Salvete omnes,

Well guess that essentially means that women must be excluded from
all political offices, be seen and not heard in the household during
her husband's business and political dinners, have a male escort to
take them to the shopping malls (markets), sandle footed, pregnant
and chained to the stove with just enough slack in the chain to reach
the bedroom.

Would it not be a better idea to have a re-enactment theocratic,
middle eastern type state with the retention of age old tribal
customs that predates the religion you choose?

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, forthegodshonor@a... wrote:
> Salvete to the women of Nova Roma (and the men who wish to learn
this subject
> too),
>
> I have to pass it up with Cassius, but I would like to create a
group -
> hopefully formally recognized by Nova Roma - that would teach women
about how to be
> proper Roman Matronas, and how women in Rome were treated, expected
to act,
> etc.
>
> Granted women did NOT have the best of lives in Rome. They were
strictly
> under the direction of the Paterfamilias and Rome's society was
extremely male -
> dominated. I will warn that this group will stress that - but not
in the
> sense to keep up that mentallity that woman can't do anything, but
in the sense
> that this is how it was - what do we want now.
>
> Are there any women (again, or men) who would like to join such a
group?
> Please e-mail privately (or I guess here on this list) at
Forthegodshonor@a...
> . My AIM is the same, Forthegodshonor . I thank you very much!
>
> I have created a poll for this, please feel free to put your
answers there as
> well. The poll will last a month. Ending on the 21 of March. The
birthday
> of Rome.
>
> Take care, be well, much love!
> Valete,
>
> ~*~**~ Katie/Seta/Anneia/Ari ~**~*~
>
> ~ those who are different change the world those
> who are the same keep it that way ~
>
> Thank you to "Master Akane" for allowing me to use this quote in my
> signature.
> I am not aware of who the originating author is. But it's too true
to pass
> up.
> It's how I feel as well. Enjoy it. :)
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ShemsuSet
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ma-A-Kherw
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/beloveddaughter
> http://www.kemetjournals.com/users/hrhprincessseta
> http://www.fanfiction.net/~HRHPrincessAri
>
> Main E-mail:
> Forthegodshonor@a...
> Second E-mail:
> BelovedDaughterOfMaatAndSet@h...
> Third E-mail:
> SetaTheThunderbird@y...
> AIM:
> FutureQueenOfAll
> Yahoo IM:
> SetaTheThunderbird
> MSN:
> BelovedDaughterOfMaatAndSet
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete omnes.

To introduce myself briefly:

I am Lucius Geminius Publicus (born Kenneth Edwin
Halliwell) and I am a new Civis Novae Romae. I reside
in America Boreoccidentalis (Washington, the state).

My fondest thanks to the Censors, Caius Flavius
Diocletianus and Marcus Octavius Germanicus, for
approving my citizenship in such a timely fashion.

And special thanks to Gaius Geminius Germanus, the
Paterfamilias, for accepting me into the gens Geminia
so warmly. I hope I can bring honor to the gens, Nova
Roma, and the Gods.


To my fellow Citizens: Live Long and Prosper.
[Before anyone raises a split-hand salute, please note
that Apollo, the God who gave man medicine (Live
Long),
and Mercurius, the God of commerce (Prosper), are the
patron Gods of the gens Geminia! Yes, I do have a
sense of humor and a keen appreciation of the irony
inherent in all things.]


Brief intro done. I have a comment and two (minor)
questions.

The comment. I've been monitoring this list for the
past couple of weeks (whilst waiting for my
citizenship to be approved) and have found the, er,
banter to be fascinating. The topics are varied and
the viewpoints diverse.

It appears to me that the Roman tradition of
lively oratory is alive and well. And this speaks
well of NR. Thanks to you all.


The (minor) questions. (Yeah, I'm a newbie, folks.)

What consitutes a 'socii' as opposed to a 'citizen'?

In regards to citizen status: what does 'Status:
unknown' (my current status) mean?

Thanks for any help. And feel free to contact me
offline if you don't want to burden the list.
Gratias agere.

Vale,
Lucius Geminius Publicus



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

Cn. Salix Astur L. Gemino Publico S.P.D.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Lucius Geminius Publicus
<kenn_halliwell@y...> wrote:

> Salvete omnes.
>
> To introduce myself briefly:
>
> I am Lucius Geminius Publicus (born Kenneth Edwin
> Halliwell) and I am a new Civis Novae Romae. I reside
> in America Boreoccidentalis (Washington, the state).

Welcome to Nova Roma, L. Gemine.

<<snipped for brevity>>

> To my fellow Citizens: Live Long and Prosper.
> [Before anyone raises a split-hand salute, please note
> that Apollo, the God who gave man medicine (Live
> Long), and Mercurius, the God of commerce (Prosper), are the
> patron Gods of the gens Geminia! Yes, I do have a
> sense of humor and a keen appreciation of the irony
> inherent in all things.]

You do seem to have a sense of humour :-).

> Brief intro done. I have a comment and two (minor)
> questions.
>
> The comment. I've been monitoring this list for the
> past couple of weeks (whilst waiting for my
> citizenship to be approved) and have found the, er,
> banter to be fascinating. The topics are varied and
> the viewpoints diverse.
>
> It appears to me that the Roman tradition of
> lively oratory is alive and well. And this speaks
> well of NR. Thanks to you all.

We try to do our best in that aspect. I'd bet that you will be
joining us pretty soon ;-).

> The (minor) questions. (Yeah, I'm a newbie, folks.)
>
> What consitutes a 'socii' as opposed to a 'citizen'?

A "socius" is a citizen that failed to comply with the requirements
of the last census (those requirements are very lenient; even if you
had done nothing in Nova Roma for years, you just had to reply to one
mail from the censores to keep being a citizen). In other
words, "socii" are people who at one point joined Nova Roma but who
no longer participate in our activities.

> In regards to citizen status: what does 'Status:
> unknown' (my current status) mean?

You will have to ask the censores about that :-). Its probably a
software quirk or something. In my own ID page, my "status"
reads "Citizen: Assidui 2003", meaning that I am a civis and not a
socius and that I paid the taxes this year.

> Thanks for any help. And feel free to contact me
> offline if you don't want to burden the list.
> Gratias agere.

I am sure that others will benefit from these questions of yours, so
I have decided to reply right here on the main list. I hope you don't
mind :-).

S.V.B.E.E.V.
CN.SALIX.T.F.A.NEP.OVF.ASTVR

---Salve Pomponia:

Thanks so much for your kind wishes. I am listed on the Jewish
Sodalitas. I am 'mail on the website' right now, due to time and
mailbox constrictions, etc. But I am there in spirit.

Vale,
Pompeia


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "rory12001" <rory12001@y...> wrote:

> Salve Pompeia Cornelia;
> and welcome back; May I also wish you, Quinus Lanius, Rufinus & all
> our Christian Cives a Happy Christmas, & may I thank Calvus for his
> regards for Channukah and if anyone wants to how a proud member of
> the Jewish Sodalitas can fully support the Religio, let me just say I
> am in the best sense, a Roman.
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael
> Kelly)" <mjk@d...> wrote:
> > Salve Pompeia,
> >
> > I am happy and feel nostelgic to see your postings on this list
> > again. All the best for the holidays and have a happy and
> prosperous
> > new year!
> >
> > Quintus Lanius Paulinus
> >
> >
> >
> > ---

Lucius Geminius Publicus wrote:

> I am Lucius Geminius Publicus (born Kenneth Edwin
> Halliwell) and I am a new Civis Novae Romae. I reside
> in America Boreoccidentalis (Washington, the state).

Welcome to Nova Roma Luci Gemini. I see that Gnaeus
Salix Astur has already answered your questions.

You have the privilege of living in the province of my
friend and gubernatorial colleague Julilla Sempronia
Magna. I hope you have a chance to meet her in person.

Vale,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salve Honorable Pompeia Cornelia Strabo, Amica!

Thank You my friend!

>Salvete Omnes:
>
>My sincere congratulations to the victors of this years elections.
>I wish you the best in the New Year. I have a feeling of optimism.
>
>Bene valete,
>Pompeia

--

Vale

Caeso Fabius Quintilianus
Senior Consul et Senator
Propraetor Thules
Sodalitas Egressus Beneficarius et Praefectus Provincia Thules
Civis Romanus sum
************************************************
Cohors Consulis CFQ
http://www.insulaumbra.com/cohors_consulis_cfq/
************************************************
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"I'll either find a way or make one"
************************************************
Dignitas, Iustitia, Fidelitas et Pietas
Dignity, Justice, Loyalty and Dutifulness

Salvete all,

While I do not want the elections redone, I am seriously wondering about the flaws in this election system. Australia, the country sited over and over as the modern nation using this system with success has also had problems with it. By using strategic voting, a vicious racist party won seats in a provincial parliament in Australia. So in reality the country supposedly using this system with success is not happy with it.

When certain citizens claimed that this system would allow factions to take over NR, I didn't believe it. Now I see that I should have listened. We now see that a candidate has won whom only 5 centuries chose for Consul because one more century (by lot no less!) wanted him as their *second* place choice. I won 16 centuries. A citizen whom only 5 centuries want as Consul should not have been elected.

Last year's system or the one before that would have given us Salix Astur as Consul. A run-off would have decided whom the second Consul would be, which is quite fair. Using this system-- which plays with numbers-- has given a second Consul whom only a *very small* percent of centuries wanted.

So while I am a bit relieved that I have not won, losing an election because the system is inaccurate isn't sitting well with me. More than 3 times the amount of citizens wanted me over Marinus as Consul and yet he has won. Something is very wrong here.

I am not asking that the elections be done over because using the same flawed system the results would be the same. However I do want it to be known that the second elected Consul, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus is in actuality a person who will be sitting on the Curule chair soley because of a flawed election system.

I'll be addressing the Senate within the next few days as a reminder to all of the new elected magistrates there that this electoral system needs to be changed before we have year after year of magistracies filled with citizens who were not the direct choice of the people.

Valete,
Diana Moravia Aventina




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete;

Caius Minucius, I shall address your comments individually.

1. Your doubt as to my knowledge of Christianity is justifiable, as I am no longer a Christian. However, I will not retract my statements. I consider my knowledge of Christianity somewhat above average, as I studied traditionalist Catholic theology and canon law at Christ the King Monastery in Cullman, Alabama while a novice Benedictine.
2. A person's religious beliefs are just that their own. However, magistrates did have sacerdotal responsibilities in Roma antiqua that we as Nova Romans seem to forget.
3. In this on-line community it is very easy to get into a "role-playing" mentality. Marinus has expressed that he was not role-playing but actually did honor Venus. I accept that 100% and acknowledge his act, without restraint.
4. Finally, I have seen you bait people...and attempt to take them down a long road of insults and on-line fighting. You will not see me walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please do so privatly.

