EDITOR’S NOTE (Nick Stamatakis).  This is clear evidence of how ill-fated would the attempt for a common Easter with the Catholics be…. It would lead to a new schism within Orthodoxy, after the one a century ago with the “New Calendar.” Please pay special attention to why the Romanian Church poses: “It should be the decision of a Panorthodox Council”!!… This is precisely the same reason why the late AB Anastasios and many others opposed Bartholomew in Ukraine’s “Cacocephaly.”…  If Bartholomew wanted to turn himself into a Pope, he should have joined the Catholic Church early in his life… This is not the way – he will end his career and life most disgracefully…

===============================

Romanian Church against celebrating Easter together with Catholics

source – spzh.eu

The Romanian Church stated that any initiative regarding the date of Easter celebration can only be discussed within the framework of a pan-Orthodox council.

On January 18, 2025, the Romanian Orthodox Church stated that the general date of the celebration of Easter can only be changed after a pan-Orthodox council, the press service of the Romanian Patriarchate reported .

The document, published on the website of the Romanian Church, states that “following the recent statement by Pope Francis on establishing a common date for the celebration of the Resurrection of the Lord, we make it clear that any consultations on the date of Easter and a possible solution can only take place within the framework of the future pan-Orthodox forum – the Synod with the participation of all sister Orthodox Churches.”

The initiative is part of the same line of work, including taking into account the very important recommendation of the Synaxis of Patriarchs and Representatives of Orthodox Churches, which met from January 21 to 28, 2016 at the Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Chambésy: “Regarding the subject of the calendar, it is entirely appropriate that each Church should be free to put into practice what it considers appropriate for the spiritual formation of its parishioners, but without changing the date of the general celebration of Easter by all Orthodox.”

The date of the celebration of Easter can only be discussed within the framework of a pan-Orthodox council, the Romanian Church emphasizes.

Previously, the UOJ wrote that the Pope called on Christians to establish a single date for celebrating Easter .

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

32 COMMENTS

  1. I think that most Patriarchs and Primates will agree with the Romanian Patriarch. His statement is very balanced and very orthodox. God bless him for his courage! The decision should be taken together with the sister churches for the unity of the OC. I think at the very minimum Patriarchs of Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Georgea, Jerusalem and of course the Primate of UOC will agree with Patriarch Daniel of Romania. We shall see what will happen in Albania and I am not optimistic about the Church of Alexandria.

    Patr. Barto’s attempt to take over the Ukrainian territory failed. OCU is a joke, not a church. He is trying the same in Estonia because perhaps he doesn’t want to learn his lesson from Ukraine, but I think once again he will fail.

    Will Patr. Bartolomew go on this change on his own and change the date and celebrate with the Catholics? This will be truly tragic for him and for the OC because he will once again create a schism. And also, will Mt. Athos, Greece and the other territories under him will follow along and celebrate with the Catholics or celebrate with the sister OCs? If he goes through with it, as far as I am concerned, he will create a greater schism and he will no longer part of the OC, he will be in a protestant church of his own.

  2. While it’s good that they are stating the obvious in writing, they are stopping short of explaining to Bartholomew what their future mutual relationship would look like if he does in fact proceed to join the Vatican’s Paschal calendar….

    Meanwhile, that quote above from the Chambesy conference is quite disturbing…what does “whatever they want without changing the general date” really mean? Does that mean there will be a “dual practice” in place, where they won’t care if you celebrate Pascha a bit early or late? What would be next…”it doesn’t matter where & how you receive Communion…?”

