Thread: Turin Consolidation

My Coalition campaign (at least the Navy) had been intended to get down to
the Turin Consolidation, so I had started detailing it almost a decade ago.
As I was blowing off the Traveller dust last year, I started putting it on
COTI. In case noone here is checking it out, see it at:

Haven't yet integrated into the main web site since i'm reworking it from
the 1990's html it is now to a new modular PHP setup. Here's the WIP:

http://masteruxi.net/traveller/turin.htm

and the COTI thread:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=24885

Got sick of our musing about cover art, marketing, and layout, did ye? :-)

> My Coalition campaign (at least the Navy) had been intended to get down to
> the Turin Consolidation, so I had started detailing it almost a decade
> ago.
> As I was blowing off the Traveller dust last year, I started putting it
> on
> COTI. In case noone here is checking it out, see it at:
>
> Haven't yet integrated into the main web site since i'm reworking it from
> the 1990's html it is now to a new modular PHP setup. Here's the WIP:
>
> http://masteruxi.net/traveller/turin.htm

I notice that you start with a quote from the DGP S&A book. How much of
what follows that is out of there or is your own creation? And after you
answer me, I'll tell you why I ask. (I am the Anti-Admiral Akbar. THIS IS
NOT A TRAP.)

> and the COTI thread:
>
> http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=24885

Hey, you quoted my Dulinor quote.
>

LoL, no it's entertaining. I just have nothing to add.
That quote is pretty much ALL there is (or that I could find
anyway) so everything else is mine. There is actually a bunch
more I did on COTI and need to rework this into a title page
since I hate the organization of what should be an index. Page 2
of the COTI thread had the logos for the Consolidation and flag,
roundel and writeup for the Knights St George. Their vehicles,
ships, TOE and heraldry remain WIP in various states of
completion on my hdd
I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an
otherwise undeveloped character known (and almost universally
reviled) only for what he did, not why. ---
from my T989

wrote:


Got sick of our musing about cover art, marketing, and layout,
did ye? :-)

> My Coalition campaign (at least the Navy) had been intended to
get down to
> the Turin Consolidation, so I had started detailing it almost a
decade
> ago.
> As I was blowing off the Traveller dust last year, I started
putting it
> on
> COTI. In case noone here is checking it out, see it at:
>
> Haven't yet integrated into the main web site since i'm
reworking it from
> the 1990's html it is now to a new modular PHP setup. Here's
the WIP:
>
> http://masteruxi.net/traveller/turin.htm
<http://masteruxi.net/traveller/turin.htm>

I notice that you start with a quote from the DGP S&A book. How
much of
what follows that is out of there or is your own creation? And
after you
answer me, I'll tell you why I ask. (I am the Anti-Admiral Akbar.
THIS IS
NOT A TRAP.)

> and the COTI thread:
>
> http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=24885
<http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=24885>

Hey, you quoted my Dulinor quote.
>

> LoL, no it's entertaining. I just have nothing to add.

Fair enough! I figured we were putting people to sleep anyway. :-)

> That quote is pretty much ALL there is (or that I could find anyway) so
everything else is mine. There is actually a bunch more I did on COTI
and need to rework this into a title page since I hate the organization
of what
> should be an index. Page 2 of the COTI thread had the logos for the
Consolidation and flag, roundel and writeup for the Knights St George.
Their vehicles, ships, TOE and heraldry remain WIP in various states of
completion on > my hdd

Here's why I ask. The stuff below the DGP quote is very detailed and uses
a lot of very specific, technical, ecclesiastical language which I assume
could only be written by a person who has a serious connection to the
churches in question, and I mean church historian level. I assume that
person is you. That stuff is really pretty interesting, and leads to a
bunch of questions/observations:

1. That is not your typical Traveller type stuff. What's the kind of
response you've gotten? I think the only other similarly serious
references to religion was Harold Hale's Children of Earth, but they were
typical expansionist conquistadors, and not at all the open-minded,
progressive organization you portray. That in itself must be surprising to
a lot of people.
2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so is
it based on current events?
3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
historically has not addressed religion much.
4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump us
in with the rest of the Protestants.
5. I am one of the most ecumenical guys you'll ever meet, but man, I'm not
as optimistic as you are in your future history!

Please talk about what led you to this singular, distinctive approach.

> I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an otherwise
undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
what he did, not why.

Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had to
have been more going on than just, "destroy it all," but we never got a
chance to hear from him. So the least I could do is give him some dignity,
some regret, some sense that he tried to do something that got screwed
up....before he walked out and got eaten by the steam shovel, or whatever
I did to him.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:02 PM, <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> > That quote is pretty much ALL there is (or that I could find anyway) so
> everything else is mine. There is actually a bunch more I did on COTI
> and need to rework this into a title page since I hate the organization
> of what
> > should be an index. Page 2 of the COTI thread had the logos for the
> Consolidation and flag, roundel and writeup for the Knights St George.
> Their vehicles, ships, TOE and heraldry remain WIP in various states of
> completion on > my hdd
>
> Here's why I ask. The stuff below the DGP quote is very detailed and uses
> a lot of very specific, technical, ecclesiastical language which I assume
> could only be written by a person who has a serious connection to the
> churches in question, and I mean church historian level. I assume that
> person is you. That stuff is really pretty interesting, and leads to a
> bunch of questions/observations:
>

> 1. That is not your typical Traveller type stuff. What's the kind of
> response you've gotten? I think the only other similarly serious
> references to religion was Harold Hale's Children of Earth, but they were
> typical expansionist conquistadors, and not at all the open-minded,
> progressive organization you portray. That in itself must be surprising to
> a lot of people.
>

It is my verbiage, though I don't claim any official connection beyond that
of a layperson interested in history the perspective it gives in
contemplating faith and the modern world. There are a few positive
comments in the thread at COTI and I got a few PM's also expressing
interest. Some from definitely non-theist perspectives but expressing
appreciation for an angle that they normally didn't use at all and provided
good data mining material. Most of the rest hasn't been shared widely.
The RC Naval campaign fizzled out well before they got close to launching
to Alpha Leonis, but I did a bunch of prep (as can be seen). I spent way
too much time doing individual Grand Masters of the Knights of St George in
eras I never had any intention of starting a campaign in and their heraldry
project spun into it's own thing, first doing it by hand then on various
software formats. Most of it's lost by the New Era and would likely have
never reached the players except for maybe a summary list, but I had fun
modeling it off of the Templars and Hospitallers from medieval history and
seeing how men of faith would respond to the Traveller universe in it's
various epochs.

It's not all progressive amity, though. Criminal Justice code based on the
7 Deadly Sins isn't going to be popular with many in the modern relativist
world, or a Church and Knighthood bound by Canon instead of Civil Law. Or
the perils of Excommunication in such a society. Some of it intended out
of practical interpretation and some for drama. Of course, man being man
there will be some of those with negative traits and the oddball villain or
two as a 'man of the cloth' cynically using his religion as a means rather
than an end.

The personality of the AZH captured by the Knights of St George and later
inhabited by one of Sandman's progeny was going to be most entertaining
since I had it with a mostly intact theological history database at it's
disposal and would tend to debate things like Arius and Trinity or the
Gregorian vs Julian Calendars, etc.

> 2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
> don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so is
> it based on current events?
>

No, most of the concept I did in the late 90's and was hypothetical on the
ecumenical movement as it was then. I think Episcopalians having women
priests was still relatively a big deal. I did update some of it as I was
presenting to COTI (mostly stuff like the disintegration of the EU, etc),
but that wasn't a part of it. Mostly I was thinking that the whole bunch
wouldn't go over in one mass and there would either be a reformist or
reactionary group that refused to bend to the "Papist apostasy". I had
ideas for one of the Orthodox churches refusing to go along, as well,
though I never pinned down which one or why (leaning on Russian Orthodox,
mostly so there could still be some claims of Third Rome, etc).

> 3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
> historically has not addressed religion much.
>

I definitely thought it was lacking, but it's obviously an area almost any
company would be hesitant to get into much detail on since it's so very
easy to offend SOMEONE and dig a big PR hole, if not very serious nut
cases.

I also wanted to bring a different and more serious element to the rather
cartoonishly simplistic Solomani Confederation. DGP showed the Booteans as
one alternative, but the Nazis still seemed way too predominant (though it
didn't annoy me as much as the cliches of the French Nth Republic -
Reformed, 2nd Edition, the Latino Banana Republic, corrupt eastern bloc
Europeans, Apartheid in Space, etc. They couldn't all be a bunch of
nincompoop stereotypes could they?

