Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.

You obviously do not understand the legal system which you have already
labeled "idiotic".

Under our leges, there is no differentiation between the two. They are
under the heading of "calumniae". I refer you to the lex Salicia
poenalis 2.14.1.

Please read the law before commenting on it.

Vale,

Cato

>
> There IS a difference between two. They are both defamation, but

> spoken and one is written. That's the definition of the word

> the word Libel. Just because they both fall under "CALVMNIAE"

> mean they all of a sudden become synonyms.
>
> Why not just say "defamation" that way you won't confuse the words?
> Everytime you say "slander" when you really mean "libel" you make
> yourself look like a fool.
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:
> >
> > Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.
> >
> > You obviously do not understand the legal system which you have

> > labeled "idiotic".
> >
> > Under our leges, there is no differentiation between the two.

> > under the heading of "calumniae". I refer you to the lex Salicia
> > poenalis 2.14.1.
> >
> > Please read the law before commenting on it.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.

Salve.

Your definitions - in fact, macronational definitions of any kind -
are unimportant as regards our law. I will say "calumniae", however,
as it directly reflects our law, and only if it becomes necessary.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@...>
wrote:
>
> There IS a difference between two. They are both defamation, but
one is
> spoken and one is written. That's the definition of the word
Slander and
> the word Libel. Just because they both fall under "CALVMNIAE"
doesn't
> mean they all of a sudden become synonyms.
>
> Why not just say "defamation" that way you won't confuse the words?
> Everytime you say "slander" when you really mean "libel" you make
> yourself look like a fool.
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia. ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:
> >
> > Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.
> >
> > You obviously do not understand the legal system which you have
already
> > labeled "idiotic".
> >
> > Under our leges, there is no differentiation between the two.
They are
> > under the heading of "calumniae". I refer you to the lex Salicia
> > poenalis 2.14.1.
> >
> > Please read the law before commenting on it.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Salve,   While it is true that the main list is not Nova Roma and the Forum was not the Republic, both the free interaction, interest, volume and variety of things Romans freely talk about whether on this list and in the ancient Forum was a good indicator of the health of the Republic then and now.   Unless Nova Roma has created a physical Forum that all Nova Romans can regularly visit on a daily basis, this main list is it.   Vale,   A. Sempronius Regulus --- On Sat, 2/14/09, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> wrote: From: Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com Date: Saturday, February 14, 2009, 11:26 PM Salve, I will once again reiterate: The Main List is not Nova Roma. Vale - Annia Minucia Marcella http://minucia. ciarin.com A. Sempronius Regulus wrote: Salvete omnes,   Compared to the traffic, threads, and topics of 2005, it seems to me (admittedly away) that Nova Roma has become unrepublican? Citizens of Republican Rome (apart from the family Pison and the Epicureans in Campania) were a decidedly talkative lot in the Forum as to matters of everything religious, political, social, cultural, and economic with respect to Rome (the city where the gods are citizens). Did I come back on a lull or what?   Or did the princeps imperial order take over so withdrawal from public life is the ars vivendi of the day?   Valete, A. Sempronius Regulus

14. CALVMNIAE (Libel and Slander):

1. Whoever is proven to have made to a third party a false and defamatory statement about a person which has damaged the dignity or reputation of that person may be compelled to make a DECLARATIO PVBLICA: the convicted reus shall then present a public retraction and apology in order to restore the actor's dignity and reputation in one of Nova Roma's official venues within thirty days of the official announcement of the sentence.
2. The convicted reus may be placed under moderation on Nova Roma's official communications venues for a maximum period of six months. The messages of a citizen under moderation may be censored; in those cases, the praetores shall publicly announce the censoring of the message, and shall provide the original message upon request to those magistrates entitled to use intercessio against the praetores' decision within twenty-four (24) hours of their announcement.

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Minuciae Marcellae Caelio Ahenobarbo SPD

Salvete.

Minucia Marcella, please read carefully before you respond. The
macronational definition has no bearing whatsoever on our law. What
you perceive to be the "actual" definition has no bearing whatsoever
on our law. The idea of calumniae is set in our law, which provides
us with the only definition applicable and is the only law that
applies. If you read the lex Salicia poenalis then you will
understand what is meant by calumniae.

Caelius Ahenobarbus, we do indeed have a legal system. It is found
in the lex Salicia iudiciaria. Whether or not it is "historically
accurate, fair, balanced, and usable" is entirely another question,
but it exists and it is the current law.

Vale,

Cato

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.

Salve.

Minucia Marcella, are you serious? It's contained within the law:

"a false and defamatory statement"

Because there is no other definition given, that is the only one with
which we can legally act. You cannot simply add to what the lex says
because you want to or because something makes sense to you. The
macronational definitions *do not matter*, because our courts operate
under our law, and our law has already given us a definition. That
is precisely why a court of law would be called, to decide whether or
not the law has been violated.

And quite the opposite, the inclusion in parentheses of "libel and
slander" indicate that they *are* considered one thing under the
law. If they were not, it would be "libel *or* slander".

Vale,

Cato

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

>
> Alright, I'm done pwning cato. Let's move on to the actual topic.
>
> Someone give me a list of republican values.
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>

> Someone give me a list of republican values.

>
> > Someone give me a list of republican values.
>
> http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Roman_virtues
>
> CN-EQVIT-MARINVS
>

>
> Salvete omnes,
>  
> "One who is first to correct himself is a man of virtue" - Seneca.
>  
> I correct myself. In terms of the post below the Elder Cato and

> referring to one who always had to make a point without knowing what
> the point was they were responding to, was WIND, not ballast. The

> state needs wind (in its sails), even if the wind knows not where

> or where it goes, the ship of state uses the wind even if the wind

> not know what it is for.
>  
> Pardon for my inaccuracy.
>  
> Valete!
>  
> A. Sempronius Regulus
>
> --- On Sun, 2/15/09, A. Sempronius Regulus

>
> From: A. Sempronius Regulus <asempronius.regulus@...>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, February 15, 2009, 10:57 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Salve,
>  
> Whatever. Why are you so defensive? You insist on repeating "you

>  
> Perhaps I can help you.
>  
> A civilization is not just its institutions. Its the life its

>  
> Vale,
>
> --- On Sun, 2/15/09, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com>

>
> From: Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> Date: Sunday, February 15, 2009, 9:01 PM
>
>
>
>
> Salve,
>
> My point is that the Main List is not the alpha and omega of Nova

> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia. ciarin.com
>
> A. Sempronius Regulus wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Salve,
>  
> While it is true that the main list is not Nova Roma and the Forum

>  
> Unless Nova Roma has created a physical Forum that all Nova Romans

>  
> Vale,
>  
> A. Sempronius Regulus
>
> --- On Sat, 2/14/09, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com>

>
> From: Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com>
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com
> Date: Saturday, February 14, 2009, 11:26 PM
>
>
>
>
> Salve,
>
> I will once again reiterate:
>
> The Main List is not Nova Roma.
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia. ciarin.com
>
> A. Sempronius Regulus wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Salvete omnes,
>  
> Compared to the traffic, threads, and topics of 2005, it seems to

>  
> Or did the princeps imperial order take over so withdrawal from

> vivendi of the day?
>  
> Valete,
> A. Sempronius Regulus
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> writes:

> Someone give me a list of republican values.

http://www.novaroma .org/nr/Roman_ virtues

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Salve,   Whatever. Why are you so defensive? You insist on repeating "you are only making a point" oblivious to the point you originally missed and brought out by some others here.   Perhaps I can help you.   A civilization is not just its institutions. Its the life its citizens invest in it as they freely interact in some common Forum. You can have an empire, totalitarian regime, but you can't have a republic (no matter what kind of constitution nor how good, no matter how many organizations or institutions, or in your parlance, yahoo groups) unless the common forum is overflowing with citizen participation. I was comparing the variety and volume of this Forum in terms of 2005 as a health ticker. If you are too dense to get the point you missed, well, both Cato the Elder and Cicero commented on one like you -- the Senate needs ballast even if the ballast doesn't know what its for.   Vale, --- On Sun, 2/15/09, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> wrote: From: Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com Date: Sunday, February 15, 2009, 9:01 PM Salve, My point is that the Main List is not the alpha and omega of Nova Roma. There are many yahoo groups associated with Nova Roma, and each provincia has their local communities. Also, not all Nova Romans are on the Main List, and not all of those on the Main List are Nova Roman. Vale - Annia Minucia Marcella http://minucia. ciarin.com A. Sempronius Regulus wrote: Salve,   While it is true that the main list is not Nova Roma and the Forum was not the Republic, both the free interaction, interest, volume and variety of things Romans freely talk about whether on this list and in the ancient Forum was a good indicator of the health of the Republic then and now.   Unless Nova Roma has created a physical Forum that all Nova Romans can regularly visit on a daily basis, this main list is it.   Vale,   A. Sempronius Regulus --- On Sat, 2/14/09, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> wrote: From: Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@ciarin. com> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Otium To: Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com Date: Saturday, February 14, 2009, 11:26 PM Salve, I will once again reiterate: The Main List is not Nova Roma. Vale - Annia Minucia Marcella http://minucia. ciarin.com A. Sempronius Regulus wrote: Salvete omnes,   Compared to the traffic, threads, and topics of 2005, it seems to me (admittedly away) that Nova Roma has become unrepublican? Citizens of Republican Rome (apart from the family Pison and the Epicureans in Campania) were a decidedly talkative lot in the Forum as to matters of everything religious, political, social, cultural, and economic with respect to Rome (the city where the gods are citizens). Did I come back on a lull or what?   Or did the princeps imperial order take over so withdrawal from public life is the ars vivendi of the day?   Valete, A. Sempronius Regulus

