[orthodoxia.i.thanatos]

În prealabil postat de BogdanF2

Mai, eu nu zic ca stiu mai bine. Eu sunt de acord ca calendarul nu trebuia schimbat. Insa pe de alta parte nici nu pot sa fiu de acord cu concluziile tale aberante. N-a stabilit oare un Sinod Ecumenic sa se sarbatoreasca Sf. Paste odata de toti crestinii? Si totusi, se pare ca asta nu s-a intamplat pentru multe sute de ani dupa Sf. Sinod: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter#Date_of_Easter

"In the years following the council, the computational system that was worked out by the church of Alexandria came to be normative. It took a while for the Alexandrian rules to be adopted throughout Christian Europe, however. The Church of Rome continued to use an 84-year lunisolar calendar cycle from the late third century until 457. The Church of Rome continued to use its own methods until the 6th century, when it may have adopted the Alexandrian method as converted into the Julian calendar by Dionysius Exiguus (certain proof of this does not exist until the ninth century). Early Christians in Britain and Ireland also used a late third century Roman 84-year cycle. This was replaced by the Alexandrian method in the course of the 7th and 8th centuries. Churches in western continental Europe used a late Roman method until the late 8th century during the reign of Charlemagne, when they finally adopted the Alexandrian method. However, with the adoption of the Gregorian calendar by the Catholic Church in 1582 and the continuing use of the Julian calendar by Eastern Orthodox and most Oriental Orthodox Churches, the date on which Easter is celebrated again deviated, and the divergence continues to this day."

Si uite ca totusi nu a pierdut nimeni Harul din cauza asta. Vezi tu, chiar si daca un Sinod Ecumenic da o anatema, ea nu se aplica automat si imediat a doua zi ce se ratacesc unii. Cu atat mai mult cred ca e valabil asta pentru anateme date de sinoade mai mici. Nu omul ia Harul, ci Dumnezeu. Iar Dumnezeu nu asculta de oameni, ci oamenii de Dumnezeu.

Din ceea ce ai scris ar rezulta ca au existat Biserici care s-au opus adoptarii pascaliei Alexandrine sau au intirziat deliberat sute ade ani adoptarea acesteia.

N-a fost deloc cazul asa cum sugerezi. La Consiliu Ecumenic de Nicaea nu s-a stabilit exact cum sa se faca calculul, daca in functie de ciclul de 19 ani sau nu. A trebuit sa treaca o vreme pina cind, sub puterea Duhului Sfint, teologii si Sfintii au realizat care a fost intentia Sfintilor Parinti de la Nicaea si au ajuns la acord pretutindeni in Biserica Catolica (Ortodoxa). Vezi mai jos ce are de spus Ips Petru cu privire la acest subiect pe siteul OCA:

"However, the council did not enter into details of the method of calculation and, therefore, did not impose the use of the nineteen-year cycle. As Professor D.M. Ogitsky correctly notes, a detailed and exhaustive ordering of all the technical aspects of the computation of Pascha (including the problems raised by the inexactness of the Julian calendar was not in the competence of the council. [55]

However, little by little the idea was introduced that the Alexandrian cycle of nineteen years had been sanctioned by the fathers of Nicea. It seems that this was already the opinion of St. Ambrose. 56] This belief was definitively implanted by the beginning of the sixth century. Dionysius Exiguus affirmed in no uncertain terms that the cycle in question had been established by the fathers of Nicea non tam pertitia saeculari quam Sancti Spiritus illustratione. [57] In the seventh century, the author of the Chronicon Paschale maintained that this cycle, which he called "admirable and worthy of eternal memory," had been adopted by the first ecumenical council under divine inspiration. [58] Dionysius’ influence in the West was such that the cycle of nineteen years spread everywhere; by the reign of Charlemagne, it had been imposed on the whole of Latin Christianity. From then on, there was complete agreement about the date of Pascha between the Latin West and the Byzantine East. This situation was maintained until 1582 when the Roman Catholic Church introduced the Gregorian calendar. "

(http://www.oca.org/Docs.asp?ID=133&SID=12)