| Subject: |
Re: Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
Helena <a href="/post/novaro--------rotectID=165158192237078153036181001245114223071048139" >oceanlilly@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 19:14:00 -0500 (EST) |
|
In a message dated 3/30/00 11:01:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> writes:
<< I think that the exchange of ideas should not be completely free in Rome, particularly in what concerns the Religio Romana. To blasphemate the Gods of Rome is to bring their wrath over all nation. >>
Senator, the gods do not exist. Therefore, they cannot vent wrath on anyone.
Gaius Lupinius Festus
Helena: And I suppose you can prove that your diety (or
dieties) of choice does exist?! From a rational
standpoint, none of us can prove or disprove Who
exists. But you are attacking the very foundations
of Nova Roma! I'm sure it's already been said but-
why did you become a citizen? A certain dose of
respect for the Roman Gods is imperative here.
You are deeply offending many citizens with the
above statement and I believe an apology would be
appreciated.
-Helena Cornelia Ovidia
Propraetrix of California
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at <a href="http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup" target="_top" >http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup</a>
|
| Subject: |
The Gods, Free Speech & Blasphemy |
| From: |
"Adrianus Arius Acadianus Draco" &-------- href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045015192254056209050218001036129208" >jhebert@--------&--------a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:24:42 -0000 |
|
Salvete, Cives et Amici Novae Romae,
I have watched from somewhat of a distance the on-going postings
regarding free speech, blasphemy against the Gods, etc., and have a
thought or two to toss out into the fray.
When I was first reviewing the various documents and articles
regarding Nova Roma and debating whether to apply for citizenship, I
believe I encountered a "caveat" which stated that while a citizen is
free to believe and practice any religious tradition in which he or
she is comfortable, as a citizen, open blasphemy against the Gods of
Rome was not a gesture that would be generously received. I debated
for a moment as to whether this mild prohibition, limiting as it
seems absolutely free speech, was problematic. I decided it was not.
Whether I believe in the Religio Romana is not an issue. However, as
a Citizen, I do feel that I am honour-bound by my tacit agreement not
to denigrate in any public way that Religion. I do not in any
substantial fashion feel limited by this "lack of absolute liberty,"
any more than I resent the expedience and good manners of publicly
showing respect for (or at least, no disrepect of) the sentiments of
the commonwealth as to treatment of the flag, national anthem or
other "emblem" of the nation in which I reside. Indeed, in the
instant matter -- refraining from demonstrating disrespect for the
Religio Romana -- I find a certain amount of pride and "patriotism,"
as well as a noetic unity with my fellow citizens and the culture
which we all admire and seek to renovate.
I do not object, therefore, to offering a pinch of incense to Apollo,
nor an occasional libation to Roma, the Genius of the Empire. A tip
of the laurels to great Jove or mighty Diana is not going to
compromise my personal sense of worth, or my understanding of my own
spiritual integrity. However, I do feel that any public denigration
of the Gods or the "animus" of Roma as expressed in the ancient and
"official" cultus of the Republic (or Empire, in its better moments)
is uncalled for and, moreover, an act of petulance (or truculance)
unworthy of the dignity of a Roman citizen. Defiance has its place
and is, indeed, at times necessary. However, I believe that open and
public defiance of the Religio Romana -- "blasphemy" if you will --
is not only not conducive to the unity we now have and the mutual
love for Rome which we express, but is gratuitously divisive,
offensive to the corporate civic bond of the Republic, and wasteful
in its utter lack of productivity, serving no purpose that I can
comprehend other than to perpetuate the religious discord which
sundered the unity of the former Empire by re-creating that shameful
dissension in its progeny, Nova Roma.
Ergo, cives, ego hic sto et sagittas inimicas attendo...
Valete omnes, et secundum honorem dignitatemque colamus semper Deis
Antiquis, et deis (vel deo) cuiusque Novae Romae civis,
Acadianus Draco
|
| Subject: |
digest 777 |
| From: |
w--------am wheeler <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=125075047121158135036082190036" >wuffa@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 16:34:40 -0800 |
|
Salve
Marcius Cornelius Felix here
I live in PDX so welcome home ( if only for a few days)
I would be very happy to meet with you any day that week.
vale
RE
Message: 21
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:53:52 -0500 (EST)
From: <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a>
Subject: Vacation
Salve, Citizens;
Just a point of information for you all, as you may be interested. My
lovely wife has been pleased to present me with a long-coveted vacation
on the West Coast (Portland, Ore.) which will consist of a cruise up the
Columbia River Gorge, and a three day visit in my old hometown Portland
with my family. I will be available in town on the evening of the 13th,
14th and 15th of April to recieve any Nova Roman who may be in the area.
We will buy a couple of bottles of Falurnian (or something as suitable)
with which to toast anyone who would wish to face-to face with us.
The vacation is a gift primarily for my being such a good boy during
this convelesance. I have not used physical violence on anyone, and
have for the most part done what the doctors have advised (my doctors
advise me, because it doesn't do much good to "tell" me anything---bad
attitude you know!!!!!) with only one exception, which is pretty good
for me. I hope that somebody will be able and will wish to share this
opportunity.
Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:36:13 -0500 (EST) |
|
Salve, Gaius Lupinius Festus;
Your comments regarding the Gods of Rome are inappropriate on this net.
I have mentioned before in anoher message about consideration for
others. There are those on this net who believe strongly in the Gods of
Rome, and in the Roman Religio. Your negative comment in regard to such
cannot be tolerated. You have read the website--you know that the Roman
Religio is an important part of Nova Roma and the beliefs in such are
very strong here.
Since you will not heed my earlier discussion of courtesy, I must now
ask you personnally to apologize to those Nova Romans whom you have
offended and cease your negative comments in regard to the Roman Religio
and the Gods of Rome.