Valete;

Gaius Modius Athanasius

In a message dated 12/26/2003 3:38:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, ben@... writes:

> Really? I'm not Christian, but I'd certainly appreciate a citation of
> proof for the above, one that applies to _all_ Christians, as per your
> statement. You may well be quite knowledgeable in the Religio Romana,
> but I very much doubt that you can claim the same for Christianity - and
> I would appreciate your retracting that implied claim.
>
> > Additionally, would Consul-elect Marinus be willing to sacrifice a
> > bull (or other animal) to the Gods as the Consuls of antiqua would
> > have done as part of their magisterial responsibility? Would the
> > pastor of his Church find this OK?
>
> Is this kind of fishing expedition into the specifics of a cive's
> religious practice encouraged here in Nova Roma, or is this strictly
> your own approach? I must say that I'm absolutely appalled in either
> case: you speak as a representative of the Religio. I do not see that
> you have the right to question *anyone's* contract with the Gods,
> whatever it may be; it is an arrogation of the Gods' privileges to
> yourself, and I find it inappropriate and highly offensive.
>
> > Its not acceptable, in my eyes, for someone who is not a follower of
> > the Religio to play "lip service" to the Gods as if they were a
> > believer on this mailing list. If Marinus truly believes that Venus
> > helped him win the election then I would EXPECT him to make a physical
> > (not virtual) offering to her in thanks for such a blessing.
>
> I don't know about Marinus, but I hope you _never_ express this sort of
> expectations about my preferences and choices for worship. My connection
> with the Gods is strictly between me and them, and attempts
> to mediate
> are most highly unwelcome, to put it mildly.
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Diana Moravia wrote:
| More than 3 times the amount of citizens wanted
| me over Marinus as Consul and yet he has won.

Salve, Diana Moravia Aventina.

Interesting statement. Have you checked this figure with the rogators,
or are you referring to centuries?

Vale, Titus Octavius Pius.

- --

"Qui desiderat bellum, praeparet bellum." - Vetinari
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/7cYUAGtgaSonkUoRAhokAJ9re0BYNtnu6JkuPMvm9HBkns/CnQCfcYVB
ujoQFexomV9Nq/NHtpLN2xo=
=Cpto
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Sp. Postumius Quiritibus et Dianae Moraviae S.P.D.

Salvete, Omnes.

I could argue, vehemently, for the legislation which was tested by you, the People, and approved by you, the People of Nova Roma. However, at this point, I would find it pointless to do so. Therefore, I will just speak on the purpose and effectiveness of our current voting proceedures of the Comitia Centuriata.

A current argument is that, in this most recent election, a candidate was elected to an office who had less centuries choose him as a first choice than an opponent. This argument is taken further to state that, because more centuries chose a candidate as their first choice who was not elected, it was flawed. I would like to use this argument to demonstrate that the system is not flawed, using the numbers from this past election, though I will not be using the same names.

In the first round, of 49 voting centuries, Candidate A was the first choice in 28 centuries, Candidate B in 16, and Candidate C in 5. Having more than half of the voting centuries, Candidate A was elected to the office.

In the second round, the 28 centuries voting for Candidate A were given to their second choice candidates. This being so, at the end of the second round, Candidate B recieved 8 of those centuries, giving the candidate 24 centuries, while Candidate C recieved 20 of those centuries, giving this candidate 25 centuries. Candidate C having the majority of centuries, but not more than half the voting centuries, this candidate was moved into the next round, and the opponent, Candidate B, was eliminated by having the fewest centuries.

In the third round, those centuries voting for Candidate B were distributed to Candidate C, giving this candidate 49 centuries.

Now, for the question: How is this fair? The answer: 28 centuries are happy that Candidate A has been elected. of those 28, 20 centuries are happy that Candidate C has been elected, whereas only 8 would have been happy if Candidate B was to be elected.

So let us look at this. 28 were happy to begin with. Then, of them, 20 stayed happy, whereas 8 were not. Only 8 centuries would be unhappy, as opposed to the 20 which are happy. 20 is definantly a majority of 28, and this is undisputed. A majority of centuries are happy, and this cannot be disputed.

I ask you, anyone, to explain to me, if it is at all possible, how having 20 centuries voting in favor of a candidate of 28 centuries, and thereby winning an election, is unfair? I know this is a fair manner, and this cannot be viably disputed.

Another argument is that a run-off election would have decided the second official. I submit that the run-off was conducted, but not in the manner as would have been desired, perhaps, by the proposer of this argument. In this run-off, Candidate C won 25 of 49 centuries, whereas Candidate B won 24. In this case, though Candidate C did not win more than half, this candidate did win a majority of the voting centuries.

Let me ask you, People of Rome, how it is unfair that a candidate, winning a majority of the voting centuries, be elected to an office. It would be a lie to say it to be so, because it is fair. It was designed to be fair, and to halt a need for run-off elections. It has done this. I propose that we allow it to continue to do so.

Optime Valete,

Spurius Postumius Tubertus

Salvete Quirites;
Oh how bitter are the sour grapes of the loser....

It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who voted for
the Lex.
bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera

>
> Let me ask you, People of Rome, how it is unfair that a candidate,

winning a majority of the voting centuries, be elected to an office.
It would be a lie to say it to be so, because it is fair. It was
designed to be fair, and to halt a need for run-off elections. It has
done this. I propose that we allow it to continue to do so.

>
> Optime Valete,
>
> Spurius Postumius Tubertus

Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.

Please consider paying taxes in 2004!

Valete;

Gaius Modius Athanasius


In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, rory12001@... writes:

> It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who
> voted for
> the Lex.
> bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera

Salve, Gaius Modius Athansius -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 12:07:40PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> Caius Minucius, I shall address your comments individually.
>
> 1. Your doubt as to my knowledge of Christianity is justifiable, as I
> am no longer a Christian. However, I will not retract my statements.
> I consider my knowledge of Christianity somewhat above average, as I
> studied traditionalist Catholic theology and canon law at Christ the
> King Monastery in Cullman, Alabama while a novice Benedictine.

I note that you have not addressed the issue I've asked about. Do you
have any proof that "It is not acceptable for a Christian to "believe"
in the existance of other Gods"? No matter what you studied or where,
unless you can provide support for your statement, it is flat wrong.

> 2. A
> person's religious beliefs are just that their own. However,
> magistrates did have sacerdotal responsibilities in Roma antiqua that
> we as Nova Romans seem to forget.

I don't know whom you're speaking of as "we", but the first part was
precisely my point. You do not have any right to dictate or demand how
someone will honor their contract with the Gods, period. Your attempting
to do so was inappropriate and highly offensive, as I've said; it may
well be impious, although I will not make that claim at this time.

> 3. In this on-line community it is very easy to get into a
> "role-playing" mentality. Marinus has expressed that he was not
> role-playing but actually did honor Venus. I accept that 100% and
> acknowledge his act, without restraint.

Thank you for the clarification. This was anything but obvious in your
original statement.

> 4. Finally, I have seen you bait people...and attempt to take them
> down a long road of insults and on-line fighting.

Your perception of my actions - speaking of baiting, that's how I see
this - is of little concern to me. However, I will not tolerate your
expressions of religious intolerance on this list, toward Christians or
anyone else. Any repetition of it _will_ be referred for appropriate
legal action here in Nova Roma. If you keep pushing, I will make a test
case of you to settle this once and for all. You do not get to ride
roughshod over others who do not share your preferences, no matter what
your position is in the Religio Romana.

> You will not see me
> walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please
> do so privatly.

I have no interest in private conversation with you, unless you choose
to send me an apology or some possible explanation of your behavior.
You've made an offensive public statement; I've responded to it
publicly. If you find that embarassing, I suggest that you modify your
high-handed approach to cives' religious preferences.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I manere in Viresium et Honorare
I remain in Strength and Honor

- I've been in the hospital November, having double vision, want to
send my check from Ireland?
Before then I am proud to say I made the first donation to the
Temple of Minerva at Academia Thules & it was double my taxes,
I may be Capite Censi but I'm not cheap.

Vale Pomponia Fabia Vera

In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:

> Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.
>
> Please consider paying taxes in 2004!
>
> Valete;
>
> Gaius Modius Athanasius
>
>
> In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,

rory12001@y... writes:

>
> > It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who
> > voted for
> > the Lex.
> > bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera

Salvete;

Caius Minucius, I mentioned to you in my last e-mail that I would gladly take this discussion privatly. If you have no interest in discussing this in private, then I have no interest in entertaining your diatribe. Everyone who knows me knows that I am a very tolerant man, and very respectful of the religous beliefs of others.

If you wish to persue "legal" action against me, please follow the dictates of your conscience. I will gladly defend my honor with a vengance you cannot yet fathom.

Valete;

Gaius Modius Athanasius

In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:40:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, ben@... writes:

> Your perception of my actions - speaking of baiting, that's how I see
> this - is of little concern to me. However, I will not tolerate your
> expressions of religious intolerance on this list, toward Christians or
> anyone else. Any repetition of it _will_ be referred for appropriate
> legal action here in Nova Roma. If you keep pushing, I will make a test
> case of you to settle this once and for all. You do not get to ride
> roughshod over others who do not share your preferences, no matter what
> your position is in the Religio Romana.
>
> > You will not see me
> > walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please
> > do so privatly.
>
> I have no interest in private conversation with you, unless you choose
> to send me an apology or some possible explanation of your behavior.
> You've made an offensive public statement; I've responded to it
> publicly. If you find that embarassing, I suggest that you
> modify your
> high-handed approach to cives' religious preferences.

Salve!

Si vales, valeo!

I will be brutally honest here, and you'll find that I am very opinionated on the subject. I am a lady. I don't want to have to mow the lawn or take out the trash or fix the car. I want to stay inside decorating, cooking and making my home a pleasant place for my family and guests. In my opinion that is my role and I am very good at what I do. As long as the women of Nova Roma have a voice and the men respect us, I see no reason for us not to act like proper women of the Republic.

Count me in! In fact, I'll help you run the group!

Vale!

Julia Modia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Taxes were collected last spring, not in November.

Drusus

rory12001 wrote:

> - I've been in the hospital November, having double vision, want to
> send my check from Ireland?
> Before then I am proud to say I made the first donation to the
> Temple of Minerva at Academia Thules & it was double my taxes,
> I may be Capite Censi but I'm not cheap.
>
> Vale Pomponia Fabia Vera
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> > Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.
> >
> > Please consider paying taxes in 2004!
> >
> > Valete;
> >
> > Gaius Modius Athanasius
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> rory12001@y... writes:
> >
> > > It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who
> > > voted for
> > > the Lex.
> > > bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

Salve!

Si vales, valeo!

I am a lady, and as such I will not shout or curse or act inappropriately. I will let the actions of Gaius Modius speak for him. Those of you who are on the Religio list know that when I first came there I didn't even know what Nova Roma was. I got a lot of flack because I said the wrong thing..so much flack that I left the group. It was Gaius who came to me and said, "Hey, it's cool with me that you're Wiccan. Your own, private religion is your own affair as long as you respect the Religio. We just do things a certain way because we are a reconstructionist group" He also offered to let me join his gens and extended his hand in friendship to me. When I returned I was welcomed into gens Modia with open arms and Gaius was delighted that I had decided to let what happened go.

This is the truth as I know it. You be the judge. I trust you'll find that my paterfamilia has been wrongfully accused. He is a very tolerant man and a noble citizen of the Republic.

Vale!

Julia Modia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve!

Si vales, valeo!

With all the respect and regard you are due, Sir, I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You shall have no other Gods..." is common knowledge. Christianity is very clear in that it teaches that you can not honor any deities but Yahweh. The Israelites got punished for it. The Christian God is a jealous God..the Bible says that quite plainly.

