This post was originally published on this site
Just two months ago, at the end of November, global news organizations paid attention — like Christians from various traditions — as His Holiness Pope Leo and His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew met in Türkiye to mark the 1700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea. Although commentators predictably focused on the recitation of the Nicaean-Constantinopolitan Creed by both hierarchs as historically significant, at the level of everyday Christian life, another issue is actually of more importance and has been discussed by leaders of the two churches.
Indeed, the First Ecumenical Council held in Nicaea in 325AD laid down the objective and the method for determining the celebration of the Resurrection of Christ for all Christians. To this end, a group of theologians met in Boston at the invitation of the Huffington Ecumenical Institute at Holy Cross School of Theology with a view to looking beyond the recitation of the Creed and drawing the attention of both Orthodox and Catholic Christians to the issue of the calendar and the most accurate evidence we have of how, when, and why Pascha, or the celebration of Easter should occur.
The statement they adopted, that follows here, begins by noting that the Council of Nicaea decreed that Pascha is to be celebrated universally on the first Sunday following the first spring (vernal) full moon. But as everyone knows, Christians of the Western tradition and those of the Orthodox East only occasionally celebrate on the same Sunday. The Statement, intended as an educational tool, attempts to provide a concise account of why the calendar issue has not been resolved, proposing concrete steps that can be taken, especially here in North America, to move toward a resolution. It is a subject of growing interest not only among so-called ecumenical marriages and families, but also for those committed to the genuine mind of the patristic tradition. We hope that readers across all levels — clergy and parishioners, as well as seminarians and faithful — will study and reflect on this statement.
A Statement by Orthodox Clergy and Theologians
On January 24, 2025, at the initiative and invitation of the Huffington Ecumenical Institute at HCHC, a group of Orthodox Christian theologians from across the United States met at Holy Cross Orthodox School of Theology for a colloquium to discuss various issues related to a common date for the celebration of Easter. The statement builds on the occasion last year marking the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea that laid down the objective and method for determining the celebration of the Feast of the Resurrection.
Celebrating Pascha Today
That first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea decreed that Easter is to be celebrated universally on the first Sunday following the first spring (vernal) full moon. The coincidence of these historic celebrations provided a unique platform to reflect on our often-fractious past and a rare invitation to explore a number ofrelated issues.
It would be tempting, albeit illusory, to compare the challenges facing Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches at the beginning of the twenty-first century with those facing the Council of Nicaea in the early fourth century. Scholars across religious traditions and academic disciplines have offered a deeper understanding and appreciation of the rich diversity that characterized pre-Nicaean Christianity, including on the question of the celebration of Easter.
An Ecumenical Council
Theologians have alerted us to an unintended consequence of the Council of Nicaea’s efforts to establish unity in its commemoration. The council was ecumenical in two senses. On the one hand, from an historical perspective, Nicaea was an imperial council, summoned by the emperor for the sake ofadvancing the empire’s unity. On the other hand, from a theological perspective, the Church received the council as charismatically expressing its mind under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit, destined to advance the Church’s mission in the broader world.
Through the centuries, whether in the East or West, the relationship between civil and ecclesiastical authority was collaborative and symbiotic, although not uncomplicated or undisputed. Today, we live in a post-Constantinian era, even if some remain beguiled by nostalgia for imperial structures that once sheltered us, but which invariably also stifled our capacity for adaptation. Today, we are invited to imagine a post-imperial church, not as a grandiose monolith, but as intimate and interactive as an extended household.
Ecumenical Impetus
The ecumenical movement of the twentieth century encouraged Orthodox involvement in efforts to search for a common date for Pascha. The 1997 Aleppo Statement was arguably the most noteworthy and groundbreaking such achievement. In the twenty-first century, with the global expansion of Christianity, Orthodox Christians are invited to explore not only the ecumenical significance of a search for a common celebration of Easter, but also its interfaith implications and consequences. Moreover, it is time to consider our relationship with fellow Christians in the developing countries of sub-Saharan Africa, southeast Asia, and elsewhere in what used to be called the Third World.
In their encounter with people of different religions and cultures, Orthodox Christians in Western nations have become more tolerant and respectful. In these encounters, they have also learned to avoid communicating with an air of superiority or colonialism. However, given this ecumenical and interfaith impetus, why has the search for a common celebration of Easter not yielded fruit?
1. First, inter-Orthodox discord has proved a major factor, and this division has become increasingly conspicuous in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine.
