A secular world holiday must have seemed appealing in the early days of the first international diplomatic body, created following the “war to end all wars.” But not everyone was sold on the idea that a new calendar would unify people on a single consistent system.
“On the morrow of all this [postwar] woe and disillusion, and on the brink of such threatened upheaval, the League of Nations could still think it worth while to embark on a quixotic enterprise like calendar tinkering,” lamented Chief Rabbi of England Joseph Hertz in his 1931 paper “The Battle for the Sabbath at Geneva.” Just when nearly the whole world had “at long last acknowledged allegiance to one calendar, the League decided to start a new era of confusion for humanity.”
In a pro-reform 1927 magazine article in the Outlook titled “Shall we scrap the calendar?,” the editors maintained that months are changeable because they aren’t tied to any astronomical constants.
His argument was practical rather than religious, outlining logistical disadvantages of the new scheme: Every insurance premium, he pointed out, every monthly or quarterly rate, every contract worldwide that included dates from the Gregorian calendar would have to be renegotiated.
Seventh Day Adventists also raised concerns about the Sabbath, while various delegates debated which fixed date should be assigned to Easter: Finland wanted it late in the spring; Norway preferred April 20 to avoid conflict with the cod fishing season; and Ireland refused to participate without a unanimous agreement from the ecclesiastical authorities.
With the floodgates opened, the conference devolved, and by the time the Colombian delegate pointed to correspondence from the Holy See calling calendar reform “dangerous,” the IFC appeared doomed.
The original article contains 1,372 words, the summary contains 280 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A secular world holiday must have seemed appealing in the early days of the first international diplomatic body, created following the “war to end all wars.” But not everyone was sold on the idea that a new calendar would unify people on a single consistent system.
“On the morrow of all this [postwar] woe and disillusion, and on the brink of such threatened upheaval, the League of Nations could still think it worth while to embark on a quixotic enterprise like calendar tinkering,” lamented Chief Rabbi of England Joseph Hertz in his 1931 paper “The Battle for the Sabbath at Geneva.” Just when nearly the whole world had “at long last acknowledged allegiance to one calendar, the League decided to start a new era of confusion for humanity.”
In a pro-reform 1927 magazine article in the Outlook titled “Shall we scrap the calendar?,” the editors maintained that months are changeable because they aren’t tied to any astronomical constants.
His argument was practical rather than religious, outlining logistical disadvantages of the new scheme: Every insurance premium, he pointed out, every monthly or quarterly rate, every contract worldwide that included dates from the Gregorian calendar would have to be renegotiated.
Seventh Day Adventists also raised concerns about the Sabbath, while various delegates debated which fixed date should be assigned to Easter: Finland wanted it late in the spring; Norway preferred April 20 to avoid conflict with the cod fishing season; and Ireland refused to participate without a unanimous agreement from the ecclesiastical authorities.
With the floodgates opened, the conference devolved, and by the time the Colombian delegate pointed to correspondence from the Holy See calling calendar reform “dangerous,” the IFC appeared doomed.
The original article contains 1,372 words, the summary contains 280 words. Saved 80%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!