Q Caecilius Metellus tr. pl. Quiritibus salutem dicit.
Saluete, Quirites.
This message is to report a session of the Senate of Nova Roma. The
session was convened by L Cornelius Sulla Felix, as acting Princeps
Senatus. The session was convened to begin at 05:00, a.d. VI Id. Ian.,
at which point the debate period began. The debate period closed at
05:00, a.d. XV Kal. Feb. Voting was opened at 05:01, a.d. XIV Kal.
Feb., and closed at 05:01, a.d. VII Kal. Feb.
The following twenty members of the Senate, in order of senatorial rank
and preceded by their identifying initials, cast votes in the session:
[DIPI] Decius Iunius Palladius Invictus, Princeps Senatus (by proxy to
L Cornelius Sulla Felix)
[MCJ] Marcus Cassius Julianus, Censorius, Pater Patriae
[LCSF] Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix, Censorius, acting Princeps Senatus
[TGP] Tiberius Galerius Paulinus, Censorius
[TIS] Titus Iulius Sabinus, Censorius
[QFM] Quintus Fabius Maximus, Consularis
[MMA] Marcus Minucius Audens, Consularis
[PUSV] Publius Ullerius Stephanus Venator, Consularis
[PMS] Pompeia Minucia Strabo, Consularis
[GTVG] Gaius Tullius Valerianus Germanicus, Consularis
[GIC] Gnaeus Iulius Caesar, Consularis
[SCVIA] Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana Aeternia, Praetoria
[MCGG] Marcus Cornelius Gualterus Graecus, Praetorius
[GPD] Gaius Petronius Dexter, Praetorius
[PACP] Publius Annaeus Constantinus Placidus, Aedilicius
[GVA] Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa, Tribunicius
[MPC] Marcus Pompeius Caninus, Tribunicius
[LVT] Lucius Vitellius Triarius
[GMC] Gaius Marcius Crispus
[CAC] Gaius Aemilius Crassus
The following two members of the Senate did not cast votes, and did not
provide a proxy:
Lucius Equitius Cincinnatus Augur, Censorius
Quintus Suetonius Paulinus, Tribunicius
The items considered by the Senate, together with the votes on each and
the results thereof, are:
[For clarity, the text of each item is enclosed between two lines
consisting of two equal signs, as '=='.]
ITEM I: Senatus Consultum Ultimum on the Removal from the Offices of
the Pontifex Maximus, Pontifex, and Flamen Portunalis
==
Under the Constitution of Nova Roma, "The Senate shall have the power
to issue the Senatus consultum ultimum (the ultimate decree of the
Senate). When in effect, this decree will supersede all other
governmental bodies and authorities (with the exception of the
dictator) and allow the Senate to invest the consuls with absolute
powers to deal with a specific situation, subject only to their
collegial veto and review by the Senate. Even under the authority of
the Senatus consultum ultimum, the consuls may only temporarily suspend
this Constitution; they may not enact any permanent changes
hereto." (Const. N.R. V.E).
Under the authority of Section V.E of the Nova Roman Constitution the
Senate of Nova Roma issues the following senatus consultum ultimum.
I. The citizen known as Gaius Petronius Dexter (citizen number 11584)
is forthwith removed from the offices of pontifex maximus, pontifex and
flamen portunalis of Nova Roma.
II. Gaius Petronius Dexter (citizen number 11584) is forbidden from
standing as a candidate for appointment or election to the office of
pontifex maximus and/or appointment or election to the office of
pontifex or any other office or position that were he to be appointed
or elected would confer on him voting and/or membership rights in the
collegium pontificum. This prohibition shall last for a period of five
(5) years, such period to commence from the close of the senate session
that enacts this Senatus consultum ultimum.
III. No pontifex, or other citizen/person, shall nominate Gaius
Petronius Dexter (citizen number 11584) as a candidate for appointment
or election to the office of pontifex maximus or the office of pontifex
or any other office or position that were he to be appointed or elected
would confer on him voting and/or membership rights in the collegium
pontificum. This prohibition shall last for a period of five (5) years,
such period to commence from the close of the senate session that
enacts this Senatus consultum ultimum.