Vale;
Marcus Minucius Audens
Consul
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Festus replies on the gods. |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=226028211237082190172248203043129208071" >Lykaion1@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:24:50 EST |
|
Salve friends,
When I last logged in, I saw 3 replies to my statement that since the
gods do not exist, they cannot vent wrath on anyone. Sulla, Fimbria, and
Helena Cornelia Ovida all replied. I will answer all three, and begin with
Fimbria.
My friend Fimbria began by asking, "Amice, I beg of you: What was the point
of posting this?"
My concern when I posted was really not the gods. I was concerned by the
first part of the noble Senator Graecus' statement. "I think that the
exchange of ideas should not be completely free in Rome, particularly in what
concerns the Religio Romana."
If the Senator is reading this, may I ask specifically what ideas may not be
expressed?
If his intent was to simply say that mere insulting remarks { eg. 'The gods
are stupid ideas and anyone who believes in them is a moron'} should not be
tolerated, then I have no problem with his statement. If, on the other hand,
it is meant to preclude the expression of metaphysical, philosophical, or
theological views he does not agree with, then I do have a most serious
problem with it. Such discussion was indeed a staple of classical thought,
and was also Roman. More on this later.
Fimbria then said, "The List had finally gotten away from all the religious
baiting that
so characterized our discourse the first year of Nova Roma's existence. You
may not share Graecus' beliefs, but as a participant in this community I ask
that you at least respect them." Helena expressed a similar view: "A certain
dose of respect for the Roman Gods is imperative here.You are deeply
offending many citizens with the
above statement and I believe an apology would be appreciated."
There is no religious baiting here. And I have voiced no disrespect. No
insults were made. I said the gods do not exist. If this is disrespect,
then the corrollary is that respect equals affirmation of existence. And the
Constitution does not require affirmation of the god's existence. My
statement is no more disrespectful or offensive than an affirmation of their
existence. They are both metaphysical viewpoints, and I think, based on my
reading of the Constitution, both are legal.
Helena said, "But you are attacking the very foundations of Nova Roma!" No.
Again, if the Constituion of Nova Roma required belief, then I would indeed
have been guilty of attacking the foundation of Nova Roma. But the real
foundation of Nova Roma is the classical world, in particular, as it existed
within the Roman state. And not all people living within the Roman world
believed in the gods.
"I'm sure it's already been said but why did you become a citizen?"
Because I like the classical world, which was much bigger and broader than
the Religio Romana. I like the philosophy, the art, the stories, histories,
etc. I simply do not buy into the gods. My main interest is the
philosophical life of the mind that was pursued by those with leisure and
means. I would also like to see the Peripatetic School of thought re-emerge
in a 21st century form. Yet again, for the third time, citizenship in no way
depends on belief in the gods.
Sulla asked me, "How do you know the gods do not exist?"
The same way I now know that the Jersey Devil does not exist. The Olympians
have been with us, in literature, for at least 2900 years, counting from the
estimated compostitions by Homer ca 900 BCE. In all this time, have we had
any reason or evidence that they DO exist? Or have their been any events
attributed to the gods that in principle cannot be explained by natural
means? Other hypotheses that lack reason are rejected in much less time than
2900 years. If, in all this time, there are no valid or substantial
evidences or arguments given, I can safely say that the gods do not exist.
And the burdon of proof is on those who make the positive affirmations.
Helena asks, "And I suppose you can prove that your diety (or dieties) of
choice does exist?!"
I have no deities Helena. I have made no such choice. I am, and have been
concerned with such questions for several years, and have done much thinking
on the matter. I have some guesses and hunches, and that is all. I am
gathering material so that someday I may write an essay on this very subject.
People will be free to read it, and reject it. I will certainly not be
offended. My skin is a bit too thick to be stung by honest and open
disagreement.
So, is there any respect I am willing to afford to the gods? Yes. I can
respect them as symbols of human, or specifically Roman values. I can
appreciate literature in which they play a part. And if need arises, I can
offer a pinch of insense in ceremonies, understanding of course that it is
the things they REPRESENT I am affirming, and not their existence. Ritual,
after all, is a universal human activity. It has it's purpose.
Sulla, Fimbria, and Helena, the classical world lived with its deists and
with its atheists. So can we!
Gaius Lupinius Festus
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=226028211237082190172248203043129208071" >Lykaion1@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:26:05 EST |
|
Salve Consul,
May I direct you to my previous reply to Sulla, Fimbria, and Helena? It
serves as an explanation.
Gaius Lupinius Festus
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Most conquests when was Re:Rufa Paula Cornelia (meandering a l... |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:40:03 EST |
|
More conquest definately did take place under the Republic. Roma started a
small city in Central Italy, and by the end of the Republic dominated all of
Italy, France, Spain, North Africa, Greece... there is comparitavely little
conquest under the emperors. The only serious conquest was under The Divine
Claudius with the subjugation of Britania, and then under Trajan in the
Middle East.
For the Senate and the Roman People, Valete!
Drusus Cornelius Claudius
|
| Subject: |
Insults |
| From: |
Donald and Crystal Meaker <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029056113163056209105098072248155208071048" >meakerfam@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 20:38:25 -0600 |
|
Salvete,
Just wanted to chime in and say I am BEYOND insulted at the below
statement.
Amethystia Iunia Crystallina Materna
Sacredos Iunonis
On 30 Mar 2000 23:20:57 -0000 <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> writes:
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 18:06:17 EST
> From: <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=226028211237082190172248203043129208071" >Lykaion1@--------</a>
> Subject: Re: Freedom of Speech
>
> In a message dated 3/30/00 11:01:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> writes:
>
> << I think that the exchange of ideas should not be completely free
> in Rome,
> particularly in what concerns the Religio Romana. To blasphemate
> the Gods of
> Rome is to bring their wrath over all nation. >>
>
>
> Senator, the gods do not exist. Therefore, they cannot vent wrath
> on anyone.
