The following table for 2019 shows how absurd the Julian Paschalion is....
Right, even though, and also especially, since it's only one week off. This highlights the lunar error since only one of the two, 18-19 vs. 23 can be factual and, coming close together, can be verified in a one week time frame -- look up at the sky and you can see for yourself. When the solar error dominates, the equinox is missed, and the difference is around a month, it's possible that the moon phase could be correct (though of course it's not the "vernal" moon).
Old Calendar zealots have the Church, especially the Orthodox, in a bind with fears of schism. There are those right up to the present Pope who (I would hope they are poorly informed.) may think the best solution is to scrap the Paschalion/computus for a fixed Sunday, thereby abandoning the link to Scripture, tradition, the historical moment and the grand celestial and unique yearly event of the two great lights aligned with the first day of creation and the eighth day, the day of Resurrection: the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater for the sake of (I would say false) unity and practicality. The scientific, "full astronomical" approach has its inherent problems and it is more a possible face-saving device for the Orthodox via Milanković-sans-computus, and therein, though well-intentioned, its deficiency: it's a necessarily over-specified computational overkill that radically reinterprets the canon.
Given the computational power of even our personal computers, it would be interesting to redo the Gregorian reform using the abundant data available today, e.g. Jet Propulsion Laboratory Development Ephemeris. One could produce a, for instance least-squares, error solution covering spans of years incrementally increasing to check the stability and wanted accuracy, using various leap year rules -- say the top three, Persian, Milanković, Gregorian -- or a floating one that readjusts after an accumulated error that exceeds 0.5 day. My hunch is that when all the trade-offs are taken into account, for a solar-lunar calendar with computus, the Gregorian reform (It probably could be tweaked a bit.) would be the choice.
#418953 03/06/1902:11 AM03/06/1902:11 AM
I think it was you, or some other Forum wit, who posted images of the Gregorian full moon and the Julian full moon. In any event, I'd enjoy seeing it again for I feel it illustrates perfectly, and rather humorously, the whole ridiculous conundrum.
AS I recall it was Mockingbird but here is one look: Compare a full moon on APR 18-19 giving Pascha on the APR 21 versus the Julian full moon on APR 23 giving Pascha on APR 28.
While the full moon is understood as the resultant indicator and so used in the astronomical method, it is a departure from the primitive prescription of Scripture and as attributed to Nicaea. It is the new moon that is the determinator, and then mark the fourteenth day of the moon. This is practical for two reasons: It's more difficult to determine fullness and if missed the event is past whereas the new moon is on off-on observation for which there are then 14 days exactly provided to prepare for the feast. The computus was a required sophistication that allowed the extended preparation time needed by the 40 days Great Fast.
The following table for 2019 shows how absurd the Julian Paschalion is.
Astronomical full moon 2019: April 19 Gregorian 14 Nisan: April 18 Samaritan 14 Nisan: April 18 Rabbinic 14 Nisan: April 19 Julian 14 Nisan: April 23
All these values agree to within a day except for the Julian value. This Astronomical full moon in April, however, is not the Astronomical vernal full moon which occurred (Jerusalem) 21-MAR-2019. This is an example where the modern scientific calculation is at odds with traditional methods. Except for the Julian, the traditional methods in this example are legitimate predictors, as is the astronomical, when each is evaluated according to its methodology and actual correspondence with sun and moon events.
This year, 2019, is also the one and only year where the Gregorian and astronomical disagree in the 25 example-years (see table) compared in the WCC-Aleppo document Towards a Common Date for Easter. Entries in the right-most column are the 17 in 25 years where the Julian does not agree with the Astronomical and Gregorian. (source)
Of special note is 2013 where Julian Easter was 5-MAY missing not only the actual 31-MAR date based on the 27-MAR full moon, but also not getting the Sunday 21-APR-2013 date following the 19-APR-2013 full moon, thereby missing, by an additional 2 weeks, a second chance to get something right. This Julian approach that has lost all factual correspondence with nature and thus the Scriptural events of Passover and Passion, and the rule accepted as evolving from the first council of Nicaea, is the one being considered by Pope Francis since at least 2015. This Julian paschalion is to be used, I presume, with a fixed civil (i.e. Gregorian) calendar thus also ensuring the debacle encountered with the same approach using the Orthodox Revised Julian Calendar.
This " brilliant solution" when realized permits the Orthodox "Historian Pavel Kuznekov" to conclude that "Catholics of the Holy Land changed directly over to our Orthodox Paschalia, returning to the tradition they had departed from in the sixteenth century—admitting by this that the main task in creating the Gregorian calendar is recognized as not having been satisfactorily completed." (link).
The Byzantine Forum provides
message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though
discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are
those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the
Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the
www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial,
have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as
a source for official information for any Church. All posts become
property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights