- YES !!!!! |
|
+++
+++
+++
|
2015.02.23.- , , . |
: http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/paul_v_lashkevich/post208185887/
- , 24 2012 . 22:36 +
: 2015.02.23.
- :
[url]http://www.rusich1.ru/publ/76-1-0-459[/url]
:
(1971-1990) - . () 1980 .
Flash player.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++
, , , , , . 1200 , , . " ", . . , , , - , , .
250 , , , . , , . , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , , .
, . . , : " , , (), , ". "" - , , , , . , . .
, . , , . , , , . , , , , , , , , .
? , - , , , , , , .
, , , 660 . , , . . . , , , . . , , . , . . , , . , , , . 681 , , , , -, , , , .
- , , , , , , "", . . "".
.
20 , . , , , .
- , . , . , . , , , , . .
, , , , . , . , , , . . , 4 740 . .
. ( , . . ). , , . , , . , . , , . - , . , .
Canon-St. Andrew-of-Crete_Part-1_on-Monday
Canon-St. Andrew-of-Crete_Part-2_on-Tuesday
Canon-St. Andrew-of-Crete_Part-3_on-Wednesday
Canon-St. Andrew-of-Crete_Part-4_on-Thursday
|
EYE-OF-PROVIDENCE-LBX |
|
- - |
wselennaj,
http://argumentua.com/stati/kak-sozhgli-istoriyu-ukrainy
+++
24 - . ?
: , , - .
, 24 1964 , , - , , .
“ ” ( : “ ”), 1965 .
- , , .
“24- 1964 , "" , , : - .
XX . , ? , , , .
, , . , , ( 1812 .) . 1964 - , , .
, , , , . , : . , .
, , , , (, . , " ", ). , , .
. , 1932 . , , . , "", . , , . 600 . , !
, , . . , , , , , , - , . - , , , .
? ? ? ? ?
, , - . (1965. - “”) , .
. , - , . : , , , - , , , , .
"" : , , . , . , , , . , :
- . , , ... , : , . , ... "" " ". , , - (!) , .
, , , . .
? . , . - . , .
, , , ?
, ? , , . - , , (, . .)?
, ? ?
, (" ?" " ?" . .).
, , : , , , , , -, ? - , . " (!) ?"
( !) . , , "", , " "?
- - . , . : , , .
, , . : , - " ". ? ! , :
,
.
, , , . , .
1933 , , , . , : ? ? ?
. . . .
, , ", , »?
? ? .
? , . ? . , , .
? , , ...
. , . " ".
-. . , , , . . - .
. - - . , , . , - . , .
" ". "". , , , . , , !
! , ? . , , , , . , .
: :
, , , . , , , , , , , . () () - ?
- , , . " ". , . , " ".
, . , , . , , . ; -, .
, , ? "" - . , ...
, , , , , " " . - , ?
, 24 . .
, , 1963-1964 , . . ? . (", XIV", " , ...", " " .) .
, , , , , - , ", ". -, , "" !
. , . ?.. ...
22 . . , . . , " ", .
, , , . ? ", - ". : " ". , . , , 22 , . ?
, , , , , , , .
22 . "". , - , " ".
. . - . - ... ", , , " - .
...
, , , . , . - . - !”
(i, i V, . 2, 1965. - . 78-84. i i i-ii i. 9- . - ., 2001)
+++
|
- - |
-
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMPIDJ8tI9Y
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
|
|
|
http://www.sedmitza.ru/text/5375811.html
,
|
|
|
+++
http://myocn.net/calendar-question/
+++
http://myocn.net/calendar-question/
+++
By Fr. Lawrence Farley in The Sounding
Dec 31, 2014 ⋅ 14 Comment(s)⋅ Tags: Julian Calendar, New Calendar, Old CalendarLately, for whatever reason, I discovered that the clock on my wall was running slow. It might have been a fading battery, or it might have been gremlins, but anyway, it was running slow and needed to be fixed. One day many, many years ago, scholars and astronomers in Europe discovered that their calendar was running slow—about thirteen days slow per year, in fact, and if it was not corrected, the gap between calendar and astronomical reality would keep on increasing. When the calendar was first created in the time of Julius Caesar in about 46 B.C., it was not out by much—only by 11 minutes and 14 seconds. But this little error kept compounding annually, so that it was now out by 13 days. At length, European scholars did the obvious thing—they fixed it. In 1582, under the patronage of Pope Gregory XIII, they brought out a revised calendar which now ran true and conformed with the actual state of the earth revolving around the sun.