>
> Gaius Lupinius Festus
>
>
|
| Subject: |
The Gods (was: Freedom of Speech) |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:16:01 EST |
|
In a message dated 3/30/00 3:11:11 PM Pa----------------andard Time, <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=226028211237082190172248203043129208071" >Lykaion1@--------</a>
writes:
<< Senator, the gods do not exist. Therefore, they cannot vent wrath on
anyone. >>
Salvete,
It's amazing how many fine debates I miss while I'm at work...
Festus, you're perfectly welcome to believe that the Gods do not exist.
Belief in the gods is not required for Citizenship. All that's required is a
love of things Roman, and you've certainly shown some sincere interest to
Roman subjects in previous posts.
If you don't believe the gods exist, they don't. For you.
Should this bother others? No. It wasn't something that bothered the ancient
Romans at all. Your disbelief doesn't affect me one whit, just as my belief
is not in fact an inconvenience to you.
What DID cause problems was a hatred of the Gods, and a concentrated effort
to destroy the Religio. When such efforts finally succeeded, a major
cornerstone of Romanitas was destroyed. Even if you don't perceive the Gods,
you can hopefully see the importance of that particular loss. It's an attack
not that dissimilar from the vilification of Western ideals and culture at
the hands of popular multiculturalism that you have decried.
Your statement of *personal* disbelief in the gods is in no way an attack
upon the Religio. My hope is that this argument won't progress to the point
where it forces you to make ever stronger statements that stray far from your
original intent.
I invite the folks who practice the Religio to continue this thread at the
ReligioRomana list. Such religious topics are badly needed there...
Valete,
Marcus Cassius Julianus
|
| Subject: |
Roman Names |
| From: |
"Qu--------s Sertor--------#34; <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=123075020254193194170038203026129208071" >gu--------he@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:18:44 -0600 |
|
30 March 2000
My Name is Quintus Sertorius, and I am the Paterfamilias of the
gens Sertoria. I am a new citizen to Nova Roma, and am Proud of
my chosen name, as it is one that belonged to an ancient Roman
of great standing. In the resent debates I noticed another being
addressed as "Sertorius", my question is, is it appropriate for
another citizen to be called "Sertorius" while it is the name of
my gens? I do not want any citizens to think the official gens
Sertoria shares the views expressed by the citizen addressed
as "Sertorius", in the resent debate.
Quintus Sertorius
Citizen
Canada Occidentalis
Nova Roma
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
| Subject: |
Back again |
| From: |
Megas-Rob--------n <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=243232178182078116015056190036129" >amgunn@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:34:08 -0600 |
|
Avete Omnes,
I go away for a week and a half and return to another "barney" of sorts on the list. Well, at least
the Republic seeems to be taking this one in stride.
By the by, is this the same or a different Festus from before?
In Officium - Piparbarbus Ullerius Venator,
Cives - Quaestor - Peregrinator
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Roman Names |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 19:38:09 -0800 |
|
Salve!
His Nomen is Cornelius.....he is in my Gens....we have many people who have
names in Cognomen that are also names of Gens Nomens. Its ok....every
applicant has had their name approved by the Censors of Nova Roma (currently
only me) I even use a nomenclator to assist me in the approval of names,
when necessary.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
Censor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Qu--------s Sertor--------#34; <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=123075020254193194170038203026129208071" >gu--------he@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:18 PM
Subject: [novaroma] Roman Names
>
>
> 30 March 2000
>
> My Name is Quintus Sertorius, and I am the Paterfamilias of the
> gens Sertoria. I am a new citizen to Nova Roma, and am Proud of
> my chosen name, as it is one that belonged to an ancient Roman
> of great standing. In the resent debates I noticed another being
> addressed as "Sertorius", my question is, is it appropriate for
> another citizen to be called "Sertorius" while it is the name of
> my gens? I do not want any citizens to think the official gens
> Sertoria shares the views expressed by the citizen addressed
> as "Sertorius", in the resent debate.
>
> Quintus Sertorius
> Citizen
> Canada Occidentalis
> Nova Roma
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!
> 1. Fill in the brief application
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR
> Apply NOW!
> <a href="http://click.egroups.com/1/2646/4/_/61050/_/954473062/" target="_top" >http://click.egroups.com/1/2646/4/_/61050/_/954473062/</a>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:55:39 EST |
|
To Gaius Lupinius Festus, from Quintus Fabius Maximus
Salve
You will apologize to the all citizens of Roma for your blasphemy, and you
will do it quickly has possible upon receipt of this e-mail. If you love our
nation and have read the requirements of membership then you know that our
Religio is part of our state. Our gods & goddesses are as much a part of who
we are as citizens as our love for law & order. What you do in your private
life is your concern. In public (i.e., the Forum) we ask simply one thing.
Do not disrespect them! And it is implied that you respect the Religio Roma
in the constitution.
Since you are in violation of that request you are to make a public apology
to both the Senate & the people of Roma. I'll put this down to overzealous
enthusiasm for your atheism and let the matter rest, and we all will not
speak of it again once you apologize.
Vale!
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Roman Names |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:57:51 -0500 (EST) |
|
Salve, Quintus Sertorius;
I am glad you mentioned this name business. I have had some questions
from some colleagues regarding a 17 year old Govenor. I was in the
processof doing some research when your letter came. I will notify the
other consul so that the nams won't get mixed up.
Thanks again for the heads up!!!