Valete
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Marcus Caledonius Farlanus
Avete Omnes;
I have read the discussions coming into my e-mail and as someone who
is not currently a member of any religious "cult", I can say that
having been raised a Christian has not affected me in any negative
way that I can think of. I have read these postings posing as
"enlightened debate" or "questioning historical perspective" which
were nothing more than cover words for baiting someone into what
amounts to a street brawl over religion.
I have tried to just put it aside and understand that every group or
collective is going to have differences of opinion, etc, etc., but I
personally cannot stand this kind of negativity and moronic stupidity
anymore. I do not think that my religion, the religion that believes
in a divine Creator, has a whole lot of flaws. Sure, you can say that
this happened or that was omitted and on and on. What religion or
group doesn't have that, but I believe that any religion that
preaches as Christianity does or any other religion deserves to be
respected even if you don't agree with their teachings and beliefs.
It's a little thing I like to call acceptance and although I may not
agree with everything someone else practices, I still would fight to
ensure that they had the right to worship and experience their
relgion in their own way. I do not begrudge anyone else celebrating
their beliefs. Here in Nova Roma,
this seems to be an on-going and underlying sore that never seems to
heal because someone is always picking at it.
This is one of those times when you just want to grab the person or
persons involved, knock their heads together and toss their sorry
butts out the door or a window if it's more handy! Sorry if my prose
isn't enlightened or refined enough and I'm not acting Roman but you
know what? I don't really care anymore. Someone out here said that
Nova Roma takes strong men and women. Well they should have also said
men and women intelligent enough to know when they have pushed the
limit and know when to be quiet. Strength doesn't count for a whole
lot if you are too damned stupid to know how to use it correctly and
if you will pardon my observation, I haven't seen a whole lot of that
in regards to this particular discussion.
You can have doctorates and diplomas and all sorts of other
assignations to your name that tell the world how smart you are. You
may even believe your own hype and think that you truly are that
special in the world but don't try to impress me because I can smell
BS a mile away and I AM intelligent enough to keep away from it. I
may be a simple person but I have tried to educate myself and I am a
afficiando of Roman history but I think I can do better than having
to endure this kind of tripe filling my inbox every day.
Don't bother to reply because I am unsubscribing to this list ASAP! I
apologize to those who try hard to recreate this community as it was
intended but there comes a time when you have to stand up and speak
your mind and being part Scottish and part German, I don't sit by and
let someone abuse my patience and sensibilities for long. Those who I
am sure will pick my words apart and make light of me will say that I
don't belong anyway and the community is better off without me. To
them I say this, just keep telling yourself that and see how your
ever shrinking community withers and dies on the vine because people
can't stomach the constant force feeding of tripe you dish out.
People like you are a cancer and you should be cut out before you
claim the whole rather than just a part. Hopefully, those in charge
will see the logic in what I say and those who continue to engage in
these sorts of attacks will be held accountable in ways that truly
matter and not just meaningless dribble. Good bye and I wish Nova
Roma growth and prosperity and her citizens who live as they should
all that they deserve to have and more.

Di vos incolumes custodiant

Marcus Claudius Farlanus

> Roman, yes, but necessarily republican? I was thinking along the lines
> of free speech, less government, etc.

1. Strength is better than weakness
2. Courage is better than cowardice
3. Joy is better than guilt
4. Honour is better than dishonour
5. Freedom is better than slavery
6. Kinship is better than alienation
7. Realism is better than dogmatism
8. Vigor is better than lifelessness
9. Ancestry is better than universalism

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Salve Marcella,

You asked about the list of virtues.

> Roman, yes, but necessarily republican? I was thinking along the lines
> of free speech, less government, etc.

As much as the Republican party in the United States might wish to
claim that it got those values from the republican values of Roma
Antiqua, I doubt the ideas of either free speech or less government
were ever discussed in the Roman forum during antiquity. It's true
that Roman citizens expected to be able to speak their minds as part
of the deliberative process within the Comitia, but that was
considered to be a part of the iura publica, which was as much a
responsibility of citizenship as it was a right. Likewise, Roman
government during the time of the republic was large for a city, and
even for a city-state. Most cities of comparable size at that time
were governed by individual hereditary rulers or small councils or both.

After the Republic was subsumed into the Principate, those Romans who
looked back with longing to the time of the Republic always cited the
Virtues as what had distinguished the Republic from later times. So I
think that the Virtues represent a very good view into the attitudes,
values, and social beliefs of the Roman Republic.

Vale,

CN-EQVIT-MARINVS

>
> Salve,
>
> I asked for a list of republican values, not necessarily the

> the roman republic, but I see the point you are trying to make. I'd

> to make a comparison between the stated values list on the NR wiki

> the "Nine Noble Virtues" held by many heathens, because I think

> find a lot of similarities.
>
> Here are some lists of the NNV(they vary between sects of heathenry)
>
> From the Asatru Folk Assembly
>
> 1. Strength is better than weakness
> 2. Courage is better than cowardice
> 3. Joy is better than guilt
> 4. Honour is better than dishonour
> 5. Freedom is better than slavery
> 6. Kinship is better than alienation
> 7. Realism is better than dogmatism
> 8. Vigor is better than lifelessness
> 9. Ancestry is better than universalism
>
> General Heathenism
> /Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality,
> Self-Reliance, Industriousness, Perseverance
>
> /Fyrnsidu þéawas
>
> Honor
> Piety
> Courage
> Generosity
> Good Demeanor
> Hospitality
> Loyalty
> Mindfulness
> Truthfulness
>
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gnaeus Equitius Marinus wrote:
> >
> > Salve Marcella,
> >
> > You asked about the list of virtues.
> >
> > > Roman, yes, but necessarily republican? I was thinking along

> > > of free speech, less government, etc.
> >
> > As much as the Republican party in the United States might wish to
> > claim that it got those values from the republican values of Roma
> > Antiqua, I doubt the ideas of either free speech or less

> > were ever discussed in the Roman forum during antiquity. It's true
> > that Roman citizens expected to be able to speak their minds as

> > of the deliberative process within the Comitia, but that was
> > considered to be a part of the iura publica, which was as much a
> > responsibility of citizenship as it was a right. Likewise, Roman
> > government during the time of the republic was large for a city,

> > even for a city-state. Most cities of comparable size at that time
> > were governed by individual hereditary rulers or small councils

> >
> > After the Republic was subsumed into the Principate, those Romans

> > looked back with longing to the time of the Republic always cited

> > Virtues as what had distinguished the Republic from later times.

> > think that the Virtues represent a very good view into the

> > values, and social beliefs of the Roman Republic.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > CN-EQVIT-MARINVS
> >
> >
>

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Annia Minucia Marcella wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> My only response to this is that I don't think Nova Roma will wither despite
> the negativity of some members.
>
> Valete
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>

My response is confusion; what did it have to do with what I posted!?

