How come Easter, innit... ?

[simonineaston]

Folks as has the time and inclination to read my occasional jottings will know I'm a regular listener to BBC R4.
However as a committed atheist, I'm not fond of the weird chanting, myth-pedalling and Jesus-of-Nazareth public-relations spin that is R4's coverage of Sunday's Christian church services. But this last Sunday I switched briefly thru' R4 on my way to 4Extra, caught the sermon and learnt about the way that Easter is calculated. The dog-collered geezer explained that the day was (in summary) as near as poss. to the full moon nearest the Spring Equinox, the purpose being to represent the so-called resurrection as near as possible to a day when there's the highest chance of 24 hour light - in day time from the old currant bun, after sunset from the full moon... How Cool Is That !
Unless he was making it up, of course.

[Mike Sales]

When I was a choirboy, in cassock and surplice, and incubating my atheism, I would try to alleviate the stultifying boredom by reading the Book of Common Prayer. It has a long and complicated section on calculating the date of Easter, involving, as far as I can remember, something called a Golden Number.

[Mike_Ayling]

The OP is on the money but some years our Greek Orthodox bretheren calculate it differently and their date can be a week or two later than the rest of us.

[Tangled Metal]

Wasn't it due to a piece of English networking and attempts to gain power and influence in Europe?

King of England, a minor state on the edge of Europe sounds familiar right? Well he brought together theologians from the two power houses of Christianity at the time, Celtic Church based in Ireland and Catholic Church based in Rome. One used the current system and the other used a fixed date.

Well the roman Church had the greater power and influence across a wider area despite the Irish Church being powerful too. So lo and behold English King found the roman Church had the better arguments and declared easter date set the roman Church way. Thus getting himself noticed across Europe.

Or something like that. Well you don't think our modern political leaders are the only ones to play with politics or fast and loose with facts to gain power and status do you?

[VinceLedge]

So , probably based on some pre Christian festivity or date if it is aiming for the day with longest amount of light, like every other Christian festival.

[VinceLedge]

Who was it who said "Religion is the opium of the masses"?

[Mick F]

Easter is the nearest Sunday to the full moon, counted in four full moons since Christmas Day.
If that co-insides with the Equinox thing, I don't know, but what I say is correct.

First full moon after Christmas was Jan 17
Second Feb 16
Third 18 March
Fourth 16 April
Easter Sunday was April 17

[ANTONISH]

Who was it who said "Religion is the opium of the masses"?

Karl Marx - actually I think he said "people" not "masses"

[drossall]

The dog-collered geezer explained that the day was (in summary) as near as poss. to the full moon nearest the Spring Equinox, the purpose being to represent the so-called resurrection as near as possible to a day when there's the highest chance of 24 hour light - in day time from the old currant bun, after sunset from the full moon... How Cool Is That !
Unless he was making it up, of course.

I think he probably was. The point of Easter is that it celebrates the death and resurrection of Jesus, which occurred around the Jewish Passover. Therefore, the calculation is dependent on the date of the Passover.

My understanding has always been that the difficulty of calculating the date of Easter reliably, and sufficiently in advance to be practical, was a significant factor in the development of modern astronomy. I did hear that there were some years when they didn't know when it was going to be until a few weeks before. In a world where then spreading the information across the nations would itself take weeks, I can imagine that being mildly inconvenient.

[simonineaston]

Well I dunno - I think the real reason is that when the Israelites decided they needed to quit Egypt sharpish they naturally chose a night when there was a full moon - it stands to reason doesnt it? If they couldn't see where they were going, they'd have got lost wouldn't they?

[Tangled Metal]

Who was it who said "Religion is the opium of the masses"?

Karl Marx - actually I think he said "people" not "masses"

He also argued a bit further than the idea that religion is about happiness and consolation. He argued that it suppresses emancipatory politics and prevents the masses from revolting against power. A controlling force together with "the powers that be" I reckon. You have some of your thinking prescribed for you with religion that might no longer be for your own good.

More I read on Marx the more I think I like his views on things. Not everything but some things. Ain't that a surprising thing for someone who's right wing of the majority of ppl on this forum to admit to?!

[Tangled Metal]

I read that in the years after decline of roman empire the communication routes were still good for a period of time. When these routes declined later on there was less central communications from the roman Church. To get around this they developed tables or methods of computing easter often called computes. This allowed your clergy, priests and monk's to locally fix easter and the church devolved power to then to define easter.

Over the years many wise men gave out new calculations on when and how to work out the date of easter. There's been changes in calendars, gregorian, Julian, etc. These all resulted in new date calculations.

All these created different easter dates across the various Christian denominations, especially Catholics and Eastern orthodox churches.

It all makes me think easter is not worth celebrating even if you're Christian. The whole Christianity thing too.

[ANTONISH]

Who was it who said "Religion is the opium of the masses"?

Karl Marx - actually I think he said "people" not "masses"

He also argued a bit further than the idea that religion is about happiness and consolation. He argued that it suppresses emancipatory politics and prevents the masses from revolting against power. A controlling force together with "the powers that be" I reckon. You have some of your thinking prescribed for you with religion that might no longer be for your own good.

More I read on Marx the more I think I like his views on things. Not everything but some things. Ain't that a surprising thing for someone who's right wing of the majority of ppl on this forum to admit to?!

Well he was a humane person and he felt that conditions for the poor was such that they would revolt - somewhat unexpectedly the Russians got there first.
Reading "London working, London poor" one gets an an idea of how grim conditions were.

[ANTONISH]

I should have said "London labour, London poor"