Since it's Easter, let's talk of Gregorian calendar. The calendar was introduced by pope Gregory XIII in 1582, replacing the earlier Julian calendar. It seems like quite a progressive move from such a conservative establishment as the catholic church. However, we should consider two facts.
Firstly, the primary motivation for the calendar reform were… issues with computing Easter date. So it wasn't really about doing something for the sake of science, but rather using science for theological purposes. Would the church undergo a calendar reform if not Easter? In fact, wouldn't it even explicitly oppose any civil reform attempt?
Secondly, the religious character of the change meant conflict with other churches. Perhaps the catholic church was in the best position to enforce a calendar reform throughout much of Europe. Nevertheless, the adoption took a few centuries. Notably, Great Britain resisted until 1752, and Moscow until 1918. And the orthodox church still uses Julian calendar internally.
I'm not claiming that civil rulers were in any better position to introduce a calendar reform. In fact, I don't even know if they would have any motivation to do so. Nevertheless (yep, I love that word), I find it hard to consider the calendar reform as a progressive move — rather as something good that was made for the wrong reasons.