> 4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump us
> in with the rest of the Protestants.
>

Sure enough. After the Anglicans, I see the Lutherans as the next closest
theologically, but there are some pretty big theological bullets, almost
too big to smooth over beyond relatively simple Roman primacy and calendar
details like the Orthodox would face. I wouldn't expect either the bulk of
the self respecting Lutherans to bend on any more than I expect the Rock of
St Peter's. I would have had relations cordial following Nicea 2054 but had
ideas for at least one world in the Consolidation with a rich Lutheran
heritage, though refusing to implement a Universal-Orthodox hierarchy, much
less bend to it, as a matter of principle. I might not have my finger on
the pulse of Lutheran ecumenism enough to be accurately capture that,
though so maybe you can provide a better perspective on how they would have
reacted to Vilani contact, the Council itself, and which theological fences
would be more willing to compromise on than others, if not also the launch
of Caelis Torino and the establishment of the TCA, Rule of Man, Turin
Consolidation, Solomani Movement, etc.

> 5. I am one of the most ecumenical guys you'll ever meet, but man, I'm not
> as optimistic as you are in your future history!
>
> Please talk about what led you to this singular, distinctive approach.
>
>
I do tend towards optimism, though it's not all roses. Partially I was
trying to emulate medieval Christendom but with a modern humanist approach
while trying to keep enough room for adventure and theology for those
inclined. The ecclesiastical language is essential to that spirit as well
as the general symbology permeating even lay life.

I think a losing war against the Vilani (as it was hypothesized for the
launch of Caelis Torino) would inspire some open minded theology, as well.

Catholic-Orthodox... cordiality, if not full reunion seems inevitable. The
huge differences of the past are relatively trivial today. I've studied
the early history of Christianity at some length, particularly the early
heresies and how the western and eastern Church grew and dealt with them.
The whole idea of the culmination of the ecumenical movement stemmed from
the ideal scenario and counterpoint to the nasty drama between Patriarch
Michael Kerularios and Cardinal Humbert and the reunion of the two oldest
branches of Christianity. Mostly it started from some of my reading of the
Latin/Greek Schism, so it was no coincidence I put the reunion 1000 years
later. It might be TOO coincidental but it does seem an obvious date to
try to do something symbolic on, as well.

Still, it's almost hilarious to see the differences that Photius condemned
as anathema the Latins for things as petty as not beginning Lent until Ash
Wednesday instead of 3 days earlier, as well as the classic staples of
married clergy and filioque (which is probably too subtle for most
non-religious to appreciate).

I don't expect many Protestants or modern Evangelicals to join the party,
though, without backtracking on relatively core theology that the Catholics
and Orthodox can't bend on either. Thus not as much mention, except for
the conservative branch of US Episcopalians that is also near to
Catholicism already. Some would be more cordial than others.

>
> > I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an otherwise
> undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
> what he did, not why.
>
> Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had to
> have been more going on than just, "destroy it all," but we never got a
> chance to hear from him. So the least I could do is give him some dignity,
> some regret, some sense that he tried to do something that got screwed
> up....before he walked out and got eaten by the steam shovel, or whatever
> I did to him.
>
>
I was going to blame some of it on the Virasin. :) The notes for the
Brotherhood of SenWenclus have a few refences to theological debate and
Apologetics defending the Arkgallop of Illelish against the claims of the
Dlan Virasin

>
>

Gary--

This is great, and I want to do it justice, but I need to get to bed, so
won't try to start responding to it until tomorrow.

Okay, I'll say this ONE thing: a Vampire Ship agonizing over the Arian
Heresy would be brilliant. Who better to argue about the nature of creator
and creation/son than Virus?

Talk to you later,

Dave

> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:02 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> > That quote is pretty much ALL there is (or that I could find anyway)
>> so
>> everything else is mine. There is actually a bunch more I did on COTI
>> and need to rework this into a title page since I hate the organization
>> of what
>> > should be an index. Page 2 of the COTI thread had the logos for the
>> Consolidation and flag, roundel and writeup for the Knights St George.
>> Their vehicles, ships, TOE and heraldry remain WIP in various states of
>> completion on > my hdd
>>
>> Here's why I ask. The stuff below the DGP quote is very detailed and
>> uses
>> a lot of very specific, technical, ecclesiastical language which I
>> assume
>> could only be written by a person who has a serious connection to the
>> churches in question, and I mean church historian level. I assume that
>> person is you. That stuff is really pretty interesting, and leads to a
>> bunch of questions/observations:
>>
>
>> 1. That is not your typical Traveller type stuff. What's the kind of
>> response you've gotten? I think the only other similarly serious
>> references to religion was Harold Hale's Children of Earth, but they
>> were
>> typical expansionist conquistadors, and not at all the open-minded,
>> progressive organization you portray. That in itself must be surprising
>> to
>> a lot of people.
>>
>
> It is my verbiage, though I don't claim any official connection beyond
> that
> of a layperson interested in history the perspective it gives in
> contemplating faith and the modern world. There are a few positive
> comments in the thread at COTI and I got a few PM's also expressing
> interest. Some from definitely non-theist perspectives but expressing
> appreciation for an angle that they normally didn't use at all and
> provided
> good data mining material. Most of the rest hasn't been shared widely.
> The RC Naval campaign fizzled out well before they got close to launching
> to Alpha Leonis, but I did a bunch of prep (as can be seen). I spent way
> too much time doing individual Grand Masters of the Knights of St George
> in
> eras I never had any intention of starting a campaign in and their
> heraldry
> project spun into it's own thing, first doing it by hand then on various
> software formats. Most of it's lost by the New Era and would likely have
> never reached the players except for maybe a summary list, but I had fun
> modeling it off of the Templars and Hospitallers from medieval history and
> seeing how men of faith would respond to the Traveller universe in it's
> various epochs.
>
> It's not all progressive amity, though. Criminal Justice code based on
> the
> 7 Deadly Sins isn't going to be popular with many in the modern relativist
> world, or a Church and Knighthood bound by Canon instead of Civil Law.
> Or
> the perils of Excommunication in such a society. Some of it intended out
> of practical interpretation and some for drama. Of course, man being man
> there will be some of those with negative traits and the oddball villain
> or
> two as a 'man of the cloth' cynically using his religion as a means rather
> than an end.
>
> The personality of the AZH captured by the Knights of St George and later
> inhabited by one of Sandman's progeny was going to be most entertaining
> since I had it with a mostly intact theological history database at it's
> disposal and would tend to debate things like Arius and Trinity or the
> Gregorian vs Julian Calendars, etc.
>
>
>
>> 2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
>> don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so
>> is
>> it based on current events?
>>
>
> No, most of the concept I did in the late 90's and was hypothetical on the
> ecumenical movement as it was then. I think Episcopalians having women
> priests was still relatively a big deal. I did update some of it as I was
> presenting to COTI (mostly stuff like the disintegration of the EU, etc),
> but that wasn't a part of it. Mostly I was thinking that the whole bunch
> wouldn't go over in one mass and there would either be a reformist or
> reactionary group that refused to bend to the "Papist apostasy". I had
> ideas for one of the Orthodox churches refusing to go along, as well,
> though I never pinned down which one or why (leaning on Russian Orthodox,
> mostly so there could still be some claims of Third Rome, etc).
>
>
>> 3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
>> historically has not addressed religion much.
>>
>
> I definitely thought it was lacking, but it's obviously an area almost any
> company would be hesitant to get into much detail on since it's so very
> easy to offend SOMEONE and dig a big PR hole, if not very serious nut
> cases.
>
> I also wanted to bring a different and more serious element to the rather
> cartoonishly simplistic Solomani Confederation. DGP showed the Booteans
> as
> one alternative, but the Nazis still seemed way too predominant (though it
> didn't annoy me as much as the cliches of the French Nth Republic -
> Reformed, 2nd Edition, the Latino Banana Republic, corrupt eastern bloc
> Europeans, Apartheid in Space, etc. They couldn't all be a bunch of
> nincompoop stereotypes could they?
>
>
>> 4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump us
>> in with the rest of the Protestants.
>>
>
> Sure enough. After the Anglicans, I see the Lutherans as the next closest
> theologically, but there are some pretty big theological bullets, almost
> too big to smooth over beyond relatively simple Roman primacy and calendar
> details like the Orthodox would face. I wouldn't expect either the bulk
> of
> the self respecting Lutherans to bend on any more than I expect the Rock
> of
> St Peter's. I would have had relations cordial following Nicea 2054 but
> had
> ideas for at least one world in the Consolidation with a rich Lutheran
> heritage, though refusing to implement a Universal-Orthodox hierarchy,
> much
> less bend to it, as a matter of principle. I might not have my finger on
> the pulse of Lutheran ecumenism enough to be accurately capture that,
> though so maybe you can provide a better perspective on how they would
> have
> reacted to Vilani contact, the Council itself, and which theological
> fences
> would be more willing to compromise on than others, if not also the launch
> of Caelis Torino and the establishment of the TCA, Rule of Man, Turin
> Consolidation, Solomani Movement, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>> 5. I am one of the most ecumenical guys you'll ever meet, but man, I'm
>> not
>> as optimistic as you are in your future history!
>>
>> Please talk about what led you to this singular, distinctive approach.
>>
>>
> I do tend towards optimism, though it's not all roses. Partially I was
> trying to emulate medieval Christendom but with a modern humanist approach
> while trying to keep enough room for adventure and theology for those
> inclined. The ecclesiastical language is essential to that spirit as well
> as the general symbology permeating even lay life.
>
> I think a losing war against the Vilani (as it was hypothesized for the
> launch of Caelis Torino) would inspire some open minded theology, as well.
>
> Catholic-Orthodox... cordiality, if not full reunion seems inevitable.
> The
> huge differences of the past are relatively trivial today. I've studied
> the early history of Christianity at some length, particularly the early
> heresies and how the western and eastern Church grew and dealt with them.
> The whole idea of the culmination of the ecumenical movement stemmed from
> the ideal scenario and counterpoint to the nasty drama between Patriarch
> Michael Kerularios and Cardinal Humbert and the reunion of the two oldest
> branches of Christianity. Mostly it started from some of my reading of
> the
> Latin/Greek Schism, so it was no coincidence I put the reunion 1000 years
> later. It might be TOO coincidental but it does seem an obvious date to
> try to do something symbolic on, as well.
>
> Still, it's almost hilarious to see the differences that Photius condemned
> as anathema the Latins for things as petty as not beginning Lent until Ash
> Wednesday instead of 3 days earlier, as well as the classic staples of
> married clergy and filioque (which is probably too subtle for most
> non-religious to appreciate).
>
> I don't expect many Protestants or modern Evangelicals to join the party,
> though, without backtracking on relatively core theology that the
> Catholics
> and Orthodox can't bend on either. Thus not as much mention, except for
> the conservative branch of US Episcopalians that is also near to
> Catholicism already. Some would be more cordial than others.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an
>> otherwise
>> undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
>> what he did, not why.
>>
>> Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had to
>> have been more going on than just, "destroy it all," but we never got a
>> chance to hear from him. So the least I could do is give him some
>> dignity,
>> some regret, some sense that he tried to do something that got screwed
>> up....before he walked out and got eaten by the steam shovel, or
>> whatever
>> I did to him.
>>
>>
> I was going to blame some of it on the Virasin. :) The notes for the
> Brotherhood of SenWenclus have a few refences to theological debate and
> Apologetics defending the Arkgallop of Illelish against the claims of the
> Dlan Virasin
>
>
>>
>>
>

Gary

> It is my verbiage, though I don't claim any official connection beyond that
> of a layperson interested in history the perspective it gives in
contemplating faith and the modern world. There are a few positive
comments in the thread at COTI and I got a few PM's also expressing
interest. Some from definitely non-theist perspectives but expressing
appreciation for an angle that they normally didn't use at all and
provided
> good data mining material. Most of the rest hasn't been shared widely.

Yes, but a very well-informed layperson. So are you RC or Eastern
Orthodox? There's a lot of Eastern/Greek Orthodox language in there which
I am only very peripherally familiar with.

So, no one saying, "Gene Roddenberry proved that there will be no religion
in the future?"

> The RC Naval campaign fizzled out well before they got close to launching
> to Alpha Leonis, but I did a bunch of prep (as can be seen). I spent way
> too much time doing individual Grand Masters of the Knights of St George in
> eras I never had any intention of starting a campaign in and their heraldry
> project spun into it's own thing, first doing it by hand then on various
software formats. Most of it's lost by the New Era and would likely
have
> never reached the players except for maybe a summary list, but I had fun
modeling it off of the Templars and Hospitallers

The military orders are a popular entry point for just about anyone.

> It's not all progressive amity, though. Criminal Justice code based on the
> 7 Deadly Sins isn't going to be popular with many in the modern
relativist
> world, or a Church and Knighthood bound by Canon instead of Civil Law. Or
> the perils of Excommunication in such a society. Some of it intended
out
> of practical interpretation and some for drama. Of course, man being
man
> there will be some of those with negative traits and the oddball villain or
> two as a 'man of the cloth' cynically using his religion as a means
rather
> than an end.
>
> The personality of the AZH captured by the Knights of St George and
later
> inhabited by one of Sandman's progeny was going to be most entertaining
since I had it with a mostly intact theological history database at it's
disposal and would tend to debate things like Arius and Trinity or the
Gregorian vs Julian Calendars, etc.
>
>
>
>> 2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so
is
>> it based on current events?
>
> No, most of the concept I did in the late 90's and was hypothetical on
the
> ecumenical movement as it was then. I think Episcopalians having women
priests was still relatively a big deal. I did update some of it as I
was
> presenting to COTI (mostly stuff like the disintegration of the EU,
etc),
> but that wasn't a part of it. Mostly I was thinking that the whole
bunch
> wouldn't go over in one mass and there would either be a reformist or
reactionary group that refused to bend to the "Papist apostasy". I had
ideas for one of the Orthodox churches refusing to go along, as well,
though I never pinned down which one or why (leaning on Russian
Orthodox,
> mostly so there could still be some claims of Third Rome, etc).
>
>
>> 3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
>> historically has not addressed religion much.
>
> I definitely thought it was lacking, but it's obviously an area almost
any
> company would be hesitant to get into much detail on since it's so very
easy to offend SOMEONE and dig a big PR hole, if not very serious nut
cases.
>
> I also wanted to bring a different and more serious element to the
rather
> cartoonishly simplistic Solomani Confederation. DGP showed the Booteans as
> one alternative, but the Nazis still seemed way too predominant (though
it
> didn't annoy me as much as the cliches of the French Nth Republic -
Reformed, 2nd Edition, the Latino Banana Republic, corrupt eastern bloc
Europeans, Apartheid in Space, etc. They couldn't all be a bunch of
nincompoop stereotypes could they?
>
>
>> 4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump
us
>> in with the rest of the Protestants.
>
> Sure enough. After the Anglicans, I see the Lutherans as the next
closest
> theologically, but there are some pretty big theological bullets, almost
too big to smooth over beyond relatively simple Roman primacy and
calendar
> details like the Orthodox would face. I wouldn't expect either the bulk of
> the self respecting Lutherans to bend on any more than I expect the Rock of
> St Peter's. I would have had relations cordial following Nicea 2054 but had
> ideas for at least one world in the Consolidation with a rich Lutheran
heritage, though refusing to implement a Universal-Orthodox hierarchy,
much
> less bend to it, as a matter of principle. I might not have my finger
on
> the pulse of Lutheran ecumenism enough to be accurately capture that,
though so maybe you can provide a better perspective on how they would
have
> reacted to Vilani contact, the Council itself, and which theological fences
> would be more willing to compromise on than others, if not also the
launch
> of Caelis Torino and the establishment of the TCA, Rule of Man, Turin
Consolidation, Solomani Movement, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>> 5. I am one of the most ecumenical guys you'll ever meet, but man, I'm not
>> as optimistic as you are in your future history!
>> Please talk about what led you to this singular, distinctive approach.
> I do tend towards optimism, though it's not all roses. Partially I was
trying to emulate medieval Christendom but with a modern humanist
approach
> while trying to keep enough room for adventure and theology for those
inclined. The ecclesiastical language is essential to that spirit as
well
> as the general symbology permeating even lay life.
>
> I think a losing war against the Vilani (as it was hypothesized for the
launch of Caelis Torino) would inspire some open minded theology, as
well.
>
> Catholic-Orthodox... cordiality, if not full reunion seems inevitable. The
> huge differences of the past are relatively trivial today. I've studied
the early history of Christianity at some length, particularly the early
heresies and how the western and eastern Church grew and dealt with
them.
> The whole idea of the culmination of the ecumenical movement stemmed
from
> the ideal scenario and counterpoint to the nasty drama between Patriarch
Michael Kerularios and Cardinal Humbert and the reunion of the two
oldest
> branches of Christianity. Mostly it started from some of my reading of the
> Latin/Greek Schism, so it was no coincidence I put the reunion 1000
years
> later. It might be TOO coincidental but it does seem an obvious date
to
> try to do something symbolic on, as well.
>
> Still, it's almost hilarious to see the differences that Photius
condemned
> as anathema the Latins for things as petty as not beginning Lent until
Ash
> Wednesday instead of 3 days earlier, as well as the classic staples of
married clergy and filioque (which is probably too subtle for most
non-religious to appreciate).
>
> I don't expect many Protestants or modern Evangelicals to join the
party,
> though, without backtracking on relatively core theology that the Catholics
> and Orthodox can't bend on either. Thus not as much mention, except for
the conservative branch of US Episcopalians that is also near to
Catholicism already. Some would be more cordial than others.
>
>
>
>
>> > I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an
>> otherwise
>> undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
what he did, not why.
>> Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had
to
>> have been more going on than just, "destroy it all," but we never got a
chance to hear from him. So the least I could do is give him some
dignity,
>> some regret, some sense that he tried to do something that got screwed
up....before he walked out and got eaten by the steam shovel, or
whatever
>> I did to him.
> I was going to blame some of it on the Virasin. :) The notes for the
Brotherhood of SenWenclus have a few refences to theological debate and
Apologetics defending the Arkgallop of Illelish against the claims of
the
> Dlan Virasin
>
>
>