As for the rest of the argument, as a new citizen I have absolutely no place in commenting on that.

Vale!

Julia Modia

----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve, Gaius Modius Athansius -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 12:07:40PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> Caius Minucius, I shall address your comments individually.
>
> 1. Your doubt as to my knowledge of Christianity is justifiable, as I
> am no longer a Christian. However, I will not retract my statements.
> I consider my knowledge of Christianity somewhat above average, as I
> studied traditionalist Catholic theology and canon law at Christ the
> King Monastery in Cullman, Alabama while a novice Benedictine.

I note that you have not addressed the issue I've asked about. Do you
have any proof that "It is not acceptable for a Christian to "believe"
in the existance of other Gods"? No matter what you studied or where,
unless you can provide support for your statement, it is flat wrong.

> 2. A
> person's religious beliefs are just that their own. However,
> magistrates did have sacerdotal responsibilities in Roma antiqua that
> we as Nova Romans seem to forget.

I don't know whom you're speaking of as "we", but the first part was
precisely my point. You do not have any right to dictate or demand how
someone will honor their contract with the Gods, period. Your attempting
to do so was inappropriate and highly offensive, as I've said; it may
well be impious, although I will not make that claim at this time.

> 3. In this on-line community it is very easy to get into a
> "role-playing" mentality. Marinus has expressed that he was not
> role-playing but actually did honor Venus. I accept that 100% and
> acknowledge his act, without restraint.

Thank you for the clarification. This was anything but obvious in your
original statement.

> 4. Finally, I have seen you bait people...and attempt to take them
> down a long road of insults and on-line fighting.

Your perception of my actions - speaking of baiting, that's how I see
this - is of little concern to me. However, I will not tolerate your
expressions of religious intolerance on this list, toward Christians or
anyone else. Any repetition of it _will_ be referred for appropriate
legal action here in Nova Roma. If you keep pushing, I will make a test
case of you to settle this once and for all. You do not get to ride
roughshod over others who do not share your preferences, no matter what
your position is in the Religio Romana.

> You will not see me
> walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please
> do so privatly.

I have no interest in private conversation with you, unless you choose
to send me an apology or some possible explanation of your behavior.
You've made an offensive public statement; I've responded to it
publicly. If you find that embarassing, I suggest that you modify your
high-handed approach to cives' religious preferences.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I manere in Viresium et Honorare
I remain in Strength and Honor


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Spurius Postumius Tubertus

The current lex REQUIRES the dropping of the lowest candidate from the ballot EVEN in a two person race. Logic but not the current lex would seem to require TWO candidates to have a RUN-OFF. As this is being called the third round in this years Consular election it had only ONE candidate and of course he or she is going to win in the third uncontested round as the first candidate the one elected , his votes will not be counted and the votes for the next candidate dropped will NOT be counted only the third round votes FOR the third round candidate will count.

The current election system is flawed and needs to be replace by REAL run-offs.

BTW I supported both Diana and Marinus for Consul.


Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

----- Original Message -----
From: Sp. Postumius Tubertus
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Electoral system


Sp. Postumius Quiritibus et Dianae Moraviae S.P.D.

Salvete, Omnes.

I could argue, vehemently, for the legislation which was tested by you, the People, and approved by you, the People of Nova Roma. However, at this point, I would find it pointless to do so. Therefore, I will just speak on the purpose and effectiveness of our current voting proceedures of the Comitia Centuriata.

A current argument is that, in this most recent election, a candidate was elected to an office who had less centuries choose him as a first choice than an opponent. This argument is taken further to state that, because more centuries chose a candidate as their first choice who was not elected, it was flawed. I would like to use this argument to demonstrate that the system is not flawed, using the numbers from this past election, though I will not be using the same names.

In the first round, of 49 voting centuries, Candidate A was the first choice in 28 centuries, Candidate B in 16, and Candidate C in 5. Having more than half of the voting centuries, Candidate A was elected to the office.

In the second round, the 28 centuries voting for Candidate A were given to their second choice candidates. This being so, at the end of the second round, Candidate B recieved 8 of those centuries, giving the candidate 24 centuries, while Candidate C recieved 20 of those centuries, giving this candidate 25 centuries. Candidate C having the majority of centuries, but not more than half the voting centuries, this candidate was moved into the next round, and the opponent, Candidate B, was eliminated by having the fewest centuries.

In the third round, those centuries voting for Candidate B were distributed to Candidate C, giving this candidate 49 centuries.

Now, for the question: How is this fair? The answer: 28 centuries are happy that Candidate A has been elected. of those 28, 20 centuries are happy that Candidate C has been elected, whereas only 8 would have been happy if Candidate B was to be elected.

So let us look at this. 28 were happy to begin with. Then, of them, 20 stayed happy, whereas 8 were not. Only 8 centuries would be unhappy, as opposed to the 20 which are happy. 20 is definantly a majority of 28, and this is undisputed. A majority of centuries are happy, and this cannot be disputed.

I ask you, anyone, to explain to me, if it is at all possible, how having 20 centuries voting in favor of a candidate of 28 centuries, and thereby winning an election, is unfair? I know this is a fair manner, and this cannot be viably disputed.

Another argument is that a run-off election would have decided the second official. I submit that the run-off was conducted, but not in the manner as would have been desired, perhaps, by the proposer of this argument. In this run-off, Candidate C won 25 of 49 centuries, whereas Candidate B won 24. In this case, though Candidate C did not win more than half, this candidate did win a majority of the voting centuries.

Let me ask you, People of Rome, how it is unfair that a candidate, winning a majority of the voting centuries, be elected to an office. It would be a lie to say it to be so, because it is fair. It was designed to be fair, and to halt a need for run-off elections. It has done this. I propose that we allow it to continue to do so.

Optime Valete,

Spurius Postumius Tubertus

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes, in April I believe & I am a citizen in May. But what has my tax-
paying status to do with you and Aventina being poor losers and
saying NR is now a role=playing game or the New Election Lex is
flawed?
This is known as the ad hominem argument, which I learnt the first
day in law school; when you have no case, attack the personality. It
shows a want of character Senator.
Pomponia Fabia Vera


In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

> Taxes were collected last spring, not in November.
>
> Drusus
>
> rory12001 wrote:
>
> > - I've been in the hospital November, having double vision, want

to

> > send my check from Ireland?
> > Before then I am proud to say I made the first donation to the
> > Temple of Minerva at Academia Thules & it was double my taxes,
> > I may be Capite Censi but I'm not cheap.
> >
> > Vale Pomponia Fabia Vera
> >
> > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> > > Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.
> > >
> > > Please consider paying taxes in 2004!
> > >
> > > Valete;
> > >
> > > Gaius Modius Athanasius
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > rory12001@y... writes:
> > >
> > > > It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who
> > > > voted for
> > > > the Lex.
> > > > bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------

------

> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?

subject=Unsubscribe>

> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >

Salve Julia Modia

Are you saying that a "Christian" Nova Roman, elected to a magistrate should not or can not take the oath of office? The oath requires that we must "Honor the Gods".

I take Honor to mean respect.

Do you take it to mean something more?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis and Louise Cantrell
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve!

Si vales, valeo!

With all the respect and regard you are due, Sir, I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You shall have no other Gods..." is common knowledge. Christianity is very clear in that it teaches that you can not honor any deities but Yahweh. The Israelites got punished for it. The Christian God is a jealous God. the Bible says that quite plainly.

As for the rest of the argument, as a new citizen I have absolutely no place in commenting on that.

Vale!

Julia Modia


----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve, Gaius Modius Athansius -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 12:07:40PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> Caius Minucius, I shall address your comments individually.
>
> 1. Your doubt as to my knowledge of Christianity is justifiable, as I
> am no longer a Christian. However, I will not retract my statements.
> I consider my knowledge of Christianity somewhat above average, as I
> studied traditionalist Catholic theology and canon law at Christ the
> King Monastery in Cullman, Alabama while a novice Benedictine.

I note that you have not addressed the issue I've asked about. Do you
have any proof that "It is not acceptable for a Christian to "believe"
in the existance of other Gods"? No matter what you studied or where,
unless you can provide support for your statement, it is flat wrong.

> 2. A
> person's religious beliefs are just that their own. However,
> magistrates did have sacerdotal responsibilities in Roma antiqua that
> we as Nova Romans seem to forget.

I don't know whom you're speaking of as "we", but the first part was
precisely my point. You do not have any right to dictate or demand how
someone will honor their contract with the Gods, period. Your attempting
to do so was inappropriate and highly offensive, as I've said; it may
well be impious, although I will not make that claim at this time.

> 3. In this on-line community it is very easy to get into a
> "role-playing" mentality. Marinus has expressed that he was not
> role-playing but actually did honor Venus. I accept that 100% and
> acknowledge his act, without restraint.

Thank you for the clarification. This was anything but obvious in your
original statement.

> 4. Finally, I have seen you bait people...and attempt to take them
> down a long road of insults and on-line fighting.

Your perception of my actions - speaking of baiting, that's how I see
this - is of little concern to me. However, I will not tolerate your
expressions of religious intolerance on this list, toward Christians or
anyone else. Any repetition of it _will_ be referred for appropriate
legal action here in Nova Roma. If you keep pushing, I will make a test
case of you to settle this once and for all. You do not get to ride
roughshod over others who do not share your preferences, no matter what
your position is in the Religio Romana.

> You will not see me
> walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please
> do so privatly.

I have no interest in private conversation with you, unless you choose
to send me an apology or some possible explanation of your behavior.
You've made an offensive public statement; I've responded to it
publicly. If you find that embarassing, I suggest that you modify your
high-handed approach to cives' religious preferences.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I manere in Viresium et Honorare
I remain in Strength and Honor


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete Quirites,

"L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:

[In reply to Pomponia Fabia Vera's explanation that she'd not been
able to pay taxes in November]

> Taxes were collected last spring, not in November.

She joined Nova Roma in May, Druse. She didn't even know that
she *could* pay taxes for the current year until the matter
came up in discussion during November.

Gaius Modius had written, earlier:

> > > Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.

Being Capiti Censi is not a social disease, Gai Modi. Please,
a bit less hectoring might bring in a bit more in taxes next
year. Consider the attitude of the ancients toward the Capiti
Censi of Roma Antiqua: They were the children of the City, and
nothing was asked of them save that which they could give freely.
It was a largely Capiti Censi army led by Gaius Marius which
defeated the Germanii. I'd rather be in the ranks with those
Capiti Censi than safe back in Rome, had the choice been mine
then.

I appreciate your concerns about our treasury, but think of
the attractive properties of honey and of vinegar, please.

Valete,


--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:

Salvete omnes,

It seems that in most democratic states that the popular vote does
not translate into a win. For example, our Liberal government won the
majority of parliamentary seats and thus total power because each
province has so many seats depending on its population and current
ridings. To make a long story short, our government under Cretchien
(now Paul Martin) won a majority with only 37% of the popular vote.
People here get upset and frustrated but that is the way the cookie
crumbles.

I am not going to suggest changes to the system here other than my
concerns a few weeks ago regarding the confusion over what centuries
vote first. I wrote at least 3 postings last year howling about the
run off elections and how the final tribune only had 6 months in
office etc. This was taken care of, this system voted in so I shall
not shoot myself in the foot.


Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Salve Julia Modia, et salvete quirites,

First, Julia Modia, welcome. I don't know that we have exchanged
ideas before this. It's good to see new citizens joining and taking
part in the discussions.

Julia Modia writes:

> I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think
> it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You shall
> have no other Gods..." is common knowledge.

We can safely assume that most organized Christian churches teach
that, yes. But we can just as safely investigate and find that
among Christian Unitarian-Universalists (for but one example) there
is substantial acceptance of respect and honor for dieties other than
the warrior god of Israel. So whatever "common knowledge" might
suggest, it's still incorrect to assume the belief for all Christians.

> Christianity is very clear

"Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
Christos. All else is subject to variation. We can discuss the teachings
of organized Christian sects, but trying to attribute the beliefs of some
sects to all Christians is the path of error.

Valete,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salve,

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 01:58:32PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
>
> Everyone who knows me knows that I am a very tolerant
> man, and very respectful of the religous beliefs of others.

You have shown the opposite in this discussion. When given the chance to
correct your statements, you chose to respond with obfuscation and
baiting. You lit the petard; now you're hoist upon it.

> If you wish to persue "legal" action against me, please follow the
> dictates of your conscience. I will gladly defend my honor with a
> vengance you cannot yet fathom.

<laugh> You'll defend yourself with Vegans? Or is that Bengals? I don't
think you'll find either of much use against a justified charge, and
empty threats don't impress me. I've warned you of what will happen
should you choose to display your religious intolerance again; the fact
that you know it is satisfactory to me.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mea mihi conscientia pluris est quam omnium sermo.
My conscience means more to me than all speech.
-- Cicero, "Epistulae ad Atticum"

Salve, Tiberius!

Si vales, valeo!

Well, Sir, I guess that it depends on how one is defining Christianity. I think that the Christianity we see today is very different from the Christianity that Christ founded. There was no Bible. The only rules were that Christians were to love one-another and follow the teachings of Jesus. Christianity, as we know it today, uses the Bible as absolute law and it can not be disobeyed. Now that I think about it I suppose a very liberal Christian who does not use the Bible could honor the Gods while remaining a Christian. What I mean was that a Bible-believing, mainstream Christian is not allowed to honor other deities than Yahweh.

Vale!

Julia Modia

----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen Gallagher
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 3:26 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] The Oath of Office


Salve Julia Modia

Are you saying that a "Christian" Nova Roman, elected to a magistrate should not or can not take the oath of office? The oath requires that we must "Honor the Gods".

I take Honor to mean respect.

Do you take it to mean something more?

Vale

Tiberius Galerius Paulinus
----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis and Louise Cantrell
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve!

Si vales, valeo!

With all the respect and regard you are due, Sir, I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You shall have no other Gods..." is common knowledge. Christianity is very clear in that it teaches that you can not honor any deities but Yahweh. The Israelites got punished for it. The Christian God is a jealous God. the Bible says that quite plainly.

As for the rest of the argument, as a new citizen I have absolutely no place in commenting on that.

Vale!

Julia Modia


----- Original Message -----
From: Caius Minucius Scaevola
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve, Gaius Modius Athansius -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 12:07:40PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
> Salvete;
>
> Caius Minucius, I shall address your comments individually.
>
> 1. Your doubt as to my knowledge of Christianity is justifiable, as I
> am no longer a Christian. However, I will not retract my statements.
> I consider my knowledge of Christianity somewhat above average, as I
> studied traditionalist Catholic theology and canon law at Christ the
> King Monastery in Cullman, Alabama while a novice Benedictine.

I note that you have not addressed the issue I've asked about. Do you
have any proof that "It is not acceptable for a Christian to "believe"
in the existance of other Gods"? No matter what you studied or where,
unless you can provide support for your statement, it is flat wrong.

> 2. A
> person's religious beliefs are just that their own. However,
> magistrates did have sacerdotal responsibilities in Roma antiqua that
> we as Nova Romans seem to forget.

I don't know whom you're speaking of as "we", but the first part was
precisely my point. You do not have any right to dictate or demand how
someone will honor their contract with the Gods, period. Your attempting
to do so was inappropriate and highly offensive, as I've said; it may
well be impious, although I will not make that claim at this time.

> 3. In this on-line community it is very easy to get into a
> "role-playing" mentality. Marinus has expressed that he was not
> role-playing but actually did honor Venus. I accept that 100% and
> acknowledge his act, without restraint.

Thank you for the clarification. This was anything but obvious in your
original statement.

> 4. Finally, I have seen you bait people...and attempt to take them
> down a long road of insults and on-line fighting.

Your perception of my actions - speaking of baiting, that's how I see
this - is of little concern to me. However, I will not tolerate your
expressions of religious intolerance on this list, toward Christians or
anyone else. Any repetition of it _will_ be referred for appropriate
legal action here in Nova Roma. If you keep pushing, I will make a test
case of you to settle this once and for all. You do not get to ride
roughshod over others who do not share your preferences, no matter what
your position is in the Religio Romana.

> You will not see me
> walk that road with you. If you wish to discuss this further please
> do so privatly.

I have no interest in private conversation with you, unless you choose
to send me an apology or some possible explanation of your behavior.
You've made an offensive public statement; I've responded to it
publicly. If you find that embarassing, I suggest that you modify your
high-handed approach to cives' religious preferences.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I manere in Viresium et Honorare
I remain in Strength and Honor


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 03:37:12PM -0500, Bill Gawne wrote:
>
> "Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
> of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
> Christos. All else is subject to variation.

Thank you for confirming my understanding of the term, Marine.


Vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dictum, factum.
Said and done.
-- Terence, "Heautontimorumenos"

Excuse me? How is pointing out the timing that taxes are collected an
attack?

If you bother reading my comments from last summer I expressed
reservations regarding the method that votes were going to be counted
from the start, even when I endorsed the law because the good of the
more historic method of casting votes outweighed the bad of some silly
utopian voting system. I was against the vote counting method long
before candidates were announced, not just after the election.

Anyone who has been on the back alley is well aware of my view that a
large number of people in Nova Roma are roleplaying a game that they
don't even know the rules to, so that is hardly a change in viewpoint
either. For the rest I'll repaet my comments from the Senate vote in
November


LSD ANTIQUO. The Section on Macronational Relations is fatally
flawed. Diplomatic Relations are a mutual recognition,
something that isn't going to happen between Nova Roma
and any Macronations in the forseeable future. This
section is little more than an exercise in fantasy
game playing having no value other than symbolic, but
that isn't the fatal flaw I spoke of. I would likely
have voted for or abstained on this measure and let
the people who want to play games have thier fun if it
wasn't for one word, "Automatic"

That word means that voting for this measure is voting
to establish a symbolic relationship with regimes that
are overtly hostile to the Religio Romana, regimes
that would murder thier own citizens if they worshiped
the Gods, regimes like Iran and Saudia Arabia.

It also creates symbolic relationships between Nova
Roma and regimes that many of our citizens may wish to
have nothing to do with, regimes ranging from the
Vatican to Isreal to North Korea.

Since there aren't provisions allowing for indiviual
votes on establishing these symbolic relationships, I
have no other choice than voting against the entire
measure.

You will note that I clearly refered to people playing Games prior to
the recent Elections and did so in comments that were intended to be
part of the offical report of a Senate meeting.

As long as some people want to engage in pretend diplomatic relations
with real nations, want to make virtual murders the highlight of games
that are susposed to honor the Gods, and to turn Nova Roma on it's head
from what it was intended to be by taking the legal fiction of a
Micronation that was a background for the Religio Romana and blowing it
up into a "Modern 21st Century Micronation" that dominates everything
else I'll not only consider them to be Role playing gamers but also
gamers who aren't very good at playing the role of a Roman.

Drusus

rory12001 wrote:

> Yes, in April I believe & I am a citizen in May. But what has my tax-
> paying status to do with you and Aventina being poor losers and
> saying NR is now a role=playing game or the New Election Lex is
> flawed?
> This is known as the ad hominem argument, which I learnt the first
> day in law school; when you have no case, attack the personality. It
> shows a want of character Senator.
> Pomponia Fabia Vera
>
>
> In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
> > Taxes were collected last spring, not in November.
> >
> > Drusus
> >
> > rory12001 wrote:
> >
> > > - I've been in the hospital November, having double vision, want
> to
> > > send my check from Ireland?
> > > Before then I am proud to say I made the first donation to the
> > > Temple of Minerva at Academia Thules & it was double my taxes,
> > > I may be Capite Censi but I'm not cheap.
> > >
> > > Vale Pomponia Fabia Vera
> > >
> > > In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> > > > Said by a true Capite Censi, from a Capite Censi gens.
> > > >
> > > > Please consider paying taxes in 2004!
> > > >
> > > > Valete;
> > > >
> > > > Gaius Modius Athanasius
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In a message dated 12/27/2003 1:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > > rory12001@y... writes:
> > > >
> > > > > It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who
> > > > > voted for
> > > > > the Lex.
> > > > > bene valete in pace deorum! Pomponia Fabia Vera
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> > >
> > > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> > >
> > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
> subject=Unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cco6mif/M=266841.4316200.5507732.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1072643016/A=1922462/R=0/*http://www.lifescapeinc.com/picasa/landing.php?capid=222&caId=1986>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I See that Nova Roma's Grand High Poobah of Trolldom is making it's
usual decent into flamebait postings.

Caius Minucius Scaevola wrote:

> Salve,
>
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 01:58:32PM -0500, AthanasiosofSpfd@... wrote:
> >
> > Everyone who knows me knows that I am a very tolerant
> > man, and very respectful of the religous beliefs of others.
>
> You have shown the opposite in this discussion. When given the chance to
> correct your statements, you chose to respond with obfuscation and
> baiting. You lit the petard; now you're hoist upon it.
>
> > If you wish to persue "legal" action against me, please follow the
> > dictates of your conscience. I will gladly defend my honor with a
> > vengance you cannot yet fathom.
>
> <laugh> You'll defend yourself with Vegans? Or is that Bengals? I don't
> think you'll find either of much use against a justified charge, and
> empty threats don't impress me. I've warned you of what will happen
> should you choose to display your religious intolerance again; the fact
> that you know it is satisfactory to me.
>
>
> Vale,
> Caius Minucius Scaevola
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Mea mihi conscientia pluris est quam omnium sermo.
> My conscience means more to me than all speech.
> -- Cicero, "Epistulae ad Atticum"
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12c0lmr7c/M=266841.4316200.5507732.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705313712:HM/EXP=1072644035/A=1911858/R=0/*http://www.lifescapeinc.com/picasa/landing.php?capid=222&caId=1987>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

Salve, Gnaeus!

Si vales valeo!

Forgive me, Sir. I live in Kentucky and you just don't meet nontraditional Christians much here. My thoughts, therefore, were colored by my environment.

Vale!

Julia Modia

----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Gawne
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus


Salve Julia Modia, et salvete quirites,

First, Julia Modia, welcome. I don't know that we have exchanged
ideas before this. It's good to see new citizens joining and taking
part in the discussions.

Julia Modia writes:
> I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think
> it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You shall
> have no other Gods..." is common knowledge.

We can safely assume that most organized Christian churches teach
that, yes. But we can just as safely investigate and find that
among Christian Unitarian-Universalists (for but one example) there
is substantial acceptance of respect and honor for dieties other than
the warrior god of Israel. So whatever "common knowledge" might
suggest, it's still incorrect to assume the belief for all Christians.