Valete - Venator

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Gaius Equitius Cato <mlcinnyc@...> wrote:
> Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.
>
> Salve.
>
> Your definitions - in fact, macronational definitions of any kind -
> are unimportant as regards our law. I will say "calumniae", however,
> as it directly reflects our law, and only if it becomes necessary.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>

I would beg to differ, as we all live under Macronational Law and our
Nova Roma Law can not contravene them.

Vale - Venator

Post scriptum: The internet origin of Troll is totally different from
the legendary northern creature. A troller is someone who casts words
out as bait, hoping to hook responses, as in trolling for fish.

• Trustworthy,
• Loyal,
• Helpful,
• Friendly,
• Courteous,
• Kind,
• Obedient,
• Cheerful,
• Thrifty,
• Brave,
• Clean,
• and Reverent.

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia. ciarin.com

> I'd
> like to make a comparison between the stated values list on the NR wiki
> and the "Nine Noble Virtues" held by many heathens, because I think
> we'll find a lot of similarities.

> Here are some lists of the NNV(they vary between sects of heathenry)
>
> From the Asatru Folk Assembly
>
> 1. Strength is better than weakness
> 2. Courage is better than cowardice
> 3. Joy is better than guilt
> 4. Honour is better than dishonour
> 5. Freedom is better than slavery
> 6. Kinship is better than alienation
> 7. Realism is better than dogmatism
> 8. Vigor is better than lifelessness
> 9. Ancestry is better than universalism

> General Heathenism
> /Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality,
> Self-Reliance, Industriousness, Perseverance

> /Fyrnsidu þéawas
>
> Honor
> Piety
> Courage
> Generosity
> Good Demeanor
> Hospitality
> Loyalty
> Mindfulness
> Truthfulness

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Gallagher wrote:
> Salvete
>
> How about these.
>
> Scout is:
>
> Trustworthy,
> Loyal,
> Helpful,
> Friendly,
> Courteous,
> Kind,
> Obedient,
> Cheerful,
> Thrifty,
> Brave,
> Clean,
> and Reverent.
>
>
> Valete
>
> Paulinus
>

Words I still try to live by, along with "Be Prepared" and "Do A Good
Turn Daily."

Venator - former Boy Scout, Scout Leader, merit badge counselor, and
Explore Post Advisor

> My response is confusion; what did it have to do with what I posted!?
>>>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Salvete;

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Annia Minucia Marcella wrote:
> Salvete,
>
> My only response to this is that I don't think Nova Roma will wither despite
> the negativity of some members.
>
> Valete
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>

My response is confusion; what did it have to do with what I posted!?

Valete - Venator

>
> Salvete omnes,
>  
> I have been working on developing philosophy pages for the Wiki. But

>  
> Thanks in advance for whoever can address this issue.
>  
> Valete,
> A. Sempronius Regulus
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato omnes in foro SPD

Salvete.

I want to say that I feel terrible about Caledonius Farlanus' post.
I know that I will be accused of fomenting strife in the Forum
regarding religion. I want to put this puppy to rest once and for
all.

There are some out there who know exactly what buttons to press to
set me off, and they do so knowingly and willingly, then can
gleefully turn around and accuse me of proselytizing or causing
strife. There are those who will point at *anything* I say and find
cause to attack it; witness the attacks on my celebrating the Greek
gods' stories. As someone commented, first I got attacked for being
too Christian, then for being too Greek - the "wrong kind" of pagan.

How do you think a Jew would react if every now and then I threw
out "oh and of course the devil-worshipping Jews always kill a child
and drink its blood at Easter in mockery of the Eucharist"? Or how
about if I said "oh yeah today is the day that a nut-job named
Mohammed started his drinking binge and ended up writing the Qu'ran
in an inebriated fog"? Would any of you feel comfortable doing
that? And yet it is easy for some of you to attack not only the
history of Christianity but the very faith itself. Who among you
would willingly have their faith constantly mocked and derided? It
is one thing to discuss historical fact and theory, it is quite
another to belittle and demonize a faith.

You can go ahead and point to a bloody Christian history; but that
is not the faith, it is the history. Pagans aren't exactly pure and
innocent victims of Christians throughout history. It took three
centuries of inhuman slaughter, three centuries of using every
concievable method of murder to try to eradicate us.

I have never attacked the Religio. I have never belittled its
practitioners. I have never attacked its gods (quite the opposite,
actually).

Maybe a nun hit you one too many times. Maybe you were told you
couldn't get married again. Maybe you were denied communion for
some reason. Maybe you didn't like having to give up something you
really really wanted and now you blame it on the Church. Maybe you
had overbearing parents. Maybe you think being nasty to Christians
is a way to prove how cool you are. Maybe you got fed too much
asparagus as an child. I don't care.

If you attack Christianity - the faith - I will answer to the best
of my ability. I will not stop. So next time someone does, don't
go crying around saying "that Cato is such an ______ because he
never stops whining about Christianity" because you know what?
You're right. If you attack, I will respond. Simple as that. And
I will do so until I die or am thrown out of the Respublica.

Vale,

Cato

Valete
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Salve,

Stop playing the victim who always has to "Defend the Faith". I've spoken to many jews about the history of Judaism and how it came from babylon mythology and they never perceived it as an attack upon them. Discussing the history of Christianity should be no different. Stop taking every statement about christianity as an attack just because it doesn't jive with the propaganda you've been fed. This forum will discuss history once in a while, which will also raise debates because some historical events are controversial. It's going to happen. I recall a debate about Napoleon last year, where some think he was a tyrant, others think differently. I don't recall frenchman rising up in protest at having to defend their frenchiness.