Vale, Respectfully;
Marcus Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Centurio Gaius Valerius Tacitus Hebernicus |
| From: |
<--------lass="msghead"> &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=132056219182127132169218031036129208" &g--------curia@--------&l--------&g--------td>
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:41:54 -0600 |
|
Salve Centurio fortis et fidelis:
No, I do not meander; I concur with your entertaining, lively, and very true
scenerio.
You have hit the nail on the head...to coin a phrase. Many tribes and small
states wanted to be a
part of the Roman Empire for the very examples you state. Have you ever
seen the move 'The Life
of Brian'. If not, do watch it. Pay close attention to the line " Well,
what have the Romans really done
for us."
Gratias
Vale
tibi qui fers ferrum Romae, bona fortuna. Fas est. Centurio Gaius Valerius
Tacitus Hebernicus
Rufa Paula Cornelia
Miles Romae
Fero ferrum Romae.
|
| Subject: |
C Marius Merullus |
| From: |
<--------lass="msghead"> &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=132056219182127132169218031036129208" &g--------curia@--------&l--------&g--------td>
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:48:04 -0600 |
|
Gratias C Marius Merullus:
For understanding what I was saying so clearly.
Vale
Rufa Paula Cornelia
Miles Romae
Fero ferrum Romae
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:05:55 +0100 |
|
Salvete Gai Lupini Feste et al
>You will apologize to the all citizens of Roma for your blasphemy, and you
>will do it quickly has possible upon receipt of this e-mail. If you love
our
>nation and have read the requirements of membership then you know that our
>Religio is part of our state. Our gods & goddesses are as much a part of
who
>we are as citizens as our love for law & order. What you do in your
private
>life is your concern. In public (i.e., the Forum) we ask simply one thing.
>Do not disrespect them! And it is implied that you respect the Religio Roma
>in the constitution.
As Praetor, I second Consul Quintus Fabius Maximus on appealing to your good
sense. To publicly say that the Roman Gods do not exist is a blasphemy and
as philosophically illogical as to say that They exist. Why don't you follow
instead the Epicurean thought which states that "although They may exist,
they have no action on Earth besides inspiring the humans"? On the other
hand you can also say: "The Gods exist, but they are perceived differently
by different human beings. For me They are just the Powers of Nature".
If you change your statement to something lke the above, I shall on my part
consider your blasphemy apologized.
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Praetor
Senator
Pontifex
-----Original Message-----
From: <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=061044104089235135169082190036" >sfp55@--------</--------; <--------ef="/post/nov----------------otectID=061044104089235135169082190036" >sfp55@--------</--------;
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 4:55 AM
Subject: Re: [novaroma] Freedom of Speech
>To Gaius Lupinius Festus, from Quintus Fabius Maximus
>Salve
>
>You will apologize to the all citizens of Roma for your blasphemy, and you
>will do it quickly has possible upon receipt of this e-mail. If you love
our
>nation and have read the requirements of membership then you know that our
>Religio is part of our state. Our gods & goddesses are as much a part of
who
>we are as citizens as our love for law & order. What you do in your
private
>life is your concern. In public (i.e., the Forum) we ask simply one thing.
>Do not disrespect them! And it is implied that you respect the Religio Roma
>in the constitution.
>Since you are in violation of that request you are to make a public apology
>to both the Senate & the people of Roma. I'll put this down to overzealous
>enthusiasm for your atheism and let the matter rest, and we all will not
>speak of it again once you apologize.
>Vale!
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!
>1. Fill in the brief application
>2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
>3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR
>Apply NOW!
><a href="http://click.egroups.com/1/2646/4/_/61050/_/954474947/" target="_top" >http://click.egroups.com/1/2646/4/_/61050/_/954474947/</a>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
|
| Subject: |
(no subject) |
| From: |
w--------am wheeler <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=125075047121158135036082190036" >wuffa@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 01:26:44 -0800 |
|
Salve
Our Gods demand Festus to apologize. Not to do it is nefas
vale
|
| Subject: |
Re: Freedom of Speech (LONG) |
| From: |
Mariu--------mbria <a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 03:53:48 -0600 (CST) |
|
Salve, mi Graecule, et salvete omnes...
> I think that the exchange of ideas should not be completely free in
> Rome, particularly in what concerns the Religio Romana.
Am I the only one on this List who is as troubled by this assertion as
I am by Lupinius Festus' response? We had been having a fairly
civilized discussion of Roman versus American ideas of political
freedom; certainly the emphasis on individual liberties is a modern
thing, the Romans having themselves been much less concerned with
rights than with responsibilities. Then suddenly a Nova Roman Pontiff
throws down the gauntlet by attempting to stifle the debate: I cannot
think of very many ways to respond to his demand that would *not* have
turned the discussion into a confrontation!
I cannot defend Festus' original statement and will not attempt to do
so. It was blunt, in-your-face, and stated as a bald fact instead of a
personal belief (am I wrong in thinking it would have been more
palatable otherwise?).
However, I think he has since explained his intent adequately, though I
realize that I differ with both Consuls in that respect. I feel
strongly that he has a valid point: Why may we *not* feel free to
discuss religion and philosophy from *any* school of thought extant in
ancient Rome? The ancients themselves certainly did so, and for the
most part without acrimony; are we not yet strong enough in our
Romanitas that we can dare to follow their example?
Understand a thing: I do not argue for the right of *anyone* to
blaspheme or otherwise publicly insult the Gods of Rome. But as
Cassius has pointed out, a statement of personal belief--even if it
expresses *non*-belief--is neither blasphemy nor any threat to the Gods
or the Religio or the practice thereof. Thousands of Romans followed
schools of philosophy that minimized the role of the Olympians in
mortal affairs or discounted Them entirely; but the Pax`Deorum covered
the philosophers just as securely as it did the priests.
