To: NRx
“”if the Church of Rome intends to abandon Easter according to the Gregorian calendar, introduced in the sixteenth century, and go back to the old one (Julian), used at a time when the Church of the East and West were united and used to date by the Orthodox, then this intention is welcome”. If, instead, the idea is to “have a fixed date for Easter and not tie it to the first full moon after the spring equinox, as established in the East and in the West by the Council of Nicaea in 325, then this proposal is totally unacceptable to the Orthodox Church
The Greeks will concur as will, I expect, the Arabs and the Ethiopians.
3 posted on
06/16/2015 11:15:23 AM PDT by
Kolokotronis
(Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
To: Kolokotronis
if the Church of Rome intends to abandon Easter according to the Gregorian calendar, introduced in the sixteenth century, and go back to the old one (Julian), used at a time when the Church of the East and West were united and used to date by the Orthodox, then this intention is welcome. If, instead, the idea is to have a fixed date for Easter and not tie it to the first full moon after the spring equinox, as established in the East and in the West by the Council of Nicaea in 325, then this proposal is totally unacceptable to the Orthodox Church
The latter is totally unacceptable to me as well. I don't see why we should change a 3.5 millenium* old feast to accommodate the secular world. The only change that I think is acceptable is computing the date w.r.t to Holy Saturday rather than Easter Sunday as Holy Saturday was the first day of the Crucifixion Passover.
*I am counting from the first Passover as it is the predecessor feast
17 posted on
06/17/2015 4:36:40 PM PDT by
ronnietherocket3
(Mary is understood by the heart, not study of scripture.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson