Holy Hosian Patriarchal Churches Council

[Polites]

@polites: I have appreciate a lot your last message. Only a general suggestion I not think it's appropriate to call the new church "Aurorian Apostolic Church" but rather "Holy Apostolic Church of Terra".

OOC: Very good point, resurrecting the name of the old Church is the most reasonable course of action RP-wise. So how about Holy Apostolic Hosian Church of Terra (HAHCoT), Apostolic Hosian Church (AHC) for short.

[egalion]

OOC: I have a few things to say:

Our people have reworked the mourning of the division between hosian which is dated 1819. Two thousand years of separation is an abyss. Only the Spirit of Eliyahu can fill this void.
My proposal is to bring us all together in a new "Holy Apostolic Church Hosian" and to elect a new Pope in unity. Our names (Selucian, Theognosian, Terran, etc) may be Patriarchy of the Church itself, where you elect a bishop in communion with the Bishop of Auroria. The latter will be the servant of the servants of Eliyahu, who will head the Apostolic Church in the communion of different rites and traditions.

Completely agree. This was the very purpose of the original council some month ago. yet, as Polites said very well, the TPC is unlikely to merge.

The representative of the Church in Selucia, Scriba Valentinianus, issued a statement of approval for the proposal of the Theognosian Arch-Patriarch that the Aurorian Patriarchal Churches must be reunited under one Apostolic Hosian Church, centred around the Aurorian Creed and with a single Arch-Patriarch. The two Churches are thus in full agreement in dogmatic terms, and as the deliberations in the Council seem to have reached a general consensus in terms of its overall goal, i.e. reunification under a single Church, the more practical matters of unification remain to be discussed.

Again, completelyagree. Although there must be some differences, and we might RP them and how they merge. Let's take it slowly, as suggested by thenewguy.

Scriba Valentinianus offers the following suggestions:

☩ The Theognosian Church and the Selucian Patriarchal Church enter full communion, forming the Aurorian Apostolic Church
☩ Arch-Patriarch Thomas VI and Arch-Patriarch Benedetto V resign their respective posts, to be replaced by a single Arch-Patriarch in Auroria
☩ The new Aurorian Apostolic Church is to follow Aurorian (Western) Patriarchal Hosian beliefs, as recognized within the Aurorian Creed
☩ The new Church is to be reorganized in terms of internal hierarchy. Warning against the danger of phyletism and religious nationalism, Selucia strongly advises against a Church divided along ethnic, linguistic, or national lines
☩ Instead, the Church is to be organized along liturgical lines, establishing self-governing particular churches, each with its own liturgical Rite, each led by a Patriarch, and all in full communion with Auroria
☩ The suggested Churches are the following:

• Selucian Church, following the Selucian (OOC: Latin) Rite, comprising Selucia, Egelion, Luthori, Hulstria and Gao-Soto, Dankuk, Jelbania, Malivia, Aldegar, Beiteynu, Dorvik, Keymon, Kalistan, and other areas where the Selucian Rite has traditionally been used
• Canrillaise Church, following the West Theognosian (OOC: Gallican?) Rite, comprising Alduria, Kanjor, Rildanor, Lourenne, Tukarali, and Darnussia
• Quanzari Church, following the East Theognosian (OOC: Ambrosian?) Rite, comprising Istalia, Solentia, and Kafuristan
• Augustan Church, following the Augustan (OOC: Byzantine) Rite, in Kalopia, Zardugal, Cobura, and Vanuku
• Pontesian Church, following the Hobrazian (OOC: Armenian) Rite, in Pontesi
• Coburan Church, following the Coburan (OOC: Alexandrian) Rite, in Cobura and Zardugal
• Barmenian Church, following the Kathuran (OOC: West Syrian/Antiochian) Rite, in Barmenia and Cildania

I really likes this, but I have a few points.
I think we ought to make a distinction between Rites and Churches, and liturgical and hierarchical Independence.
Ex-Theognosian Churches have a reason to conserve their indipendence, but other churches don't. It would not make much RP sense that the centralist SPC would voluntarily give extr-autonomy to the church in Pontesi for exmple.