Scholarship is never done in a vacuum (just ask the scholars), and politics always affects how the work of scholars is received. Given that the Orthodox East and the Catholic West were locked in deadly battles in the sixteenth century (as were the Catholics and the Protestants), it is not surprising that the West tried to make the most polemical use of their new scholarly discovery and that the East responded in kind by having none of it. (The Protestants of those days also rejected the new calendar as a part of a popish take-over plot. They weren’t so much rejecting a calendar as rejecting the papacy.)
In those far off days of international fisticuffs, then, the revised calendar was not simply a scientific improvement created by scholars in their studies, but also a weapon used by churchmen in their polemics. The Orthodox Church’s condemnation of the Gregorian calendar by its local synods was not based on fidelity to its timeless faith, but on the perceived necessities of its struggle to pastorally care for its children and keep them safe from western ecclesiastical aggression. Happily, the worst of those days is behind us, and we are now free to examine the question on its own historical and scientific merits.
Part of this calendar question involves examining what commitment the Church has to the old pre-revised calendar of Julius Caesar (the so-called “Julian calendar”). Did any of the Ecumenical Councils of the Church decree an eternal and binding acceptance of then-current secular calendar? Is use of a different secular calendar as the basis for the Church’s feasts “against the canons”?
Actually, no. There is not a single canon from the time of the Ecumenical Councils which speaks to this issue. What we do have is the formula from the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea in 325 which mandates that Pascha must be celebrated on the first Sunday following the first full moon after the spring equinox, but as one can see, this has nothing to do with the question of which calendar is used. All Orthodox today, both those using the old Julian calendar and those using the new revised calendar (the so-called “Gregorian calendar”), use the same formula for calculating Pascha and therefore celebrate Pascha and the liturgical Paschal cycle on the same dates. (Perhaps a more accurate terminology for the two calendars might be “the Julian calendar” and “the revised Julian calendar”.)
The reality is that even those using the old Julian calendar and therefore celebrating Christmas on January 7 do not say that Christmas is kept on January 7. What those keeping the old calendar in fact say is that December 25 (the date of Christmas) does not actually arrive for them until the day that the rest of society regards as January 7. The ancient Church’s canons simply never dealt with the details of the astronomical calendar. Its own calendar containing the dates when it kept its feasts was not an astronomical system, but simply a grid and list of dates set over that astronomical system. The Church’s grid said that (for example) whenever society says that it is December 25, that is when the Church keeps Christmas. When the world looks up in the morning and says that today is August 6, the Church calendar decrees that its Christians then keep the Feast of the Transfiguration. It is for the state with its scientists and astronomers to tell us what day it is. It is for the Church to say that, on that day, it will keep a certain feast.
Why then do I keep the revised Julian (or “new”) calendar? Because the Lord said to render to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar, and questions of calendar and banking and date-books belong to him and to the secular world. Because to use two calendars—a new one to live in the world by and an old out-dated one for Church use—would introduce a kind of liturgical schizophrenia into my life (“What’s the date today? I mean not in the Church, but really?”) And because it makes sense to fix the clock on my wall when it runs slow—or the calendar the Church uses when it runs slow, too.
The Church uses the best science that it has available, and that science gives us a more accurate calendar to use as basis for our own Church feasts. And what about those Orthodox churches using the old Julian calendar? Whatever they decide is fine with me. I would not presume to correct my friend when visiting his home, and if he has no objection to the clock on his wall running a bit slow, then it is no business of mine. As we walk side by side throughout the world, there are more important challenges that we both have to face together than clocks on the wall, or calendars giving the dates for our feasts.