IV. Any candidacy as specified at II and/or III above, by or on behalf
of Gaius Petronius Dexter (citizen number 11584) shall be illegal and
he shall be deemed to be automatically removed from the list of
candidates for such office. This prohibition shall last for a period of
five (5) years, such period to commence from the close of the senate
session that enacts this Senatus consultum ultimum.
V. Any election result that declares the appointed or elected person to
the offices of pontifex maximus and/or pontifex, or any other office or
position that were he to be appointed or elected would confer on him
voting and/or membership rights in the collegium pontificum, to be
Gaius Petronius Dexter (citizen number 11584) shall be illegal and in
the case of an election the winner shall be the candidate with the next
largest number of votes cast in his/her favor. In the absence of other
candidates, the election shall be considered void. This prohibition
shall last for a period of five (5) years, such period to commence from
the close of the senate session that enacts this Senatus consultum
ultimum.
VI. For the purposes of this Senatus consultum ultimum, the positions
of pontifex maximus and/or pontifex, or any other office or position
that grant the appointed or elected incumbent voting and/or membership
rights in the collegium pontificum, shall be deemed to include any
acting, temporary or otherwise impermanent period performing such a
specified role, or any role that consuls deem to be the equivalent of
such office.
VII. The consuls, now or consuls in the future to the point of
expiration of this Senatus consultum ultimum, shall by means of edictum
make such amendments to any aspect of this Senatus consultum ultimum
that they deem necessary to either clarify its meaning, or enforce its
original intent, as expressed in I to VI inclusive. Such amendments
require consular collegiate agreement. For the purposes of this Senatus
consultum ultimum both consuls are deemed to be invested with the
imperium necessary to issue such edictum. The consuls, now or in the
future to the point of expiration of this Senatus consultum ultimum,
are forbidden from waiving, cancelling, suspending this Senatus
consultum ultimum or engaging in any other act, or a failure to act,
that would negate the execution of the intent of this Senatus consultum
ultimum.
VIII. This Senatus consultum ultimum shall remain in force for a period
of five (5) years, commencing from the date of the close of the senate
session that enacts this Senatus consultum ultimum.
==
DIPI: Uti rogas
MCJ: Abstineo
LCSF: Uti rogas
TGP: Uti rogas
TIS: Uti rogas
QFM: Uti rogas
MMA: Uti rogas
PUSV: Uti rogas
PMS: Uti rogas
GTVG: Abstineo
GIC: Uti rogas
SCVIA: Uti rogas
MCGG: Uti rogas
GPD: Antiquo
PACP: Uti rogas
GVA: Uti rogas
MPC: Uti rogas
LVT: Uti rogas
GMC: Uti rogas
CAC: Antiquo
With sixteen (16) in favour, two (2) opposed and two (2) abstaining,
the item passes.
Comments:
MCJ: While I have heard the numerous complaints about the current
Pontifex serving as Pontifex Maximus, I have enough personal experience
with removal from office that I can neither block nor participate in
this action.
LCSF: I am a firm believer of holding people in positions of authority
accountable. As I have stated in the past this Session was needed
because this individual choose to abandon his post and fail to carry
out his Constitutional duty. His actions shown he treated the incoming
magistrates with complete disrespect and he has treated the entire
organization with complete disregard. To not recognize the selfishness
of his actions and the utter contempt he showed not only his friends
but the organization he served for years is unconscionable. To be
honest, he deserves more punishment than what this SCU gives him, but
despite my reputation I am lenient. 5 years is expulsion from the
religious offices he held is reasonable.
TIS: Whatever are the reasons behind his non-involvement of the last
time, C. Petronius chose to not use the only available honorable way
which is that of resignation from the Pontifex Maximus position.
QFM: We must remove the current Pontifex Maximus for abandoning the
citizens and not carrying out his duty for Nova Roma. However, banning
him from our religion is extreme and undeserved. As the presiding
magistrate crowed: "To be honest, he deserves more punishment than what
this SCU gives him, but despite my reputation I am lenient. 5 years is
expulsion from the religious offices he held is reasonable." As he
points out, its his decision to do this unilaterally even though we
here all recall how the cohors treated Cornelius Sulla when he was in
their crosshairs. One would think he would have learned. I hope
Senator Dexter stays in Nova Roma after this, but I doubt it.