    • Markos:
      I don’t think we can speak of a “future mutual relationship” as there is not much a mutual relationship even now, due to the unfair and papal ambitions of Bartolomew. Patr. Bartolomew created a disaster in Ukraine and the minority of Romanians living in Ukraine are severely persecuted by OCU especially in Bukovina which is a former Romanian territory. Their churches are stolen and Romanian orthodox Christians are getting seriously hurt with OCU participating in these attacks–the same OCU that Patr. Barto gave birth to. I think the idea of pursuing a united Easter day with the Catholics at this point in history is quite stupid, considering that he can’t even unite OCU and UOC and he is creating more schisms. Patr. Daniel is well aware of all this and he tried to help alleviate the persecution of the small Romanian minority in Ukraine, but Patr. Bartolomew did not co-operate. I think Patr. Bartolomew lost sight of his position and thinks he is the orthodox pope and is not co-operating with anyone in the orthodox world but is making his own rules, no matter the consequences…

      https://spzh.eu/en/news/84340-in-bukovyna-uoc-believers-appeal-to-vance-on-the-eve-of-ocus-church-raid

  3. For those of us who are Orthodox Christians in the US, having our Pascha on a separate date most of the time provides an advantage; we can invite our Protestant and Catholic friends to come to our Pascha and experience the glory that is missing in their services.

  4. Patriarch Bartholomew has not expressed any interest at all in changing the way Pascha is calculated. His clear hope is that Roman Catholics will change their calculation to match what was decided at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea:

    “If any bishop, or presbyter, or deacon celebrates the holy day of Pascha before the vernal equinox with the Jews, let him be deposed.”
    (Canon 7, Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.)

    From what the Romanian Patriarchate is saying, they are not indicating any problem at all with Roman Catholics changing their calculation to match the Orthodox.

  5. Joseph,
    You continue to amaze me in how you refuse to understand the truth. Why would we need a Pan Orthodox council to decide the Date of Easter, if we don’t change it? Certainly we don’t need a Pan Orthodox council for the Catholics to change their date.

    I say let Patr. Barto celebrate with the Catholics and they won’t get the Holy Light. Even if the Catholics with join us on the same date, it doesn’t mean anything. We don’t even have the same Liturgy. And they added a lot of other heresies that they would have to renounce before we can consider a union, including having a pope that is “infallible”. Way too many problems, we do not want to unite in heresy, but in truth.

    • In Patriarch Bartholomew’s own words:

      “the unanimous wish is expressed that the common celebration of Pascha next year by Eastern and Western Christianity should not be merely a happy coincidence, but the beginning of the establishment of a common date for its annual celebration, according to the Paschalion of our Orthodox Church.”

      https://orthochristian.com/163257.html

      Note the last part, “according to the Paschalion of our Orthodox Church.”

      The statement coming from the Romanian Patriarchate merely emphasizes that the Orthodox churches are not planning to change their Paschalion. If Rome wants to celebrate a common Pascha with Orthodox, then Rome will have to follow the Orthodox Paschalion. It’s that simple.

      Patriarch Bartholomew fully understands this as well, and he is being very diplomatic in an attempt to convince Rome to follow the Orthodox Paschalion.

  6. Joseph,

    it’s great that you are starting to quote Canons about who should be “deposed”…do you also want to add the Canons about deposing clergy after common prayer with heretics, etc to this list?

    Would you want to support the immediate enforcement of these canons,, in light of the several documented cases of Cardinals showing up side by side with hierarchs in Orthodox churches, “multi-faith prayer services” at St. Nicholas shrine and elsewhere, performing services at Protestant Churches with LGBT flags flying out front, and even being given “myrh vessels” and “censers” to “bless” the Orthodox faithful last year during Holy Week and Pascha in the United States?

  8. More on this topic from Patriarch Bartholomew, from just last month:

    “This agreement would exclusively concern the date of Easter and not a liturgical concelebration with our Roman Catholic brethren, as such a concelebration presupposes full communion between our two Churches—a goal we have not yet achieved despite significant progress in theological dialogue.”