I advise two divisions, one on rites and one hierarchical:

RITES: (what Polites said)
• Selucian Rite, comprising Selucia, Egelion, Luthori, Hulstria and Gao-Soto, Dankuk, Jelbania, Malivia, Aldegar, Beiteynu, Dorvik, Keymon, Kalistan, and other areas where the Selucian Rite has traditionally been used. The default rite, as Latin in the Catholic Church.
• Theognosian Rite, comprising Alduria, Kanjor, Rildanor, Lourenne, Istalia, Solentia, and Kafuristan, (Why Tukarali, and Darnussia ?) Since they were part of one church, it makes sense that their ties are similar, even if in different languages.
• Augustan Rite, in Kalopia, Zardugal, Cobura, and Vanuku
• Hobrazian Rite, in Pontesi
• Coburan Rite, in Cobura and Zardugal
• Kathuran Rite, in Barmenia and Cildania[/list]

HIERARCHY
ArchPatriarch in Auroria (or whatever we call him)
----Majority of bishops (both of Selucian and other rites)
--Patriarch of Canrille
----Canrillese Bishops
--Patriarch of Solentia
---- Solentian and kafuri bishops
--Patriarch of Istalia
---- Istalian Bishops
--Other Patriarchs that make RP sense,

Keymon is know to have a history of independence, so maybe a patriarchy in Keymon.

Other Special Churches, as the Augusta, would have their own liturgy, but th bishops would be appointed by the Arch patriach in Selucia like everyone else (as for in the Catholic Church, were also the head of the Ambrosian Rite is appoinetd by the Pope)
. Patriarch instead would be appointed internally (as in orthodox Churches), although of course they would need approval by the Pope.

WHY this? Cause creating cultural churches with their own Patriarch ultimately results, in phyletism, and I completely agree with Polites that this should not happen. This methods gives liturgical independence to everyone, but preserves the centrality of Auroria. At the same time, it gives specific autonomy to some selected churches, specifically ex-Theognosian and churches that have a history of independence. Ex-Thoegnosian would RP want their autonomy, and this provides that, and the SPC would have to reluctantly give it to them. But at the same time, the SPC would not want to giv autnomy to some churches, as Pontesi, or Barmenia, that have always been under the direct control of Auroria. Also, I separated Istalia, Solentia, and Canrille. This makes sense, cause there never was a good reason for Istalia and Solentia to be under the Canrillese domain. This way, they each are separate. it gives Solentia the independence it wants, and it makes RP sense that it cretaes smaller churches and not one big heir of the Theognosian Church that would be disruptive. I added kafuristan to Solentai cause it makes sense.

We can RP additional Patriarchs, but I wouldn't do too many.

NOTES---------

Name: There is a problem.
I believe that officially the name of the SPC (as probably the TPC and TC too) always was HAHPC. Just like both the Catholic Church and Orthodox CHurch call themselves officially One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, or else simply the Church. Catholic and Orthodox are colloquial terms. In the same way, Selucian Patriarchal and Terran. Correct me if I'm wrong Polites.
Hence, the name would remain the same (cause no one ever dropped it).
When it comes to colloquial name, how should we call it? Calling it HAHPC would be seen badly vy the TPC.
I say there are two options:
Keep the SPC (this would save us a lot of rewriting protocols)
Call it Aurorian as suggested. This would make it distinct from the TPC (this is the one I prefer)
Again, the official name would be HAHPC, but Aurorian would be the functional name.

TheNewGuy: does this work with your call for independence of Solentia? It would no more be under Istalian or Canrille dominion. Also, I know AntaniSfini is controlling the whole TC,. but that's only b/c TC countries are apparently not interested in this forum

The Rites and Hierarchial division, if you guys like this dual division, could be RP even more and in more detail.

[TheNewGuy]

OOC: I don't want to go too much into OOC stuff now, because this thread is risking getting derailed, but a few things:
1) I defer to Polites on most, if not all, issues of OOC knowledge of IC consistency. He has done and continues to do excellent work in meshing otherwise nonsensical storylines. My objection above was out of a misunderstanding on my own part of the IC history of Hosianism which Polites has cleared up for me in #particracy. I am onboard with his proposals.
2) I do not think Solentia should be grouped with Kafuristan - there is no history of connection there. There IS a history of Solentian/Quanzari/Istalian connection, and I am firmly in favor of a Patriarch of Solentia/Quanzar as currently exists in the Theognosian Church. Quanzar is the historic name of the South Majatran region, derived from the Kansar Emirate (See here and here) and the Theognosian Church is tied to Quanzari history quite heavily - it is worth keeping alive.

