall before Pascha?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31 |
A Pontifex Maximus is supposed to build bridges, not break them! He did and does (build), just that some won't use them, but cling to the old one with serious structural flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31 |
Aside from the reflexive anti-Romanism, just what is the objection to the Gregorian Paschalion? Is it that sometimes it allows the Jewish Pesach to fall before Pascha? Just to note that the requirement of Jewish Pesach falling before Pascha is a red-herring.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
Well, then, someone needs to explain it to me, because I simply do not comprehend the vehemence of the issue. I mean, it was funny when English workers rioted for back pay when England went Gregorian in the 18th century (they moved forward ten days, and the proles wanted to be paid for them). But the calendar is a pretty objective thing--either it corresponds to the seasons or it doesn't. The Julian doesn't, so it is increasingly inaccurate and useless. If the Eastern Churches have a problem with the formula used to calculate Pascha under the Gregorian Paschalion, then they can use the old formula under the new calendar.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
|
|
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1 |
... the calendar is a pretty objective thing--either it corresponds to the seasons or it doesn't. The Julian doesn't, so it is increasingly inaccurate and useless. Stuart, The problem is that the JC is still accurate enough that it doesn't cause major problems with regard to the seasons. Egypt had been using a solar calendar for centuries prior to the invention of what would come to be known as the JC, but the calendars would require massive intercalations every 50 years or so, usually prompted by the fact of someone recognizing that the calendar had gotten noticeably out of sync with the seasons. Yes, the JC is off, but it still has several centuries before it will be that far off. In the meantime, the JC has gained a history of about 1600 years of continuous usage by the Orthodox Church--a fact that continues to be viewed by them as more significant than any claims that it is scientifically inaccurate. Peace, Deacon Richard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
The problem is that the JC is still accurate enough that it doesn't cause major problems with regard to the seasons. When Julius Caesar reformed the Roman Calendar in 45 BC, he replaced the lunar calendar used by the Romans which was by then more than a month out of synch. He replaced it with a fixed, 365-day calendar, with the start of the year on the Vernal Equinox as determined by Egyptian astronomers--25 March. These astronomers knew that the solar year was actually 365.25 days long, and so Caesar anticipated the need for intercalation. Unfortunately, so far as I can tell, this intercalation never occurred, and so gradually the difference between the Julian calendar year and the solar year got out of synch. It was ten days in 1565, it was 11 days by 1765, and it is 13 days today. That is hardly minor when you take matters such as tides, planting and navigation into account. Pope Gregory did not reform the calendar on a whim, he did so because 25 December should fall somewhere close to the Winter Solstice, because 25 March should be somewhere close to the Equinox, and because there should be some rationale behind our dating system other than cultural inertia. In the meantime, the JC has gained a history of about 1600 years of continuous usage by the Orthodox Church--a fact that continues to be viewed by them as more significant than any claims that it is scientifically inaccurate. An example of warped priorities and bad history. The Church did not make the Julian Calendar--it was promulgated by a Roman pagan dictator using calculations derived by pagan Egyptian priests. Under the principle of accommodation, the Church adopted it because it was the secular calendar, and secular time is not the Church's purview. What concerned the Church was the accuracy of the calendar (good in its own day) and its suitability for its own liturgical purposes. There is nothing holy about the Julian calendar. And custom is not a sufficient reason to reject a calendar that has been adopted by the rest of the world, and which (with the exception of a few zealots) not even the Orthodox use for daily purposes. And even the Old Calendarists don't celebrate the New Year on 25 March, so methinks this is an example of being different for the sake of being different.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31 |
Yes, the JC is off, but it still has several centuries before it will be that far off. And what should be done then? It was difficult enough removing 10, 11 and 12 days. What about removing 13 or 30? In the meantime, the JC has gained a history of about 1600 years of continuous usage by the Orthodox Church--a fact that continues to be viewed by them as more significant than any claims that it is scientifically inaccurate. Its being scientifically inaccurate is more than just a claim. What was being implied, however, was not its scientific inaccuracy but (note the title): I bought one book from the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies titled "A Scientific Examination of the Orthodox Church Calendar" which is somewhat of a polemic but still good information if one can sift through the combative tone of the writing. Anyone have an opinion of this book or know of another? and I know that book well - and it's quite good.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31 |
If the Eastern Churches have a problem with the formula used to calculate Pascha under the Gregorian Paschalion, then they can use the old formula under the new calendar. The problem is that the method for determining the paschalion, which is considering a lunar event, is tied directly to the solar calendar on which it is based.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
What is the problem with first Sunday after the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox and after Pesach" (though I really think we're a bit past the problem of Judaizing, don't you think?)?
It really doesn't matter which calendar you use because the equinox is the equinox. So, go to the new calendar, add a clause about Passover, and be done.
Let's all be honest and admit that the real reason is the new calendar was promulgated by a Roman pope. But from my perspective, it could have been promulgated by Bozo the Clown, and I would still prefer it because it is more accurate.