2. Second, the absence of education on the subject is lamentable. Here it should be added that education involves not just a final product but also an ongoing process. It is through mutual engagement that we ultimately learn and grow. Only by engaging in dialogue with the broader society and culture do we come to appreciate the principles of adaptation.
3. Third, as Orthodox Christians, we are accustomed to a top-down approach to authority in the Church, although this approach is far less effective than in the Constantinian age. While, over the centuries, the institutions of imperial Christianity became more embedded in and wedded to authority, wealth, and dominance, the Church’s lived history and theology were nourished by the faithful worship and witness of ordinary Christians. Therefore, amore communal, local approach would be more constructive and productive in considering such issues related to calendar.
We must be be more demanding of ourselves in our commitment as disciples of Christ. Ecclesial unity requires more than simply synchronous liturgical observance. It involves sustained humility and charity. It manifests as constant openness to and encounter with others, sharing in their joys and sorrows, on a mutual basis. Only in this way can we fittingly celebrate together the paschal victory of the incarnate, crucified, and risen Word of God.
Nicaean Norms
In an effort to promote Christian unity and avoid unreliable calculations of the spring full moon, the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea in AD 325 issued a normative formula for the calculation of Pascha on the basis of scientific learning of the time. The council determined that Easter should occur on the first Sunday after the first full moon occurring on or after the spring equinox. This Nicaean norm for the calculation resolved that Easter would be closely associated but not dependent upon the Jewish Passover that depends upon where in the world one sights the spring full moon (i.e., 14th of Nisan). By resolving that the Christian celebration of Easter would occur annually on the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the spring equinox, Nicaea ensured that Easter would only take place once each solar year. Today, Orthodox, Catholics, and most Christians accept these Nicaean norms for thecalculation of the date of Easter.
However, divergences in the date of the celebration of Easter continue to occur because the Orthodox Church’s calculation of Easter uses theincreasingly inaccurate Julian Calendar (currently 13 days behind the Gregorian Calendar) and a “fixed” Julian Calendar date of March 21 (Gregorian Calendar, April 3) as the spring equinox, when in fact the actual spring equinox occurs between thirteen to fifteen days earlier. The Orthodox Church also uses a mathematically calculated approximation for the first full moon of spring based on the nineteen-year Metonic lunar cycle.
Inasmuch as the Orthodox method of implementing the Nicaean formula will become increasingly inaccurate, Orthodox Easter will increasingly be celebrated out of step with the expected Nicaean norms. For example, the West will celebrate Easter on March 28th in 2027 (on the Gregorian Calendar), a date which is consistent with the Nicaean formula; by contrast, most Orthodox will celebrate Easter May 2nd, a date which is actually the second Sunday after the second full moon after the spring equinox.
The Orthodox Church’s current method of calculating the date of Pascha is no longer consistently faithful to the Nicaean norms. Continuing to applythis method will over time result in Orthodox Easter falling much later in the solar year. Renewed efforts are vital for the Orthodox Churches to calculate more accurately the date of Easter so that the Orthodox paschalion adheres to the Nicaean formula that the Orthodox Church professes as normative. Failure to do so will over time result in Western and Eastern Christians never celebrating Easter together.
Ecumenical and Pastoral Implications
Unifying the body of Christ temporally can also contribute to alleviating some of the burdens within the family (i.e., the home church).
To give one example: the majority of Greek Orthodox in North America marry Catholic and Protestant partners outside the church. Neither the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese nor any other Orthodox body can ignore this issue or expect it not to impact the spiritual lives of our faithful. Any fragmentation of the family is unacceptable, and conversion to one or the other communion, even when it occurs, cannot account for the extended family of the non-Orthodox spouse. Embracing humility and raising awareness are the most fruitful ways of moving beyond ignorance, or indifference, ignorance, and condescensionon issues related to calendar questions and the calculation of Easter. This is especially pertinent in the case of “ecumenical families,” where children cannot commune or celebrate with both parents.
What has been done to address this issue as it affects homes and families? In its efforts to demonstrate pastoral care for spouses and children of“ecumenical families,” in 2024 the North American Orthodox Catholic Dialogue issued a statement, entitled “The Pastoral Care of Mixed Marriages: Neither Yours nor Mine, but Ours,” which was endorsed by the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the United States of America and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Two of the recommendations are:
1. That both churches exercise joint responsibility for the pastoral care of spouses and children in a spirit of love and mutual respect.
