Easter & Astrology, and what no one ever explained to you

Before using the Bible as an argument against astrology, it is worth knowing how the date of the Easter you just celebrated was calculated.

Moral superiority that arrives before study

There is a pattern that repeats with a regularity that is no longer surprising but still deserves to be named with precision. Someone discovers the work of evolutionary astrology. They do not study it. They do not question it with genuine curiosity. They do not investigate the intellectual, philosophical, and historical tradition underlying it. They take a biblical verse, often stripped of the historical and linguistic context that would give it meaning, and use it as a projectile.

The question this pattern raises is not theological. It is psychological. Because what is at stake is not a genuine divergence of opinion on spirituality. It is what contemporary psychology describes precisely as spiritual bypass: the use of spiritual language and references to avoid the internal emotional work that genuine spirituality demands. The Bible as a shield. Moral superiority as armor. And beneath both, invariably, a wound that has not been looked at and which seeks in the judgment of others the temporary relief that confronting oneself does not offer.

Moral superiority is not a spiritual position. It is a sophisticated ego defense mechanism that uses the language of the sacred to legitimize itself. Anyone who genuinely practices a spiritual tradition with depth and honesty has no need to use that practice to place themselves above anyone else. Humility is not an optional value in spiritual traditions. It is structural. It is what makes growth possible.

And the first commandment the New Testament attributes to Jesus is not about astrology. It is about love. The second is about not judging. The sequence is not accidental.

The date no one questions

Easter does not have a fixed date. Unlike Christmas, which was established on a specific day of the solar calendar, Easter moves. It happens on a different Sunday each year, in a range that can vary between March and April. And the reason why it moves is as simple as it is ignored by most of those who celebrate it: the date of Easter is calculated based on the Moon.

The Council of Nicaea, in 325 AD, established the rule that still determines the date of Easter throughout the Christian world today: the first Sunday after the first Full Moon that occurs after the spring equinox. This rule is neither poetic nor metaphorical. It is astronomical. It is a calculation based on lunar cycles that the Church codified, institutionalized, and applies to this day, calling that specific Full Moon the Paschal Moon.

Paschal Moon. The name, in all its elegance, says exactly what it is: a Moon with a Christian name given to an astronomical phenomenon that existed long before Christianity and which the Church needed to integrate into its system of sacred time because there was no way to ignore it. The Moon does not ask for permission to exist. And lunar cycles do not submit to any theology.

Those who use the Bible to condemn work with lunar cycles celebrate Easter on a date calculated by those very cycles. This is not irony. It is an inconsistency that can only be maintained as long as one does not study what one claims to defend.

The Vatican and the zodiac that no one wants to see

If the date of Easter calculated by the Moon is not enough of an argument, there is a second point that is literally impossible to ignore for those who have eyes to see.

St. Peter's Square in Rome, the heart of world Catholicism, the place where pilgrims from all over the world converge in search of closeness to the sacred, has the signs of the Zodiac on its pavement. Perfectly aligned. Perfectly visible. Part of the square's original architecture, designed by Bernini in the 17th century by direct commission from the Vatican.

Inside the Vatican, the Sala Pontificia has on its ceiling astrological representations that have been part of papal decoration for centuries. Renaissance popes did not just tolerate astrology. They used it. They consulted astrologers. They made decisions based on birth charts. The history of this relationship is documented, studied, and available for anyone who wants to consult the primary sources in the Vatican's own archives.

The question that arises is not rhetorical. It is genuinely historical: if astrology is heresy, what are the signs of the Zodiac doing in St. Peter's Square? What theology presided over the decision to place them there? And who ordered them to be removed?

No one removed them. They are there. And they will continue to be.

Spiritual bypass has a characteristic that makes it particularly resistant to fact: it selects information that confirms a pre-existing position and systematically ignores what contradicts it. It is easier to use an isolated verse as a projectile than to study the complete history of the institution in whose name that verse is launched. Study requires humility. Judgment does not.

The Bible and the stars

The argument that the Bible condemns astrology deserves to be examined with the rigor that any historical and textual argument demands.