That being the case, what manner of religious and philosophical
discussion and interchange would be appropriate and acceptable?
None...? --But then we admit we are not as sturdy as our ancestors.
Only that which does not make practitioners of the Religio
uncomfortable...? --But what true belief cannot stand a little testing;
what muscle does not benefit from a good hard stretch?
Many of my Christian friends are afraid of philosophy because they fear
that if they really *think* about their faith they will lose it. To
them I have said: Try it; if you still have your faith after doing
philosophy, it will be (a) much stronger for the experience, and (b)
truly *yours* in a way that no Sunday-school hand-me-down could ever
be. No God worth worshipping, I feel, is so flimsy that He's going to
evaporate just because His followers have dared to do a little
thinking. Are not the Gods of Rome at least that strong? Do Their
followers also fear philosophy?
When I first became a Citizen, I would have liked very much to have
been able to ask some exploratory questions about the Religio; it is
important to me to understand the things that matter to my friends.
Unfortunately, I joined at a time when it seemed that merely admitting
to being a non-pagan was tantamount to confessing treason; such gentle
inquiry, I felt at the time, was quite impossible.
The followers of the Religio Romana have made long strides since then
in the direction of tolerance, God(s) be praised; but incidents like
this one do indeed serve to 'push the envelope'. Will they use this
opportunity to demonstrate their strength by tolerating (respectful!)
discourse? Or will they close ranks and adopt a defensive stance, not
permitting anyone to speak who does not see the cosmos the way they do?
Lupinius Festus will be drilling with his National Guard unit this
weekend. I am not certain how much online time (if any) he is going to
have. If we do not see the requested apology this weekend, I urge you,
Quirites, not to aggravate the situation by reading too much into his
silence. Let the thing take its course; and let's all leave each other
room to resolve these situations with some semblence of dignity.
Thank you for plowing through this with me. 'Nuff said--by this author
at least! >({|8-)
***********************************************************
Lucius Marius Fimbria / Legio VI Victrix |>[SPQR]<|
<a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a> |\=/|
Storyteller, Roleplayer Emeritus, ( ~ 6 )~~~----...,,__
Historical Re-Creationist, `\*/, `` }`^~`,,, \ \
and Citizen of Rome ``=.\ (__==\_ /\ }
'Just a-hangin' around the Universe, | | / )\ \| /
bein' a Roman...it's hard work, but _|_| / _/_| /`(
*somebody's* gotta do it!!' /./..=' /./..'
|
| Subject: |
The Gods Exist? A Philosophical approach. |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:13:42 +0100 |
|
Salvete Festus et al
Although Festus as incurred on a capital crime, as a person with an interest
on philosophical thought I cannot stay away from the raised discussion. For
some reason they call me "Graecus". I will now address you as simply a
philosopher and a citizen.
Festus, you have presented a claim that to say that the Gods exist is
contrary to Philosophy. Well, that's precisely the opposite. Parmenides
stated this principle very well when saying that "One cannot speak of a
thing which does not exist". As such, the very fact that you speak about the
Gods and say that They do not exist, is the very proof of their existence.
So, the Gods exist in some way. I also evoke the memory of many good
philosophers who believed that the Gods existed: Socrates, Plato, Zeno,
Epicuro, Lucretius, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Plotinus. These men show that
Philosophy is not against the belief on the Gods and they justify their
belief. They believed the Gods in different ways, of course, but they
believed them. So Festus, I recognise your point of view and think it is
worth of philosophical discussion. But that cannot be in public because it
is the same as going into the streets shouting that this or that citizen as
committed a crime without having proofs. If the subject of such a statement
is a human being we call it defamation (is it correct in English?). If the
subject is a God, we call it blasphemy. In either case, the subjects of
those statement are included in our Leges. We have only to read Cicero in
order to realize it.
Now, even the Greek authors of antiquity were amazed at the Roman piety
towards the Gods, and ancient authors recognised that it was the main factor
for Rome's ultimate greatness... On the contrary, when the Romans started to
abandon their Gods, they started to loose province after province. So,
Festus, I ask you for the sake of respect and love for our Republic, for our
ancestors the Manes, and your fellow citizens to apologize. Not doing that
you are invoking the same 'nefas' which contributed to the fall of Rome in
476 AD.
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Praetor
Senator
Pontifex
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Freedom of Speech (LONG) |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:21:26 +0100 |
|
Salve Luci Mari Fimbria
>> I think that the exchange of ideas should not be completely free in
>> Rome, particularly in what concerns the Religio Romana.
>
>Am I the only one on this List who is as troubled by this assertion as
>I am by Lupinius Festus' response? We had been having a fairly
>civilized discussion of Roman versus American ideas of political
>freedom; certainly the emphasis on individual liberties is a modern
>thing, the Romans having themselves been much less concerned with
>rights than with responsibilities. Then suddenly a Nova Roman Pontiff
>throws down the gauntlet by attempting to stifle the debate: I cannot
>think of very many ways to respond to his demand that would *not* have
>turned the discussion into a confrontation!
Stiffle? I've only said that the Gods of Rome cannot be publicly
blasphemated. That's the Law of Rome. If you are a Christian fine! Offer
prayers to your God. But you cannot blsaphemate the State of Rome! Yes,
because the Gods are the "archetype" (philosophically speaking) of the
State.
>I cannot defend Festus' original statement and will not attempt to do
>so. It was blunt, in-your-face, and stated as a bald fact instead of a
>personal belief (am I wrong in thinking it would have been more
>palatable otherwise?).
????