> Christianity is very clear

"Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
Christos. All else is subject to variation. We can discuss the teachings
of organized Christian sects, but trying to attribute the beliefs of some
sects to all Christians is the path of error.

Valete,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@m...>
wrote:

> Salve Julia Modia
>
> Are you saying that a "Christian" Nova Roman, elected to a

magistrate should not or can not take the oath of office? The oath
requires that we must "Honor the Gods".

>
> I take Honor to mean respect.
>
> Do you take it to mean something more?
>
> Vale
>
>Salve Gai,

the dictionary definition of "honor" means: to show great respect
for, treat with deference and courtesy.


As I understand the oath of office which I took before, we are to
respect the religio and protect it. So as a magistrate, if a
Christian, aetheist or any type of person tries to run down the
religio, evangelize its practioners or try to remove or trivialize
it, it is your duty to come down on that person like a ton of bricks
even though you are not a practioner of the RR. The oath of office is
not a conversion from what I can see nor does it ask you to
personally sacrifice.


Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Salve, Sir!

Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to mainstream Christianity.

Vale!

Julia Modia

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means giving
them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of Roma
are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors also
honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their God is
a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their religion
(Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations of a
Roman Magistrate.

L. Sicinius Drusus
Pontifex


Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:

> Salve, Sir!
>
> Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would
> say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or
> taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to
> mainstream Christianity.
>
> Vale!
>
> Julia Modia
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

Gaius Modius Athanasius Tiberio Galerio Paulino SPD

I think you could look at it as passive vs. active honor. From my understanding of Christianity it would be possible for a Christian to passively honor the Gods, while not actively possible. A passive honoring would be to honor the Gods by not speaking ill of them, or encouraging others to disregard thier Religio duties and obligations. An active honoring would be making sacrifice to the Gods.

A Christian within Nova Roma could easily engage in a passive honoring of the Gods.

Vale;

Gaius Modius

In a message dated 12/27/2003 3:26:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, spqr753@... writes:

> Are you saying that a "Christian" Nova Roman, elected to a magistrate should not or can not take the oath of office?
> The oath requires that we must "Honor the Gods".
>
> I take Honor to mean respect.
>
> Do you take it to mean something more?
>
> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

Gaius Modius Athanasius Gnaeo Equitio Marino SPD

It is the area of tax paying that I do tend to take a very harsh stance. I think it is paramount for all active citizens to pay their taxes and support the cause of the Republic. I am even more harsh when a magistrate or a sacerdotes fails to support the treasury. It is a matter of principle.

Everyone needs to pay the tax. It is a simple and nominal fee imposed to support the Republic.

Vale;

Gaius Modius


In a message dated 12/27/2003 3:19:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, gawne@... writes:

> Being Capiti Censi is not a social disease, Gai Modi. Please,
> a bit less hectoring might bring in a bit more in taxes next
> year. Consider the attitude of the ancients toward the Capiti
> Censi of Roma Antiqua: They were the children of the City, and
> nothing was asked of them save that which they could give freely.
> It was a largely Capiti Censi army led by Gaius Marius which
> defeated the Germanii. I'd rather be in the ranks with those
> Capiti Censi than safe back in Rome, had the choice been
> mine
> then.
>
> I appreciate your concerns about our treasury, but think of
> the attractive properties of honey and of vinegar, please.
>
> Valete,
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salvete:

A Catholic or a main-line Protestant theologian would not consider a Unitarian-Universalist "Christain" a true Christian unless they belived in the Trinitarian formula for the Christain God-Head. Catholics and mainline Protestants do not believe that Jehovah's Witnesses are Christain because they reject the Trinitarian model. They also do not recognize the baptisms done by Jehovah's Witnesses.

Additionally, I'm not sure what you mean by 'monolithic' but Christianity surely is monotheistic.

Some Christian sects rejected the Divinity of Christ, or at least looked at it in different ways.

The Nestorian sect, for example, taught that Christ was Divine ONLY. The Monophysite sect taught that the Divine and human element were in conflict. The Orthodox teaching, and the one that prevailed within Catholicism and Eastern Othrodoxy is that the Divine nature and the human nature were in perfect harmony with one another.

More than just believing in a Divine Jesus are essential for most Christian sects. Belief in baptism, trinitarian God-head, and divinity of Christ are essential.

Valete;

Gaius Modius


In a message dated 12/27/2003 3:37:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, gawne@... writes:

> We can safely assume that most organized Christian churches teach
> that, yes. But we can just as safely investigate and find that
> among Christian Unitarian-Universalists (for but one example) there
> is substantial acceptance of respect and honor for dieties other than
> the warrior god of Israel. So whatever "common knowledge" might
> suggest, it's still incorrect to assume the belief for all Christians.
>
> > Christianity is very clear
>
> "Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
> of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
> Christos. All else is subject to variation. We can discuss the teachings
> of organized Christian sects, but trying to attribute the
> beliefs of some
> sects to all Christians is the path of error.

Salve Druse,

That is your interpretation of "honouring". The dictionary and others
here see the word differently as we can see in the postings. Be that
as it may, perhaps the oath of office for NR should have been more
specific from day one by saying that "all magistrates are required to
make prayers and sarifices to the gods of Rome." In that way things
would be perfectly clear and Judeo -Christians, atheists or wiccans
could serve Res Republica in other ways. I asked some of the religio
practioners in leadership here about these matters last year and they
all had an opinion that reflects Modius' last post.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means

giving

> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of

Roma

> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors

also

> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their

God is

> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their

religion

> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations

of a

> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I

would

> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them

or

> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable

according to

> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------

------

> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?

subject=Unsubscribe>

> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >

Salve Honourable Drusus

While what you say here is technically true for "by the Book" Christians, those tend to be Fundamentalists. The majority of Christendom however are NOT "by the book" anymore: They recognize that much of the material in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was meant for archaic pasturalists and no longer applies.
Those who adopt a Fundamentalist stance are NOT likely to be interested in becoming Citizens of Nova Roma! They aren't here aren't going to come here:They wouldn't be able to stomache the company of so many "heathens", so this is a non-issue.

Vale
~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus

-----Original Message-----
From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
Sent: Dec 27, 2003 4:32 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office

In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means giving
them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of Roma
are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors also
honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their God is
a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their religion
(Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations of a
Roman Magistrate.

L. Sicinius Drusus
Pontifex


Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:

> Salve, Sir!
>
> Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would
> say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or
> taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to
> mainstream Christianity.
>
> Vale!
>
> Julia Modia
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

That is the Roman interpatation of honoring, not just mine. Many Roman
Religous terms were taken over by the Xtians when they assumed power in
the 4th Century CE, and the meaning was changed to suit Xtian needs.
This change in meaning does NOT mean that the Romans who lived before
that time frame used the terms in the same way as 4th Century Xtians or
Moderns do. To a pre 4th Century Roman Honoring the Immortals meant
giving them their due according to the Mos Maiorum, and for a magistrate
this included offering Prayers and Sacrifices to the Gods of Roma on
behalf of the Roman nation. A Magistrate who failed to fulfil these
obligations was Impius, with Pius having the Roman sense of the word,
fullfilling ones duties.

Please Note that I am discussing a Roman system, not that of a moderm
21st century micronation. I Have no advice on the later, that is a make
it up as you go affair. I'm commenting on Roman Government.

L. Sicinius Drusus
Pontifex

Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly) wrote:

> Salve Druse,
>
> That is your interpretation of "honouring". The dictionary and others
> here see the word differently as we can see in the postings. Be that
> as it may, perhaps the oath of office for NR should have been more
> specific from day one by saying that "all magistrates are required to
> make prayers and sarifices to the gods of Rome." In that way things
> would be perfectly clear and Judeo -Christians, atheists or wiccans
> could serve Res Republica in other ways. I asked some of the religio
> practioners in leadership here about these matters last year and they
> all had an opinion that reflects Modius' last post.
>
> Regards,
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> wrote:
> > In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means
> giving
> > them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> > Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of
> Roma
> > are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors
> also
> > honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their
> God is
> > a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their
> religion
> > (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations
> of a
> > Roman Magistrate.
> >
> > L. Sicinius Drusus
> > Pontifex
> >
> >
> > Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
> >
> > > Salve, Sir!
> > >
> > > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I
> would
> > > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them
> or
> > > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable
> according to
> > > mainstream Christianity.
> > >
> > > Vale!
> > >
> > > Julia Modia
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> > >
> > > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> > >
> > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
> subject=Unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salve Athanasius

Exactly right - and the diversity of beliefs within Christendom is even more diverse today, which is what was meant by it not being Monolithic: There is no such thing as "THE Church", there are many churches with many varying beliefs. A number of these are open to worship of divinities other than just Yahweh and Son.

As for who considers who a "True Christian", that discussion is irrelevant here. Christian sects tend to recognize the Christian-ness of those other sects whose beliefs are most similar to their own, and consider those with the greatest difference from their own views to be "un-Christian". This is nothing new - they just don't call them "Heretics" and try to kill each other anymore, that is all.

The ONLY thing relevant here is whether someone who considers them self to be a Christian is able, with a clear conscience and no hypocrisy, to take the Oath of Office. There are Christian sects who are open minded enough to do this, which is a simple fact. It is not for you or anyone else to decide whether they are "really Christian" for being able to do this, and that is another simple fact. So unless the wording of the Oath of Office is changed to alter this set of facts, drop the matter please. It is done.

Vale
~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus

-----Original Message-----
From: AthanasiosofSpfd@...
Sent: Dec 27, 2003 5:00 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae and Tribus

Salvete:

A Catholic or a main-line Protestant theologian would not consider a Unitarian-Universalist "Christain" a true Christian unless they belived in the Trinitarian formula for the Christain God-Head. Catholics and mainline Protestants do not believe that Jehovah's Witnesses are Christain because they reject the Trinitarian model. They also do not recognize the baptisms done by Jehovah's Witnesses.

Additionally, I'm not sure what you mean by 'monolithic' but Christianity surely is monotheistic.

Some Christian sects rejected the Divinity of Christ, or at least looked at it in different ways.

The Nestorian sect, for example, taught that Christ was Divine ONLY. The Monophysite sect taught that the Divine and human element were in conflict. The Orthodox teaching, and the one that prevailed within Catholicism and Eastern Othrodoxy is that the Divine nature and the human nature were in perfect harmony with one another.

More than just believing in a Divine Jesus are essential for most Christian sects. Belief in baptism, trinitarian God-head, and divinity of Christ are essential.