The biblical text was written over several centuries, in cultures that lived in direct relation with celestial cycles. The Magi from the East who, according to the Gospel of Matthew, followed a star to find the place of Jesus' birth, were astrologers. The original Greek term in the text is magoi, which precisely designated practitioners of the art of reading the heavens in Persian and Babylonian traditions. The nativity narrative, in its own canonical text, places astrologers as the first external figures to recognize the significance of what happened.

The book of Job refers to the Pleiades, Orion, and Arcturus. The book of Amos mentions the same constellations. The Apocalypse of John is a deeply astronomical text, filled with references to celestial cycles that any astronomer or astrologer of the time would have immediately recognized.

What the Hebrew prophetic tradition condemned was not the observation of the stars as a symbolic language. It was the worship of the stars as deities, which was a specific religious practice of neighboring cultures. The distinction is fundamental and is rarely made by those who use isolated verses as arguments. Because making the distinction would require having studied the historical and linguistic context of the text. And those who use the Bible as a projectile have rarely studied enough to know this distinction.

What the history of the Church shows

The relationship between the Catholic Church and astrology throughout history is not the permanent opposition that the popular narrative suggests. It is a relationship of integration, tension, instrumental use, and selective condemnation that reflects the dynamics of political and institutional power much more than a consistent theological position.

St. Thomas Aquinas, the doctor of the Church par excellence, whose theology remains a fundamental reference in Catholic thought, wrote about the influence of celestial bodies on human temperaments. Not as heresy. As natural philosophy integrated into Christian theology.

Dante Alighieri, whose Divine Comedy is one of the most profoundly Catholic texts of Western literature, structured the heavens of Paradise according to the planets of the Ptolemaic system. The architecture of the sacred, in a work the Church never condemned, is astrological.

Sixtus IV, pope between 1471 and 1484, was himself a practitioner of judicial astrology. Julius II chose the date for the foundation of the new St. Peter's Basilica based on a birth chart. Paul III, who convened the Council of Trent, did not make decisions without consulting his personal astrologer.

These are not marginal facts. They are the central history of the relationship between the Church and celestial knowledge for over a thousand years. A history that is documented, available, and remains completely unknown to those who use the authority of that same Church to condemn astrology.

Moral superiority that does not rest on study is not superiority. It is ignorance with a good presentation.

What true spirituality is

Jesus Christ did not found a building. He did not establish a hierarchy of judgment. What the Gospels record, regardless of the theological tradition from which they are read, is a teaching about the sacred inner space, about the direct relationship with the divine that needs no intermediary, about love as a fundamental law that precedes and surpasses any institutional norm.

Genuine spirituality is demanding internal work. It is the honest confrontation with one's own shadows, one's own fears, one's own inconsistencies between what one declares to believe and what concrete choices reveal one believes in practice. It is exactly the work that spiritual bypass avoids, using the language of the sacred so as to never have to reach the place where that work requires real presence.

Those who use the Bible to judge the work of others are practicing the opposite of what the text they invoke teaches. This is not an opinion. It is a direct reading of the canonical text that anyone with access to a Bible can verify for themselves.

The evolutionary astrology I practice is not incompatible with spirituality. It is a symbolic language of self-knowledge that serves exactly what any genuine spiritual tradition serves: a deeper understanding of who we are, what we came here to do, and how we can live more consciously, more responsibly, and more authentically. Without judgment. Without superiority. With the intellectual rigor and emotional honesty that real work demands.

A final note

The Easter that just passed was calculated based on the Moon. The signs of the Zodiac are in St. Peter's Square. Renaissance popes consulted astrologers. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote about the influence of the stars. Dante structured Paradise around the planets.

These are not opinion-based arguments. They are documented historical facts, available in any university library, verifiable by anyone who wants to study what they claim before using it as an argument.

Ignorance always has a cure: it is called study. Spiritual bypass and the moral superiority that accompanies it are considerably more difficult to treat, because they require those who practice them to be willing to acknowledge that the discomfort they feel when faced with the work of others is not spiritual indignation. It is the reflection of something left to work on internally.

And that work, as any astrologer knows, no one can do for us. Regardless of how many verses we cite to avoid beginning.

This article is available on all my platforms. Share with anyone who needs to read it.