www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Why do we not follow Orthodox Pascha?

Then there's that little phrase in ECI which requires Pascha to fall after Passover. We have seen (even recently) Western Pascha falling within Passover in the Gregorian reckoning, and not celebrated after as is mentioned in the Council.

And we have seen that certainly the Gregorian calendar has its imprecision as well, whatever arguments about one being slightly or more "precise" over the other aside.

Because of temporal inaccuracies and limitations of science in any calendar, as well as changes in the Jewish reckoning of Passover, it seems much more sensibile and objective to me to just call March 21st/April 3 as "good enough" and make it a standard for the date calculation as using the Orthodox convention Pascha will never fall before or during Passover.

In doing so there is also an implicit honoring of the Fathers of the First Council as well as great ecumenical value.

Actually, what you give is one specific interpretation of the little phrase - an interpretation that has some protagonists and some antagonists (linked in previous discussions here) - within Orthodoxy. What actually survives from EC1 is the letter of the Emperor that unambiguously favors the interpreatation "irrespective of the Jewish reckoning" rather than "after the celbration of Passover by the Jews". I would disagree totally. In the imediate aftermath of EC1 astronomical observations were used to determine the vernal equinox for setting the Paschal calendar. That is apperntly what was decided at EC1; to put that perspective aside and arbitrarily select a a date is an innovation that does violence to what was decided by the Fathers. And it is just odd, IMO, to hold that "vernal"equinox" does not mean vernal equinox, and instead to substitute arbitrarily some date on some calendar.

As to accuracy: I am happy to use the best observations and calculations in setting the Paschal calendar, but let's agree that while the approximations used in the Western reckoning lead to a "vernal equinox" that, from time to time, is off by a day from the astronomical event, this "inaccuracy" is scarcely comparable to the Eastern reckoning which never gets it right.

I'm still waiting for a theological or liturgical argument in support of the Gregorian Paschalion (try comparing it with the traditional Paschalion - it's an incredible mess).

Incognitus

It's very simple, we're not Orthodox--that should sum it up. :rolleyes:

Oh...now that's substantive! :rolleyes:

djs, you also "disagree totally" on the part about the importance of the ecumenical value? I in return disagree, as that seems a bit above the pale of Christian consideration of the received tradition of others.

I think that consideration alone, our ecumenical goal of eventual reunification with Orthodoxy, trumps any rationalist scientific renderings of arguable interpretations of the Fathers (this being said by someone who is a scientist). You have your interpretation of ECI, I have mine, others have theirs, and even within Orthodoxy, as you say, there is not agreement.

We know after the Council that March 21st was set and became the center for the Paschal reckoning. We know Pascha was calculated for many centuries based on that reckoning and continues to be, right or wrong. It is fact, it is praxis with over 90% of Eastern Christianity regardless of our own personal interpretations of the mind of the Fathers.

We know the Orthodox will not change their date of reckoning, nor should they in honoring the received tradition. Therefore, I have no problem whatsoever in the interests of ecumenism with my historical Mother Church honoring her general interpretation of the reckoning of Pascha and think we should do so post haste.

I did not in my reply and I do not in general.

If you do not recall from previous discussions, then let me say again, I whole heartily Chrysotom's remark that it is better to celebrate together on the "wrong" day, than be disunified.

I take exception, however, to the idea that there the Western date somehow violates canons of EC1. In reality the whole calendar change was a process that worked to maintain the prescriptions off EC1 without throwing off the usual connections between moveable and immovable feasts.

This is not true. The astronomical vernal equinox became the center of reckoning, and, owing to limitations of astronomical observations there was disagreement (March 18 vs. Mar 21) about the date in the immediate aftermath of EC1.

On the contrary there has been movement. Not only the Aleppo proposal, but also the acceptance of the Westen reckoning by EO's in Finland.

Overall, If my particular church used the Easatern reckoning I would accept it. As it happens it uses the Western reckoning. This has the ecumenical value of allowing concurrent celebration with the overwhelming majority of our fellow Catholic and Christian friends and neighbors. It also has the value of being faithful to the prescriptions deriving from EC1. I accept it, and son't see this as an issue worthy of further division.

Well, I suppose at one degree Kelvin there is also a movement of sorts. A similar amount of movement perhaps realistically exists towards any further Orthodox consideration.

No one outside of the Finns are taking any substantive steps towards an official movement away from the traditional reckoning of Pascha. There are all kinds of proposals on the table for all sorts of things. Not one canonical Orthodox council of bishops has even put it to a vote for consideration, not SCOBA, not anyone. I posit further that it is not even under serious consideration by any canonical Orthodox jurisdiction.