PUSV: Having reviewed posts available to me, I reluctantly say Uti
Rogas. The hesitance is over the gravity of the situation, not the
necessity.
GTVG: I have decided to abstain from voting on this measure. While I
feel that Dexter must be removed, I shall not vote against my
conscience. The Pontifex Maximus should serve for life. That seems to
be a matter of pontifical law. Dexter should step down voluntarily, if
he no longer wants to do the job. Or perhaps the other pontifices are
competent under pontifical law to remove him. But the Senate ought not
to have that power.
GIC: The reason Dexter needs to be removed is that he won't resign. If
he was going to do that, honorably, he would have already have
indicated his intention to do so. Even if he popped up now and fell on
his sword, however unlikely that might be, this still needs to be
passed. He abandoned his post. There was some suggestion outside this
house we wait for 45 days. That is unacceptable. The consuls have been
delayed enough in taking office, as have all the curule magistrates. To
wait 45 days, and then either have this debate or wait for the clique
in the collegium to act would be lunacy. Dexter needs to be prevented
from having a voice in the collegium pontificum because he has proven
himself a voice of damaging obstruction. he is no bridge builder, but a
bridge destroyer. By refusing and/or neglecting to call the comitia
curiata he has also proven himself unworthy of being a pontifex of Nova
Roma. Left inside the collegium he will be a source of continued
trouble. He has violated the pax Nova Romana (such as it is,or isn't!)
by deliberately setting the collegium on a collision course with the
senate. The issues he fought over were trivial administrative ones, but
the damage far outweighed the scope of those issues. Five years to keep
the collegium free of him is a fair amount of time.
SCVIA: Although I do not agree with the term limit of penalty. I am
just relieved that next years set of Magistrates will NOT be facing
this dilemma and to me that is more important. What C. Petronius
Dexter did or in this case the lack thereof was absolutely
unconscionable. I am just hoping if Item III comes to pass, that
proper procedures will be created and developed so that we as a
community will not have to suffer an almost lockdown of our government
never again in our lifetimes.
PACP: Uti Rogas, for reasons already amply stated by others.
LVT: We have no alternative in this matter other than to remove the
current Pontifex Maximus for abandoning the citizens of Nova Roma.
Where the Collegium Pontificum could not or would not remove him, the
Senate has been tasked with that job.
CAC: I consider the actions and in this case the lack of actions of
Pontifex Maximus completely unacceptable. The only constitutional duty,
and it is a duty not a right, is to call the Comitia Curiata to witness
the imperium to the curul magistrates and the appointment of new
Pontifices. This duty is not to be performed as the will of the
Pontifex Maximus but by him as representative of the all community. The
fact Dexter has been reported to been active in other onlines venues
indicates to me that the non calling of the Comitia Curiata was a
deliberated decision and I don't have any doubt he should resign
immediately from all his Pontifices duties and positions for the
flagrant lack of respect of all other bodies in NR, including the
Comitia that elected the magistrates. Sadly not even that last path of
honor was taken as we all could observe. With all this said the citizen
and actual Pontifex Maximus deserves some kind of punishment in my
opinion and what is been proposed here is very lenient, once more in my
opinion, but I can't conceived that we, the Senate, decide what will be
the punishment while doing it outside all our laws and constitution and
a Nova Roman citizen is effectively sentenced without any kind of legal
protection of his rights no matter how much guilty we all think or
believe him to be. The constitution should never be suspended to punish
a citizen no matter how obstructive his actions or lack of them are.
Item II: Senatus Consultum Ultimum on the Appointment of an Acting
Pontifex Maximus
==
Under the Constitution of Nova Roma, "The Senate shall have the power
to issue the Senatus consultum ultimum (the ultimate decree of the
Senate). When in effect, this decree will supersede all other
governmental bodies and authorities (with the exception of the
dictator) and allow the Senate to invest the consuls with absolute
powers to deal with a specific situation, subject only to their
collegial veto and review by the Senate. Even under the authority of
the Senatus consultum ultimum, the consuls may only temporarily suspend
this Constitution; they may not enact any permanent changes
hereto." (Const. N.R. V.E).