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM, <> wrote:

>
>
> So, no one saying, "Gene Roddenberry proved that there will be no religion
> in the future?"

Naw, Mel Brooks proved there would be.....
--
Evyn

Gary

>> It is my verbiage, though I don't claim any official connection beyond
that
>> of a layperson interested in history the perspective it gives in
> contemplating faith and the modern world. There are a few positive
comments in the thread at COTI and I got a few PM's also expressing
interest. Some from definitely non-theist perspectives but expressing
appreciation for an angle that they normally didn't use at all and
provided
>> good data mining material. Most of the rest hasn't been shared widely.

Yes, but a very well-informed layperson. So are you RC or Eastern
Orthodox? There's a lot of Eastern/Greek Orthodox language in there which
I am only very peripherally familiar with.

So, no one saying, "Gene Roddenberry proved that there will be no religion
in the future?"

>> The RC Naval campaign fizzled out well before they got close to
>> launching
>> to Alpha Leonis, but I did a bunch of prep (as can be seen). I spent
way
>> too much time doing individual Grand Masters of the Knights of St
George
>> in
>> eras I never had any intention of starting a campaign in and their
heraldry
>> project spun into it's own thing, first doing it by hand then on
various
> software formats. Most of it's lost by the New Era and would likely
have
>> never reached the players except for maybe a summary list, but I had
fun
> modeling it off of the Templars and Hospitallers

The military orders are a popular entry point for just about anyone.
Especially St. George, the patron saint of armor and the only saint
portrayed as fighting mounted.

>> It's not all progressive amity, though. Criminal Justice code based on
the
>> 7 Deadly Sins isn't going to be popular with many in the modern
> relativist
>> world, or a Church and Knighthood bound by Canon instead of Civil Law.

I didn't see that stuff in there, but admittedly skimmed some. However,
the mention of their commitment to democracy, and preventing persecution
of minorities, atheists and agnostics is pretty far from the portrayal
most people would create of a church given that much rope to play with.
Could something that progressive and open remain that unchanged for so
long?

You may be doing this, but do you have the church pulling in local
people's/races' hallowed/legendary/sanctified figures into the ranks of
the saints? This was something that the (Roman) Catholic church did very
successfully, and gave us other "military" saints like St. Barbara. This
is much like the Imperial Romans did when they rolled into a town, looked
at the local gods, and said, "Hey, we know them. Those are Apollo and
Athena, you just know them by one of their other names. So you're already
one of us! Huzzah!" Hence a shrewd meaning of the "Roman" in "Roman
Catholic"

>> Or
>> the perils of Excommunication in such a society.

My pastor in Maryland (Bastien) used to like to threaten to excommunicate
my dad. It's fun to be in a liturgical church where such terms have
meaning.

Some of it intended
> out
>> of practical interpretation and some for drama. Of course, man being
> man
>> there will be some of those with negative traits and the oddball
villain
>> or
>> two as a 'man of the cloth' cynically using his religion as a means
> rather
>> than an end.

To the extent that so many political leaders are described as being
members of the church I would assume that like today that is as much the
rule as the exception.

>> The personality of the AZH captured by the Knights of St George and
> later
>> inhabited by one of Sandman's progeny was going to be most entertaining
> since I had it with a mostly intact theological history database at it's
disposal and would tend to debate things like Arius and Trinity or the
Gregorian vs Julian Calendars, etc.

I really like that idea.

>>> 2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
> don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so
is
>>> it based on current events?
>> No, most of the concept I did in the late 90's and was hypothetical on
> the
>> ecumenical movement as it was then. I think Episcopalians having women
> priests was still relatively a big deal.

What about your church in Turin? Male and female priests yet? There's a
real tension in SF between retaining ancestral strictures to make them
more vivid and allowing change to show the passage of time.

I did update some of it as I was
>> presenting to COTI (mostly stuff like the disintegration of the EU,
> etc),
>> but that wasn't a part of it. Mostly I was thinking that the whole
> bunch
>> wouldn't go over in one mass and there would either be a reformist or
> reactionary group that refused to bend to the "Papist apostasy". I had
ideas for one of the Orthodox churches refusing to go along, as well,
though I never pinned down which one or why (leaning on Russian
> Orthodox,
>> mostly so there could still be some claims of Third Rome, etc).
>>> 3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
historically has not addressed religion much.
>> I definitely thought it was lacking, but it's obviously an area almost
> any
>> company would be hesitant to get into much detail on since it's so very
> easy to offend SOMEONE and dig a big PR hole, if not very serious nut
cases.

Yeah, I can't see our having gone there, at least not with clearly
identified current churches. (I made a "CommSent" church in Ranger, its
priest semi-named after my favorite Catholic priest, Father Amerigo
DiNorcia.) But watching someone else play with it in their personal
universe is certainly intriguing.

>> I also wanted to bring a different and more serious element to the
> rather
>> cartoonishly simplistic Solomani Confederation. DGP showed the
Booteans
>> as
>> one alternative, but the Nazis still seemed way too predominant (though
> it
>> didn't annoy me as much as the cliches of the French Nth Republic -
> Reformed, 2nd Edition, the Latino Banana Republic, corrupt eastern bloc
Europeans, Apartheid in Space, etc. They couldn't all be a bunch of
nincompoop stereotypes could they?

Idunno, depends upon your opinion of humanity. After the day I've had
today, yeah, maybe they could.

>>> 4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump
> us
>>> in with the rest of the Protestants.
>> Sure enough. After the Anglicans, I see the Lutherans as the next
> closest
>> theologically,

I quibble with that a little because of the nature of the origin of the
Anglicans as a change in management so the king could change his woman and
get England out from under Italian thumbs. And "via media" was a PR
invention by Anglicans themselves. Aside from English hymns vs. German
hymns you can hardly slip a piece of paper between the Anglicans and
Lutherans, and we're in full communion and with joint congregations. Along
with the RC we are the sacramental churches with more in common with each
other than most of the other protestants. Real presence, infant baptism,
ONE baptism.

> but there are some pretty big theological bullets,almost
> too big to smooth over beyond relatively simple Roman primacy and
calendar
>> details like the Orthodox would face. I wouldn't expect either the
bulk
>> of
>> the self respecting Lutherans to bend on any more than I expect the
Rock
>> of
>> St Peter's. I would have had relations cordial following Nicea 2054 but
had
>> ideas for at least one world in the Consolidation with a rich Lutheran
> heritage, though refusing to implement a Universal-Orthodox hierarchy,
much
>> less bend to it, as a matter of principle. I might not have my finger
> on
>> the pulse of Lutheran ecumenism enough to be accurately capture that,
> though so maybe you can provide a better perspective on how they would
have
>> reacted to Vilani contact, the Council itself, and which theological
fences
>> would be more willing to compromise on than others, if not also the
> launch
>> of Caelis Torino and the establishment of the TCA, Rule of Man, Turin
> Consolidation, Solomani Movement, etc.