Valete;

Gaius Modius


In a message dated 12/27/2003 3:37:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, gawne@... writes:

> We can safely assume that most organized Christian churches teach
> that, yes. But we can just as safely investigate and find that
> among Christian Unitarian-Universalists (for but one example) there
> is substantial acceptance of respect and honor for dieties other than
> the warrior god of Israel. So whatever "common knowledge" might
> suggest, it's still incorrect to assume the belief for all Christians.
>
> > Christianity is very clear
>
> "Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
> of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
> Christos. All else is subject to variation. We can discuss the teachings
> of organized Christian sects, but trying to attribute the
> beliefs of some
> sects to all Christians is the path of error.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Salve Severi,

Well spoken. Like I mentioned year or so ago, I have been told by
some fundementalist sects that the RC church I belong to is the whore
of Babylon etc and we are condemned for venerating Mary whose
situation can be shown to be partially analogous to Isis. Futhermore
Jesus will never take me to heaven because I enjoy my wine in
moderation forgetting of course what the first miracle was and
maintaining that wine was really grape juice though proverbs 30
something says take not too much wine lest you feel you are on the
mast of a ship in a stormy see or awaken feeling you were bitten by a
poison serpent. Err ... don't sound like grape juice to me!! I've
been through that. Furthermore I'm not reborn and face condemnation
but they are saved, can become contract killers, drug dealers etc and
are always saved. I call God a liar for believing in evolution.

Finally, if you mix with heathens or dabble in magic God will spit
you from his mouth (according to a TV preacher). Hmm, I've enjoyed
NR, have many pagan friends and took the oath to protect RR. I'm
still here, enjoying a beer, my health and family are fine and I'm in
for a good year of great work contracts. As Servius says, I doubt
we'll get fundies here of all places.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@e...> wrote:

> Salve Honourable Drusus
>
> While what you say here is technically true for "by the Book"

Christians, those tend to be Fundamentalists. The majority of
Christendom however are NOT "by the book" anymore: They recognize
that much of the material in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was meant for
archaic pasturalists and no longer applies.

> Those who adopt a Fundamentalist stance are NOT likely to be

interested in becoming Citizens of Nova Roma! They aren't here
aren't going to come here:They wouldn't be able to stomache the
company of so many "heathens", so this is a non-issue.

>
> Vale
> ~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> Sent: Dec 27, 2003 4:32 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office
>
> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means

giving

> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of

Roma

> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors

also

> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their

God is

> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their

religion

> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations

of a

> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I

would

> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them

or

> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable

according to

> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------

------

> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?

subject=Unsubscribe>

> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

The Anglican Churches are hardly Fundementalist Churches, but the
American Anglican Church (Episcopalian) are on the verge of being booted
out of the worlwide Anglican movement and splitting into two churches
over the apointment of a Gay Bishop. Most Xtians do not live in the USA
and Europe anymore with the Liberal attitudes of those areas towards
Gays. The same is even more true of challenging the Monotheism that is
at the heart of the Religion rather than just being a dispute over how
"sinful" a Gay Relationship is. Most Xtians world wide would consider
offering Prayers and Sacrifices to the Gods of Roma to be a major sin,
and many if not most would no longer consider the person who did so to
be a Xtian until he gave up his apostacy and asked for forgivness from
the Xtian God.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus wrote:

> Salve Honourable Drusus
>
> While what you say here is technically true for "by the Book"
> Christians, those tend to be Fundamentalists. The majority of
> Christendom however are NOT "by the book" anymore: They recognize that
> much of the material in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was meant for
> archaic pasturalists and no longer applies.
> Those who adopt a Fundamentalist stance are NOT likely to be
> interested in becoming Citizens of Nova Roma! They aren't here aren't
> going to come here:They wouldn't be able to stomache the company of so
> many "heathens", so this is a non-issue.
>
> Vale
> ~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
> Sent: Dec 27, 2003 4:32 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office
>
> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means giving
> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of Roma
> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors also
> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their God is
> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their religion
> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations of a
> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would
> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or
> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to
> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

Salve!

Sir, I am Wiccan and have no problem at all with honoring the Roman deities with prayers and offerings. I've been worshipping the Roman deities since I became Wiccan. They are my chosen pantheon and I love them dearly.

Vale!

Julia Modia

----- Original Message -----
From: Quintus Lanius Paulinus (Michael Kelly)
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 5:07 PM
Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office


Salve Druse,

That is your interpretation of "honouring". The dictionary and others
here see the word differently as we can see in the postings. Be that
as it may, perhaps the oath of office for NR should have been more
specific from day one by saying that "all magistrates are required to
make prayers and sarifices to the gods of Rome." In that way things
would be perfectly clear and Judeo -Christians, atheists or wiccans
could serve Res Republica in other ways. I asked some of the religio
practioners in leadership here about these matters last year and they
all had an opinion that reflects Modius' last post.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:
> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means
giving
> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of
Roma
> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors
also
> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their
God is
> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their
religion
> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations
of a
> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I
would
> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them
or
> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable
according to
> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---


Salve Modia: (long if you want it to be)

With respect to your statement, I must agree with you. I do not
presume to know all of what those Christians in the bible-belt areas
subscribed to, and I don't like to stereotype. My impression is that
alot of them believe in the very 'literal' interpretation of the
Bible, that is, exactly what is written, without rendering individual
interpretation and application to what was possible or appropriate to
the historical times.

It is a common misconception in Nova Roma, I fear, to judge all
Christians, even Catholics in NR, regardless of their geographic
location, by what one sees in the Bible Belt, which are a large part,
in my observation, very hyperfundamentalist.

Alot of Christians have done their leader a gross disservice because
of their attitude (and I am not restricting this to the Bible Belt)
with their holier than thou posturing, their threats, their
alienations of people sincerely seeking the truth, and this is a tragedy.

*******optional reading****** Well, the whole darned post is
optional, isn't it? lol

Below are some examples of how I interpret things, as opposed to a
more strict fundamentalist interpretation. You don't have to read
them, and I, for the record am 'expressing an opinion' and not
'preaching', for the benefit of those who might think otherwise.





For example: "God into the world and preach the gospel" is a command
Christ gave to his apostles. A literal interpretation commonly
adapted today is that 'all' of us are to drop everything, knock on
doors, witness as it were, about the divinity of Christ and the faith,
etc.
"I" dont believe this is reasonable. He was talking to Apostles that
were with him for nearly three years. Many were not at liberty to
pick up and do what they wanted. In Palestine, and in Rome, it would
be a disgrace for a woman to abandon her family and play Joan of Arc.
Slaves had no such freedom.

Later on in the epistles of Paul, it says 'women, obey your husbands,
slaves obey your masters', so I don't imagine Jesus himself expected
everyone to break the status quo and risk their lives on a cross for a
religious 'rally' for support, the Apostles were trained to undertake.

Paul also said 'be prepared to render an account of the hope that lies
within you', a far cry from overtly leaving home, job, social station
shoving your believes down other peoples' throats.

**************

Some sources cite Ovidius as saying that he didn't believe in all of
the literal interpretation of the stories relating to the Gods of
Rome, in Metamorphosis, but he nonetheless believed in their existance
and placated them. I have trouble with the Jonah and the Wale story
from the OT, to name one, but my difficulty with it, I believe, is
neither here nor there.

**********

The Sermon on the Mount was preached to people of all religious walks,
not just orthodox Jews. Gallilee was a major port, encountering
peoples of diversified religious beliefs. What he preached were
religious principles, that all could apply. Did he believe by some
statements that he felt non-monotheists were 'missing' something?
Yes, that is not denied by me. But he didn't feel, obviously, that he
couldn't atleast lend something to their lives, in their current
religious walk.

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for spiritual righteousness
for they shall be filled" was said that day, to all persons. He
assigned no ifs and and buts to that.

"For those who sincerely seek the truth I shall in no wise case out'
comes to mind."

***********************

And another bit of trivia. Jesus had a temper, according to some. He
encountered a fig tree and said 'you shall never bear fruit again' and
the tree shriveled. Apparently he was less than happy with the
produce of the tree. To some historical botanists, he was having a
temper tantrum perhaps? It was the wrong time of year for figs :)

*************

Have a happy new year, Modia, and if the Kentucky Christians give you
a hard time, just send them to Po :)





In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis and Louise Cantrell"
<cant97@b...> wrote:

> Salve, Gnaeus!
>
> Si vales valeo!
>
> Forgive me, Sir. I live in Kentucky and you just don't meet

nontraditional Christians much here. My thoughts, therefore, were
colored by my environment.

>
> Vale!
>
> Julia Modia
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bill Gawne
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 3:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: Results of Voting in the Centuriae

and Tribus

>
>
> Salve Julia Modia, et salvete quirites,
>
> First, Julia Modia, welcome. I don't know that we have exchanged
> ideas before this. It's good to see new citizens joining and taking
> part in the discussions.
>
> Julia Modia writes:
> > I believe that since we live in a majority Christian society I think
> > it is safe to assume that such basic Christian concepts as "You

shall

> > have no other Gods..." is common knowledge.
>
> We can safely assume that most organized Christian churches teach
> that, yes. But we can just as safely investigate and find that
> among Christian Unitarian-Universalists (for but one example) there
> is substantial acceptance of respect and honor for dieties other than
> the warrior god of Israel. So whatever "common knowledge" might
> suggest, it's still incorrect to assume the belief for all Christians.
>
> > Christianity is very clear
>
> "Christianity" is not a monolithic entity. The only defining property
> of Christianity is a belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth, the
> Christos. All else is subject to variation. We can discuss the

teachings

> of organized Christian sects, but trying to attribute the beliefs

of some

> sects to all Christians is the path of error.
>
> Valete,
>
> --
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

Service.

>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--Salvete Equiti et Druse:

I think, Equitius, this is what I was trying to say yesterday, but my
wording might have been obscure. The Christians here in NR are hardly
'fundies' . They wouldn't have the tolerance for other's faiths, nor
the thick skin :) They are not enemies of Rome, the Religio or its Gods.

I think it is up to each practitioner as individuals to decide if they
can in good conscience, make the oath of office necessary to assume a
magistracy. Nobody else can do it for them, nor should they try, with
due respect.

If it is a major issue, the time to take it up is 'before' an electin,
not 'after' one.

Valete,
Pompeia


- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
<hermeticagnosis@e...> wrote:

> Salve Honourable Drusus
>
> While what you say here is technically true for "by the Book"

Christians, those tend to be Fundamentalists. The majority of
Christendom however are NOT "by the book" anymore: They recognize that
much of the material in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was meant for
archaic pasturalists and no longer applies.

> Those who adopt a Fundamentalist stance are NOT likely to be

interested in becoming Citizens of Nova Roma! They aren't here aren't
going to come here:They wouldn't be able to stomache the company of so
many "heathens", so this is a non-issue.

>
> Vale
> ~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
> Sent: Dec 27, 2003 4:32 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office
>
> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means giving
> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of Roma
> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors also
> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their

God is

> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their religion
> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations of a
> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would
> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or
> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to
> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >

<mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Salve Drusus

Precisely my point, Sir - thank you! "Most" only, and that within the Anglican example which you give.
"Most" is not "All"; the ONLY question is whether any individual Candidate can take the Oath of Office. That, for any Jewish or Christian candidate, would be a matter for their own conscience to decide, and a matter between the individual and the leader of their congregation. It is not for anyone else to decide whether this makes them a "good" or "bad" Jew or Christian.
If anything, you should be glad: By the definitions you are using, the person is no longer a Christian and by making an Oath to the Gods is just a few rituals away from proper Orthopraxy of the Religio. Sorry if that sounds a bit cheeky, but you can't really go around saying that a Christian "must" believe such and such, and then complain when they don't. These days about the only thing a person seems to need to consider themselves to be a Christian is to accept Yahweh's Only Begotten in some positive capacity; in the last couple of decades Christendom has splintered into every variety and degree conceivable!
Personally, I'll stick with the Religio - it's more consistent! To each their own, though.