Under the authority of Section V.E of the Nova Roman Constitution the
Senate of Nova Roma issues the following senatus consultum ultimum.
I. The finding of the Senate that the citizen and senator known as
Titus Iulius Sabinus (citizen number 8092) was in contempt of the
Senate for matters concerning the conduct of the Collegium pontificum
is forthwith and with immediate effect from the passage of this Senatus
consultum ultimum revoked and the Senatus consultum it was enacted in
shall be deemed not to include his name. Such a finding shall survive
the expiration of this Senatus consultum ultimum.
II. The citizen known as Titus Iulius Sabinus (citizen number 8092) is
forthwith appointed as the acting pontifex maximus of Nova Roma.
III. For the purposes of this Senatus consultum ultimum the position of
acting pontifex maximus shall encompass all the rights, duties and
obligations enjoyed by and imposed on the pontifex maximus.
IV. The period of Titus Iulius Sabinus’ appointment shall be for six
(6) months, such period to commence from the close of the senate
session that enacts this Senatus consultum ultimum.
V. Titus Iulius Sabinus is specifically authorized by the authority of
this Senatus consultum ultimum to summon the comitia curiata in order
that its normal business maybe conducted. Any attempt, in any manner,
by any person, to impede Titus Iulius Sabinus in this duty shall be
illegal and void.
VI. The consuls shall by means of edictum make such amendments to any
aspect of this Senatus consultum ultimum that they deem necessary to
either clarify its meaning, or enforce its original intent, as
expressed in I to IV inclusive. Such amendments require consular
collegiate agreement. For the purposes of this Senatus consultum
ultimum both consuls are deemed to be invested with the imperium
necessary to issue such edictum. The consuls are forbidden from
waiving, cancelling, suspending this Senatus consultum ultimum or
engaging in any other act, or a failure to act, that would negate the
execution of the intent of this Senatus consultum ultimum.
VII. This Senatus consultum ultimum shall expire in six (6) months,
unless the consuls deem that a further extension is required. Such
extension shall be by means of a consular edictum issued collegiately.
This extension may not be extended further more than once, and this
Senatus consultum ultimum shall expire, regardless of any extension in
force, on December 31st 2014.
==
DIPI: Uti rogas
MCJ: Abstineo
LCSF: Uti rogas
TGP: Uti rogas
TIS: Uti rogas
QFM: Uti rogas
MMA: Uti rogas
PUSV: Uti rogas
PMS: Uti rogas
GTVG: Abstineo
GIC: Uti rogas
SCVIA: Uti rogas
MCGG: Uti rogas
GPD: Antiquo
PACP: Uti rogas
GVA: Uti rogas
MPC: Uti rogas
LVT: Uti rogas
GMC: Uti rogas
CAC: Uti rogas
With seventeen (17) in favour, one (1) opposed and two (2) abstaining,
the item passes.
Comments:
MCJ: I have no issue with Sabinus performing the duties of the office
for Nova Roma. However I never surrendered the religious office, and
maintain it elsewhere, so I find it a conflict of interest to vote.
LCSF: This SCU is actually the one SCU I have ever had a pleasure of
voting Yes on. Pontiff Sabinus has been the most active Pontiff in
Nova Roma for the past 6 months. He has summoned the College
continuously and under his care and guidance he is dedicated to
bringing respectability to the College of Pontiffs, something that has
been sorely lacking for a long time. I think we all agree that the
College has needed tender loving care and to be reformed since the
Civil War of 2010 and under the plans that Sabinus has voiced I have
confidence that he will be able to turn the College around. I applaud
his effort and I have complete confidence in Pontiff Sabinus as the
Pontifex Maximus of Nova Roma.
TIS: It is customary for those who are nominated for a function to
abstain. That is a courtesy in normal conditions. But in cases of
crisis and emergency, courtesy no longer serves any purpose. I also
vote in favor of this item and not abstain, to give an example to the
nominees of the item 3. In this exceptional situation, to abstain it
means to not fully agree with the correction of the current undesirable
situation.