Yikes. That is way too big of a homework assignment to think of how they'd
respond to all of those in-game events. However, as far as American
Lutherans go, the ELCA would go a great distance toward unity with the RC,
Anglicans and Reformed movements, and already has. Missouri Synod and
Wisconsin Synod Lutherans, however, don't even like to be in the same room
with ELCA. Can't have their pictures taken with them in the paper. And
then their are the two new lutheran churches that splintered off in the
last year.

The Lutherans and RC have already agreed on justification, which was what
sparked off Brother Martin to begin with. We agree on the priesthood of
all believers. Most of the differences in that area were in
emphasis/tradition, not actual theology or doctrine. That and lazy
prejudice and habit. There is a strong will in the ELCA for real unity. I
can walk into any RC, Ang, or Lutheran church and know the order of
worship and all the words to all of the liturgy (English, not Latin). I
would think you could with not too far a stretch imagine a Lutheran Rite,
or perhaps Melancthonian Rite in your church. A number of Lutheran
churches are still in, or have gotten back into the Apostolic Succession,
so are considered as Catholics by not just themselves, but by some
Catholic standards.

Would Lutherans take back the other five sacraments? Would they pray to
saints? Venerate Mary? Could those things become adiaphora? Although
doctrinal stuff seems like it would be the biggest obstacle, "feel" stuff
like the RC approach to tradition would loom large. But the biggest thing
would probably be the obvious thing, Primacy of the Pope and Papal
Infallibility. But a lot of Lutherans would want to find a way to make it
work. Maybe if the Pope took the first step.

Speaking of Papal Infallibility, how did the RC and Orthodox settle that
in your Ortho-Catholic church?

>> I do tend towards optimism, though it's not all roses. Partially I was
> trying to emulate medieval Christendom but with a modern humanist
approach
>> while trying to keep enough room for adventure and theology for those
> inclined. The ecclesiastical language is essential to that spirit as
well
>> as the general symbology permeating even lay life.

Absolutely. Narthex vs. lobby, Sanctuary vs. auditorium, Sexton vs.
Janitor, Pulpit vs. podium, Purificator vs. napkin, Verger instead of
bouncer.

>> I think a losing war against the Vilani (as it was hypothesized for the
> launch of Caelis Torino) would inspire some open minded theology, as
well.
>> Catholic-Orthodox... cordiality, if not full reunion seems inevitable.
The
>> huge differences of the past are relatively trivial today. I've
studied
> the early history of Christianity at some length, particularly the early
heresies and how the western and eastern Church grew and dealt with them.
>> The whole idea of the culmination of the ecumenical movement stemmed
> from
>> the ideal scenario and counterpoint to the nasty drama between
Patriarch
> Michael Kerularios and Cardinal Humbert and the reunion of the two
oldest
>> branches of Christianity. Mostly it started from some of my reading of
the
>> Latin/Greek Schism, so it was no coincidence I put the reunion 1000
> years
>> later. It might be TOO coincidental but it does seem an obvious date
> to
>> try to do something symbolic on, as well.
>> Still, it's almost hilarious to see the differences that Photius
> condemned
>> as anathema the Latins for things as petty as not beginning Lent until
> Ash
>> Wednesday instead of 3 days earlier, as well as the classic staples of
> married clergy and filioque (which is probably too subtle for most
non-religious to appreciate).

However, another piece of the tension in your church in Traveller is that
digging in on "petty" differences like that comes from people feeling very
strongly about them, and feeling strongly about things correlates with
surviving as a continuous movement for a long time. In order to keep a
movement together, you can't relax on too many things.

Herbert's OC Bible was interesting, and I think a nice example of how
things staying the same, combined with changing, made for a nice SF feel.

>> I don't expect many Protestants or modern Evangelicals to join the
> party,
>> though, without backtracking on relatively core theology that the
Catholics
>> and Orthodox can't bend on either.

The word "Protestant" hardly means anything, except they signed a letter
in 1529, back before most of the denominations were invented...usually in
a huff by people stomping out. Since then all it means is "Anybody who's
not RC or Orthodox," and the distance between the sacramental churches is
much less than the breadth across "Protestantism" as a whole.

Baptism, re-baptism, your baptism wasn't as real as my rebaptism,
sacrament vs. ordinance, congregationalism vs. hierarchy, too many things
to disagree on.

>>> > I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an
>>> otherwise
>>> undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
> what he did, not why.
>>> Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had
>
>> I was going to blame some of it on the Virasin. :) The notes for the
> Brotherhood of SenWenclus have a few refences to theological debate and
Apologetics defending the Arkgallop of Illelish against the claims of the
>> Dlan Virasin

And your final observation here maybe gets at why intrigues me about your
Traveller church. When Traveller says that Dulinor is a Virasin, I think,
"okay, makes sense, whatever they are." But when you say, "Cleon was a
(Latin) Catholic," I go, "huh? That doesn't make sense." So why why does a
made-up faith for Dulinor or Herbert's OC Bible make more sense in that
part of my brain than faiths I have already met, which have lasted for
2000 years, lasting another 3700? I find that question interesting. And I
like the time and thought you've put into this. We use the phrase so much
that we've got at acronym, "IMTU," but I'm thinking that a lot of the
time, as this list shows, what's really more interesting than what's IMTU
is what's in his Traveller Universe, and his, and his. Gary's, Evyn's,
John's, all you guys. Good stuff.

Dave

Having slept on my own question to myself I think the answer is at least
partly that it is interesting to seriously consider the ramifications of
something that I myself would not have believed sufficiently possible to
assert in an official game setting. There are lots of reasons, some of
which I alluded to, to say, "existing Earth faiths would probably not
project forward so essentially unchanged," but once you let go of that, it
is a great deal of fun to say, "screw that, what if they did?" Which after
all is what SF is actually about: taking existing aspects of human
experience, putting them somewhere else, and playing with what might
happen.

I think to the extent that the "Ortho-Catholic Church" was successful, it
would play off the "fact" that their initial evangelization would draw on
Solomani populations, so that there is a common nexus in their pasts so
that the events and doctrine can feel relevant to them. Further, the
Traveller humaniti conceit allows some of that deep resonance connection
to be deployed for evangelization of other human races. If you add in the
"Roman" concept of discovering your gods everywhere you go (and if they
are "The Gods," of course you would, this is not merely cynical, but also
true and faithful). The big fun would be how the OCs would deal with
"messiah" figures in other faiths they deal with, whether they attempt to
disprove them, overwrite them, or co-opt them. The doctrinal implications
of "your Christ was also our Christ" would be great, because all of the
great heresies were about Christology. Any attempt to lay out an
engineering diagram of fully human/fully divine and begotten/pre-existing
breaks the faith model. Which is why the Athanasian Creed says, "Thing A
and its polar opposite are both true, and if you don't believe both, you
will perish eternally." Like they say, try to believe one impossible thing
every day.

Anyway, good fun.

> And your final observation here maybe gets at why intrigues me about
your
> Traveller church. When Traveller says that Dulinor is a Virasin, I
think,
> "okay, makes sense, whatever they are." But when you say, "Cleon was a
(Latin) Catholic," I go, "huh? That doesn't make sense." So why why does
a
> made-up faith for Dulinor or Herbert's OC Bible make more sense in that
part of my brain than faiths I have already met, which have lasted for
2000 years, lasting another 3700? I find that question interesting. And
I
> like the time and thought you've put into this. We use the phrase so
much
> that we've got at acronym, "IMTU," but I'm thinking that a lot of the
time, as this list shows, what's really more interesting than what's
IMTU
> is what's in his Traveller Universe, and his, and his. Gary's, Evyn's,
John's, all you guys. Good stuff.

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:07 PM, <> wrote:

>
> Gary
>
> >> It is my verbiage, though I don't claim any official connection beyond
> that
> >> of a layperson interested in history the perspective it gives in
> > contemplating faith and the modern world. There are a few positive
> comments in the thread at COTI and I got a few PM's also expressing
> interest. Some from definitely non-theist perspectives but expressing
> appreciation for an angle that they normally didn't use at all and
> provided
> >> good data mining material. Most of the rest hasn't been shared widely.
>
> Yes, but a very well-informed layperson. So are you RC or Eastern
> Orthodox? There's a lot of Eastern/Greek Orthodox language in there which
> I am only very peripherally familiar with.
>

I consider myself an Orthodox Catholic Christian. :D

less facetiously of the Latin Rite, though I admire most of the Eastern
Fathers as much as those of the West.