Vale
~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus



-----Original Message-----
From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
Sent: Dec 27, 2003 5:46 PM
To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office

The Anglican Churches are hardly Fundementalist Churches, but the
American Anglican Church (Episcopalian) are on the verge of being booted
out of the worlwide Anglican movement and splitting into two churches
over the apointment of a Gay Bishop. Most Xtians do not live in the USA
and Europe anymore with the Liberal attitudes of those areas towards
Gays. The same is even more true of challenging the Monotheism that is
at the heart of the Religion rather than just being a dispute over how
"sinful" a Gay Relationship is. Most Xtians world wide would consider
offering Prayers and Sacrifices to the Gods of Roma to be a major sin,
and many if not most would no longer consider the person who did so to
be a Xtian until he gave up his apostacy and asked for forgivness from
the Xtian God.

L. Sicinius Drusus

Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus wrote:

> Salve Honourable Drusus
>
> While what you say here is technically true for "by the Book"
> Christians, those tend to be Fundamentalists. The majority of
> Christendom however are NOT "by the book" anymore: They recognize that
> much of the material in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was meant for
> archaic pasturalists and no longer applies.
> Those who adopt a Fundamentalist stance are NOT likely to be
> interested in becoming Citizens of Nova Roma! They aren't here aren't
> going to come here:They wouldn't be able to stomache the company of so
> many "heathens", so this is a non-issue.
>
> Vale
> ~ Servius Equitius Mercurius Troianus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
> Sent: Dec 27, 2003 4:32 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: The Oath of Office
>
> In a Roman system of government "honoring" the Immortals means giving
> them the Honors that are due to them in the form of Sacrifices, of
> Prayers, and of taking part in Ritiuals and festivals. The Gods of Roma
> are not Jealous Gods who object if someone who gives them Honors also
> honors other Gods. The Vast majority of Xtians beleave that their God is
> a jealous God, as it plainly states in their Bible, and their religion
> (Not the Religio Romana) bars them from fulfilling the obligations of a
> Roman Magistrate.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
> Pontifex
>
>
> Dennis and Louise Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Salve, Sir!
> >
> > Well, if that is what is intended then I suppose a magistrate can
> > protect the Religio without being a practitioner himself. I would
> > say, however, that praying to the Gods, making offerings to them or
> > taking part in rites and festivals would be unaccpetable according to
> > mainstream Christianity.
> >
> > Vale!
> >
> > Julia Modia
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
> >
> > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
> >
> > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Yahoo! Groups Links*
>
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nova-Roma/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Nova-Roma-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Salvete Quirites, et salve Cai Minuc,

Gaius Modius had written:

> > Everyone who knows me knows that I am a very tolerant
> > man, and very respectful of the religous beliefs of others.

And Caius Minucius replied:

> You have shown the opposite in this discussion. When given the chance to
> correct your statements, you chose to respond with obfuscation and
> baiting.

Gaius Modius is a man of strong beliefs and he sometimes is frustrated
by things he perceives as improper. I know that you are also a man
of strong opinions. Please, for the sake of Concordia let this friction
between you go. Gaius Modius and I had a fruitful private conversation
and cleared the air between us. I understand that my satisfaction is not
your satisfaction, but please, give the man the benefit of the doubt.

Valete,

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salvete Omnes,

I Have a question, but I'm not looking for an answer from members of
this list, rather it's a question that I would like Members of this list
to ask.

I Would like the Monotheists on this list to ask their Minister, Priest,
Rabbi, or Imam if it's permitted for them to offer prayers and
sacrifices to the Gods of Roma. Most of the Christians will have a
chance to do so tomorrow. Let us know what people trained in Monotheist
Religious Theology have to say on the subject.

L. Sicinius Drusus

I have a better idea Senator Drusus. Why don't we
just drop this once and for all, and move on to more
productive measures?

Marcus Scipio Africanus
Tribunus Augusticlavii


--- "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@...>
wrote:

> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I Have a question, but I'm not looking for an answer
> from members of
> this list, rather it's a question that I would like
> Members of this list
> to ask.
>
> I Would like the Monotheists on this list to ask
> their Minister, Priest,
> Rabbi, or Imam if it's permitted for them to offer
> prayers and
> sacrifices to the Gods of Roma. Most of the
> Christians will have a
> chance to do so tomorrow. Let us know what people
> trained in Monotheist
> Religious Theology have to say on the subject.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus
>
>
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

Salve Senator Drusus,

Well, I have the answer to your question. NO. I am a Roman Catholic and
we are not allowed to pray or sacrifice to the gods of Rome. If it is for some
sort of act or play, yes. But on a serious measure. NO. I think anyone whom is
Roman Catholic would already know this and would not even bother asking
his/her priest.

BENE.VALE.
I.MANERE.IN.AMORA.DI.ROMA.
ET.FORTIS.IN.FIDE.
GNAEVS.SCRIBONIVS.SCRIPTOR.
DI.NOVA.ROMA.ET.LEGIO.XXIV.MA.
ET.LVDVS.MAGNVS.GLADIATORE.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Salvete Quirites,

L. Sicinius Drusus requested:

> I Would like the Monotheists

I'm not exactly a monotheist, but I do occassionally attend a church of
a fairly liberal Christian sect.

> on this list to ask their Minister, Priest,
> Rabbi, or Imam if it's permitted for them to offer prayers and
> sacrifices to the Gods of Roma.

I've already done that, about a year and a half ago. The pastor looked
at the Nova Roma constitution and declaration online, considered the
wording of the oath of office, etc... and assured me that he didn't see
any source of conflict. Of course if he *had* it's more likely I'd not
have gone back there than that I'd have left NR, but since you asked,
I figured I'd give you a datapoint.

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salve, Gnaeus Equitius Marinus -

On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 06:17:23PM -0500, Bill Gawne wrote:
> Salvete Quirites, et salve Cai Minuc,
>
> Gaius Modius had written:
> > > Everyone who knows me knows that I am a very tolerant
> > > man, and very respectful of the religous beliefs of others.
>
> And Caius Minucius replied:
> > You have shown the opposite in this discussion. When given the chance to
> > correct your statements, you chose to respond with obfuscation and
> > baiting.
>
> Gaius Modius is a man of strong beliefs and he sometimes is frustrated
> by things he perceives as improper. I know that you are also a man
> of strong opinions. Please, for the sake of Concordia let this friction
> between you go. Gaius Modius and I had a fruitful private conversation
> and cleared the air between us. I understand that my satisfaction is not
> your satisfaction, but please, give the man the benefit of the doubt.

Marine, please note that I have, from the very beginning. However, when
the questions I've asked are answered by accusations instead of
clarification and denial instead of an admission that, say, his original
response was overstated or unclear, then that doubt slowly moves toward
certainty.

I've mentioned that I'm satisfied with the status quo - well, perhaps
"satisfied" isn't exactly the right word. I would prefer that Modius and
I were not at odds, but I cannot reconcile his stated position and the
spirit of Concordia; however, I'm willing to either 1) leave things as
they are (my original intention) or 2) entertain _productive_ discussion
of the issues between us. My purpose is, as it was from the very
beginning, to establish that religious discrimination is unacceptable in
Nova Roma; I believe that the issue bears far more on Concordia than any
disagreement between two individuals.


Optime vale,
Caius Minucius Scaevola
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dulce bellum inexpertis.
War is sweet for those who haven't experienced it.
-- Pindaros

Salvete omnes,

From the previous post comments I'm afraid that Gai Modius' post was
overlooked so here it is again:


Gaius Modius Athanasius Tiberio Galerio Paulino SPD

I think you could look at it as passive vs. active honor. From my
understanding
of Christianity it would be possible for a Christian to passively
honor the
Gods, while not actively possible. A passive honoring would be to
honor the
Gods by not speaking ill of them, or encouraging others to disregard
thier
Religio duties and obligations. An active honoring would be making
sacrifice to
the Gods.

A Christian within Nova Roma could easily engage in a passive
honoring of the
Gods.

Vale;

Gaius Modius

Now Gai is an RR practioner but also well educated in the Catholic
faith. I have had several discussions with him offline. I thought I
knew a fair bit of Christianity but he has been well educated in that
and is much sharper than me on the subject. Under similar
circumstances I recieved the same answer from RC priests with regards
to attending other religion's festivities from Hindu to Islamic.

To answer you directly Senator Drusus, Roman Catholics can passively
honor the gods of other beliefs but NOT make active sacrifices and
prayers.

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

"L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:

>
> That is the Roman interpatation of honoring, not just mine.

Would you have a citation for that, Drusus? I ask because my source
of Roman information, _As The Romans Did_ by Jo-Ann Shelton, says
the following about the Roman meaning of the word 'honor.'

"The Latin word honor has two meanings: (1) political office (such as
the consulship) to which one is elected by the people, or (2) public
esteem." -- p 9, footnote 28, 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press 1998

Assuming for the moment that Professor Shelton knows at least as much as
you do about matters Roman, it would seem that we honor the gods by
according them public esteem (since I haven't seen any of them running
for office thus far.)

[...]

> Please Note that I am discussing a Roman system, not that of a moderm
> 21st century micronation. I Have no advice on the later, that is a make
> it up as you go affair. I'm commenting on Roman Government.

We *are* a Roman system, Drusus. We are not the Romans of antiquity,
but we are most certainly Roman citizens by our own Declaration. Our
Senate, our Comitiae, our Religio are all based in those of Roma. We
may not be the Roman system you want, but we are most certainly the
Roman system that you once swore to always act in the best interest of.

--
Gnaeus Equitius Marinus

Salvete Quirites;
let our cosmopolitan cives, amble over to the Jewish Sodalitas where
we can discuss pious Philo, his utterly Romanized nephew Tiberius
Alexander, Governor of Egypt, complex Flavius Josephus and those
witty worldly Herods;) & anything else that inspires...
valete Pomponia Fabia Vera

Salvete, Quirites

Sic

> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 07:59:29 -0800 (PST)

> Subject: Happy Holidays!
>
>
>
> Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit,
> our best wishes for an environmentally conscious,
> socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive,
> gender neutral celebration of the winter solstice
> holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable
> traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice,
> or secular practices of your choice, with respect for
> the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of
> others, or their choice not to practice religious or
> secular traditions at all.
>
> In addition, please also accept our best wishes for a
> fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and
> medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of
> the generally accepted calendar year 2004, but not
> without due respect for the calendars of choice of
> other cultures whose contributions to society have
> helped make this country great (not to imply that this
> country is necessarily greater than any other country
> or area of choice), and without regard to the race,
> creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith
> or sexual orientation of the wishers.
>
> This wish is limited to the customary and usual good
> tidings for a period of one year, or until the
> issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever
> comes first. "Holiday" is not intended to, nor shall
> it be considered, limited to the usual Judeo-Christian
> celebrations or observances, or to such activities of
> any organized or ad hoc religious community, group,
> individual or belief (or lack thereof).
>
> Note: By accepting this greeting, you are accepting
> these terms. This greeting is subject to clarification
> or withdrawal, and is revocable at the sole discretion
> of the wisher at any time, for any reason or for no
> reason at all. This greeting is freely transferable
> with no alteration to the original greeting. This
> greeting implies no promise by the wisher to actually
> implement any of the wishes for the wisher her/himself
> or others, or responsibility for the consequences
> which may arise from the implementation or
> non-implementation of it.
>
> This greeting is void where prohibited by law.