QFM: Senator Sabinus is knowledgeable in the religion, and he is a good
choice. However, he cannot be the true Pontifix Maximus until Marcus
Cassius Jullianius is dead. Livy makes this very clear. I suggest all
Senators request that Marcus Cassius resign in writing as Pontifix
Maximus. This will allow the College to at least reclaim some
legitimacy for the office as we may move forward.
PUSV: Though I am reluctant, I did a little reading and it does seem
that the Senate did involve itself in relgious governance in Roma
Antiqua. I am hoping that the first three measures, if enacted, will
help our Republic and the Rigio.
GTVG: I abstain from this vote as well. I feel that the college of
pontiffs must deal with the selection of the new Pontifex Maximus.
While I would certainly find Sabinus to be an excellent candidate, and
I feel his state of contempt must be removed, I must abstain from
voting on a measure that only has effect if another measure passes upon
which I have already abstained.
GIC: Titus Iulius Sabinus is my friend, and was from the start. We
might have been on opposite sides briefly during 2008, but that was
then. This is now. Sabinus has proven himself a true Roman and a voice
of reason in the collegium. He also has vision, and we need that. a
mature, calm and focused Roman, senator, consular and censorial -
founder of Dacia province. The list of his achievements go on and on.
He was a staunch opponent of the coup attempt in 2008. He was an
excellent pontifex maximus and will be again. He is the only hope for
the collegium, but we are fortunate he is also the best hope for the
collegium.
MPC: I congratulate Pontifex Sabinus on his return to the role of
Pontifex Maximus. I hope this will be a permanent, fully committed,
lifetime assignment for one of the most conscientious and dedicated
pontifices in Nova Roma history. I am sure the gods are well pleased
with this action by the Senate.
LVT: I began my service in the Cursus honorum several years ago under
the consulship of Senator and Pontifex Sabinus. He is one of the most
respectable and honored men in our Respublica, and I support him as the
new Pontifex Maximus as he is the voice of reason and common sense. I
feel that if he is appointed Pontifex Maximus, we will enjoy many years
of good leadership toward the pax Deorum.
CAC: Of the 3 SCU proposed in the Senate only this one addresses the
real emergency NR faces, the fact the Curul magistrates are being
denied imperium by the lack of action of the Pontifex Maximus. The
solution which had the approval of the Immortal Gods would be the
Pontifex Sabinus to call the Comitia Curitata but our constitution
prevents it so the path to solve this impasse would be only to
temporally remove that legal constraint. As it is this SCU goes too far
than would be necessary but at the moment is the only possible solution
which would work to solve immediately the problem. I have said it here
in the Senate and I want to express also publicly that Pontifex
Sabinus was the best Pontifex Maximus I saw since joining NR and no
matter what would be the decision of the Senate I hope he will be
elected again to that position by the CP as soon as possible but the
emergency would be solved without needing to appoint him PM by the
Senate. With the objective to see through the real emergency but with
some reservations I vote favorable to this proposal.
Item III: Senatus Consultum Ultimum on the Appointment of Pontifices
==
Under the Constitution of Nova Roma, "The Senate shall have the power
to issue the Senatus consultum ultimum (the ultimate decree of the
Senate). When in effect, this decree will supersede all other
governmental bodies and authorities (with the exception of the
dictator) and allow the Senate to invest the consuls with absolute
powers to deal with a specific situation, subject only to their
collegial veto and review by the Senate. Even under the authority of
the Senatus consultum ultimum, the consuls may only temporarily suspend
this Constitution; they may not enact any permanent changes
hereto." (Const. N.R. V.E).
Under the authority of Section V.E of the Nova Roman Constitution the
Senate of Nova Roma issues the following senatus consultum ultimum.
I. All provisions of the Constitution of Nova Roma, and those of any
lex, decretum, senatus consultum or edict that speak to the method
and/or qualifications and/or preconditions of appointment/election to
the position of pontifex and/or method of admission to the collegium
pontificum, are hereby suspended for the purpose of this Senatus
consultum ultimum.