[egalion]

OOC: Thank you TheNewGuy for clarifications. I indeed like the idea of keeping the Patriarchate of Qanzar. In RP, I don't see the Istalian Church being part of it since, as you said, the name itself is a thorne in the spine of Istalia (btw very interesting background in those links). As Polites did before me, I put Kafuristan for a very simple reason: Kafuristan Hosians are a small minority and it makes RP sense that during the centuries they depended mostly on the closest big Hosian church, that is SOlentia. Hence the Patriarch of Solentia would also have jurisdiction on them, even if it is a different culture. It is like Catholicism in North Africa or Oceania, where there is no diocesis but it relays on closer catholic diocesis.

[Polites]

OOC: Good point on the distinction between Rites and Churches, we should not confuse them. As for Patriarchates, I think it would make most sense to continue the organization of the two Churches in terms of Patriarchates, while adapting it a bit to the context of a reunified large Church. Both the Selucian and Theognosian churches have their Patriarchs, and I think they should to a large extent be maintained.

So from what I gather, the Selucian Church has the following Patriarchates:

Patriarch of Auroria
---Most bishops
Patriarch of Dovani
---Indrala, Hulstria & Gao-Soto, Dankuk
Patriarch of Pontesi
---Pontesi, Barmenia
Patriarch of Cildania
---Cildania
Patriarch of Kalistan
---Kalistan
Patriarch of Keymon
---Keymon

While the Theognosian Church has the following structure:

Patriarch of Rildanor
---Rildanor and Sekowo
Patriarch of Kanjor
Patriarch of Alduria
Patriarch of Lourenne
Patriarch of Quanzar
---Solentia, Istalia, Kalopia, and maybe Kafuristan
* I don't know where Darnussia and Tukarali fit in this

So I suggest the following hierarchy for the new church:

ArchPatriarch in Auroria (or whatever we call him)
----Majority of bishops (both of Selucian and other rites)
--Patriarch of Canrille
----Canrillaise Bishops (all of the Theognosian Church outside Majatra)
--Patriarch of Quanzar
---- Solentian, Istalian, and Kafuri bishops
--Patriarch of Kalopia/Augusta?
----Kalopian bishops and Augustan-Rite bishops in Zardugal, Cobura, and Vanuku (so a merger of current TC and SPC hierarchies that are likely to use the Byzantine Rite)
--Patriarch of Pontesi
---Pontesian, Barmenian, and Cildanian bishops, as well as Coburan-Rite bishops in Zardugal and Cobura (basically the SPC's Eastern Rite churches, which are already autonomous under two Patriarchs)

Notes

1. As Zanz pointed out, "Quanzar" is the historical name for "South Majatra". Although that name has often been used by anti-Istalian players, it is not in itself a politically charged term, nor an alternate term for Istalia. Solentia and Istalia have historically been a single subdivision within the Theognosian Church, and I see no reason in separating them. Maybe a compromise can be found; calling the sub-Church Quanzari but headquartering it in Romula?
2. I agree with egalion's argument, Kafuristan needs to be part of the above-mentioned Quanzar Church
3. The reason I argue in favour of an autonomous Augustan Patriarchate is because right now there is no clear parallel of the Byzantine/Eastern Orthodox Church. The TPC is heavily Slavicized, even in Zardugal (the core of the Augustan Empire), while the Apostolic Church of the East, originally intended to group all Eastern Rite Churches, is now pretty much just Oriental Orthodox + Nestorian Churches. As previous players in Kalopia have proven, they tend to assume that that nation's presence in the TC makes it Latin-Rite Roman Catholic, which is not the case. Creating that Patriarchate also has the RP advantage of challenging the legitimacy of the TPC, which sees itself as the sole heir of the historical Augustan Church.
4. The SPC is indeed officially named the Holy Apostolic Hosian Church, and I think that is in fact the case with the TPC and TC as well. I would not be in favour of calling the new Church SPC, as that would imply that the Theognosians were absorbed into the Selucian Church. Calling it Aurorian in colloquial parlance and the Holy Apostolic Hosian Church officially is probably the best way to do it.
5. The Patriarchates of Dovani, Keymon, and Kalistan should be abolished IMO. The SPC has been declining heavily in Dovani with the resurgence of Gao-Showa-oriented regimes, and the continent is no longer a stronghold of Patriarchal Hosianism as it once was. Keymon and Kalistan have their patriarchs as a result of bilateral deals with players in the two nations, who would have gone with Episcopalian churches instead. While I am all for merging smaller churches into large ones, I don't think a small island ought to have more church autonomy than Churches in large nations. If Egelion does not have its own Patriarchate, why should Keymon?
6. The SPC would indeed not want to give up full control over Churches it already has, but as I pointed out above, the Pontesian, Barmenian, and Cildanian churches already have autonomy, and I suggest they should have a single Patriarch instead of two, while also bringing the Alexandrian-Rite churches in Zardugal and Cobura under his rule.