Posted by the Orthodox Christian Network. You can find the Orthodox Christian Network on Google+
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
31 , 2014 ⋅ 14 () ⋅ : , ,
· 
, , , . , , , . - , , , , , . 46 . .., - 11 14 . , 13 . , : . 1582 , XIII, , , .
( ), . , ( ), , , . ( . .)
, , , , . , . , , , .
, ( « »). - ? » "?
, . , . , 325, , , , , , . , , , ( " "), , . (, " " " ".)
, , , , 7 , 7 , , 25 ( ) , 7 . , , , , . , (), , 25 , . , 6 , . , , . , , , .
( «») ? : , , - . , -, , (", ? , ? ") , , , , , .
, . , ? . , , , , . , , , , .
. Google+
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++
· 
Kimberly Lewis Encapera · Top Commenter
The only argument that makes some sense to me for the "old" calendar" is that the "new" calendar ends up truncating the Apostles fast. I assume this is true anyways...
Reply · Like · 4 · Follow Post · January 1 at 1:25am
· 
Zoran Milosavljevic · Prosser Career Academy
We as Orthodox Christians should all be in the same date in my opinion.
Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · January 3 at 7:17pm
· 
Sorry Father, but this is a very shallow arguments. Did you even try to live by Old calendar? Nobody is going crazy and bipolar because of it.
Reply · Like · 6 · Follow Post · January 3 at 7:50pm
o 
Benjamin Bryant · Solution Engineer at Couchbase, Inc.
And the OCN again shows its true colors as a New Calendarist initiative, not to mention their other materialist overtones. I find most of what they offer difficult to enjoy.
· 
FrSava Stephen Leida · Memorial High School Tulsa OK
In 1582, when the calendar reform of Pope Gregory XIII was promulgated, the difference between the Julian and Gregorian reckonings was 10 days, not 13. It has since grown to 13 days, and will become 14 days beginning in 2100. And yes, those who follow the new reckoning do forfeit the blessing of keeping the Apostles' Fast in years when Holy Pascha is late, as happened in 2013.
Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · January 3 at 8:42pm
·
Zoran Milosavljevic · Prosser Career Academy
Of the 300 million+ orthodox.. A majority follow the Julian Calender. It does not change our religion as it is only a date that is formed by man. The purity of your soul lies from within.
Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · January 3 at 8:46pm
· 
Stephen Parsons · Los Gatos, California
@Kimberly - If Pascha were calculated according to the revised Julian calendar, then the Apostles' Fast would not be truncated as much as it is with the current situation (it's always variable). Since Pascha - and therefore the Sunday of All Saints, after which the fast starts - would generally be much earlier, the fast would also start commensurately earlier. With the end-date fixed, the fast generally would be longer than the mixed calculation results in. Over time, the length of the fast would average out to what a consistent use of the Julian calendar provides. It really would fix the calendar mess we have. And in another 85 years, all the NS/OS calculations will be off, since the difference will become 14 days, not 13. Can we fix this in the next 85 years? <holding breath>
· 
Evan Rodick · Tutor at Smarty cats
I don't think the issue is about dates. I think the problem is that the New Calendar seems to have been accepted to make union with the Catholics easier while sacrificing unity among Orthodox Christians. It was not universally accepted so now the "schizophrenia" is in our Church rather than in individual lives in society. It should have been all or nothing but now I'm fasting and the parish in the next town is feasting or vice versa. Is it really such a consolation to be on the same calendar with the Catholics while this disunity exists in our own Church?
Reply · Like · 5 · Follow Post · Yesterday at 1:36am
· 
If i am correct the problem is with the jewish passover, in the coincil it is said we must celebrate after jewish, with new calendar this is not always happening...am i wrong?
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 23 hours ago
· 
Katherine van der Lee · The College of Law, Guildford, United Kingdom
The Gregorian calendar is NOT astronomically accurate. No calendar is. Astronomical and scientific accuracy was not a reason given by Patriarch Metataxis for changing the church calendar. Achieving unity with non-Orthodox Christians was. In 90+ years it has not achieved that goal because there are important theological differences between the denominations. The author should know, he is a former Anglican. However, it has sown discord within the Orthodox community, the majority of which use the Julian Calendar in observing the fixed and movable feasts and fasts, which are a matter for the Church, not governments or scientists.
