Easter western and eastern dates

I hope that the faithful had a good Easter, filled with renewal, or at least the resolution to do so. Greetings to all who have entered the Catholic Church at this time. Please do not politicize the one nominal Muslim convert; that serves neither faith, both of whom are blessed in the eyes of God and both of whom benefit from converts all the time.

I was not going to blog because it's obvious that the sign of the Lord earlier this week signals that people listen to me, but do whatever the **** they feel like doing anyway, even when I correct their errors in the faith. I can tell this was another Easter of lukewarm faith disguising secular and New Age beliefs for many, and like God, I am disgusted and fed up. The only exception is, of course, the work of the Holy Father in Rome, who continues to do all that he can as the worthy and true Vicar of Christ.

I am going to comment and clear up one thing, and that is the difference between "eastern" and "western" dates because I know that this factors into head games and mind games by some who have one foot on the dock of Catholicism (and Christianity in general) and one on the (sinking) boat. The "eastern" rites don't celebrate Easter until April 27. The eastern rites claim to have "the more accurate and oldest calendar." Baloney. And I mean no disrespect, as my much loved deceased stepfather was pious eastern rite. But the correct dates of Easter are the western dates. It does not matter that "calculations" and "tradition" argue for "eastern dates." The correct dates are those celebrated by the Seat of Peter, period. When eastern rites schismed from the Roman Catholic Church they lost their correctness on such matters. Jesus said clearly two things on this matter. One is that he is where several gather in his name. The other is that what Peter loosens or binds on earth is loosened or bound in heaven. Period. So the calendar that the Seat of Peter observes is the calendar that is "observed" in heaven. Period. If Peter had sailed to Ireland and placed the Seat of Peter there, that would have been the place and he would have been endorsed as making that binding decision by Jesus, who gave him and him alone that authority. Likewise the correct liturgical calendar is the responsiblity of the Seat of Peter.

I am sick of smarty pants beating me over the head with this subject. And if I am sick of it I will let you imagine how the Lord God feels about it. I do not want to weaken the faith of the eastern rite or tell them that they need to change their dates or piety, but I'll be a freaking monkey's uncle if I put up with people telling me, directly or indirectly, that they are "more correct" on this subject or any other. You can schism your fannies off but it does not make you more correct, it makes you incorrect because you no longer place yourself under the divinely inspired and correct position of the Seat of Peter. I'd really stop bragging about it if I were you with your noses in the air (and here I am again not insulting the pious, but those on the borderline who manipulate the differences between the east and west like it is some sort of sick arbitrage that they can benefit from).