[Antani Sfini]

OOC: All your comments are very important, thank you very much. Regarding the Patriarchate Istalia / Solentia, our people would be really irritated to continue to call themselves "Quanzar" because that name is by now associated with the dictators who have taken away rights and democracy. The solution to call our Church as "Quanzarian" would have my opposition.
The solution I propose is to egalion: have two patriarchs, one for Istalia and another for Solentia:

HIERARCHY
ArchPatriarch in Auroria (or whatever we call him)
----Majority of bishops (both of Selucian and other rites)
--Patriarch of Canrille
----Canrillese Bishops
--Patriarch of Solentia
---- Solentian and kafuri bishops
--Patriarch of Istalia
---- Istalian Bishops
--Other Patriarchs that make RP sense,

[Polites]

OOC: All your comments are very important, thank you very much. Regarding the Patriarchate Istalia / Solentia, our people would be really irritated to continue to call themselves "Quanzar" because that name is by now associated with the dictators who have taken away rights and democracy. The solution to call our Church as "Quanzarian" would have my opposition.
The solution I propose is to egalion: have two patriarchs, one for Istalia and another for Solentia

OOC: What if we have a single Patriarch for both, but instead of calling the church "Quanzari" its official name is "Patriarch of Istalia and Solentia"?

[Kubrick]

OOC: What if you simply agree to call it the Patriarch of Solentia, Istalia and Quanzar. Whoever identifies as what can fit in that category, even if the two nation names are essentially the same. Quanzar is still the 'historical' name of that part of Majatra and the Church is, from my experience, always hard on tradition.

As for Kalopia/Zardugal/Vanuku/etc. the Patriarchy of Augusta sounds best, especially since the Augustans controlled so much back then, they would be the 'religious center' in that area I'd say.

[egalion]

Archbishop weighs on the Quanzar-debate


Cardinal Monterrey-Diaz de Tolemar has expressed his opinion regarding the Quaranzan debate. In the background, the temporary structures around the Empyrean Temple that host the council.

Today, during a general meeting in the Empyrean Temple, Cardinal Monterrey-Diaz de Tolemar from Egelion has voiced his thoughts on the ongion debate over the Patriarchy of Quanzar. The prelate, who has served many years in church diplomacy, is regarded as one of the key figures in the dialogue between the Istalian and the Solentian delegations. The use of the Patriarchy of Quanzar, that for long time has been established in the Theognosian Church, always has upset Istalians. Under Canrillese rule Istalians bishops had to comply with the formulation, but the recent election of Gregorio and the Council have given the chance to Istalians to voice their dissent.

The words of Cardinal Monterrey-Diaz:

Brothers in the faith, let us rejoice in the gift of unity, that indeed is a gift of Elyon. For too many years faithful of Istalia and Solentia have lacked to find a true unity in the Church because of divisions of ethnic and historical significance. Let us not precipitate again in petty discussions and let us embrace the renewing power of the Spirit of Elyon.
To the delegates of Solentia I say to be careful and respectful of their brothers in faith in Istalia, especially in such a delicate and meaningful moment as the Council. To the reverend Gregorio and the Istalian Church I say to learn to put the past behind us and look to the future with joy and hope, without being overly concerned with petty problems and names.
Lastly, as to the creation of a unique Patriarchy for the two countries. I welcome the idea with great joy and I sincerely hope that it will be possible. Alas, we also have to be open to the possibility that the differences between these two communities may need the creation of two separate Patriarchies.