Reply · Like · 2 · Follow Post · 15 hours ago
· 
Orthodox Christian Network you treat us like idiot. This is 90% uncorrected. This part " Happily, the worst of those days is behind us, and we are now free to examine the question on its own historical and scientific merits." is malicious. Shame on you!
Reply · Like · 1 · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
·
Dear readers read facts for change: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ea_calendar.aspx.
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 13 hours ago
· 
Henry Sherburneoftheplains Gilman · Wabash College
We dont always follow those rules. For example this year the spring equinox is march 20 the full moon is april 4th a saturday so why isnt pascha on the 5th?
Reply · Like · Follow Post · 3 hours ago
+++
+++
|
|
|
+++
? , – 25 7 . , ? , , . – ?
, , : . , . . .
. , . , , ( alendae – ). , .
. : , , , , . 4 .
, 46 1- 45 .. . , pontifex maximus ( ). .
, 365 . , – 365,2425 (5 48 47 ). (annus bissextilis): .
I , 325 , , . 21 . , , , , , ( 14 ), .
: , , . .
, : 128 . - , , , , . , 2101 , 7 () , XX–XXI , 8 , , , 9001 — 1 ( ), - 25 ( ).
, , .
. XVI , .
IV, VII, XIII – (1582 .). .
XIII (1572-1585)
XIII , . , 21 , ( XVI . 11 ), 10 .
, (1520-1576 .) . . , .
, .. () . "" "" , , .
, XIII, . , , . – . , , . , (7- ; 1- ). , XIII I .
, . XVI , , , , . . . , . .
. , , .
.
XVI , . , . - : XIV 8 , XX XXI — 13, XXII 14 . . , , 27 1709 , () 8 ( XVIII 11 ), , , — 26 1812 , 7 , XIX 12 . , ( — , — , . . — . .).
XIX . . , (Newcomb) (1835-1909) . , (. .. , . , .. ) – « ». . .
1917 . . 16 (29) 1917 . «-» «». , . . , , . « », « ».
« »
« » 24 (6 ) 1918 . – « ». 31 1918 . 1-, 14- . . . , .
1923 . . , , .
«» . , , , . : , - . , , , , .
()
(), . () , , .
1923 . IV , . , 1923 . IV. , , . , 20- .
IV
11 , .. , , . , (1879 – 1956 .). , 900 , 800 ( 2800 ).
, 20- ( ) , , , , , . , «» «». : . , , ( 4/5 ).
. , .
, , . « : . (, -, ) . — . — . , , , , , ».
, . , , , ( 5 ) .
- , , .
. , . 28 31 . . ( 90 92 ). ( ). - . , . « ». ( , . ).
, 400 . . . 18 11 , 20 – 13 .
. : , , , , — , .
. , . , .
. : , , . , , , , , . , .
, , , , , .
, , , ( ), . , : . , .
, . , , , , , . , .
, , . - «», — , . .
, , , .
. – , , , . , , , , . . — . .
. , , , .
- , - , . - , . , , . , .
« »
++
|
- |
|
+
:
http://obozrevatel.com/crime/
++++++
http://obozrevatel.com/crime/34168-boeviki-kaznili-ukrainskih-voennoplennyih-na-donbasse-bloger.htm
+
Dajey Petros InformNapalm.
, . !
, , , , .
" 3 , ", - .
: 12 , 2 , 3 .
: 4 .
: , 4 .
, (. ). ( ).
1 , 2 ( 3).
, , ( ). .
, , :
" , . , , ", - (9 ) .
2:40 1 , 9 , , .
1:35 , 12 .
": . 12 13 . , ", - .
, . , .
" , . . , """, - .
Dajey Petros , 3 " " , .
" . , . , , ", - Dajey Petros.
" , : " "", - .
Russia Today(RT) , , :
" # , , , ", - Twitter .
, Al Jazeera. , .
, Al Jazeera "Dedouka"
:
.
, "Dedouka" .
"" — "". . , – , "".
", . , : " . – ", - .
"" "", — , 1963 , . " " , "" , .
, () - , .
"", 2014 , .
+++
+
|