>However, I think he has since explained his intent adequately, though I
>realize that I differ with both Consuls in that respect. I feel
>strongly that he has a valid point: Why may we *not* feel free to
>discuss religion and philosophy from *any* school of thought extant in
>ancient Rome? The ancients themselves certainly did so, and for the
>most part without acrimony; are we not yet strong enough in our
>Romanitas that we can dare to follow their example?
>Understand a thing: I do not argue for the right of *anyone* to
>blaspheme or otherwise publicly insult the Gods of Rome. But as
>Cassius has pointed out, a statement of personal belief--even if it
>expresses *non*-belief--is neither blasphemy nor any threat to the Gods
>or the Religio or the practice thereof. Thousands of Romans followed
>schools of philosophy that minimized the role of the Olympians in
>mortal affairs or discounted Them entirely; but the Pax`Deorum covered
>the philosophers just as securely as it did the priests.
One thing is to say: "I do not believe the Gods". Another is to say "Tha
Gods do not exist". The first statement is personal, the second is
Universal.
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
|
| Subject: |
ATTN (Religio Romana): pridie Kalendas April (March 31st) |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:32:46 +0100 |
|
Salvete omnes
This is one of the dies comitiales (C), when committees of citizens could
vote on political or criminal matters.
Today is the birthday of the temple of Luna (Dies Natalis Templi Lunae) on
the Aventine hill, which was dedicated by king Servius Tullius. Conception
is today favoured by Lucina, which is a Goddess identified with Luna and
Diana.
Pax Deorum Vobiscum
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 05:48:28 EST |
|
In a message dated 3/31/2000 1:55:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,
<a href="/po--------ovaroma?protectID=034056178009193116148218000036129208" >legion6@--------</a> write--------r>
<< If we do not see the requested apology this weekend, I urge you,
Quirites, not to aggravate the situation by reading too much into his
silence. Let the thing take its course; and let's all leave each other
room to resolve these situations with some semblance of dignity. >>
I agree with this assessment of the situation.
QFM
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Re: Freedom of Speech |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 11:56:32 +0100 |
|
Salvete
><< If we do not see the requested apology this weekend, I urge you,
> Quirites, not to aggravate the situation by reading too much into his
> silence. Let the thing take its course; and let's all leave each other
> room to resolve these situations with some semblance of dignity. >>
Ok. But yet, there is a difference between saying "The Gods do not exist"
and "I do not believe the Gods exist".
Valete
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
|
| Subject: |
ATTN (Religio Romana): Kalendas April (April 1st) |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 15:37:25 +0100 |
|
Salvete
Tomorrow is the first day (Kalendas) of April. I have the honour to announce
that the Collegium Pontificum will restablish tomorrow the public ritual of
the Kalendas, which consists on the announcement (Kalare) of the Nones day
(5th or 7th on the month) by the Pontifices at the Curia Calabra. According
to the month (whether the Nones fell on the 5th or the 7th), the
announcement was "Die quinti te kalo Iuno Covella" ("I announce you Iuno
Covella of the 5th day") or "Septimi die te kalo Iuno Covella" ("I announce
you Iuno Covella of the 7th day"). So, the invocation is performed to Iuno
Covella to Whom the Kalendas are dedicated. So, tomorrow, Pontifex Iunia
Ovidia Luna will announce the Nones as our ancestors did. She will perform
the invocation at her home, and after that, she will post to the NovaRoma
and ReligioRomana mailing lists in order to make the announcement public to
you, cives of Nova Roma.
As I will not be here tomorrow, here goes the little note on the month of
April and its 1st day.
The month of April is consecrated to Venus. As to the Kalendas:
This is one of the dies fasti (F), on which legal actions are permitted.
In this day the women honour Venus and the Fortuna Virilis.
In 114 BC, a thunderbolt fell on a girl who was riding a horse, a prodigy
which was connected to the fornication of three Vestals. This provoked the
erection of the temple to Venus Verticordia ("Venus who converts the
hearts"). So this is also the celebration of inauguration of the temple.
In this day, both men and women participate on bathing Venus in the form of
her statue, having previously removed her golden colar and other ornaments.
After the bath, her ornaments are returned and She is offered roses.
The women also have bath coronated with myrtle, which is a plant consecrated
to Venus, having both purification and aphrodisiac properties.
Women also go to the baths of the men for honouring Fortuna Virilis. Through
the incense offered to Fortuna, She hides the imperfections of the immersed
bodies.
Pax Deorum vobiscum
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
Pontifex
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] Digest Number 777 |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 14:35:59 GMT |
|
"Salve Antonia Grilo:
Your stand on the First Amendment is interesting. What then is your
position on the the frist part of the amendment 'Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion'? This is the law that makes it
possible for people to practice their religion freely and openly. I am very
interested.
Vale,
Rufa Paula Cornelia"
Salvete
If the honored Antonio Grilo will alow me to post my own reply...
Speaking as someone who first got involved with Nova Roma when it was brand
new, I remember what drew myself and many others here was the
re-establishment of the Religio Romana and all that it represents. The
Religio is a centerpiece of Nova Roma. Our constitution as Nova Romans is
not the Constitution iof the United States. Our constitution clearly
mentions the Religio as a central aspect of Nova Roma, unless someone has
changed it during my latest hiatus (my explanation and apologies are
forthcoming). The First Amendment in the US is a very necessary document,
especially in these troubled times. One similar in Nova Roma is unnecessary
because it is stated quite openly that the Religio is a central facet of
Nova Roma. It is also stated that those of other religions are welcome here
and will not be discriminated against. There are at least a couple
Christians in Nova Roma who have attained much respect and are shining
examples of the Roman virtues. I believe Audens is one of them. (Please
pardon me if I am mistaken.) So please do not trouble yourself to compare
the Constitution of the polyglot US and the Constitution of the more
homogenous Nova Roma. It is apples and oranges. The lowest common
denominator in the two nations is very different. Speaking as someone who
lives in the northern edge of Bible Belt mentality, I know from experience
the differences. The populi of Nova Roma are a much more thoughtful and
better-educated lot who are here in intentional community to create and
sustain this micro-nation.
