New Year?

Here's an interesting article to think about as the "year" begins

http://www.badeagle.com/journal/archives/2009_01.html#001313

Happy New Year! 2009
Crazy as it is, the Gregorian Calendar of the Western world is the only one of its kind. This January 1, 2009, is the only New Year in the world. The other cultures of the world see the new year in the Spring, when life returns. When there is new growth. The Catholic calendar puts the new year in the dead of Winter. Why is that? Isn't that just a little curious?
The Gregorian Calendar also divides time into a backward/forward table, like BC (before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini, "in the year of our Lord"). This causes a great deal of confusion to young people just learning world history, and it remains problematic even to adults. I know from personal experience in teaching ancient history to college level students. And to make things more confusing, we have the term "century" which does not match the numerological labels of years. For instance, the year 1620 is in the early part of the 17th century. Like, the year 321 is in the early part of the 4th century, etc. Fourth century does not mean 400's, and 17th century does not mean 1700's.
But to make matters even more confusing, when we're talking about Gregorian "BC" time, everything reverses. Time always flows forward (left to right) but, the numerical figures on Gregorian time begin in larger quantity, and decrease as they move forward! That is, until you're on the right side of Christ. (Also I must remind everyone, Annos Domini does not begin at the crucifixion of Christ, but at His birth.)
4000-----3000----2000----1000----0----1000----2009
Let's say we want to go back three thousand years. That would put as at 991 BC. The BC numbers all get smaller as you move to the right. And 991 BC is what part of what century? It is the early part of the 10th century, BC. (The year 1000 BC is the beginning of the 11th century, BC. That century-to-numerical year relationship is the same as on the AD side of the time line. The "century" is one number larger than the numerical year date.) So, "early" in BC time means the larger number: 991 is early on the time line than 990, or 899, even though it is a larger number.
This problematic system also extends to the concept of millennia, or, thousand year periods. The year 1620 is in the second millennium AD. The year 991 BC is in the first millenium BC. The year 1776 is toward the latter part of the 18th century, and the latter part of the 2nd Millennium. The year 991 BC is in the early part of the 1st Millenium BC.
Of course, the cherry on the mud pie is the fact that there is no year "0." The year 1 BC is followed by the year 1 AD. This fact has caused a problem or two when Bible prophecy enthusiasts (as well as scholars) calculate Biblical prophecies--most of which are from the "BC" period, though St. John's Revelation came in the AD 90's.
No other cultures have placed such awkward and unnecessary numerical abstractions on themselves. Even the Hebrew culture, on which the Christian religion is based, simply numbers the years from 1 to 5769 (today's Gregorian 2009). Why would anyone want to go against the entire world? What was Pope Gregory trying to accomplish? Some gigantic acknowledgement of Christ in the world? Is it all an unnecessary, graphic, iconographic, "idolatrous" superimposition? What is the purpose and effect?
The Gregorian Calendar became fixed and functional February 24, 1582 AD (latter part of the 16th century), on the authority of Pope Gregory XIII. What was the Catholic Church doing before then? Was it otherwise the year 5342? And what of the months of the year? And the number of days in a given month and a given year?
The Gregorian Calendar was a reformation of the Julilan Calendar, of course, which was a Roman thing, on the authority of Julius Caesar (45 BC). (The Catholic Church is definitely a "Roman" thing.) But this doesn't help us answer the question as to what year Gregory thought it was before his imposition of a new calendar. In fact, the only thing we can be sure of is that he was taking a Roman approach to time, and the Roman approach was itself rather novel, relative to the ancient Mesopotamian world.
In the end, the only thing we can be sure of is that civilization has always had twelve months, and that constituted some kind of year. And more certain than that, we know civilization has always had seven days in a week, and they have always been in the same order. This is of interest, because the Hebrew story of Bereshith (beginnings, or Genesis) actually begins with the week, marked by the holy Sabbath. Genesis 1:14 speaks of celestial lights which are "for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years." The world may have various understandings and interpretations of the length of months and years, but, there are phenomenon in nature which seem constant: sunrise, sunset; the cycles of the moon; the changes of weather (seasons), etc. However, seasons are what they are, of themselves. Man's calculations and labels have no bearing on the change of temperature or the advent of Spring. The only thing that has apparently never been affected by any of this is that mysterious weekly cycle--which has no natural account. There is no reason for it, or explanation for it, save that given in the Hebrew story of creation. And only the Hebrew story contains logic with the logistics. Other ancient myths fail to provide even the illusion of cause when it comes to the weekly cycle. The Hebrew Sabbath is il mistero di misteri, as our late friend Dr. Samueli Bacchiocchi might have said, "the mystery of mysteries."
I say, Happy New Year, in all sincerity, but I really don't know what year it is, or what day it is, numerically. The only thing I can really wish for is a Good Shabbas when it comes your way! Then we know we're on target!