    “We believe there is no better way to honor the memory of the Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, who, among other achievements, addressed the issue of a unified Easter. It is indeed regrettable that 1,700 years later, we are still debating [with Roman Catholics and Protestants] this issue!””

    https://orthodoxtimes.com/ecumenical-patriarch-it-is-unacceptable-that-we-still-live-with-fanaticism/

    • Joseph,

      You and anyone else are free to join the Vatican at any time. Don’t waste your time advertising propaganda, however, because we won’t follow you.

      The solution of “common celebration” is not via the path of introducing more Schism in Orthodoxy. That’s both illogical and ludicrous. The Vatican has had every opportunity to examine its own history, and figure out why they are not in agreement today with the dogmas and practices that Pope Leo III preached…when they align with what he preached first, and reject the heretical nonsense that they have adopted since his reign, then we can seriously sit down with them and figure out if they are ready to talk about the true definition of “Apostolic succession, and if they are finally serious enough to return to Orthodoxy.

      In the meantime, can you answer the question above, if you ware willing to support the enforcement of all Canons that involve “common prayer with heretics”, etc? (Given that you initiated by quoting a canon about defrockment…)

      • Markos, have you ever invited a Roman Catholic or Protestant person to your parish? My parish has been full of Roman Catholics and Protestants that have prayed with us, and then most of them ended up becoming baptized Orthodox Christians. We even had a Jehovah Witness (Arian) come and pray with us and later she was baptized Orthodox.

        • Joseph,

          There’s are big differences between:
          A) inviting someone to observe a service, have them VOLUNTEER to become a catechumen of their own will, catechize them properly over time to become Orthodox (that’s how the Rus became Orthodox…by observing Liturgy at St. Sophia back in the day…nothing wrong with that, but there is an established process for onboarding catechumens, and there do exist known boundaries that should never be crossed so that proper order and liturgical decorum are maintained…),

          B) having the Orthodox clergy and laity praying for the illumination of catechumens (which has always been a real tradition) as a traditional exception to ONLY praying for “pious and Orthodox Christians” (this exception includes the 40 day blessing of babies that have not yet been baptized, by the way), VS:

          C) an orthodox hierarch handing over a censer or “myrrh vessel” to a heretical Cardinal in the middle of a service to “bless” the Orthodox flock, or even allowing a Cardinal (heretic) to give a sermon to the Orthodox faithful, or allowing the Pope to participate in an Orthodox liturgy by reciting the Lord’s Prayer (blatantly Common Prayer), or allowing the Pope / Cardinal to sit upon the bishop’s throne (fully vested) in plain sight of the faithful in the middle of liturgy, at the same time when our Liturgical Texts of St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil CLEARLY delineate for the last 1700 years exactly at what points Catechumens “depart” and when ONLY the “faithful [Orthodox] remain”, and the Canons CLEARLY stipulate what a bishop is allowed and not allowed to do with a heretic (common prayer, etc)…

          D) Orthodox hierarchs joining in common prayer with other religious leaders in various venues, showing up to inaugurations of Hindu temples in New Jersey, or performing liturgies in heretical places of worship, or making statements like “there are many paths to the top of the mountain” (in essence denying their own faith, attending muslim Ramadan evening meals, or even reciting the Filioque during their ordination as a bishop at the Phanar (remember that gem of an example?)…preaching heresy and denial of faith are yet additional Canonical justifications for defrocking such hierarchs, according to what has been handed down to us by our forefathers)

          Unfortunately, you are currently adopting a classic Protestant behavioral mindset, because you are applying “selective theology”, by selecting one concept (A&B above) to discuss, and promote, [only tangentially addressing the topic], while simultaneously ignoring the most important details of the core issue (C&D above) that don’t quite fit the narrative you are trying to push…

          So, back to the original question, since you are suddenly interested in [selectively] quoting the Canons, will you now fully support the defrocking of clergy that have violated any of them as well, or will you insist upon promoting a skewed and generally deceptive “theological marketing” campaign?