2. That the spouses maintain mutual recognition of their shared life in Christ and support of one another on the way towards salvation as a foundation of their marital unity.
In light of and in addition to these recommendations, clergy are responsible for ensuring that couples receive the necessary pastoral support for navigating the challenging landscape of marriage and family. The support of priest and community will prove immensely helpful in healing family conflict.
A positive step in this direction would be an acknowledgement of the pastoral and ecumenical dimensions in securing a common date for the celebration of Easter. This would in turn restore faith in parishioners struggling to live Christian marriages and nurture Christian families within a secular society in a more visible way that signals our common desire to advance Christian unity by coming together on the most important Christian feast of the year.
A Local Approach
Orthodox Christians in what some persist in calling the “diaspora” feel the pain of celebrating Pascha separately from Catholic and Protestant Christians more acutely than Orthodox living in countries where the Eastern Orthodox comprise the majority of the population. However, this reality has the potential to be a blessing in disguise as an appeal of those jurisdictions to their Mother Churches to show pastoral care for all the faithful living in North Americaregardless of “jurisdiction.”
In supporting Orthodox Christians of its jurisdiction in North America to celebrate Pascha according to the rules established at the Council of Nicaea and accurate astronomical realities, the Ecumenical Patriarchate, for example, would not require the consent or corroboration of other autocephalous churches. The dilemma of what to do with the calendar is and never has been doctrinal, but purely pastoral, even in the effort to honor the norms laid down by Nicaea, although it is clear that the Julian Calendar fails to meet the criteria of Nicaea.
The latest attempt to address this issue was at the Holy and Great Council of Crete (2016), which unfortunately removed from its agenda the item regarding calendar, given the inability of the entire Orthodox world to address this issue with any reasonable consensus, let alone unanimity. In this context, the autocephalous churches that do not participate in pan-Orthodox gatherings find themselves in a position that is less relevant in attempting to prevent other autocephalous churches from acting out of pastoral concern for their faithful in the West. This is an internal, local issue—pertaining to each autocephalous church—and not a matter for pan-Orthodox agreement.
Moreover, there are historical precedents that dispel exaggerated fears promulgated in certain circles. For example, with the blessing of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the Church of Finland celebrates Pascha according to the rule of the First Ecumenical Council by using the Gregorian Calendar.
Certain ertain jurisdictions in the United States, such as the Carpatho–Russian diocese in the United States and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the USA (both under the Ecumenical Patriarchate), have allowed their parishes to choose between the two calendars on fixed feasts.
Despite the above-mentioned exceptions, Orthodox unity has not been ruptured. Even where there has been a diverse pastoral reality at the parish level, this has not been perceived as a threat to the unity of the diocese. Indeed, for over a century, the Orthodox have not regarded the existence of two distinct and separate calendars (Julian and Gregorian) as threats to its unity.
Educational Perspectives
Orthodox Christians aware of the current rumors about a common date for Easter labor under a disadvantage. For many reasons, myths, misunderstandings, and fears continue to obscure the existing basis for discussing a common date.
The Aleppo Agreement—produced nearly thirty years ago by an international group of Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant participants—remains the best approach for discussing the inconsistencies of the calendar and the calculation of Easter. In addition, the Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops in America (SCOBA), the predecessor of the current Assembly of Orthodox Bishops, asked the Orthodox Theological Society in America (OTSA) to assess the Agreement and submit its recommendation to the hierarchs. Furthermore, OTSA endorsed the Agreement, urging the bishops to launch a program foreducating clergy, monastics, and laity about what a “common date” of Easter would entail for Orthodox Christians.
Unfortunately, no such education was ever undertaken. Yet, a “common date” of Easter is more important now than a generation earlier, especially in North America. Marriages between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, Catholics, Protestants, and non-Christians continue to increase in number and frequency. Expecting families to negotiate two observances of Lent, Christmas, Pascha, and other markers of the Christian life does not support orstrengthen marriage, which is already in decline as an institution. For pastoral reasons, we urge the hierarchs of the Assembly of Bishops (potentially with the concurrence of the Oriental Orthodox hierarchs) to foster discussion of issues related to the celebration and date of Easter, both among themselves and within their jurisdictions, in order to clarify misconceptions and preconceptions.
Much misinformation begs to be addressed, in particular why the celebration of Pascha must follow the Jewish Passover, why the Julian Calendar is incorrect for identifying the spring equinox, whether the Orthodox Church has always observed a common date, and whether our identity as Orthodox requires us always to be different or separate from all other Christian confessions.