And please, don't confuse the Julian Calendar with Julian dating--some people have been known to make claims for the Julian calendar based on NASA's use of Julian dating, which is a format, not a calendar.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309 Likes: 3 |
On the Julian Dating System (nothing to do with lovelorn Orthodox singles, by the way), see: Julian Date Calculator [ astronomy.villanova.edu] What is a Julian Date?
Everyone knows how to use the conventional date system with seven days a week, about 30 days a month, and 12 months a year (or at least I hope everyone does!). Such a system is very confusing - some months have 31 days, some 30, and the number of days in February change almost every four years! Most people learned and starting using this complicated date system at a very young age, so they face little or no problems with it. However programming a computer with such variable dates is a very difficult task indeed! Which is why we had to choose the simple way out: the Julian Date! In fact, the whole of science is about choosing the easy way out! But I digress... my apologies. On this web page I shall explain and apply Julian Dates (JD) in context with astronomical dating methods, although a JD is (I am told) a more general concept.
In astronomy, a JD is defined as the contiguous count of days from January 1, 4713 B.C., Greenwich Mean Noon (equal to zero hours Universal Time). The fraction of each day is represented as a decimal number. Hence noon (GMT) on January 2, 4713 B.C. would have JD 1.00000, 6.00 pm GMT on the same day would have JD 1.25000 and 6.00 hours Universal Time would have JD 2443509.75. Simple, right?
Well, not quite so simple. The irregularity of the conventional date system makes the date conversion formulae to find JD's rather tedious and complex. Being a sophomore at College, I am in no position to derive these formulae myself. The formulae used were given to me during our first semester Observational Astronomy Laboratory taught by Dr. G. McCook, Chair, Department of Astronomy, Villanova University. I simply wrote the JavaScript code that implements these formulae and lets the computer do the number crunching. After all, that's what computers are good at, right?
Also you may ask, what's so special about January 1, 4713 B.C.? Well, according to Kevin Bourque, this day was chosen because, amongst other reasons, it is the most recent day in which the year began on a Sunday with a full moon. In addition, Kenneth Silverstein points out that the Julian Day count was:
1) developed by Joseph Justus Scaliger in 1583 (1 year after the institution of the Gregorian calendar),
2) named by Joseph in honour of his father Julius Caesar Scaliger, and
3) day 1 was chosen as January 1, 4713 B.C. because the Julian Calendar, the Lunar Calendar (corresponding to Kevin Bourque's point) and the Roman Tax Calendar all coincided. This happens every 7,980 years, so the next coincidence will be in 3267 A.D.
According to one of my professors, there are hardly any scientific records of astronomical phenomena prior to that date anyway, so it seems like a good starting point. If anyone has further opinions, please let me know by e-mail!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,370 Likes: 31 |
What is the problem with first Sunday after the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox... Nothing, that's it. ...and after Pesach" (though I really think we're a bit past the problem of Judaizing, don't you think?)?It really doesn't matter which calendar you use because the equinox is the equinox. So, go to the new calendar, add a clause about Passover, and be done. The intent was NOT to look to the Jewish dating of Passover, in fact just the opposite: do not rely or depend on other such dates, in particular the Jewish reckoning of Passover. The Julian Calendar/Paschalion itself, before its accumulating error became large enough, had on a few instances Pascha before Passover. Let's all be honest and admit that the real reason is the new calendar was promulgated by a Roman pope. Well, indeed, you have said it. But from my perspective, it could have been promulgated by Bozo the Clown, and I would still prefer it because it is more accurate.
And please, don't confuse the Julian Calendar with Julian dating--some people have been known to make claims for the Julian calendar based on NASA's use of Julian dating, which is a format, not a calendar. We've been through this. Such erroneous claims, like the Passover before Pascha false assertion, have been discussed but they just get repeated. For the last go-round in this forum see link and links there in my post to the three threads that have preceded it. One will find the NASA and other claims corrected, with documentation, and then they are simply repeated as fact again and again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
Personally, I vastly prefer Benedict XVI to Bozo the Clown . . . but de gustibus non est disputandum, I suppose. Meanwhile since His Holiness manages to congratulate those of us who continue to celebrate Pascha on the Old Calendar, you might consider doing likewise.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,750 Likes: 28
John Member
|
|
John Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,750 Likes: 28 |
Personally, I vastly prefer Benedict XVI to Bozo the Clown . . . but de gustibus non est disputandum, I suppose. Meanwhile since His Holiness manages to congratulate those of us who continue to celebrate Pascha on the Old Calendar, you might consider doing likewise.
Fr. Serge Unfair and uncalled for. The discussion is a technical one. No one has refused Christian greetings to those on the Julian Calendar. I do not particular care what calendar is followed. And these days I generally worship in a parish that is on the Julian Calendar. But science is science. And the fact is that the Church authorities simply used the civil calendar of their day. One historical point that was not mentioned (or that I missed). The reason Nicea said to ignore the date of the Jewish Passover (the accounts all report "irregardless" not "after") is that the Jews themselves had a few calendars in use and all Jews did not celebrate Passover on the same date.
|
|
|
|
|