          • Markos, I only quoted the canon from the Council of Nicea to point out what Patriarch Bartholomew has been saying all along, that the calculation of Pascha has already been decided 1700 years ago. As for whether or not clergy should be deposed (defrocking, by the way, is Roman Catholic terminology, not Orthodox), I will leave it to the bishops to interpret and apply the canons. That’s their job, not mine.

          • Joseph,
            You continue to “swallow camels”…if you “leave it to the bishops to interpret and apply the Canons”, let’s first ask which of these bishops was LEGITIMATELY elected by the participation of the Laity, which is the ORIGINAL and most ancient practice of the Church, (where even women participated in such elections according St. John Chrysostom’s commentary on Acts 1:15), but it is now a participation which has somehow been “quietly taken away from us without reaction” in recent times for some unexplained reason.

            Remember, in Constantinople, it was the people who rejected the delegation of bishops returning from the Council of Ferrara (1439), and as a result the “interpretation and application of these treasonous bishops” who signed their names in favor of subservience to the Vatican was fully rejected by the faithful, and the only one who resisted (St. Mark of Ephesos) became the hero of Orthodoxy, and was the only one cheered, not jeered, by the lay people of Byzantium.
            You’ve now opened a much bigger discussion for another day, but first, please re-read your historical facts, and read the wonderful booklet “Η Συμμετοχη του Λαου εν τη εκλογη των Επισκοπων” by professor Panagiotis Trempelas (CAREFULLY) before we continue this discussion further…

          • Markos, it’s ironic that you wave a book by Panagiotis Trempelas. He was noted for being characteristic of the western captivity of Greek theology during his time. His book on Dogmatics has been heavily criticized by both Bishop Kallistos Ware and Christos Yannaras, that later who called it “a non-Orthodox treatise compiled from Orthodox materials.” He was also hugely influential for advocating Protestant pietism in Greek society with his early support of the Zoe brotherhood. He’s not exactly what I would call a St. Mark of Ephesus figure.

          • Joseph,

            Stick to the topic. Even the “broken clock” has the ability to tell time correctly twice a day, they say…
            The Trempelas citation was from a text regarding the participation of Laity in the election of Bishops.

            This was not a discussion about Dogmatics, nor what Kallistos Ware thought of the Dogmatics books that Trempelas wrote, nor what “personally biased beef” Yannaras had against anything and anyone that was ever associated with some negative experiences he says he had with “Zoe”. Once personal bias enters the equation, criticism can no longer be considered “reliable or objective”, for sure.

            And if your standard for “Orthodox criticism” of Trempelas is Kallistos Ware, then as Bugs Bunny would say “you took a wrong turn at Albuquerque!….How can this famous Kallistos Ware “non-Orthodox” quote below be reconciled as “Orthodox”, a point of view which sadly helped propel his final years into the “hall of shame”?

            Excerpt below from this publication:
            https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54d0df1ee4b036ef1e44b144/t/5b199e5f03ce64a767c66c7f/1528405608178/%2313%3A14+Foreword.pdf

            “…But homosexual men and women are not personally guilty of their orientation, because this is not something they have chosen;…- Kallistos Ware ”

            The above is certainly not a statement becoming of any Orthodox bishop, for sure, let alone an example of a “reliable source of criticism”…

            We are going around in circles here, Joseph…you don’t like to stick to a subject that doesn’t fit your narrative, and you elect to “defer / deflect / distract” instead…

        • Joseph:
          “He’s not exactly what I would call a St. Mark of Ephesus figure.

          Patr. Barto is not what I would call “a St. Mark of Ephesus figure” either, but you don’t seem to be bothered by it. His actions during the Council of Crete brought nothing but division and the majority of the Orthodox Bishops did not participate in it. He called it “great”, “pan-orthodox” and “ecumenical”. It was none of the above and it even created a schism as far as I know in Romania. This is not the only schism Barto created in Romania through his actions, and he is not even done with his schisms there–they continue! Patr. Daniel is well aware of Barto’s ambitions and so are most of the orthodox on the planet. You are one of the few that refuse to see the truth. We now see the consequences on his hostile council when he insisted to call the Catholics and Protestants churches. We only recognize ONE church. Nicaea 2025 is just a continuation of more of the same of his ecumenist ideas. None of the Holy Fathers would have agreed with him and ALL condemn ecumenism as a heresy. Why are you trying to mix oil with water? They don’t mix.