And traditional it is, whether we want to acknowledge it as such or not, with far longer use than the Gregorian.

I realize my Church only accepted this modern date you refer to very recently in its past, and even in the last century continued to celebrate on the same calendar as our mother Orthodox Churches.

The Greek Catholics came to this country in the 19th and early 20th centuries celebrating Julian Pascha. The burden of history and usage even for Greek Catholics is well on the side of the older reckoning of Pascha.

Therefore it is only sensible that we remove yet another stumbling block to that unity between ourselves and Orthodoxy desired not only by the Church but by the See as well.

John Paul II was quite willing to allow dioceses to take the Orthodox Pascha in countries with Orthodox majority to not be divisive. The Orthodox will likely not change. Anyone thinking so I believe may be bordering on naivety considering the internal Orthodox conflicts on this issue.

This issue will likely not be pushed within Orthodoxy, especially considering the bulk of converts seem to actually prefer more traditional usages.

I am far less concerned about perceptions from local RCs (which are spoken about so often but rarely materialize in a concrete way for us GCs) and far, far, far, more concerned about the eventual reunion with my mother Church and removing all unnecessary roadblocks to that reunification.

This is one that I can easily toss aside as unnecessary. We know Rome is all for us minimizing differences with the Orthodox (i.e. the Instruction and various other documents promulgated during the pontificate of JPII of blessed memory).

But I am not sure that I disagree with the statement that the Western Pascha explicitly violates ECI, either. If I did, I doubt in good conscience I could actually celebrate it on that day. I don't like to, but feel compelled to with my parish.

But there is a little more movement on the calendar. AFAIK a number of Orthodox juridictions have taken the bold step of shifting to the Western calendar for immovable feasts while retaining the traditional Eastern reckoning for moveable ones. This development strikes me as far more of an innovation than the adopting both the Western calendar and Pascha calculation.

I think that you probably overestimate the ecumenical value that shifting the date of pascha would have. The Orthodox who are most doctrinaire on the calendar probably have scant respect for us whatever we do. Interchurch discussion get heated not on the date of Pascha for the uniates, but on the our very existence.

I also think that honestly that a reversion of the calendar would be very tough for us - harder even than tweaking the prostopinije. Higher in priorities for me, anyway, are to restore vespers, matins, etc.

Absolutely, amin, amin, amin and that should be our focus, i.e. in restoring the lex orandi.

In my parish, however, I am confident that a majority would vote to adopt Orthodox Pascha if given the opportunity.

Merely relaying the pervasive attitude of the Pittsburgh metropolia from the past and today. We'd probably lose more people if we switched to celebrating Pascha with the Orthodox. I'd be all for celebrating with them, but I think that the hierarchs would never let it happen.

As to losing people, my experience is that in years when Easter and Pascha do not coincide we have a notably greater attendance on Pascha than we have in years when the two do coincide.

Incognitus

Incognitus--

Yes, but I fear that we'd have the attitude that, "Easter was already. Why do I need to celebrate it again?"

As for losing people---I meant losing them more permanently, as "it's too hard not to celebrate holidays with everyone else."

BTW...these are both real quotes that I have heard regarding keeping Pascha on the traditional calendar.

John writes: "Yes, but I fear that we'd have the attitude that, "Easter was already. Why do I need to celebrate it again?"

First of all, that's an excellent reason to use the correct term - PASCHA - for our celebration. "Easter" is the name of a minor teutonic deity. Second, it will of course require catechesis and patience; I don't advocate simply decreeing the return to the Orthodox Paschalia as of tomorrow at 8:32 AM.

As for losing people---I meant losing them more permanently, as "it's too hard not to celebrate holidays with everyone else."

The answer to that is, first, who ever claimed that Christianity was easy? Second, who is "everyone else"? Easter is rapidly ceasing to be of secular importance on any calendar. Third, wherein lies the hardship? People are free to attend any church they wish; ours does things at certain times and in certain ways. Others also do things at certain times and in certain ways. Even the civil law allows the adherents of various religions a limited right to a number of religious holidays.

Incognitus

Incognitus, I agree with you 100% on all your comments. Celebrating Pascha on the Orthodox calendar should make it MORE meaningful, as all the secular garbage is over and all you can focus on is the true meaning! All we ever hear is "easter" at my parish unfortunately. And as for "who is everyone else?" It's the real Catholics of course! :p Rather than revising the Liturgy, our energy should be more focused on restoring things we've lost or disgarded first. Returning to our orignal Paschalion is an easy one, and should have been done by now.