II. The following citizens are hereby appointed as pontifices of Nova
Roma, with all the rights, obligations and powers the position of
pontifex enjoysand is entitled to, and further are not subject to any
restriction or confirmation of this appointment by the collegium
pontificum:
a. Gaius Vipsanius Agrippa (citizen # 1365)
b. Marcus Cornelius Gualterus Graecus (citizen # 3743)
c. Gnaeus Iulius Caesar (citizen # 7228)
d. Lucius Vitellius Triarius (citizen # 8446)
e. Marcus Pompeius Caninus (citizen #13539)
III. The appointments at section II above are permanent and shall not
be considered conditional or probationary.
==
DIPI: Uti rogas
MCJ: Antiquo
LCSF: Uti rogas
TGP: Uti rogas
TIS: Uti rogas
QFM: Antiquo
MMA: Uti rogas
PUSV: Uti rogas
PMS: Antiquo
GTVG: Antiquo
GIC: Uti rogas
SCVIA: Uti rogas
MCGG: Uti rogas
GPD: Antiquo
PACP: Antiquo
GVA: Abstineo
MPC: Uti rogas
LVT: Uti rogas
GMC: Uti rogas
CAC: Antiquo
With twelve (12) in favour, seven (7) opposed and one (1) abstaining,
the item passes.
Comments:
MCJ: The Senate should not be granted direct internal powers within the
Collegium Pontificium. I believe that is a step which will directly
harm the CP as a *religious* body.
LCSF: When this item was proposed it seemed almost revolutionary a
non-religious body adding members to the College of Pontiffs, UNTIL we
found out about the Lex Ognulia which was promulgated in 300 BCE. Much
like the Lex Domitia de Sacerdotis of 104 BCE the Lex Ogrnulia had to
deal with adding Pontiffs to the College of Pontiffs. The College of
Pontiffs, much like ancient Rome at that time, is in a period of
crises. There is a clear inability for the necessary reforms to be
taken within the College. Now, we could either just let the College
whither and die...and just end up proclaiming Piscinus as the perpetual
Pontifex Maximus of all the practitioners of the Cultus Deorum (as he
tried to claim in his email to Triarius) or we can aid the College and
assist Pontiff Sabinus by adding new members to promote new ideas,
implement the necessary policies to become a more effective
administrative body or we can do nothing. Gentlemen, we have all at
one time had to take the Oath of Office to uphold and defend the
Official Religion, by voting Yes I believe I am honoring that Oath.
TIS: Leaving aside all the reasons and arguments in favor or against of
this proposal, one question remains: by your vote sustain the same
state of affairs that did not work or choose the change and by default
the future development? The answer is obvious and it can only be in the
favor of this item.
QFM: The Senate has taken upon themselves to put members into our
College without asking us if it was all right. Several of the Senators
will make fine Pontiffs, but of the rest who knows? All I know is they
had no interest up to now.
PUSV: Uti Rogas for reasons previously stated.
PMS: With respect to all concerned, I think our appointment of five
senators to the CP as pontifices, is in excess of what is required to
mitigate the emergent component of the current CP crisis.
GTVG: While I believe that new blood is desirable, and even essential,
the proposed method seems to me to be a violation of both pontifical
and augural law. I am not an expert in pontifical law, but the opinion
of the majority of sitting pontifices is that this would be a
violation. The fact that Sabinus supports it does not mean that it is
in accord with pontifical law - indeed, if that were the case, we would
have nothing to discuss, since whatever Dexter thinks would be
appropriate, by that logic. This SCU also contravenes augural law, in
which I am competent to rule that this must not pass. I would also
comment that I have heard the argument that "opposing this measure
opposes the will of the gods, since the auspices for this session were
favorable" - a line I never expected to hear again since we got rid of
Horatius "I speak for the gods" Piscinus. The gods approved us
discussing the issue. The gods have not inaugurated these candidates.
That argument is fallacious at best, and blasphemous impiety at worst.
GIC: I think to many of you my position is already well known. The
senate has the perfect legal right to pass the SCU on this matter. Any
attempt to suggest that this is "unconstitutional" is bogus. Our
Constitution is clear. An SCU outranks any and all authorities, except
for the dictator. An SCU maybe passed to deal with any specific
situation the senate, as the supreme policy making body of Nova Roma,
sees fit to do so on. I haven't just relied on "because I say so" as an
argument why. I have laid the facts out for why the proposed SCU is
legal. Of course since the Constitution is so clear in allowing
emergency legislation to be passed and no openly or even covertly
restricting it from certain topics, any argument to the contrary is
patently, to me, absurd. I have gone through the steps of outlining why
it is so. I have also produced two examples of historical precedent.