    • Joseph:
      The First Ecumenical council had all Church’s bishops decide together, not only one orthodox patriarch. They met to settle the heresy of Arianism and adopt the Nicaea Creed. If all of the Orthodox Biships would participate at this meeting to decide on a common date, as Patr. Of Romania suggested, I’d be all for it. They could settle also on all the heresies of the other faiths and also they could all adopt the Nicaea Creed, so the Catholics would have to change their incorrect creed.
      They can then condemn all other heresies, as the Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council condemned the heresy of Arianism, including condemning the papal infallibility and all the other heresies–the list is long.
      Patriarch Bartolomew is not “very diplomatic”, he is very likely to create another schism, which is a grave sin. Some time ago after the Council of Crete he created schisms. Then in Ukraine. Now he is trying to create another schism in Estonia. Creating schism is not diplomatic! It is a very grave sin! And like Markos already pointed out, common prayer with heretics is uncanonical. I remind you that the Holy Fathers of the FIrst Ecumenical council DID NOT pray with the Arians! So this meeting will not honor our Holy Fathers for the First Ecumenical council at all! Using this even should indeed be to honor them, not to steal the show and pass propaganda! We do not have the same creed and the same faith!

      • Sandy, you don’t want the Roman Catholics to adopt the Orthodox Paschalion? Really?
        Maybe that would cause some strange schism within Roman Catholicism, but it wouldn’t create any schism within the Orthodox Churches.

    • Joseph,
      Yes, of course I read the letter. In case you did not notice, everything that Barto touches creates a schism. The initiative for a common date did not come from the pope alone so let’s be fair and not throw him under the bus and pretend that Barto has nothing to do with it… The same thoughts that patr. Daniel expressed to the pope, applies to Patr. Bartholomew, too, not just the pope. You don’t suppose the Romanian Patriarch would say one thing to the Catholics and another to Barto? That’s absurd!
      The fact that Barto does not involve the other OCs in the decision only shows that he has no one else’s support and that he acts like a pope making the decisions for the entire OC. That is the opposite of acting like an orthodox hierarch! The OC does not work this way. NO one hierarch, not me, not you, not anyone has the right to make any major decisions without the other churches being involved. If the Catholics want to change the date on THEIR OWN, that’s fine. Barto has no business in getting involved in this without consulting with the other sister churches. That is what the pope did and look where they are now! You can’t even recognize their church from what it used to be… We have the Holy Light. They have a pope. Barto should join them if he wants to. He does not represent me or the majority of the OC if he goes on this on his own. That is not what the Holy Fathers did, but quite the opposite! He is on his own on this. Patr. Daniel is actually not very strict in his decisions compared to the other patriarchs. He is usually somewhere in the middle. So if this is his answer, I do not expect any other patriarch to join Barto except maybe the patr. of Alexandria… who may give in under pressure, and there will be pressure… Like it was with the Counsil of Crete… I followed it very closely. Barto did not have the sister churches agree with him then, either. But he went through with it, like a pope. Very unorthodox.

    • Sandy, all the Orthodox bishops have already agreed on the calculation of Pascha, beginning with the First Ecumenical Council in 325 AD. It’s been decided already for the Orthodox Church. The question is whether or not the Roman Catholics and Protestants will return to the original calculation for their Easter.

      Pope Gregory XIII changed the calculation of Easter in 1582 for Roman Catholics. Protestants originally used the Orthodox calculation, but they were later mostly forced by their governments to adopt the Gregorian Easter. It’s certainly odd that Protestants, whose very identity comes from protesting against Papal authority, now use this very same Easter calculation of Pope Gregory XIII.