*stepping off the soapbox*
Valete,
Lucina Iunia Cypria
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at <a href="http://www.hotmail.com" target="_top" >http://www.hotmail.com</a>
|
| Subject: |
The Gods |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 14:42:14 GMT |
|
"Senator, the gods do not exist. Therefore, they cannot vent wrath on
anyone.
Gaius Lupinius Festus"
Salve Lupinius
I will kindly ask you to consider that your opinion in regards to the Gods
is only your own. Those of us who believe otherwise would appreciate it if
you would remember that blasphemy against the Gods is impolite at best in a
nation where the re-establishment of the Religio is a matter of some
importance to many of us.
Vale
Lucina Iunia Cypria
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at <a href="http://www.hotmail.com" target="_top" >http://www.hotmail.com</a>
|
| Subject: |
My absence |
| From: |
"Tinnekke Bebout" <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 14:48:49 GMT |
|
Salvete Omnes, especially my revered Paterfamilias,
I wanted to say hello after having been silent for quite a while. I've been
on a personal quest for quite some time and have finally finished what I was
doing and have returned to civilization. I recently finished a year of
private service to Vesta, maintaining an altar to Her and doing devotions to
Her daily. The lessons She gave me caused me to go on my internal quest, so
that I could truly understand Her. Ave Vesta! I will not publicly discuss
what I learned as it is a private matter, but anyone who is curious is
welcome to mail me privately.
I am hoping to return fully to Nova Roman life and fulfill my duties as a
citizen. Once I get my bearings again, I might be relooking at serving in a
public capacity, perhaps in the temple of Ceres. (This also ties in with the
lessons of Vesta and is not a sudden switch.)
I greet you all most happily.
Valete,
Lucina Iunia Cypria
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at <a href="http://www.hotmail.com" target="_top" >http://www.hotmail.com</a>
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] My absence |
| From: |
"Antonio Grilo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 15:56:36 +0100 |
|
Salve Lucina
And I welcome you back and want to say that your learning and pietas is much
needed in Nova Roma.
Also, if you have read my note on today's religio you have surely found that
this is also your day, Lucina.
Vale
Antonius Gryllus Graecus
-----Original Message-----
From: Tinnekke Bebout <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a>
To: <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a> <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>
Date: Friday, March 31, 2000 3:49 PM
Subject: [novaroma] My absence
>Salvete Omnes, especially my revered Paterfamilias,
>
>I wanted to say hello after having been silent for quite a while. I've been
>on a personal quest for quite some time and have finally finished what I
was
>doing and have returned to civilization. I recently finished a year of
>private service to Vesta, maintaining an altar to Her and doing devotions
to
>Her daily. The lessons She gave me caused me to go on my internal quest, so
>that I could truly understand Her. Ave Vesta! I will not publicly discuss
>what I learned as it is a private matter, but anyone who is curious is
>welcome to mail me privately.
>I am hoping to return fully to Nova Roman life and fulfill my duties as a
>citizen. Once I get my bearings again, I might be relooking at serving in a
>public capacity, perhaps in the temple of Ceres. (This also ties in with
the
>lessons of Vesta and is not a sudden switch.)
>I greet you all most happily.
>
>Valete,
>
>Lucina Iunia Cypria
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at <a href="http://www.hotmail.com" target="_top" >http://www.hotmail.com</a>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>DON'T HATE YOUR RATE!
>Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as
>0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees.
>Apply NOW!
><a href="http://click.egroups.com/1/2120/4/_/61050/_/954514130/" target="_top" >http://click.egroups.com/1/2120/4/_/61050/_/954514130/</a>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] My absence |
| From: |
<a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=045232113165042200148200112241225012177026038196249130152150" >jmath669642reng@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 09:58:26 -0500 (EST) |
|
Salve, Lucina Iunia Cypria;
Welcome back to Nova Roma. You have been missed, and I am most pleased
to hear that your quest has yielded to you some satisfaction in your
beliefs. Welcome Home!!
Marcus Minucius Audens
Fair Winds and Following Seas!!!
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Gods |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:14:48 EST |
|
In a message dated 3/31/00 10:03:36 AM EST, <a --------="/post/novaroma?protectID=189176234185056182213038203004129208071" >tinnekke@--------</a> writes:
<<
Salve Lupinius
I will kindly ask you to consider that your opinion in regards to the Gods
is only your own. Those of us who believe otherwise would appreciate it if
you would remember that blasphemy against the Gods is impolite at best in a
nation where the re-establishment of the Religio is a matter of some
importance to many of us.
Vale
Lucina Iunia Cypria
>>
Salve Lucina Iunia Cypria!
Well said!
Drusus Cornelius Claudius
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Gods Exist? A Philosophical approach. |
| From: |
<--------lass="msghead"> &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=034166250009056116130232203056129208071" &g--------bienus@--------&l--------&g--------td>
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:52:27 US/Central |
|
Salvete Antoni Grylle et alii.
Graecus:
”Although Festus has incurred on a capital crime,…”
Fortunatus:
Surely you can’t believe that Festus should be *executed* for his statement,
regardless of how distasteful. True, he should have phrased it as a statement
of belief, and not of fact. Still, who among us has not committed that venial
sin?
Graecus:
“Festus, you have presented a claim that to say that the Gods exist is
contrary to Philosophy. Well, that's precisely the opposite. Parmenides
stated this principle very well when saying that ‘One cannot speak of a
thing which does not exist’.”