>
>
> >> It's not all progressive amity, though. Criminal Justice code based on
> the
> >> 7 Deadly Sins isn't going to be popular with many in the modern
> > relativist
> >> world, or a Church and Knighthood bound by Canon instead of Civil Law.
>
> I didn't see that stuff in there, but admittedly skimmed some. However,
> the mention of their commitment to democracy, and preventing persecution
> of minorities, atheists and agnostics is pretty far from the portrayal
> most people would create of a church given that much rope to play with.
> Could something that progressive and open remain that unchanged for so
> long?
>

Some is implied. Most of it hasn't been put up explicitly yet, though if
it appears too "progressive," maybe I need to make it a higher priority. ;)
It's the logical endpoint and something that would be uncomfortable to
many in the West accustomed to a greater secularization, particularly in
what's usually seen as personal matters yet undeniably crimes that could be
classified as mala in se rather than mala prohibita (particularly
adultery). The point of the Turin Consolidation seemed the rejection of
secularism, though I thought it should still have a very Solomani rejection
of the [Vilani] Imperium's ethos (which would seem a necessary prerequisite
for it's membership in the Confederation as opposed to the Imperium). I
did consider that the trappings of Christendom would invite the nobility,
etc which is why I referenced some of the colonies altering themselves to
Constitutional Monarchies. Dichotomy seems to be the modus operandi.
Supports Hiroshi's goals, though not all of his methods (for example),
mostly those elements that inspired them to leave Terra in the Interstellar
Wars to begin with. Toleration of agnostics and atheists doesn't precisely
mean they'd be welcomed, particularly if they behaved as belligerents and
excommunication would be a very serious offense, particularly in the early
days. While they wouldn't be burned at the stake or stoned, they would
effectively become persona non grata if not effectively exiled.

> You may be doing this, but do you have the church pulling in local
> people's/races' hallowed/legendary/sanctified figures into the ranks of
> the saints? This was something that the (Roman) Catholic church did very
> successfully, and gave us other "military" saints like St. Barbara. This
> is much like the Imperial Romans did when they rolled into a town, looked
> at the local gods, and said, "Hey, we know them. Those are Apollo and
> Athena, you just know them by one of their other names. So you're already
> one of us! Huzzah!" Hence a shrewd meaning of the "Roman" in "Roman
> Catholic"
>
>

I was more interested in covering the breadth of Traveller history but I do
like to envision the Vilani Mission launched to proselytize while the
Interstellar Wars were heating up, if not raging. I've often questioned
whether I have the stones for martyrdom myself, if not the pure selfless
denial that would be required for such an undertaking, likely doomed to a
fate of an obscure fate hundreds of light years from home and unlamented
and unmourned.

The Missions themselves would have been aimed at precisely that, though
it's an interesting philosophical exercise to ponder the need of salvation
or not that the various aliens would have. One can make numerous arguments
for and against the various Major and Minor Races and I thought of canon
and non-canon examples of each that would instigate an appropriate amount
of theological wrangling inside the Universal-Orthodox Church in Charted
Space. The likely reaction of the K'kree to the Eucharist and
Transubstantiation is a favorite of the former, as well as the glorious
martyrdom that would be likely to follow.

>
> Some of it intended
> > out
> >> of practical interpretation and some for drama. Of course, man being
> > man
> >> there will be some of those with negative traits and the oddball
> villain
> >> or
> >> two as a 'man of the cloth' cynically using his religion as a means
> > rather
> >> than an end.
>
> To the extent that so many political leaders are described as being
> members of the church I would assume that like today that is as much the
> rule as the exception.
>
>

A bit beyond, since the higher clergy would in some ways more resemble
their medieval counterparts and have at least limited secular authority. I
imagine the modern Roman Church's prohibition of outright politics would
continue through the Interstellar Wars period with more of the unscrupulous
pushing the boundaries as far as they could and in the face of the
increasing chaos in the Rule of Man would probably be condoned if not
promoted as a backstop against the lack of central secular authority.

>
> >>> 2. I note at the (Second) Council of Nicea in 2054 that US Episcopals
> > don't join. Is that a result of the recent split with the Anglicans, so
> is
> >>> it based on current events?
> >> No, most of the concept I did in the late 90's and was hypothetical on
> > the
> >> ecumenical movement as it was then. I think Episcopalians having women
> > priests was still relatively a big deal.
>
> What about your church in Turin? Male and female priests yet? There's a
> real tension in SF between retaining ancestral strictures to make them
> more vivid and allowing change to show the passage of time.
>
>

Yet not everything that is unchanging is bad and not all change is for the
better. I would likely have avoided any explicit reference, and like to
imagine the timelessness potential that the core pillars in AD 3000, 4000,
or 5000 wouldn't necessarily differ as much from AD 1000 or 2000 in that
regard. I definitely envisioned the Roman sanctioned Anglicate Rite
allowing a married lower clergy (below the Episcopate, at least) but that
it would still be male. There would be repetitions of many of the more
obscure heresies arguing concepts like Rex Mundi, and rumors of obscure and
sanctioned Rites... There would be the perpetual debate between the Eastern
Rites and the Latin on the merits and perils of married secular clergy.
They just wouldn't be tossing anathemas about it anymore.

> >>> 3. It is really interesting what you are doing in a game which
> historically has not addressed religion much.
> >> I definitely thought it was lacking, but it's obviously an area almost
> > any
> >> company would be hesitant to get into much detail on since it's so very
> > easy to offend SOMEONE and dig a big PR hole, if not very serious nut
> cases.
>
> Yeah, I can't see our having gone there, at least not with clearly
> identified current churches. (I made a "CommSent" church in Ranger, its
> priest semi-named after my favorite Catholic priest, Father Amerigo
> DiNorcia.) But watching someone else play with it in their personal
> universe is certainly intriguing.
>
>
Indeed. Just because it's delicate PR wise doesn't mean it's likely to
just go away. Regardless of those who wish it would.

> >> I also wanted to bring a different and more serious element to the
> > rather
> >> cartoonishly simplistic Solomani Confederation. DGP showed the
> Booteans
> >> as
> >> one alternative, but the Nazis still seemed way too predominant (though
> > it
> >> didn't annoy me as much as the cliches of the French Nth Republic -
> > Reformed, 2nd Edition, the Latino Banana Republic, corrupt eastern bloc
> Europeans, Apartheid in Space, etc. They couldn't all be a bunch of
> nincompoop stereotypes could they?
>
> Idunno, depends upon your opinion of humanity. After the day I've had
> today, yeah, maybe they could.
>
>
They just seem so dated on top of being stereotypes. Apartheid In Space
aka Doochean seems especially hard to handwave. Quesada today would be
cartel kingpins, etc.

More realistic for an Ibero-Latin-American polity of a general
European-flavored character than "Estados Unidos Quesada" IMO. The French
Nth Republic is more of a Continental/secularist joint French-German
polity. etc.

>>> 4. What happens to the Lutherans? Surely you know better than to lump
> > us
> >>> in with the rest of the Protestants.
> >> Sure enough. After the Anglicans, I see the Lutherans as the next
> > closest
> >> theologically,
>
> I quibble with that a little because of the nature of the origin of the
> Anglicans as a change in management so the king could change his woman and
> get England out from under Italian thumbs. And "via media" was a PR
> invention by Anglicans themselves. Aside from English hymns vs. German
> hymns you can hardly slip a piece of paper between the Anglicans and
> Lutherans, and we're in full communion and with joint congregations. Along
> with the RC we are the sacramental churches with more in common with each
> other than most of the other protestants. Real presence, infant baptism,
> ONE baptism.
>
>
Indeed, I generally wouldn't dispute those in favor of the Lutheran though
I would tend to Anglican on the intercession of Saints, the nature of Holy
Orders and the procession of the Sacraments.

