Will Pope Francis change the date of Easter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter conRep12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

conRep12

Guest
catholicnewsagency.com/news/will-pope-francis-change-the-date-of-easter-87684/

The linked article discusses the possibility of the pope changing the date of Easter as a step toward unity and solidarity with the Eastern (especially the persecuted) Christians. I’m not sure what I think of this I guess. I’m not too much up on the history of the Western nor Eastern calculation of Easter. To me, it seems to somehow delegitimize the Western traditions surrounding the celebration of Easter and to accommodate the inferior Julian calendar, which because of its flaw is now 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar. Also, the Gregorian calendar is one of the most well known, ubiquitous, and even secularly-utilized legacies of one of our popes. So what do you all think of this idea?
 
I hope he doesn’t change the date.

Currently we’re more in sync with Passover, which is the week Jesus died, than the Orthodox.

If anything, they should be looking at changing to the same date as the Catholic Church.

Jim
 
Not only that, but the Council of Nicaea was very clear. Easter is the first Sunday, after the first full moon after the vernal equinox.

The last two are very precise astronomical events that are independent of how we count the dates, and both Churches agree on the day of the week.😛

It would be a very simple matter to agree on what Nicaea states.

The problem enters in that the Churches do not use the astronomical event to actually determine the vernal equinox, but a calendar date. The Gregorian calendar does match up, but the astronomical equinox does not occur on the date specified in the Julian calendar.

Ergo, there is a discrepancy.

If both Churches would rely on the astronomical event instead of a calendar date, there would be an agreed upon date for Easter.

The last remaining thing to discuss would be a date ime median. If the vernal equinox occurred at 11:58pm GMT on a Saturday, and the moon achieved fullness at 11:59pm GMT, does that mean that the following Sunday is Easter?

The obvious choice WOULD be GMT, but a case could be made for Jerusalem being the defining meridian (define the day as relative to Jerusalem, not to London)
 
My cursory research seems to point to the whole purpose of the Gregorian calendar being the correction of the error in the dating of Easter that was caused by the Julian calendar’s inaccuracy over the centuries. We may have the newer calendar, but it’s accuracy means we celebrate Easter closer to the time of year that the early Church celebrated it.

As far as Passover, my cursory research into its significance to Christians seems to be answered at the Council of Nicaea when the Church purposefully separated the calculation of Easter from reliance on the Jewish calendar. In fact at the council, some Christians thought the Jewish calculation of the 14th of Nisan had begun to shift due to inaccuracies in the Jewish calendar that placed the 14th of Nisan on a day prior to the spring equinox when it had always fallen after.
 
conRep12 said:
catholicnewsagency.com/news/will-pope-francis-change-the-date-of-easter-87684/

The linked article discusses the possibility of the pope changing the date of Easter as a step toward unity and solidarity with the Eastern (especially the persecuted) Christians. I’m not sure what I think of this I guess. I’m not too much up on the history of the Western nor Eastern calculation of Easter. To me, it seems to somehow delegitimize the Western traditions surrounding the celebration of Easter and to accommodate the inferior Julian calendar, which because of its flaw is now 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar. Also, the Gregorian calendar is one of the most well known, ubiquitous, and even secularly-utilized legacies of one of our popes. So what do you all think of this idea?
Click to expand...
I think it is a great idea for several reasons. One is that the date we celebrate Easter on is a discipline, not a doctrine, and therefore can be changed for the better if good enough reasons are given. A second reason is that I think it could promote unity. In my opinion, promoting unity is a greater good than promoting the more scientific calendar established by Pope Gregory XIII. In my opinion, promoting scientific accuracy and the tradition of Pope Gregory XIII is also a good thing, but promoting unity is better.

A third reason is due to the different ways the Orthodox churches and the Catholic churches view disciplines. My understanding is that the Orthodox do not believe they can change a discipline set by an ecumenical council unless a new ecumenical council makes the change. But in the Catholic Church, it is my understanding that a pope can change the disciplinary decisions of ecumenical councils. Thus, it is easier for us to change our discipline in order to make the Orthodox happy than it is for them to make a corresponding gesture.
 