Time and time again I hear christians complaining about being persecuted and it's freaking annoying. You're not persecuted. You're not even close. Stop thinking you have to defend christianity at every corner. Why is it we only have this problem with you and christianity and never with judaism, or heathenism, or druidism, etc? Maybe because you're the only one who likes to play the victim and acts like you're being attacked.

My suggestion to you is to not take yourself or your religion so seriously. If you don't like the negative aspects of christianity' s history being talked about then, just ignore those topics when they come up, just as other have had to ignore them. There really isn't anything you can say or do that will remove the negative past of your faith.

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia. ciarin.com

Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:

Cato omnes in foro SPD

Salvete.

I want to say that I feel terrible about Caledonius Farlanus' post.
I know that I will be accused of fomenting strife in the Forum
regarding religion. I want to put this puppy to rest once and for
all.

There are some out there who know exactly what buttons to press to
set me off, and they do so knowingly and willingly, then can
gleefully turn around and accuse me of proselytizing or causing
strife. There are those who will point at *anything* I say and find
cause to attack it; witness the attacks on my celebrating the Greek
gods' stories. As someone commented, first I got attacked for being
too Christian, then for being too Greek - the "wrong kind" of pagan.

How do you think a Jew would react if every now and then I threw
out "oh and of course the devil-worshipping Jews always kill a child
and drink its blood at Easter in mockery of the Eucharist"? Or how
about if I said "oh yeah today is the day that a nut-job named
Mohammed started his drinking binge and ended up writing the Qu'ran
in an inebriated fog"? Would any of you feel comfortable doing
that? And yet it is easy for some of you to attack not only the
history of Christianity but the very faith itself. Who among you
would willingly have their faith constantly mocked and derided? It
is one thing to discuss historical fact and theory, it is quite
another to belittle and demonize a faith.

You can go ahead and point to a bloody Christian history; but that
is not the faith, it is the history. Pagans aren't exactly pure and
innocent victims of Christians throughout history. It took three
centuries of inhuman slaughter, three centuries of using every
concievable method of murder to try to eradicate us.

I have never attacked the Religio. I have never belittled its
practitioners. I have never attacked its gods (quite the opposite,
actually).

Maybe a nun hit you one too many times. Maybe you were told you
couldn't get married again. Maybe you were denied communion for
some reason. Maybe you didn't like having to give up something you
really really wanted and now you blame it on the Church. Maybe you
had overbearing parents. Maybe you think being nasty to Christians
is a way to prove how cool you are. Maybe you got fed too much
asparagus as an child. I don't care.

If you attack Christianity - the faith - I will answer to the best
of my ability. I will not stop. So next time someone does, don't
go crying around saying "that Cato is such an ______ because he
never stops whining about Christianity" because you know what?
You're right. If you attack, I will respond. Simple as that. And
I will do so until I die or am thrown out of the Respublica.

Vale,

Cato

>
> Salve,
>
> Stop playing the victim who always has to "Defend the Faith". I've
> spoken to many jews about the history of Judaism and how it came

> babylon mythology and they never perceived it as an attack upon

> Discussing the history of Christianity should be no different. Stop
> taking every statement about christianity as an attack just because

> doesn't jive with the propaganda you've been fed. This forum will
> discuss history once in a while, which will also raise debates

> some historical events are controversial. It's going to happen. I

> a debate about Napoleon last year, where some think he was a

> others think differently. I don't recall frenchman rising up in

> at having to defend their frenchiness.
>
> Time and time again I hear christians complaining about being

> and it's freaking annoying. You're not persecuted. You're not even
> close. Stop thinking you have to defend christianity at every

> Why is it we only have this problem with you and christianity and

> with judaism, or heathenism, or druidism, etc? Maybe because you're

> only one who likes to play the victim and acts like you're being

>
> My suggestion to you is to not take yourself or your religion so
> seriously. If you don't like the negative aspects of christianity's
> history being talked about then, just ignore those topics when they

> up, just as other have had to ignore them. There really isn't

> you can say or do that will remove the negative past of your faith.
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:
> >
> > Cato omnes in foro SPD
> >
> > Salvete.
> >
> > I want to say that I feel terrible about Caledonius Farlanus'

> > I know that I will be accused of fomenting strife in the Forum
> > regarding religion. I want to put this puppy to rest once and for
> > all.
> >
> > There are some out there who know exactly what buttons to press to
> > set me off, and they do so knowingly and willingly, then can
> > gleefully turn around and accuse me of proselytizing or causing
> > strife. There are those who will point at *anything* I say and

> > cause to attack it; witness the attacks on my celebrating the

> > gods' stories. As someone commented, first I got attacked for

> > too Christian, then for being too Greek - the "wrong kind" of

> >
> > How do you think a Jew would react if every now and then I threw
> > out "oh and of course the devil-worshipping Jews always kill a

> > and drink its blood at Easter in mockery of the Eucharist"? Or how
> > about if I said "oh yeah today is the day that a nut-job named
> > Mohammed started his drinking binge and ended up writing the

> > in an inebriated fog"? Would any of you feel comfortable doing
> > that? And yet it is easy for some of you to attack not only the
> > history of Christianity but the very faith itself. Who among you
> > would willingly have their faith constantly mocked and derided? It
> > is one thing to discuss historical fact and theory, it is quite
> > another to belittle and demonize a faith.
> >
> > You can go ahead and point to a bloody Christian history; but that
> > is not the faith, it is the history. Pagans aren't exactly pure