Now, these do not advance the legality of the SCU, that is already
clear nor the need now, but it does indicate in 300 BCE the plebs
forced a recalcitrant, obdurate patrician CP to open its doors. Then,
as now, legislation had to be used to pry the doors open. Then as now
names were chosen not by the CP. The lex Ognulia of 300 BCE shows how
the Romans dealt with a CP that was out of step with the times. Our CP
too is similarly out of step. As to the motivations of those that form
this obdurate and obstructive clique in the collegium pontificum, well
each of us who see them as an issue may have their own theories. I
remind the senate of what Livy tells us of the collegium in 300 BCE:
"But the co-optation of the additional priests from the plebs created
almost as much indignation amongst the patricians as when they saw the
consulship made open. They pretended that the matter concerned the gods
more than it concerned them". Pretense then and now. This isn't about
the gods or the good of the religio, despite what some outside of this
House, and maybe some in, might say. It is about "power" - whatever
that really is in Nova Roma. It is about keeping tight control on who
gets in the "club". It is about keeping the collegium locked on the
same narrow circular path around the walls of Nova Roma it has plodded
around for years. Surely enough is enough? Let us pass the measure and
move forward. If we do not, we will be right back here in the future,
and it is only a matter of time and over what issue, but be back we
will. If we do not pass this measure Sabinus will be impotent to
implement the necessary changes. Support Sabinus in his work I say and
vote uti rogas.
http://gnaeusiuliuscaesar.blogspot.ca/2014/01/the-collegium-clique-perpetrators-of_18.html
SCVIA: This is probably one of the most unorthdox methods of
recruitment I have seen in a long while. How I see it is this.
Sabinus would not have reached out to the Senate like this if there
wasn't a true problem. We as the Senate have a responsibility to help
where we can not just in Magisterial form. Therefore I support Sabinus
in this 100%
PACP: In spite of everything that has been said about this, and in
spite of the fact thet this is a SCU (with all of its implications), I
am still convinced that a political institution such as the Senate
should not interfere in religious matters.
MPC: I have no doubt that the gods demand a change in the Collegium
Pontificum. I also have no doubt that the action described in this SCU,
although not desirable, is within the legal and constitutional
authority of the Senate. My readings of Livy and other sources over the
past week have assured me the Senate exercised control over religious
matters in the Collegium Pontificum during the Republic, with
significant cross-representation as members of the Collegium Pontificum
were typically of the Senatorial class. The fact that Nova Roma's
Collegium Pontificum has the power itself to correct the problems that
made this SCU necessary but has been unwilling to act is deeply
troubling. It would be much better all around if the Collegium
Pontificum could take the five named individuals as camilli and grant
them full voting rights in the Collegium Pontificum until they each
earn the title of pontifex or some other position with voting rights.
However, given the history of the Collegium Pontificum, any promises
made to that affect to avoid the use of the SCU are suspect and quite
likely to be broken when it is actually time to give the individuals
named in this SCU the right to vote. The arguments suggesting that
appointments made in this manner would be impious and offensive do have
some merit. I have given serious thought to declining my appointment as
a pontifex because that title should be earned through study and
practical assessment by the Collegium Pontificum. Yet the signs from
the gods support the actions of the Senate; actions that are being
taken only because one of the pontifices has requested the Senate to
intervene. Reluctantly and sadly, I vote in favor of the SCU because I
have no faith in the current membership of the Collegium Pontificum to
change the way they operate. The addition of these five citizens to the
Collegium Pontificum should result in a better functioning college and
a richer, deeper relationship between the State and the gods.
LVT: Some feel the current members of the Collegium Pontificum are
inefficient, uncooperative, stalemated, obstructionist, etc. Since the
experiences of 2010 with the prior regime, who wished to create a
religio unknown to the ancients and steeped in modern tradition, I feel
that the current members of the CP are just plain tired and beaten up.