  11. Joseph,
    We will see about the date. Obviously, those in close circles do not agree with you, otherwise there would not be these discussions. Why would the WCC “head” would say this? Why would Patriarch Daniel say this?
    Certainly, there are things going on behind closed doors–they would not make those statement otherwise. And don’t forget that the first protestant was actually the pope, when he departed from the OC and made his own church and declared himself infallible and the head of it. He is welcome to come back and say he was wrong, repent, and convert to orthodoxy. Let’s not pretend we are the same by celebrating Easter on the same date. We are NOT the same at all! It is dishonest to pretend otherwise.

    • Sandy, I hope more Orthodox Churches than just Romania let the Pope know that Orthodox Christians are not changing their calculation of Pascha. It’s important that Romania (and hopefully others) let Pope Francis know in clear terms that changing the calculation of Pascha is not on the table. I believe all Orthodox Christians, including Patriarch Bartholomew, are unified on this very point.

      The statement of the WCC also recognizes that Orthodox Christians are not going to change their calculation of Pascha. If members of the WCC want all Christians to use the same calculation, then they will have to accept the original Orthodox Paschalion as was decided in 325 AD.

      • Don’t you think that in order to verify and show their unity they will have to hold a Panorthodox Synod on such an important issue? What is the meaning of “unity” among Orthodox leaders if Bartholomew is acting like a Pope and decides by himself? Did you say anything? I did not hear your voice… Ha…ha… You really think we are stupid and we are eating your fake arguments…

      • Well, Joseph:

        I will never agree with you but you are free to join what the saints called heretics in their celebrations. I am not going to be a traitor. The other “Christians” have departed so far from the faith that I truly can’t pretend we are the same. The protestants and now the Catholics are allowing homosexuals priests to serve. THere is no point for them to repent since they are glorifying sins. The head of the episcopal “church” took it a notch further claiming that “trans people are bearers of salvation of the world”: https://spzh.eu/en/news/84426-head-of-episcopal-church-trans-people-are-bearers-of-salvation-of-the-world

        Really? That’s who you want to celebrate Easter with? The blasphemers? I am going to look for salvation somewhere else, in the One Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church.

        Not surprising, NOT ONLY the Romanian OC but also the Russian OC came out with reasons on why a union with Rome is impossible at this point. The Russian OC chairpersons’ reasons are of course agreed on by every saint, so I am not surprised at all. I thank the Russian OC for coming out in the defense of our orthodox values. God bless them!

        https://spzh.eu/en/news/84424-decr-rocs-chairperson-no-longer-sees-common-ground-with-catholics

        There can be no unity between the OC and the Catholics and the protestants under these conditions because they look like they want to follow antichrist, not Christ. I will follow Christ. I don’t need anyone else. THe OC has everything and doesn’t need to unite with anyone because it is already complete.

        • Sandy, this is not about union. Patriarch Bartholomew has made it clear that there will be no liturgical concelebration, because the Orthodox Churches are not in communion with Roman Catholics.

          This is simply about the calculation of Pascha. This year, Roman Catholics everywhere will be celebrating their Easter at the same time as the Orthodox. If the Roman Catholics don’t change their calculation this year, then next year will be celebrated on different dates as per usual.

          Even if the Roman Catholics change their calculation of Easter, it won’t bring about a union either. That’s not the what this is about. However, if the Roman Catholics and/or Protestants change their calculation to reflect the Orthodox Paschalion, then that will be a huge witness and testimony of the truth of Orthodox Christianity. I can only imagine the upshot would be people flocking to Orthodox churches in droves.

          • Sorry – this will be the last exchange on this issue for now. It is not simply about a calculation. It is a set of differences that have to do with the concept of “Anastasis” etc. This is why a Panorthodox Synod would be necessary. On our part we will to illuminate the issue by publishing the views of the best theologians.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here