Both would face the largest obstacle to ecumenical reunion and be
incompatible on grounds of Justification and particularly ideas of Sola
Fidei and Sola Scriptura though from my perspective there is stronger
influence of Anglo-Catholics in the Anglicans ranks. Of course, I'm
speaking in vague generalities

>
> > but there are some pretty big theological bullets,almost
> > too big to smooth over beyond relatively simple Roman primacy and
> calendar
> >> details like the Orthodox would face. I wouldn't expect either the
> bulk
> >> of
> >> the self respecting Lutherans to bend on any more than I expect the
> Rock
> >> of
> >> St Peter's. I would have had relations cordial following Nicea 2054 but
> had
> >> ideas for at least one world in the Consolidation with a rich Lutheran
> > heritage, though refusing to implement a Universal-Orthodox hierarchy,
> much
> >> less bend to it, as a matter of principle. I might not have my finger
> > on
> >> the pulse of Lutheran ecumenism enough to be accurately capture that,
> > though so maybe you can provide a better perspective on how they would
> have
> >> reacted to Vilani contact, the Council itself, and which theological
> fences
> >> would be more willing to compromise on than others, if not also the
> > launch
> >> of Caelis Torino and the establishment of the TCA, Rule of Man, Turin
> > Consolidation, Solomani Movement, etc.
>
>

> Yikes. That is way too big of a homework assignment to think of how they'd
> respond to all of those in-game events.
>

How about just the Council itself, if not the idea of Caelis Torino?

> However, as far as American Lutherans go, the ELCA would go a great
> distance toward unity with the RC,
> Anglicans and Reformed movements, and already has. Missouri Synod and
> Wisconsin Synod Lutherans, however, don't even like to be in the same room
> with ELCA. Can't have their pictures taken with them in the paper. And
> then their are the two new lutheran churches that splintered off in the
> last year.
>
> The Lutherans and RC have already agreed on justification, which was what
> sparked off Brother Martin to begin with. We agree on the priesthood of
> all believers. Most of the differences in that area were in
> emphasis/tradition, not actual theology or doctrine. That and lazy
> prejudice and habit. There is a strong will in the ELCA for real unity. I
> can walk into any RC, Ang, or Lutheran church and know the order of
> worship and all the words to all of the liturgy (English, not Latin). I
> would think you could with not too far a stretch imagine a Lutheran Rite,
> or perhaps Melancthonian Rite in your church. A number of Lutheran
> churches are still in, or have gotten back into the Apostolic Succession,
> so are considered as Catholics by not just themselves, but by some
> Catholic standards.
>

Definitely Interesting. I like that idea. And the etymology of the
Melancthonian Rite. So shall it be in the next revision.

> Would Lutherans take back the other five sacraments? Would they pray to
> saints? Venerate Mary? Could those things become adiaphora? Although
> doctrinal stuff seems like it would be the biggest obstacle, "feel" stuff
> like the RC approach to tradition would loom large. But the biggest thing
> would probably be the obvious thing, Primacy of the Pope and Papal
> Infallibility. But a lot of Lutherans would want to find a way to make it
> work. Maybe if the Pope took the first step.
>

You definitely give me ideas to incorporate and flesh out a bit more of the
early pre-IW history.

> Speaking of Papal Infallibility, how did the RC and Orthodox settle that
> in your Ortho-Catholic church?
>

Greater emphasis on "Primus Inter Pares." More than diminishing Rome's
own stature, the elevation and renewed influence of the other Patriarchs
particularly in the expansion into Vilani and uncharted space, more than in
the historical territories that have been long dominated by Islam (speaking
of which, I an Islamic interstellar power taking the place of the Doocheans
IMTU). Official concession of at least the sharing of the Keys in an
Ecumenical Council, if not to the individual Patriarchs in their own
spheres of influence.

>> I think a losing war against the Vilani (as it was hypothesized for the
> launch of Caelis Torino) would inspire some open minded theology, as
well.
>> Catholic-Orthodox... cordiality, if not full reunion seems inevitable.
The
>> huge differences of the past are relatively trivial today. I've
studied
> the early history of Christianity at some length, particularly the early
heresies and how the western and eastern Church grew and dealt with them.
>> The whole idea of the culmination of the ecumenical movement stemmed
> from
>> the ideal scenario and counterpoint to the nasty drama between
Patriarch
> Michael Kerularios and Cardinal Humbert and the reunion of the two
oldest
>> branches of Christianity. Mostly it started from some of my reading of
the
>> Latin/Greek Schism, so it was no coincidence I put the reunion 1000
> years
>> later. It might be TOO coincidental but it does seem an obvious date
> to
>> try to do something symbolic on, as well.
>> Still, it's almost hilarious to see the differences that Photius
> condemned
>> as anathema the Latins for things as petty as not beginning Lent until
> Ash
>> Wednesday instead of 3 days earlier, as well as the classic staples of
> married clergy and filioque (which is probably too subtle for most
non-religious to appreciate).

However, another piece of the tension in your church in Traveller is that
digging in on "petty" differences like that comes from people feeling very
strongly about them, and feeling strongly about things correlates with
surviving as a continuous movement for a long time. In order to keep a
movement together, you can't relax on too many things.

Certainly. I just don't find the differences to be nearly as significant
as those of say... Arius or Nestorius or even the Iconoclast Emperors or
their minions they intruded on the Patriarchal throne. I always found the
Filioque debates a bit fascinating as the Procession of the Holy Spirit
wasn't mentioned at Nicea at all. Though I take the issue very seriously,
it doesn't arouse wrath in me as much as healthy desire to study history
and refine my apologetics.

Photius himself is at least as interesting as any of the figures of the
Reformation, though his intrusion on the See of Ignatius seems difficult to
justify at best and the most obvious source of his later turn from
supplication to antagonism with Rome.

>
> >> I don't expect many Protestants or modern Evangelicals to join the
> > party,
> >> though, without backtracking on relatively core theology that the
> Catholics
> >> and Orthodox can't bend on either.
>
> The word "Protestant" hardly means anything, except they signed a letter
> in 1529, back before most of the denominations were invented...usually in
> a huff by people stomping out. Since then all it means is "Anybody who's
> not RC or Orthodox," and the distance between the sacramental churches is
> much less than the breadth across "Protestantism" as a whole.
>

Right. That's the general intent of my use of the term and most definitely
lacking any pejorative intent. Less hyphenated than
"Non-Universal-Orthodox" but (generalizing, of course) with a sola fidei
and/or sola scriptura perspective.

> >>> > I Love that Dulinor quote. Hints at a depth and humanity to an
> >>> otherwise
> >>> undeveloped character known (and almost universally reviled) only for
> > what he did, not why.
> >>> Thanks. I wanted to give him a bit of a grace note, because there had
> >
> >> I was going to blame some of it on the Virasin. :) The notes for the
> > Brotherhood of SenWenclus have a few refences to theological debate and
> Apologetics defending the Arkgallop of Illelish against the claims of the
> >> Dlan Virasin
>
> And your final observation here maybe gets at why intrigues me about your
> Traveller church. When Traveller says that Dulinor is a Virasin, I think,
> "okay, makes sense, whatever they are."
>

That was facetious. Survival Margin said he expressed interest, though I
never took it to mean he actually joined. Which is why he wore black and
one of the reasons he's known as "Dulinor the Black." Even before the
pejorative inspired by the assassination and later Black War.

> But when you say, "Cleon was a
> (Latin) Catholic," I go, "huh? That doesn't make sense."
>

Not precisely what I intended, either. For Cleon, it was noted in the same
tone as the Imperial Encyclopedia data that has some kernel of truth but
may or may not be objectively true as the Ref's Section (and preference)
would determine. It could be Universal-Orthodox Propaganda...
anti-Alkhalikoi propaganda, etc and most of the general history is to be
considered as commonly accepted in the timeframe of the New Era (subject to
the reconstruction of the local database, fragmentary hard copy records,
etc). IMTU caveat would have had him more in the mold of Hiroshi, possibly
practicing but keeping it in the contemporary 20th century public sphere as
a private personal matter than one that influenced his governing, much less
government. It also served the purpose of spreading the neglected concept
of religion in general through "Big Names" in Traveller history. Though I
purposely left off any mention of the more fleshed out characters of the
late 3I, Rebellion, Hard Times, and New Era. Though naturally have my own
ideas.

>
>

Gary--

> I consider myself an Orthodox Catholic Christian. :D
>
> less facetiously of the Latin Rite, though I admire most of the Eastern
Fathers as much as those of the West.

I'm an Evangelical Catholic Christian, which is the name Brother Martin
preferred, and they still use in Germany.

> Some is implied. Most of it hasn't been put up explicitly yet, though
if
> it appears too "progressive," maybe I need to make it a higher priority. ;)

Yeah, I think you need to. As I read it, I did not hear the jackbooted
stomps of a corrupt, power-hungry hierarchy masquerading as men of God,
and it sounds like you want me to hear that.

