Regarding “calendar questions, comments” made in this topic, the following is presented:
Verbatim quotes from the book The Calendar Question, by Reverend Basile Sakkas, translated by Holy Transfiguration Monastery.
(Emphases are mine)
Quote:
“OUR ADVERSARIES pretend that the calendar “is not a dogma”, thus leaving it to be understood that one can do with it what one pleases.
Is the question of the calendar truly one of dogma?
Does the wearing of a beard, or a rassa (garment) denote a dogmatical action?
The Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary gave birth in time to the Timeless One, our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ. That is an established dogma.
It would seem appropriate that the entire Orthodox Church (since it is one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic) would celebrate the Birth of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ –
ON THE SAME DAY.
Sadly, this does not happen.
Why does this not happen one may ask?
After all, this is a most important Feast of the Orthodox Church.
The “reason” that all who call themselves Orthodox do not celebrate this most joyous Feast, which has a 40-day fast prescribe prior to the Feast itself, is that a “new” calendar has been, for lack of a more polite term, “introduced”.
In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII the reform of the calendar was passed. This act made October 4th now October 14th. Thus Gregorian calendar was initiated. The calendar used up until that time was known as the Julian calendar, named after Julius Caesar.
In 1924, the then Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople instituted the “new” calendar in Greece (quite forcefully one may add) so that the difference now measured 13 days as opposed to just 10 with Pope Gregory’s calendar.
“THE HOLY APOSTLE commands us saying,
“Hold fast the traditions which ye have received, whether by word of mouth or through an epistle of ours.” (2 Thes. 11:15).
These words were the exact words used by the Blessed Metropolitan Philaret, in the introduction of the book The Calendar Question.
He goes on to state,
“These condemnations (three condemnations of the Gregorian Calendar enacted by Pan-Orthodox councils in the 16th century and the Pan-Orthodox condemnation of modernism last century presided over by Patriarch Anthemus) were never lifted by any later council –they still stand and are binding for all Orthodox Christians.”
It would seem proper that if an Apostle actually commands something, then it should be obeyed.
This is obviously not the case; at least in this case.
Consider the following:
A. The Condemnation of the Papal New Calendar in 1583.
In the work Ecclesiastical History, written by Metropolitan Meletius of Athens (published in Austria, 1784. Ch. XI, p. 402) we read:
Council of Jerusalem convoked because of the New Calendar. During the reign of the same Patriarch Jeremy, a Council of Metropolitans was convoked in Constantinople in 1583, with Sylvester, Patriarch of Alexandria, also being in attendance.
This Council condemned the calendar which had been introduced by Gregory of Rome, and did not accept it, as the Latins had requested.
According to the Codex Manuscript (#772) of the Russian Monastery of St. Panteleimon on Mount Athos, we learn of the sigillium issued by this council:
The sigillium of the Patriarchal Encyclical to the Orthodox Christians in every land commands them under the punishment and anathema not to accept the new Paschalion or the new calendar but to remain wuth that which was well defined once and for all by the 318 Holy and God-bearing Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council.
In the year of the God-Man, 1583,
12th Indiction, November 20
The Patriarch of Constantinople, Jeremy II
The Patriarch of Alexandria, Sylvester
The Patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius
And the other hierarchs of the Council who were present.
2. The Second Condemnation of the New Calendar in 1587.
In the Ecclesiastical History (Constantinople 1912. Vol. III., p. 125), written by Philaret Baphides, Metropolitan Of Didymotichon, we read a confirmation of the condemnation of 1583 and moreover:
“Likewise in 1587, a council at Constantinople was convoked where, in the presence of Jeremy II, Meletius Pegas and Sophronius of Jerusalem, the correction of the calendar was condemned as being perilous and unnecessary and as being, rather, the cause of many dangers.”
3. The Third Condemnation of the New Calendar in 1593.
This Council took place in February, 1593, in the Holy Church of the Mother of God of Consolation. In its Eighth Canon, it prescribes the following concerning the change of the calendar:
“Concerning the rejection of the new calendar, that is, the innovation of the Latins regarding the celebration of Pascha. We wish that that which has been decreed by the Fathers concerning Holy and Salutary Pascha remain unshaken …
Let all those who have dared to transgress the definitions regarding the Holy Feast of the Salutary Pascha be excommunicated and rejected from the Church of Christ.”
According to Polycarp, Bishop of Diaulia (Cf. The Change of the Calendar. Athens, 1947 p. 13)
“…in 1593, a Council of the Orthodox Churches was convoked where the four patriarchs, the plenipotentiary of the Russian Church and many other Orthodox hierarchs representing the Orthodox churches participated.
This Council reiterated the excommunication of the Most Holy Patriarch Jeremy II and issued an encyclical which, among other things, stated the following:
"He that does not follow the customs of the Church which were decreed by the Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils which have ordained well that we observe the Holy Pascha and the Menologion, and wishes to follow the new Paschalia and Menologion of the Pope’s astronomers, and, opposing himself to all these things, wishes to overturn and destroy them, let him be anathema and outside of the Church of Christ and the assembly of the faithful…”
D. The Requirements of Sacred Tradition.
“Let him that transgresses the ecclesiastical traditions be deposed” (Canon No. 7 of the Seventh Ecumenical Council).
Of the doctrine and preaching which are preserved in the Church, some we possess derived from written doctrine, others we have received delivered to us “in secret” (en mysterio) by the tradition of the Apostles; and both of these have the same validity and force as regards piety.
And these no one contradicts – no one, at all events, who is even moderately versed in the institutions of the Church.
For were we to attempt to reject such customs as have no written authority, on the ground that the importance that they possess is small, we would unintentionally harm the Gospel in its vitals; or, rather, would make our preaching mere words and nothing more (St. Basil, On the Holy Spirit 27:66; also Canon 91 of St. Basil the Great).
It should be required reading of all Orthodox Christians to learn this entire Canon by heart.
The 92nd Canon of the same Saint confirms the above and also recalls the words of the divine Apostle:
“Hold fast the traditions which ye have received, whether by word of mouth or through an epistle of ours” (2 Thes. 2:15).
Behold, therefore, why we adhere to the calendar of the Fathers:
Not because it is “Julian”,
but because it has become “Ecclesiastical” and has always been the pulse of the Body of our most Holy Church.
We keep this calendar because it is the one which we have received from the Fathers.
The calendar of the West has been transmitted to us by no one.
We keep this calendar because it was with this one that the Martyrs shed their blood, and our Fathers and Mothers in the Faith burned like living candles in their ascetical discipline.
We keep this calendar of our Fathers because, according to the principle stated by St. Vincent of Lerins, it is the only one which has been used “always, everywhere, by all.”
We keep this calendar because, if our Fathers were not upset by its inaccuracies, why should we become upset?
We keep this calendar because, even if it is “erroneous, irregular, obsolete and antiquated,”
“Yet it is also patristic, orthodox, sanctified, ecclesiastical, lived and celebrated at the same time by the whole Church, both in heaven and on earth.”
Unquote
If someone can accurately and precisely explain,
Exactly why was the "new calendar" "introduced?
What, in fact, was the Orthodox "basis" behind its "introduction"?
Has the "new calendar's" "introduction" somehow furthered "unity" among Orthodox Christians"?
John