Gaius Modius Athanasius Quinto Lanio Paulino SPD

Senator/Pontifex Drusus does make an interesting point, that the magistrates of Roma Antiqua did have certain sacerdotal duties. This included making offerings to the Gods. I have been thinking of this with regard to my post on active and passive forms of honor, and how to reconcile my opinion with the more conservative opinion of Drusus.

If I were a Christian magistrate within Nova Roma I would appoint someone I trusted as my proxy for those Religio duties that I could not conduct as a matter of religious conscience. This way I would be fillfilling my responsibilities as a magistrate, and also not interfering with my personal religious beliefs that would be comprimised by making offerings to Gods I did not fully wish to patronize. This way the person would not be making offerings, but the office they held would be making the offerings via proxy. Does this make sense?

The passive/active case that I made would clearly apply to citizens of Nova Roma and the passive/active case combined with the use of proxy would apply to magistrates. Similar to the recent Augury decre passed by the Collegium; "Curule magistrates who are practitioners of the Religio Romana shall have the ius auspicandi...A curule magistrate who is not a practitioner of the Religio Romana shall consult an augur or pullarius who shall take the auspication and provide an interpretation thereof to the curule magistrate."

Through the use of proxy a non-Religio magistrate would still be contributing to the Pax Deorum, without forcing him to commit an act that would comprimise his faith.

Just some random thoughts...

Vale;

Gaius Modius Athanasius

In a message dated 12/27/2003 7:09:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, mjk@... writes:

> Now Gai is an RR practioner but also well educated in the Catholic
> faith. I have had several discussions with him offline. I thought I
> knew a fair bit of Christianity but he has been well educated in that
> and is much sharper than me on the subject. Under similar
> circumstances I recieved the same answer from RC priests with regards
> to attending other religion's festivities from Hindu to Islamic.
>
> To answer you directly Senator Drusus, Roman Catholics can passively
> honor the gods of other beliefs but NOT make active
> sacrifices and
> prayers.
>
> Regards,
>
> Quintus Lanius Paulinus

Salve Druse;
I'm born a Jew I don't need anyone's permission about how observant a
Jew I want to be, that's up to me. In antiquita there were a wide
variety of responses by Jews to Roman culture, as you well know. And
Hellenized Jews too, think of the Hasmoneans, fascinating topic...
We're such an ancient cosmopolitan people, so deligtful;)
bene vale in pace deorum Pomponia Fabia Vera



In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "L. Sicinius Drusus" <drusus@b...>
wrote:

> Salvete Omnes,
>
> I Have a question, but I'm not looking for an answer from members

of

> this list, rather it's a question that I would like Members of this

list

> to ask.
>
> I Would like the Monotheists on this list to ask their Minister,

Priest,

> Rabbi, or Imam if it's permitted for them to offer prayers and
> sacrifices to the Gods of Roma. Most of the Christians will have a
> chance to do so tomorrow. Let us know what people trained in

Monotheist

> Religious Theology have to say on the subject.
>
> L. Sicinius Drusus

Bill Gawne wrote:

> "L. Sicinius Drusus" wrote:
> >
> > That is the Roman interpatation of honoring, not just mine.
>
> Would you have a citation for that, Drusus? I ask because my source
> of Roman information, _As The Romans Did_ by Jo-Ann Shelton, says
> the following about the Roman meaning of the word 'honor.'
>
> "The Latin word honor has two meanings: (1) political office (such as
> the consulship) to which one is elected by the people, or (2) public
> esteem." -- p 9, footnote 28, 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press 1998

You are supplying a meaning for a noun in resposnse to a statement using
a verb. "Honoring" is a verbal tense showing the action of paying
Honors, not a noun.

>
>
> Assuming for the moment that Professor Shelton knows at least as much as
> you do about matters Roman, it would seem that we honor the gods by
> according them public esteem (since I haven't seen any of them running
> for office thus far.)

The Immortals don't have to run for office, they hold it by the nature
of their existance, and Roman Office entitles it's holders to certain
public acts of showing esteem. For a curile magistrate it's Lictors. For
a God it's being offered certain Rituals at certain times.

>
>
> [...]
> > Please Note that I am discussing a Roman system, not that of a moderm
> > 21st century micronation. I Have no advice on the later, that is a make
> > it up as you go affair. I'm commenting on Roman Government.
>
> We *are* a Roman system, Drusus. We are not the Romans of antiquity,
> but we are most certainly Roman citizens by our own Declaration. Our
> Senate, our Comitiae, our Religio are all based in those of Roma. We
> may not be the Roman system you want, but we are most certainly the
> Roman system that you once swore to always act in the best interest of.

Don't confuse Labels with reality. The Facist Government of Italy
labeled itself Roman, but few agree with that label.

I can Label myself a Millionaire, a King, or President of the United
States, but those self applied labels don't translate into reality. We
seem to be labeled "the Best of Rome", though very little of Roma meets
the arbitrary "best". In a REAL Roman Government sacrifices would be
offered by the new Consuls to Iuipter Optimus Maximus on the first. I
Don't expect to see anything of the sort in "NOVA roma"

Drusus

> Salvete Quirites;
> Oh how bitter are the sour grapes of the loser....

Not bitter at all. And I don't think that I sounded sour at all. I
will be enjoying my year at
Palladius's villa in Sicily while doing less stressful work for Nova
Roma.

A question: Will it be that everytime I say anything for the next
year you'll say 'sour grapes'? Can
I at least ask that you change the fruit now and then? Sour oranges
are much worse than sour grapes
for example, especially if one drinks sour orange juice immediately
after brushing one's teeth. And
flowers are quite beautiful when they are in the vase but stink
horribly after two weeks. So you
could use 'rotten flowers' now and then as well.

> It is entirely just in my eyes Spuri Postumi and all who voted for
> the Lex.

I voted for it too. In hindsight I would not have.

And Posthumous: I've read your email in detail and I've come to the
same conclusion. I have to admit
that your explanations are excellent and again I think you.

Valete,
Diana Moravia

Salve Julia Modia,
Salve Anneia,

> I will be brutally honest here, and you'll find that I am very

opinionated on the subject. I am a
lady. I don't want to have to mow the lawn or take out the trash or
<fix the car.
< I want to stay inside decorating, cooking and making my home a
pleasant place for my family and
guests.

What if a woman enjoys all of the above (ok not the taking out the
trash part! )? I can sew, crochet
and knit, make candles and a list of other more female hobbies. And
what surprises everyone is that
even though I look rather girly, I am a 'Ms. Fix-it' and really good
at woodworking, fixing cars
and anything at all that is electrical. My only complaint is that I
wreck my manicure when doing the
men's work :-)

<In my opinion that is my role and I am very good at what I do. As
long as the women of Nova Roma
have a voice and the men respect us, I see no reason for us <not to
act like proper women of the
Republic.

I agree there-- but as women of the 21st century, many of us are
fully functional with the guy stuff
as well as the women stuff. Should we pretend that we are women of
the 1st century? For example,
when the battery needs to be changed on the car, do I watch my
Partner stare helplessly at it
because I am a lady or should I help him? The question is then: what
is the role of a modern lady in
a New Rome? Do we stay out of politics and the Religio?

Hey that can be the first topic of the new list :-)

Vale,
Diana

Salvete, Quirites

Just a small thing that caught my attention.

>
> Message: 24
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 15:26:47 -0500
> From: "Stephen Gallagher" <spqr753@...>
> Subject: The Oath of Office
>
> Salve Julia Modia
>
> Are you saying that a "Christian" Nova Roman, elected to a magistrate

should not or can not take the oath of office? The oath requires that we
must "Honor the Gods".

I guess it depends on whether or not you can Honor the Roman Gods in the day
to day performance of your duties as Tribune. What you believe isn't the
issue. It's what you do that matters, the old 'actions speak louder that
words' adage.

> I take Honor to mean respect.

They are similar, but there is more esteem involved in Honor. Also, one can
show respect, but what must one do to Honor?

> Do you take it to mean something more?

Yes, Honor is repect to a higher degree.
I've got to say that since HONOR and respect *are* different words and have
different meanings then it would follow that they are not the same. Now what
this comes down to in regards to what you mean by "something more than show
respect", pleas do tell us what you think Honor means.
I beleive to honor something *IS* more than merely respect. I might respect
someone, but that certainly doesn't mean I honor them.

> Vale
>
> Tiberius Galerius Paulinus

Vale, L Equitius Cincinnatus Augur

Salve Gai Modi,

I think your ideas are good on that matter. That is a route that one
could follow. There is no sin on my part if a pontiff or religio
practioner prays to the gods for my health, political decisions or
well being. This would also make sense for the pax decorum also. In
addition, as I mentioned yesterday, it would also be a great idea to
have a RR practitioner, even better yet, a priest at my side to
advise me if and when I was heading toward thin ice or something
contraversial with respect to the religion. The same applies to the
Augur consultations.

Once again, thank you for your wise thoughts!

Regards,

Quintus Lanius Paulinus

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, AthanasiosofSpfd@a... wrote:
> Gaius Modius Athanasius Quinto Lanio Paulino SPD
>
> Senator/Pontifex Drusus does make an interesting point, that the
magistrates of Roma Antiqua did have certain sacerdotal duties. This
included making offerings to the Gods. I have been thinking of this
with regard to my post on active and passive forms of honor, and how
to reconcile my opinion with the more conservative opinion of Drusus.
>
> If I were a Christian magistrate within Nova Roma I would appoint
someone I trusted as my proxy for those Religio duties that I could
not conduct as a matter of religious conscience. This way I would be
fillfilling my responsibilities as a magistrate, and also not
interfering with my personal religious beliefs that would be
comprimised by making offerings to Gods I did not fully wish to
patronize. This way the person would not be making offerings, but
the office they held would be making the offerings via proxy. Does
this make sense?
>
> The passive/active case that I made would clearly apply to citizens
of Nova Roma and the passive/active case combined with the use of
proxy would apply to magistrates. Similar to the recent Augury decre
passed by the Collegium; "Curule magistrates who are practitioners of
the Religio Romana shall have the ius auspicandi...A curule
magistrate who is not a practitioner of the Religio Romana shall
consult an augur or pullarius who shall take the auspication and
provide an interpretation thereof to the curule magistrate."
>
> Through the use of proxy a non-Religio magistrate would still be
contributing to the Pax Deorum, without forcing him to commit an act
that would comprimise his faith.
>
> Just some random thoughts...
>
> Vale;
>
> Gaius Modius Athanasius
>
> In a message dated 12/27/2003 7:09:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mjk@d... writes:
>
> > Now Gai is an RR practioner but also well educated in the
Catholic
> > faith. I have had several discussions with him offline. I thought
I
> > knew a fair bit of Christianity but he has been well educated in
that
> > and is much sharper than me on the subject. Under similar
> > circumstances I recieved the same answer from RC priests with
regards
> > to attending other religion's festivities from Hindu to Islamic.
> >
> > To answer you directly Senator Drusus, Roman Catholics can
passively
> > honor the gods of other beliefs but NOT make active
> > sacrifices and
> > prayers.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Quintus Lanius Paulinus