OOC: I like that there is genuine discussion, it creates RP! Personally, I like either proposals, both the creation of one Patriarchy or two. I believe that if indeed there are too many differences, it might just make RP sense to make 2. If it was one, depending if the current Patriarch is Istalian or SOlentian, half of the church would be resentful, and that's not good.

Additionally, Polites, I agree with most of what you said. Here is one thing tho: Autonomy doesn't necessarily come from dimension of the church of ethnical background, just for historic reason. Catholic churches in Brazil and USA for example are Latin rite and under the pope despite being extra-European and huge. Very small churches like the Greco-orthodox catholic church instead are Catholic but autonomous, it all depends on history. RP Dovani for example IMO, should be Selucian and not independent because it was colonized by Egelion. I agree for the necessity of an Augustan Patriarch; I'm still undecided for Pontesi, since it was religiously colonized by Selucians directly.

[Polites]

Scriba Valentinianus on Quanzar-Istalia Dispute



Responding to the ongoing debate on the fate of the old Quanzar Patriarchy within the new Church, Scriba Valentinianus issued the following comment:

Brothers in Spirit, the seemingly imminent union of our hitherto separate flocks has brought great joy to our hearts. As the great wound in the Church is to get healed, it is time to move away from petty divisions and quarrels that have nothing to do with matters of the faith. The issue of the old Quanzar Patriarchate is of great concern for the See of Saint Michael, and we offer our sincere hope that it will not affect the creation of a single orthodox Church on Terra. It seems to us that Solentia objects to the Patriarchy not including "Quanzar" in its name and to the separation of Istalia from under the joint Patriarchate, while Istalia is strongly opposed to the name "Quanzar", which rightfully reminds them of anti-Istalian dictatorial regimes in their nation. I therefore suggest a compromise solution. Some members at the Council already brought forth the suggestion that the Patriarch be called "of Istalia, Solentia, and Quanzar". Is that solution acceptable to the Istalian and Solentian delegations? Alternatively, if I may suggest that the Patriarchy be divided in two, one "Patriarchy of Istalia" and one "Patriarchy of Solentia and Quanzar". That way neither the supremacy of one ethnic group over the other is recognized, nor does the Church turn its back to centuries of tradition.

OOC: I confess I am not familiar with the history of the SPC in Pontesi, but from what I can tell the Church there, in spite of its association with Selucian nationalism and the Crimson Crusade, does seem to follow the Hobrazian/Armenian Rite and is also very friendly towards the Nrkteks/Arev Mardik, the equivalent of Armenians. That is, I know, not good enough grounds for autonomy, but I notice that the Pontesian Church often expresses some degree of independence towards Auroria. Also, bringing most of the Eastern Rites under a Pontesian Patriarch could parallel the IC history of those Rites; the Patriarchal Church (ER) was introduced in the South by Barmenian missionaries and in opposition to the Aurorian-oriented Augustan Church (see here), and within the SPC Barmenia is hierarchically subordinate to Pontesi. So if an Augustan Patriarchate is to be established over Kalopia, Zardugal, and Cobura, the SPC faithful in those nations that follow the Coburan/Alexandrian Rite would not want to submit to it or even directly to Auroria, for historical reasons. Which is why I suggest the creation of a single non-Byzantine Eastern Rite Patriarchate within the new Church, and since Pontesi already has that role (shared with Cildania), I'd say it should keep it, while abolishing the Cildanian Patriarchate (which was never to any extent RPd anyway).

As to Keymon, well I wouldn't mind it keeping its Patriarchate if it really wants to, but I think we shouldn't have too many Patriarchs in the new Church. We are, after all, abolishing the separate Patriarchates of the Theognosian Church and merging them into a single Canrillaise Patriarchate + the now disputed Solentian/Istalian/Quanzari one, so why not do the same for the SPC Patriarchates that don't have any RP relevance.