> > innocent victims of Christians throughout history. It took three
> > centuries of inhuman slaughter, three centuries of using every
> > concievable method of murder to try to eradicate us.
> >
> > I have never attacked the Religio. I have never belittled its
> > practitioners. I have never attacked its gods (quite the opposite,
> > actually).
> >
> > Maybe a nun hit you one too many times. Maybe you were told you
> > couldn't get married again. Maybe you were denied communion for
> > some reason. Maybe you didn't like having to give up something you
> > really really wanted and now you blame it on the Church. Maybe you
> > had overbearing parents. Maybe you think being nasty to Christians
> > is a way to prove how cool you are. Maybe you got fed too much
> > asparagus as an child. I don't care.
> >
> > If you attack Christianity - the faith - I will answer to the best
> > of my ability. I will not stop. So next time someone does, don't
> > go crying around saying "that Cato is such an ______ because he
> > never stops whining about Christianity" because you know what?
> > You're right. If you attack, I will respond. Simple as that. And
> > I will do so until I die or am thrown out of the Respublica.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.

Salve.

Do you actually even read what is written before you start typing a response? Look for these
key words: history, faith. Different things. Different responses.

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Salve Marcella:
> Romans did value strength, they valued competition, their
> reputation, the antiquity of their past, sex, actually 1-9 of your
> list.
> optime vale
> Maior
> >
> > Salve,
> >
> > I asked for a list of republican values, not necessarily the
> virtues of
> > the roman republic, but I see the point you are trying to make.
I'd
> like
> > to make a comparison between the stated values list on the NR
wiki
> and
> > the "Nine Noble Virtues" held by many heathens, because I think
> we'll
> > find a lot of similarities.
> >
> > Here are some lists of the NNV(they vary between sects of
heathenry)
> >
> > From the Asatru Folk Assembly
> >
> > 1. Strength is better than weakness
> > 2. Courage is better than cowardice
> > 3. Joy is better than guilt
> > 4. Honour is better than dishonour
> > 5. Freedom is better than slavery
> > 6. Kinship is better than alienation
> > 7. Realism is better than dogmatism
> > 8. Vigor is better than lifelessness
> > 9. Ancestry is better than universalism
> >
> > General Heathenism
> > /Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality,
> > Self-Reliance, Industriousness, Perseverance
> >
> > /Fyrnsidu þéawas
> >
> > Honor
> > Piety
> > Courage
> > Generosity
> > Good Demeanor
> > Hospitality
> > Loyalty
> > Mindfulness
> > Truthfulness
> >
> >
> > Vale
> > - Annia Minucia Marcella
> >
> > http://minucia.ciarin.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Gnaeus Equitius Marinus wrote:
> > >
> > > Salve Marcella,
> > >
> > > You asked about the list of virtues.
> > >
> > > > Roman, yes, but necessarily republican? I was thinking along
> the lines
> > > > of free speech, less government, etc.
> > >
> > > As much as the Republican party in the United States might wish
to
> > > claim that it got those values from the republican values of
Roma
> > > Antiqua, I doubt the ideas of either free speech or less
> government
> > > were ever discussed in the Roman forum during antiquity. It's
true
> > > that Roman citizens expected to be able to speak their minds as
> part
> > > of the deliberative process within the Comitia, but that was
> > > considered to be a part of the iura publica, which was as much a
> > > responsibility of citizenship as it was a right. Likewise, Roman
> > > government during the time of the republic was large for a
city,
> and
> > > even for a city-state. Most cities of comparable size at that
time
> > > were governed by individual hereditary rulers or small councils
> or both.
> > >
> > > After the Republic was subsumed into the Principate, those
Romans
> who
> > > looked back with longing to the time of the Republic always
cited
> the
> > > Virtues as what had distinguished the Republic from later
times.
> So I
> > > think that the Virtues represent a very good view into the
> attitudes,
> > > values, and social beliefs of the Roman Republic.
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > CN-EQVIT-MARINVS
> > >
> > >
> >
>

>
> It is not "my" Christ and you know that perectly
>
> so said, all philosphy and even science are "banlette

>
> saying that is saying nothing
>
> wemust seek to understand all doctrines from within and not from

>
> take one naoher fact from the daily news
> the pope choose to reinstate a bishop who claims the gas chambers

>
> so the media and the vulgum pecus understood the facts
> but really Benedict XVI reinstated an "integrist" bishop, not for

>
> so vulgar point of views on matters of facts and intellectual

> to return to the trinity the outstanding point is the fact that

> as the dctrines aid it exists one and only one god they tried t o

>
> should we say lex orendi lex credenti? what would it happen if

>
> so you see, history ( religious sociology and facts) and theology

> the trinity doctrine is an issue, not the only one possible but it

>
> Varo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gaius Petronius Dexter
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 10:27 AM
> Subject: [Nova-Roma] Re: OT Why Christianity Won?
>
>
> C. Petronius Varroni s.p.d.,
>
> > sorry dexter
> > i must agree with cato against you
> > the following in french for you
>
> No matter, you can be with which you want, I am not like your

> with him :"Who is not with me, is against me."
>
> So, the trinity is a poor effort to combine the manifeste

> (God, Jesus and Spirit dove) within a monotheism.
>
> As we say in French, it is a "branlette intellectuelle".
>
> But it is not with that that the christianism was imposed by

> puppet emperors, but because this religion was attractive by its
> church copied on the empire administration.
>
> > tout cea n'a de sens qu à partir dumoment où l'on considère

> comme dieu et que l'on veut défendre l'idée du monothéisme: le

> de la trinité cherche à concilier ces deux affirmatons a priori
> contradictoires.
>
> Mais elle le sont a priori et a posteriori.
>
> > le NT lui meme a plutot une perspective "adoptianiste" jésus

