Posted on 05/06/2015 6:13:49 AM PDT by marshmallow
Amsterdam (Agenzia Fides) - The debate on the opportunity to unify the dates of the liturgical solemnities currently celebrated on different days from different Churches and communities, is "a historical problem" that in itself does not have implications of faith and doctrine.
This is why the proposal to unify the Easter date for all Christian Churches "on the third Sunday of April" is being studied. This is what Patriarch Tawadros II said during a meeting with young people which took place on Sunday, May 3 at the Coptic Cultural Centre in Amsterdam, in the context of the visit carried out by Pope Tawadros in the Netherlands and in other European countries.
The solicitation to unify Easter - had already been expressed by the Coptic Patriarch in a letter sent in May 2014 to Pope Francis, on the occasion of the first anniversary of their meeting at the Vatican (see Fides 07/05/2014).
(Excerpt) Read more at fides.org ...
This would take a lot of thought and prayer. Personally, I’m skeptical. Changing the rules for Easter to a somewhat arbitrary date is too much like saying the historical date does not matter.
If we want to unify, I’d rather agree to unify by holding Easter on the day after the Jews recognize Passover. At least that has a clear, accurate, and unambiguous connection to scripture. That is the date on which the events occurred.
There was a clear unambiguous date agreed upon at the first ecumenical council
The historical date is also arbitrary. Are there Roman records that indicate the date?
At the time they agreed, that agreement produced a clear, unambiguous date. That date now has ambiguity, and these people want to unify the churches. My impression is that you object to changing the date. I object also, but I see some value in unification. That will not happen if our position is that Eastern churches must take our date. I do not consider it reasonable to divorce the date from the lunar calendar. If we want to unify, I think the best option is a "minor" modification to the method from the first ecumenical council.
I may eventually decide that you are right, but I think we should give the date some consideration before choosing between tradition and a unification that would not compromise any key doctrine.
>At the time they agreed, that agreement produced a clear, unambiguous date.
>That date now has ambiguity
That’s not true.
The date is not ambiguous at all.
>(unification) will not happen if our position is that Eastern churches must take our date.
Not true either.
It’s entirely possible to unify based on the original agreed upon date.
I’d argue that the fact that it was already agreed upon makes it a more likely candiate for unification around than any other date.
If I recall correctly, the date for celebrating Easter was adjusted at some point in order to celebrate Holy Week during a full moon.
One important detail is that the original agreed upon date used the Julian calendar. Orthodox Christians still use that calendar in their calculation, so their date is based on the original agreement. When the churches split, in 1054 AD, we both kept the same date and calendar, so Easter matched for the next 300+ years.
When we changed to the Gregorian calendar, in 1582 AD, we changed our calculation to use the original formula but with the new calendar. They continued using the original formula, with the original calendar. It is reasonable to argue (as they do) that they are following the original agreement, and we are not.
The date for Easter (Holy Pascha) is fixed by church canons. It would require an Ecumenical Synod to change that.
Of course it’s purely coincidental, but the first Ecumenical Synod in almost seven hundred years is scheduled to convene in 2016.
>It is reasonable to argue (as they do) that they are following the original agreement, and we are not.
I completely disagree.
“... the first Ecumenical Synod in almost seven hundred years is scheduled to convene in 2016.”
Are you sure? The representatives of the Bishop of Rome will be participating? That’s news, good news, but news nevertheless.
Am I wrong on which calendar was in use under the original agreement or on some other aspect of the history? Or am I wrong in suggesting that it is reasonable to continue using the calendar that was in effect at the time of that decision?
maybe i misunderstood who “they” and “we” were in that sentence.
““... the first Ecumenical Synod in almost seven hundred years is scheduled to convene in 2016.”
Are you sure? The representatives of the Bishop of Rome will be participating? That’s news, good news, but news nevertheless.”
The Pope of Rome seems to be a nice guy, but he is not Orthodox. His presence is not required. Neither he, nor his representatives were present at 9th Council either.
“The Pope of Rome seems to be a nice guy, but he is not Orthodox. His presence is not required. Neither he, nor his representatives were present at 9th Council either.”
And without the Bishop Of Rome, how will there be an Ecumenical Council? Who, other than some in the Western press, claim this council will be an “Ecumenical” council? The “Oecumene” still includes the West, NRx, despite what Fr. Romanides, of blessed memory, and his followers may have thought.
The Copts are reaching out to every Christian group, it’s really stunning to see how closely they are working with evangelicals in Egypt. They hosted a joint “Night of Prayer” 3 years ago when 50,000-70,000 people showed up at the open air (an abandoned old quarry) Church of the Cave in Cairo to pray for their country. They have come out of their churches and are active and very visible in the streets, which may have something to do with ISIS especially targeting them. If you want to see joyous christians, check them out:
10 minutes of 70,000 Arabic-speaking Christians yelling “Jesus! Jesus! Jesus! (”Yesuah!”):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwCr3GNYBag
Music clip from the “Night of prayer.” They gathered at 6 pm and kept going until sunrise:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTU-MwzZWhY
The Arab countries are undergoing big changes, the church in Algeria is growing rapidly, There is persecution, but there is also growth happening.
The Council is being convened under the authority of His All Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and New Rome with the agreement of all the local churches. Councils are not Ecumenical because the Pope says they are. There have been plenty of Councils ratified by the Pope that we do not recognize. Councils are Ecumenical because the Church receives them as such. It remains to be seen if this will be received as the tenth or not.
The Pope of Rome is not Orthodox. The Primacy of Old Rome has devolved upon the See of Constantinople until such time as Rome returns to the Church. That is not a position unique to Fr. Romanides and Old Calendarists.
Sorry. I was not clear.
One important detail is that the original agreed upon date used the Julian calendar. Orthodox Christians still use that calendar in their calculation, so their date is based on the original agreement. When the churches split, in 1054 AD, all Christians kept the same date and calendar, so Easter matched for the next 300+ years.
When the western churches changed to the Gregorian calendar, in 1582 AD, the western churches changed their calculation to use the original formula but with the new calendar. The eastern churches continued using the original formula, with the original calendar. It is reasonable to argue (as the eastern churches do) that the eastern churches are following the original agreement, and the western churches are not.
Note: My intention is not to argue for one position or the other. I had not considered this issue before, and my goal is to understand the issue through informed discussion. In no way am I claiming to know the correct scriptural, spiritual, or traditional answer.
I would like all the Apostolic churches to be able to be more united. Just tell me which day is Easter and I’ll be there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.