When approved, the addition of new blood into the CP will be a source
of support and revitalization for them and we shall see that they are
the pontifices that we all know they are. In the ancient Roman world,
Senators and Pontifices were often the same, as Cicero states, "Many
things, O priests, have been devised and established with divine wisdom
by our ancestors; but no action of theirs was ever more wise than their
determination that the same men should superintend both what relates to
the religious worship due to the immortal gods, and also what concerns
the highest interests of the state, so that they might preserve the
republic as the most honourable and eminent of the citizens, by
governing it well, and as priests by wisely interpreting the
requirements of religion."
CAC: Once more we are proposing to use the extreme measures the Senate
has in his power to solve what is not an immediate emergency. As said
before what was the impossibility of NR function normally without the
Curul magistrates having imperium. The power to issue SCU and
temporally suspend the constitution shouldn't be used to solve the fact
the CP is in a impasse since NR could for certain still function and
work for its missions, including the RR revival, in this situation. I
understand and share the frustration with the actual CP paralyses but
can't accept the use of SCU to solve the situation. If PM had performed
his duty and called the Comitia Curiata we would never be considering
approving this SCU and since it has nothing to do with that matter is a
clear indication it doesn't related to the emergency and in this way we
shouldn't be suspending the constitution to alter the CP composition.
My opposition has nothing to do with the individuals proposed to be
appointed Pontifices, much on the contrary since I know they will work
tireless and with the best interests of NR in theirmind but
nevertheless I can't support the appointment of Pontifices by Senate
decreee.
Item IV: Senatus Consulta on adopting the Report submitted by Senator
Caninus and Authorization to use the CISTA for the Comitia Populi
Tributa and the Comitia Centuriata
[On this item, there was not a specified text on which the Senate was
to vote; rather, the item was as the title of the item indicates.]
DIPI: Uti rogas
MCJ: Uti rogas
LCSF: Uti rogas
TGP: Uti rogas
TIS: Uti rogas
QFM: Uti rogas
MMA: Uti rogas
PUSV: Uti rogas
PMS: Uti rogas
GTVG: Uti rogas
GIC: Uti rogas
SCVIA: Uti rogas
MCGG: Uti rogas
GPD: Antiquo
PACP: Uti rogas
GVA: Uti rogas
MPC: Uti rogas
LVT: Uti rogas
GMC: Uti rogas
CAC: Uti rogas
With nineteen (19) in favour and one (1) opposed, the item passes.
Comments:
LCSF: Thank you for this report and I am very pleased that the Cista is
working well in the elections that have been conducted on it. I do
hope there will be some tools that the presiding magistrate will have
access too, like sending reminders to those citizens who have not
submitted votes during voting periods and such.
TIS: My thanks to M. Pompeius for his dedication and good work.
QFM: Senator Caninus has proven himself an excellent contributor to
solving our technical problems, following in footsteps of the noble
Octavius Germanicus. All of Rome owes him their gratitude.
PUSV: Uti Rogas and Vivat!
GIC: Excellent news. So the $10,000 USD that was deemed so vital by the
plotters of 2010 was not necessary. My congratulations to Caninus for
all his hard work getting us to this point.
SCVIA: Thank you to fellow Senator and CIO M. Pompeius Caninus for his
time and dedication in this herculean effort. This is most excellent
to see. Many kudos well earned.
LVT: I can only say that our Senator Caninus has proven himself to be
one of our most distinguished citizens and his work and contributions
to the Respublica go without criticism and certainly with not enough
praise. He is our technical genius, and I support his advice and
recommendations without questions. His actions and expertise will save
us an great amount of money in the long run, and I only hope that we
may develop soon to the point that we may adequately in some way repay
him for his service.
CAC: First of all I want to thank Praetor Caninus for is efforts in
recovering the functionality of the Cista. His work concerning this
matter and the server change will save considerable amount of the NR
treasury.
Note of the reporting tribune:
Dates noted within this report, but outside the specific text of the
items considered by the Senate, are MMDCCLXVII AVC, or 2014 CE; times
are expressed as that in Rome, GMT +0100.
Valete optime.
Quintus Caecilius Metellus Postumianus
Tribunus Plebis