| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Going Forward | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jan 4 2010, 02:26 AM (159 Views) | |
| Sedulius | Jan 4 2010, 02:26 AM Post #1 |
|
Field Marshal
|
I have a good idea of where I want to take things with the RPs. I suspended/ended certain things for my own sake in RL. Now I wish to revive them. I'm bringing back the Old Church with a new sense of faith and reason. It will keep communion with the Orthodox, but it will be something different. This is what I meant for it to be anyways. The Order of Saint Patrick will once again be military in nature, and other Orders will rise to its side. Ireland will be truly Irish, and the other parts of its empire will be true to their culture. However, Roman law and certain Roman structures will be implemented. I think I'll bring Edessa back under the Order's wing. I have only the time for one major nation and its operations. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Jan 4 2010, 02:40 PM Post #2 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
What does this mean for me and my relations with your nation(s)? |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Jan 6 2010, 12:41 PM Post #3 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Edessa stays a Roman state, just under Order control, as was originally intended by your Emperor. Ireland... well I've been doing some reading. I suppose it's best just to go back to Celtic Catholic Church thing for now, and go by Celtic Rite, or by Romanized Celtic Rite. That said, there's no reason for it to be out of communion with the Eastern Orthodox Churches. So, we'll essentially be united as one church, but they really aren't the same. Think of the Western Church and Eastern Church before the schism. They were one united church, but they were very different (being that the Irish more or less created the rites of the West). That said, there is still the branch in Venice, if Telo is still going with that. They would likely be following the Roman rite. So, I'm still unsure if I should just put the whole Church under Roman rite and call it Roman. Genesian and Colognian are both Roman rite, so I'd think, unless whoever created them seriously changed up the rites, it which case I could claim Roman rite alone. Orthodoxy would mostly go by Byzantine rite. I'd think the Colognians, being mostly in Kasnyia now, would have some sort of unique Kasynian rite. I'd think the Genesians would have deviated quite a bit from RL Roman Rite old and new. Just trying to see where everything is before I devote to a particular path. This is why I made the thread "Purity". I can just put in a new church leader pure in heart who says what to do, which will be whatever seems to be the right thing in this case. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Jan 6 2010, 05:36 PM Post #4 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
To my knowledge, Genesian and Colognian both used the Roman rite. Most of Orthodoxy, I think, would use the Byzantine rite, but I have long had it (at least in mind, though perhaps in writing) that the Antiochene rite is prevalent in much of Syria. Same with the Alexandrian rite in Egypt. In the western provinces, there is actually a fair amount of Roman rite use, though it can vary whether such consider themselves affiliated with the imperial creed or the papal one. I had some ideas for using revived Gallican rites in southern France, which I would go back to if I were to be able to reclaim my land there after France falls, though I don't know if I'd be allowed to do so. I've always been fascinated by the multiplicity of rite - ironically the Byzantine church was supressing other rites at a time when it was politically weak during the medieval period. |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Jan 6 2010, 05:59 PM Post #5 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Hmm. It might be more interesting, and certainly more defining, if I went with the Celtic rite. It forms the basis for and predates the Roman rite, so why not. I think the term Old Catholic should be used to distinguish non-Celtic members of my Church, but Celtic Catholic will suffice in the case of the Celtic nations. Even if members are using Roman rite, they are still distinguished from the Colognians and Genesians in their doctrine (or whatever term should be used). They won't recognize Papal bloodline, and they won't recognize modern reforms, hence that distinguishes my Church from both. I think there would be more than just the rite distinguishing it from Orthodoxy, but as I said, no reason to not be in communion. The Church will act on its own and rule itself, but should a Ecumenical Council be called it would be appropriate for them to send someone. Part of what led up to the Schism of 1054 was the exclusion of much western clergy in such councils, giving eastern clergy more pull in deciding overall doctrine, which a good part of why the doctrines became so different. All in all, the Irish people won't tolerate being something other than good ol' Irish Catholics. Going Celtic rite and not recognizing non-Roman Popes is Irish enough methinks. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Jan 6 2010, 06:13 PM Post #6 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
The western church in the late antique and early medieval periods was widerspread but more thinly populated than the eastern church. That meant that 1) there were fewer western bishops than eastern ones, and 2) they were spread over a wider area making it more difficult for many of them to make the journey to the empire's cities where councils tended to be held. Both of those factors help to explain the exclusion to which you refer, as in the west only places like Italy and Sicily, and Africa (northern Africa was western Christian before its conquest, even when under the eastern emperors) were really well connected to the east mediterranean world. What do you mean by "non-Roman Popes"? |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Jan 6 2010, 06:53 PM Post #7 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Both current Popes lay claim to the title of Bishop of Rome while never having been crowned Pope in Rome. The office of the Colognian Pope has never been Roman, and the office of the Genesian Pope is through descent, which is not the way of a legitimate Roman Pope. If we really wanted to go old Catholic, the Pope would need to be elected by senior clergymen in and near Rome. So, the Pope need not be of Roman birth or anything like that, but the Pope, being afterall the Bishop of Rome, should be elected by Rome, eh? That said, I should send Irish clergy to Rome. I should send chapter houses to Rome. Or at least I should send them to be around Rome. If the Genesians want to cause an incident, let them. Yay for peaceful invasion. |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Jan 6 2010, 08:44 PM Post #8 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
I'm still in this. Aww :(. I wanted to blow something up. |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Jan 8 2010, 04:11 AM Post #9 |
|
Field Marshal
|
You may be able to. It just depends on Genesian reaction. |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |








11:38 AM Jul 13