Given the exceptionally high number of “ecumenical marriages” in the United States, as well as the overwhelmingly interfaith context within which Orthodox Christians live and work each day, parish clergy are in a position to seize the moment and share with baptized members and catechumens the fruits of significant resources and ecumenical dialogues that explain the origin, diversity, and development of the central Feast of Pascha.
Educational resources would include the decisions of local and universal councils as well as contemporary documents, including the Pan-Orthodox Council of 1923, the Pre-Conciliar Conferences of Chambésy from 1971, the Aleppo Agreement of 1997, the North American Orthodox–Roman Catholic Agreed Statement of 2023, and the Inter-Orthodox Statement of 2024 in Egypt.
Honoring Nicaea
This statement seeks to encourage open and frank discussion—uninhibited by fear and prejudice—about the lamentable lack of unity among Christians in celebrating the most important feast of the Resurrection of Christ together. If the question has not been resolved through official hierarchy or theological dialogue, this does not mean it does not deserve to remain at the forefront of our commitment and conversation. If the question of a joint celebration of Easter is not on the agenda for Autocephalous Orthodox or Mother Churches, where Orthodox Christianity is either a greater majority or a comfortable presence in the wider population, this does not mean it cannot be considered for the benefit of minority Orthodox Churches in the so-called Diaspora. If we are still far from achieving theological or sacramental unity with our Roman Catholic and Protestant brothers and sisters on the level of doctrine and the eucharist, this does not mean we cannot pursue greater cooperation and cohesion as fellow Christians by sharing the celebration of major feast days, especially Easter.
Pursuing a common celebration of Easter constitutes a tangible way of honoring educating God’s people, raising awareness on issues related to a common date of Easter and providing care to married couples and families who deal with the practical consequences of celebrating the most important feast of the year on different days.
Parish clergy will naturally seek the blessing of their diocesan hierarch in order to enter into a process that is best done in collaboration with other Orthodox clergy in their geographic area, beginning with their own jurisdiction but also reaching out to include others. The educational process should begin with consent from the parish council and broaden to ministry leadership before being incorporated into sermons, bible studies, catechism classes, or special events. Such occasions could involve visiting clergy and theologians on the topic for the sake of inspiring congregations and communities, and the equally important task of providing the proper education on this issue in Orthodox seminaries, centers, and schools.
The ultimate goal would echo what existed in the earliest centuries—namely, diversity in unity—since no parish should in any way be coerced. However, the effort to educate and celebrate a common date of Easter is an essential pastoral task and ecumenical mandate that can enable Orthodox Christians to realize deeper unity while in fact moving closer to Nicaean norms. Striving to celebrate a common date of Easter each year is no small matter. Families, parishes, and communities experience the pain of our different calendars and calculations in tangible ways. Efforts of the Eastern and Western churches to achieve an annual common celebration of Easter should be reignited at every level, allowing the light of Christ’s resurrection to shine each year evermore brightly in our hearts and in our world.
* * *
Rev. Dr. John Chryssavgis, Professor of Theology, Holy Cross School of Theology; Exec. Director, Huffington Ecumenical Institute at HCHC (HEI)
Rev. Robert M. Arida, Dean Emeritus of Holy Trinity Cathedral (Boston, MA), Advisory Board Member (HEI))
Rev. Dr. Radu Bordeianu, Professor of Theology and Director of Graduate Studies, Duquesne University
Dr. George Demacopoulos, Fr. John Meyendorff & Patterson Family Chair of Orthodox Christian Studies, Fordham University
Rev. Dr. John H. Erickson, Gramowich Professor Emeritus and former Dean, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary.
Dr. John Fotopoulos, Chair and Associate Professor, Department of Religious Studies and Theology, Saint Mary’s College (Notre Dame, IN)
Rev. Dr. Philip Halikias, HCHC Administrator and Adjunct Professor of Ecumenical Relations and Advisory Board Member (HEI)
Rev. John Maheras, Ecumenical Officer for the Metropolis of Boston (ret.)
Rev. Dr. Harry Pappas, Presiding Priest at Archangels Greek Orthodox Church (Stamford, CT) and Executive Board Member (HEI)
Rev. Dr. Anthony Roeber, Professor of Church History, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary
The post Toward a common date of Easter appeared first on Orthodox Observer.