Vatican II had a special declaration about the date of Easter, but nothing really came of it.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
Vatican II:
A DECLARATION OF THE SECOND ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN ON REVISION OF THE CALENDAR

The Second Ecumenical Sacred Council of the Vatican, recognizing the importance of the wishes expressed by many concerning the assignment of the feast of Easter to a fixed Sunday and concerning an unchanging calendar, having carefully considered the effects which could result from the introduction of a new calendar, declares as follows:
  1. The Sacred Council would not object if the feast of Easter were assigned to a particular Sunday of the Gregorian Calendar, provided that those whom it may concern, especially the brethren who are not in communion with the Apostolic See, give their assent.
  2. The sacred Council likewise declares that it does not oppose efforts designed to introduce a perpetual calendar into civil society.
But among the various systems which are being suggested to stabilize a perpetual calendar and to introduce it into civil life, the Church has no objection only in the case of those systems which retain and safeguard a seven-day week with Sunday, without the introduction of any days outside the week, so that the succession of weeks may be left intact, unless there is question of the most serious reasons. Concerning these the Apostolic See shall judge.
Click to expand...
 
conRep12 said:
catholicnewsagency.com/news/will-pope-francis-change-the-date-of-easter-87684/

The linked article discusses the possibility of the pope changing the date of Easter as a step toward unity and solidarity with the Eastern (especially the persecuted) Christians. I’m not sure what I think of this I guess. I’m not too much up on the history of the Western nor Eastern calculation of Easter. To me, it seems to somehow delegitimize the Western traditions surrounding the celebration of Easter and to accommodate the inferior Julian calendar, which because of its flaw is now 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar. Also, the Gregorian calendar is one of the most well known, ubiquitous, and even secularly-utilized legacies of one of our popes. So what do you all think of this idea?
Click to expand...
This “news” is four months old. Look at the date on the CNA report. It was the subject of a fairly extensive thread here at CAF at the time.
 
As I think I said then, synchronizing Easter to the Jerusalem meridian would eliminate the “issue” and would have the further advantage that the Jerusalem Holy Fire would then be shared by both traditions.

ICXC NIKA.
 
dmar198 said:
I think it is a great idea for several reasons. One is that the date we celebrate Easter on is a discipline, not a doctrine, and therefore can be changed for the better if good enough reasons are given. A second reason is that I think it could promote unity. In my opinion, promoting unity is a greater good than promoting the more scientific calendar established by Pope Gregory XIII. In my opinion, promoting scientific accuracy and the tradition of Pope Gregory XIII is also a good thing, but promoting unity is better.

A third reason is due to the different ways the Orthodox churches and the Catholic churches view disciplines. My understanding is that the Orthodox do not believe they can change a discipline set by an ecumenical council unless a new ecumenical council makes the change. But in the Catholic Church, it is my understanding that a pope can change the disciplinary decisions of ecumenical councils. Thus, it is easier for us to change our discipline in order to make the Orthodox happy than it is for them to make a corresponding gesture.
Click to expand...
I guess I understand this, but the problem isn’t exactly that we calculate the date of Easter differently; it’s that the Julian calendar is inaccurate and causes the calculation of Orthodox Easter to place the date ever later in the year. The Gregorian calendar helps to fix the date during the time of year it was celebrated by the first Christians before the Jewish and Julian calendars began to have a noticeable shift in the date of the spring equinox. I don’t think the adoption of the Gregorian calendar would be proscribed by the Orthodox attachment to the disciplines of the Council of Nicaea. The Western date seems to be the more consonant with the early Church.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
I hope he doesn’t change the date.

Currently we’re more in sync with Passover, which is the week Jesus died, than the Orthodox.

If anything, they should be looking at changing to the same date as the Catholic Church.

Jim
Click to expand...
I agree with you. It should be close to the time of Passover.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top