> adopté comme fils de dieu à son baptême
> > l'expression le fils ou les fils de dieu a une longue histoire

> le AT et était même employé (métaphoriquement?) pour les rois de

> > en tout cas les premiers textes subordonnent nettement jésus

> père et meme jésus est censé demander "pourquoi m'appelles-tu

> Dieu seul est bon"
> "God only is good"
>
> Jupiter, remarque-le, était très bon Optimus. Les chrétiens y

> Jupiter, notice, was "very good" Optimus, christians lose out.
>
> > on aurait pu développer un trithéisme, c'est ainsi que les

> les musulmans comprennent le christianisme et que tu sembles
> l'interpréter mais c'est un abime que la théologie trinitaire

> sans jamais y plonger (la religion populaire est une autre

>
> Sans jamais y plonger? Parce qu'on ne veut pas en débattre sur

> fond et que les gens s'en moquent.
> Car si l'on admet que 3 = 1, pourquoi ne pas admettre que tous

> dieux, déesses du polythéisme ne fassent qu'1. Selon la formule,

> = 1, alors 1 000 000 = 1.
> Ainsi tous les polythéismes ne sont alors qu'un monothéisme.
>
> > tous les théologiens sont d'accord pour dire de toute manière

> ce dogme trinitaire est une élaboration des données du NT et n'y
> figure pas mot à mot
>
> Oui, ce sont des fadaises.
>
> > ensuite ce dogme n'a rien à voir avec les triades romaines que

> soit la triade archaique ou la triade capitoline
>
> Que tu crois. Il s'agit tout à fait de la même chose. Pourquoi

> triade? Parce que ça parlait aux gens normaux de l'époque.
>
> > c'est aussi différent de la théologie zoroastrienne des saints
> immortels quoique que celle ci ait influence grandement les

> temps de l'exil
> > on dit que les égyptiens croyaient que tous les dieux étaient

> multiples formes d'un unique dieu, s'il y a un rapport avec le

> trinitaire, je ne peux pas le dire<<
>
> C'est la conclusion logique à la formule si 3 = 1 alors 1 000

> Et alors tout est monothéisme.
>
> >> enfin que beaucoup de saints sont ds divinités paiennes
> christianisées à commencer par Brigitte mais ça na rien à voir

> la Trinité<<
>
> Ca a à voir avec la "victoire" du christianisme.
>
> > enfin marie est certainement la christinisation de la déesse

> antique mais meme si c'est une déesse pour le peuple elle ne

> pas pour les théologiens, et cela prouve surtout que le coté

> de la divinité doit être honoré même dans le christianisme ceq

> ouvre certes un autre aspect du débat sur le monothéisme, je le

> bien mais ne touche pas la Trinité per se<<
>
> Les théologiens ne représentent qu'eux mêmes et celui qui croit

> qui paie c'est le peuple. Il lui faut une déesse mère, il l'a.

> avec le pseudo monothéisme que serait le christianisme.
>
> Vale.
> C. Petronius Dexter
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

> Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a été contrôlé par l'anti-

> Aucun virus connu à ce jour par nos services n'a été détecté.
>

> Salve,
>
> I do. But my words shouldn't matter to you remember?
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:
> >
> > Cato Minuciae Marcellae sal.
> >
> > Salve.
> >
> > Do you actually even read what is written before you start typing

> > response? Look for these
> > key words: history, faith. Different things. Different responses.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
>

>
> "that's a basic Christian or Jewish practice"
>
> Unfortunately incorrect. It is found across the board:
>
>
> "The four classic Western Cardinal virtues are:
>
> temperance: sophrosyne
> prudence: phronesis
> fortitude: andreia
> justice : dikaiosyne
>
> This enumeration is traced to Greek philosophy, and was listed at

> by Socrates, from whom no attributable written works exist. Plato

> "holiness"; In Protagoras and Meno, he states that the separate

> independently, and offers as evidence the contradictions of acting

> (prudence), yet in an unjust way, or acting with bravery

> (prudence).
>
> In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle describes every virtue as a

> deficiency and an excess of a trait. The point of greatest virtue

> middle, but at a "golden mean" sometimes closer to one extreme than

> example, courage is the mean between cowardice and foolhardiness,

> between self-deprecation and vanity, and generosity the mean

> extravagance.
>
> Hinduism, or Sanatana Dharma (Dharma means moral duty), has pivotal

> everyone keeping their Dharma is asked to follow. For they are

> manusya (mankind), that allow one to be in the mode of goodness.

> of material nature (guna), as described in the Vedas and other

> (goodness, creation, stillness, intelligence), Rajas (passion,

> and Tamas (ignorance, restraint, inertia, destruction). Every

> these modes in varying degrees. A person in the mode of Sattva has

> prominence in his nature, which he obtains by following the virtues

>
> Buddhism's four brahmavihara ("Divine States") can be more properly

> in the European sense. They are:
>
> 1. Metta/Maitri: loving-kindness towards all; the hope that a

> kindness is "the wish that all sentient beings, without any

> 2. Karuna: compassion; the hope that a person's sufferings will

> the "wish for all sentient beings to be free from suffering."
> 3. Mudita: altruistic joy in the accomplishments of a person,