To be fair, right now it's mostly a framework of historical events, so
ones imagination can color it any way one likes.

> It's the logical endpoint and something that would be uncomfortable to
> many in the West accustomed to a greater secularization, particularly in
what's usually seen as personal matters yet undeniably crimes that could
be
> classified as mala in se rather than mala prohibita (particularly
adultery). The point of the Turin Consolidation seemed the rejection of
secularism, though I thought it should still have a very Solomani
rejection
> of the [Vilani] Imperium's ethos (which would seem a necessary
> prerequisite
> for it's membership in the Confederation as opposed to the Imperium).
I
> did consider that the trappings of Christendom would invite the
nobility,
> etc which is why I referenced some of the colonies altering themselves
to
> Constitutional Monarchies. Dichotomy seems to be the modus operandi.
> Supports Hiroshi's goals, though not all of his methods (for example),
> mostly those elements that inspired them to leave Terra in the
> Interstellar
> Wars to begin with. Toleration of agnostics and atheists doesn't precisely
> mean they'd be welcomed, particularly if they behaved as belligerents
and
> excommunication would be a very serious offense, particularly in the
early
> days. While they wouldn't be burned at the stake or stoned, they would
effectively become persona non grata if not effectively exiled.

You'll want to find a way to counter-point the factual statements that
imply progressivism. You know, say them, and then three lines later talk
about a ship load of agnostics sent to the local gas giant to make a
pilgrimmage to their god, if they decide to believe in him. And then have
the Papal Legate say, "The Lord recognized His own."

> I was more interested in covering the breadth of Traveller history but I do
> like to envision the Vilani Mission launched to proselytize while the
Interstellar Wars were heating up, if not raging. I've often questioned
whether I have the stones for martyrdom myself, if not the pure selfless
denial that would be required for such an undertaking, likely doomed to
a
> fate of an obscure fate hundreds of light years from home and unlamented
and unmourned.

Probably good that you don't. Most people who drone on and on about how
they'd like to be martyred are just self-absorbed, and are counting on a
large audience for their big finish.

> The Missions themselves would have been aimed at precisely that, though
it's an interesting philosophical exercise to ponder the need of
salvation
> or not that the various aliens would have.

Exactly, which is one of the things I find intriguing.

> One can make numerous
> arguments
> for and against the various Major and Minor Races and I thought of canon
and non-canon examples of each that would instigate an appropriate
amount
> of theological wrangling inside the Universal-Orthodox Church in Charted
Space. The likely reaction of the K'kree to the Eucharist and
> Transubstantiation is a favorite of the former, as well as the glorious
martyrdom that would be likely to follow.

Yes, very nice touch. "You had this perfectly nice wafer, and you turned
it into meat? Whatthehellsamatter with you? Wait a minute, it's not meat.
You're lying."

"No I'm not, it really is meat. Kill me."

"No, I won't kill you, because it's not meat."

"Yes it is. Shoot me now! Shoot me now! I must place God in my debt!"

"Oh, shut up."

> A bit beyond, since the higher clergy would in some ways more resemble
their medieval counterparts and have at least limited secular authority.

> I
> imagine the modern Roman Church's prohibition of outright politics would
continue through the Interstellar Wars period with more of the
> unscrupulous
> pushing the boundaries as far as they could and in the face of the
increasing chaos in the Rule of Man would probably be condoned if not
promoted as a backstop against the lack of central secular authority.

I can definitely see that, you just need to punch up the description a bit
more so I can tell that's what I'm supposed to see.

> Yet not everything that is unchanging is bad and not all change is for
the
> better.

No, change simply IS. As time goes by, some of it happens. The hints about
the impending further upgrade of Mary do, in fact offer something to the
growing voice of women in society, internationally. So maybe that instead
of the priesthood.

> I would likely have avoided any explicit reference, and like to
> imagine the timelessness potential that the core pillars in AD 3000,
4000,
> or 5000 wouldn't necessarily differ as much from AD 1000 or 2000 in
that
> regard.

One of the things about change is that we retrospectively decide that
pillars were not pillars after all, that other things were more important.
I wouldn't think of male clergy as a pillar compared to so many other
things.

"Let us posit a middle case, that God should not be God."
"Parliament has not the competence."

> Indeed, I generally wouldn't dispute those in favor of the Lutheran
though
> I would tend to Anglican on the intercession of Saints, the nature of
Holy
> Orders and the procession of the Sacraments.

Yeah, but again, those came with the franchise. :-) You buy a Burger King,
you don't throw out the deep fryers.

> Both would face the largest obstacle to ecumenical reunion and be
incompatible on grounds of Justification and particularly ideas of Sola
Fidei and Sola Scriptura though from my perspective there is stronger
influence of Anglo-Catholics in the Anglicans ranks. Of course, I'm
speaking in vague generalities

As I pointed out later, the Lutheran World Federation and RC issued a
Joint Declaration on Justification around the turn of the millennium, so
that is officially not an issue. Not that most of our members know about
it. Argumentative history is more fun.

>
> How about just the Council itself, if not the idea of Caelis Torino?

You mean the idea of a Theocracy in space? Or of a spiritual ideal behind
that? I'll need a little more information to give that the attention it
deserves.

> Definitely Interesting. I like that idea. And the etymology of the
Melancthonian Rite. So shall it be in the next revision.

Cool. There are a lot of High Church Lutherans who would probably join
right away.

> You definitely give me ideas to incorporate and flesh out a bit more of
the early pre-IW history.

I am pleased and honored. :-)

> Certainly. I just don't find the differences to be nearly as
significant
> as those of say... Arius or Nestorius or even the Iconoclast Emperors or
their minions they intruded on the Patriarchal throne.

Sure, except that you've got the disagreements of the Great Schism taking
place between the literate leaders and not involving the masses, and the
later example of the Reformation taking place by riding on/with social
movements where the "religious issues" got popularized where your German
peasant could decide he agreed with something. Those issues might appear
or legitimately be more piddling, but the common man might not get what
the big deal about the Trinity is anyway, whereas getting German Mass vice
"Hocus Pocus" Latin he could understand. So you've got different
prototypes of Christian fission: elite and popular.

> Right. That's the general intent of my use of the term and most definitely
> lacking any pejorative intent. Less hyphenated than
> "Non-Universal-Orthodox" but (generalizing, of course) with a sola fidei
and/or sola scriptura perspective.

And a whole lotta works righteousness, AND intellectualization
masquerading as faith.

> That was facetious. Survival Margin said he expressed interest, though
I
> never took it to mean he actually joined. Which is why he wore black
and
> one of the reasons he's known as "Dulinor the Black." Even before the
pejorative inspired by the assassination and later Black War.

You're right, he wore the black because he lived among them but was not of
them. Still, my point was the same, "Dulinor lived near a faith called
Virasa, and they told him how to dress."

>> But when you say, "Cleon was a
>> (Latin) Catholic," I go, "huh? That doesn't make sense."

> Not precisely what I intended, either.

No, I got what you said, that he was culturally or nominally Catholic, or
claimed by the Catholics. What I meant was for any in-game phrase "Cleon
was Catholic" to be logically comprehensible makes me pause. But why not?

> For Cleon, it was noted in the same
> tone as the Imperial Encyclopedia data that has some kernel of truth but
may or may not be objectively true as the Ref's Section (and preference)
would determine. It could be Universal-Orthodox Propaganda...
> anti-Alkhalikoi propaganda, etc and most of the general history is to be
considered as commonly accepted in the timeframe of the New Era (subject
to
> the reconstruction of the local database, fragmentary hard copy records,
etc). IMTU caveat would have had him more in the mold of Hiroshi,
possibly
> practicing but keeping it in the contemporary 20th century public sphere as
> a private personal matter than one that influenced his governing, much less
> government. It also served the purpose of spreading the neglected concept
> of religion in general through "Big Names" in Traveller history. Though I
> purposely left off any mention of the more fleshed out characters of the
late 3I, Rebellion, Hard Times, and New Era. Though naturally have my
own
> ideas.

Sure, I get that. The idea of the impulse to do so in Traveller is simply
such an unusual one, it makes me stop. But I like what you've done with
the place.

But I have to ask, what are your ideas about the later characters? Pat
Ritter, good German name, definitely Melancthonian Rite? Strephon? Craig?
Norris? Maggart? "Hammer" Lathrop? Dilgaadin?

Talk to you soon,

Dave