Fortunatus:
I’ve always felt that this was a spurious argument. Medieval authors spoke of
people who had no heads and wore their faces on their chests. I am quite
capable of writing and saying the most amazing nonsense (hmm, I’m just walking
into that one, aren’t I?). Does my assertion that there is an orange walrus
that walks on seventy-five legs living in my back yard make said peculiar
walrus exist? Only in my overactive imagination.
That said, I would claim that both Graecus and Festus are incorrect in their
assertions about what is contrary to philosophy. One of the primary questions
that philosophy has attempted to answer is whether or not the Gods exist. The
jury is still decidedly out, despite several thousand years of deliberation.
Graecus:
“As such, the very fact that you speak about the Gods and say that They do not
exist, is the very proof of their existence. So, the Gods exist in some way.”
Fortunatus:
I have no doubt that an atheist would agree that they “exist in some way.” He
or she would simply argue, as did Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche, and the French
Existentialists, that that existence is only a product of human belief.
Graecus:
“So Festus, I recognise your point of view and think it is worth of
philosophical discussion. But that cannot be in public because it is the same
as going into the streets shouting that this or that citizen as committed a
crime without having proofs.”
Fortunatus:
No, it is not. Philosophical debate should be public. Philosophy exists not
as a series of silly mental games, but as a system of investigation by which we
may come to a better understanding of that which the concrete sciences--
physics, chemistry, et cetera--cannot study. The process of coming to that
understanding can only better us as people, and should neither be stifled nor
limited to private conversations.
Graecus:
“If the subject of such a statement is a human being we call it defamation (is
it correct in English?).”
Fortunatus:
Yes, this is correct.
Graecus:
“If the subject is a God, we call it blasphemy. In either case, the subjects of
those statement are included in our Leges. We have only to read Cicero in order
to realize it.”
Fortunatus:
And yet, even Cicero, in his conclusion to "The Nature of the Gods", admits
that proving the existence of the Gods is a terribly difficult thing. Modern
philosophers tend to believe that it is impossible in the context of the
anthropocentric model (wherein it is admitted that we can only know our
perception of truth, and not truth itself) of human existence that philosophy
has settled upon.
Still, the inability to prove a thing does not disprove that thing. The three
most compelling (to me, at least) arguments for the Gods’ existence--the
argument from design, the ontological argument, and the cosmological argument--
have yet to be satisfactorily disproven.
Therefore, it is in accordance with philosophy to say that the existence of the
Gods has neither been proved nor disproved. Unless one is taking one side or
the other in an effort to elicit a new understanding through the dialectic, it
is not in accordance with philosophy to deny the possible validity of either
stance.
Graecus:
”So, Festus, I ask you for the sake of respect and love for our Republic, for
our ancestors the Manes, and your fellow citizens to apologize.”
Fortunatus:
It seems to me that Festus has offered an apology, in the tradition of Socrates
and Apuleius. I do, however, believe that it would behoove him to adopt less
of an authoritarian tone when stating beliefs that are as inflammatory as his
appear to be.
Valete
T Labienus Fortunatus
|
| Subject: |
Re: Festus replies on the gods. |
| From: |
"RMerullo" <a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=194232192180194153138149203043129208071" >rmerullo@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:53:31 -0500 |
|
Salvete Feste et alii
>
>There is no religious baiting here. And I have voiced no disrespect. No
>insults were made.
You don't know that, any more than you know definitively that the gods don't
exist. Blunt denial of the existence of the gods sounds like religious
baiting to me. And the statement that you made, in addition to its
potentially blasphemous and offensive meaning, was disrespectful in the
extreme.
When we're communicating in this forum, the implication of your words
matters, as well as how true or accurate you the speaker believe your words
to be. In other words, what is the use here of a declaration that has as
its consequence a lot of hurt and offense? I have discussed the existence
of the gods with people who have said "I don't believe in the gods". But
you provide no room for debate Feste, "they don't exist".
I find your lengthy, carefully constructed reply somewhat insulting, not to
mention your referring a consul, elected by this nation, to it. This forum
is a Roman place, it belongs to the populus Novae Romae, a nation over which
the Roman gods preside. Paenite aut tace
Valete
C Marius Merullus
Senator
|
| Subject: |
test message |
| From: |
<--------lass="msghead"> &l--------href="/pos--------varoma?pro--------ID=132056219182127132169218031036129208" &g--------curia@--------&l--------&g--------td>
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 13:00:24 -0600 |
|
Test message only please egnore
|
| Subject: |
Re: [novaroma] The Gods Exist? A Philosophical approach. |
| From: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 16:42:29 EST |
|
In a message dated 3/31/00 5:10:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
<a href="/post/novaroma?prote--------=243232178003185091033082" >amg@--------</a> writes:
<< Socrates, Plato, Zeno,
Epicuro, Lucretius, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Plotinus. >>
You can't forget Cicero (The greatest Lawyer and Orator in Rome during the
time of Caesar), In my old latin book there's a story titled "Cicero Praises
Jupiter" its 3 pages of Latin describing how Cicero walked through the
streets of Rome to the temple of Jupiter to pay hommage with 2 gold coins.
|
| Subject: |
Apologies |
| From: |
"Donald and Crystal Meaker" <a href="/post/novaroma?protectID=029056113163056209105098072248155208071048" >meakerfam@--------</a> |
| Date: |
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 22:26:11 -0000 |
|
--- In <a href="mailto:novaroma@--------" >novaroma@--------</a>, william wheeler wuffa@i... wrote:
> Salve
> Our Gods demand Festus to apologize. Not to do it is nefas
> vale
I agree.
Vale,
Amethystia Iunia Crystallina Materna
Sacredos Iunonis
|