> joy, "is the wholesome attitude of rejoicing in the happiness and

> beings."
> 4. Upekkha/Upeksha: equanimity, or learning to accept both loss

> blame, success and failure with detachment, equally, for oneself

> equanimity means "not to distinguish between friend, enemy or

> sentient being as equal. It is a clear-minded tranquil state of

> overpowered by delusions, mental dullness or agitation."
>
>
> The Chinese martial virtues:
>
> Morality of deed:
>
> Humility (Qian Xu)
> Loyalty (Zhong Cheng)
> Respect (Zun Jing)
> Righteousness (Zheng Yi)
> Trust (Xin Yong)
>
> Morality of mind:
>
> Courage (Yong Gan)
> Endurance (Ren Nai)
> Patience (Heng Xin)
> Perseverance (Yi Li)
> Will (Yi Zhi)"
>
> etc., etc., etc. You can read much more here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue
>
> and here:
>
> http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/GkVirtue.html
>
> and here:
>
> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-virtue/
>
> and here:
>
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/index.html
>
> Valete,
>
> Cato
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> How about some support for our polytheistic cousins in Greece,
> YSEE,the Supreme Council of Ethnic Hellenes, for their efforts in
> getting legal recognition, in trying to worship at their historic
> sites?
> http://www.ysee.gr/index-eng.php
>
> optime valete
> M. Hortensia Maior

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> Maior Catoni spd;
> well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just told
> me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I used
> christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done in
> Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> valeas
> Maior

> Salve.
>
> I certainly would, and Agricola didn't pass on erroneous

>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Maior Catoni spd;
> > well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just

> > me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I

> > christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> > about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done

> > Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> > Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> > Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> > valeas
> > Maior
>

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

-Maior Catoni spd;
good let's get on with it. I certainly trust M. Lucretius Agricola
scholarship over your internet research. Now let's stop the back &
forth arguing it is truly trollish.
valeas
Maior

> Salve.
>
> I certainly would, and Agricola didn't pass on erroneous
information, you did.
>
> Vale,
>
> Cato
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> >
> > Maior Catoni spd;
> > well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just
told
> > me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I
used
> > christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> > about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done
in
> > Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> > Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> > Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> > valeas
> > Maior
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@...> wrote:
>
> -Maior Catoni spd;
> good let's get on with it. I certainly trust M. Lucretius Agricola
> scholarship over your internet research. Now let's stop the back &
> forth arguing it is truly trollish.
> valeas
> Maior
>
> > Salve.
> >
> > I certainly would, and Agricola didn't pass on erroneous
> information, you did.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Maior Catoni spd;
> > > well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just
> told
> > > me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I
> used
> > > christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> > > about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done
> in
> > > Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> > > Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> > > Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> > > valeas
> > > Maior
> >
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> He probably thinks you're attacking his religion again. When will you
> stop persecuting him by mentioning christianity Maior?
>
> ROFL
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com

Vale
- Annia Minucia Marcella

http://minucia.ciarin.com

Cato Maiori sal.

Salve.

Agricola's scholarship is not even at issue here, and perhaps you should leave him alone
and allow him to speak for himself if he desires to; your presentation of fantasy as fact is
the issue, Maior. If you cannot make a simple factually correct declaratory statement then
how can we trust you with such an undertaking like this, to be presented on a public
medium? As a member of the Board of Directors of this corporation I am afraid of what
you might end up trying to pass off as truth - something which could be disproven in an
instant by an eight-year-old with access to a computer?

Vale,

Cato

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, "Maior" <rory12001@. ..> wrote:
>
> -Maior Catoni spd;
> good let's get on with it. I certainly trust M. Lucretius Agricola
> scholarship over your internet research. Now let's stop the back &
> forth arguing it is truly trollish.
> valeas
> Maior
>
> > Salve.
> >
> > I certainly would, and Agricola didn't pass on erroneous
> information, you did.
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogrou ps.com, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Maior Catoni spd;
> > > well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just
> told
> > > me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I
> used
> > > christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> > > about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done
> in
> > > Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> > > Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> > > Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> > > valeas
> > > Maior
> >
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Annia Minucia Marcella <annia@...> wrote:
>
> Salve,
>
> But those are macronational facts and they don't apply here.
>
> Vale
> - Annia Minucia Marcella
>
> http://minucia.ciarin.com
>
>
>
> Gaius Equitius Cato wrote:
> >
> > Cato Maiori sal.
> >
> > Salve.
> >
> > Agricola's scholarship is not even at issue here, and perhaps you
> > should leave him alone
> > and allow him to speak for himself if he desires to; your presentation
> > of fantasy as fact is
> > the issue, Maior. If you cannot make a simple factually correct
> > declaratory statement then
> > how can we trust you with such an undertaking like this, to be
> > presented on a public
> > medium? As a member of the Board of Directors of this corporation I am
> > afraid of what
> > you might end up trying to pass off as truth - something which could
> > be disproven in an
> > instant by an eight-year-old with access to a computer?
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Cato
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > >
> > > -Maior Catoni spd;
> > > good let's get on with it. I certainly trust M. Lucretius Agricola
> > > scholarship over your internet research. Now let's stop the back &
> > > forth arguing it is truly trollish.
> > > valeas
> > > Maior
> > >
> > > > Salve.
> > > >
> > > > I certainly would, and Agricola didn't pass on erroneous
> > > information, you did.
> > > >
> > > > Vale,
> > > >
> > > > Cato
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>, "Maior" <rory12001@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Maior Catoni spd;
> > > > > well go argue with Agricola who studied Classics and who just
> > > told
> > > > > me that enumerating virtues in a list, was typically Catholic, I
> > > used
> > > > > christian and jewish to make it more generic. I really don't care
> > > > > about Buddhism, though I know all about it. I care what was done
> > > in
> > > > > Republican Rome. They told stories to inculcate Roman virtues.
> > > > > Agricola would like to replace the list of virtues with the Core
> > > > > Narrative. And I would be happy to work on the project. Would you?
> > > > > valeas
> > > > > Maior
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>