Sanguis Astroism

[Meneldur]

Constantine has long been an advocate of greater ecclesiastical authority, though in the past it's been a secondary concern to Allison's shenanigans. Constantine still sees himself as a theocrat on an extended missionary trip, which is why he still favors the theocratic system, though I don't know how many even remember his time in Astrum.

IMO the movement of power away from the theocracies is very much the doing of the theocracies themselves. In the past prominent theocrats, often rulers, were also very prominent Elders which prevented the council from acting against theocratic interests, allowing them to get away with the very things that would now earn condemnation (like Bustorsenzio harboring Bowie). The new generation of theocratic leaders however seem to have taken this for granted and shown little interest in church politics leading to the current situation of a nearly entirely non-theocratic Elders Council that has much to gain but little to lose in extending it's power over the theocracies. If the rulers of the theocracies take more interest in the church, perhaps even have their nobles vote in blocs during Consul elections, we could see quite a reversal in this trend.

[Chenier]

Constantine has long been an advocate of greater ecclesiastical authority, though in the past it's been a secondary concern to Allison's shenanigans. Constantine still sees himself as a theocrat on an extended missionary trip, which is why he still favors the theocratic system, though I don't know how many even remember his time in Astrum.

IMO the movement of power away from the theocracies is very much the doing of the theocracies themselves. In the past prominent theocrats, often rulers, were also very prominent Elders which prevented the council from acting against theocratic interests, allowing them to get away with the very things that would now earn condemnation (like Bustorsenzio harboring Bowie). The new generation of theocratic leaders however seem to have taken this for granted and shown little interest in church politics leading to the current situation of a nearly entirely non-theocratic Elders Council that has much to gain but little to lose in extending it's power over the theocracies. If the rulers of the theocracies take more interest in the church, perhaps even have their nobles vote in blocs during Consul elections, we could see quite a reversal in this trend.

Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies, but now that they stopped caring as much, the non-theocracies want to use the church to vassalize the theocracies.

[Meneldur]

Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies, but now that they stopped caring as much, the non-theocracies want to use the church to vassalize the theocracies.

I wouldn't say that- I would say the current situation is more about the Elders Council desiring to subordinate the theocracies to themselves rather than to their realms. Constantine often acts against D'Haran official policy for example and apart from perhaps Hireshmont and Jonsu there is considerably less "fighting for the realm"  from non-theocratic Elders than we used to get from the theocratic ones,

[Indirik]

Indeed. Theocracies wanted to use the church to vassalize the non-theocracies...

OK, that's simply wrong. No one ever tried to do that using the church. That never happened.

[Lefanis]

All in all, Theocracies have lost a lot of their power in the church over the years.   Would be nice to see them get some of it back rather than being shackled even more.

Exactly why some want theocracies to have it, and not republics 

[Gustav Kuriga]

OK, that's simply wrong. No one ever tried to do that using the church. That never happened.

You've evidently never seen it from the Farronite Republic side of things... god forbid we create our own realm after Allison's "Theocracy" imploded when she left...

[Lefanis]

You've evidently never seen it from the Farronite Republic side of things... god forbid we create our own realm after Allison's "Theocracy" imploded when she left...

Forming Farronite as a republic was basically spitting in the face of the church. If they didn't want people in the church reacting badly to that, they should've formed as a theocracy. Now they should deal with the consequences, and expect angry reactions when they demand to benefit from privileges given to the theocracies. It doesn't help that they tried to lead their armies against faithful to usurp a city for a heathen, and again were seen to be consorting with multiple enemes of the church.

Ironic that when everyone wanted Farronite to be the newest theocracy, they went republican, and now that they're a republic, they yearn to be recognised as a theocracy. If they'd been a theocracy from the get go, they'd have everything they wanted- a cushy seat on the elder council, their fancy republican titles, and their voting system.

[Indirik]

No on ever attempted to "vassalize" FR, in any way, shape, or form. Many people took extreme offense to the way FR flipped off the entire church by becoming a republic, with no warning at all. The backlash you got was entirely predictable to anyone who knows how the church works. If you had ever bothered to ask the church, the entire episode could have been avoided.

[Dishman]

Forming Farronite as a republic was basically spitting in the face of the church. If they didn't want people in the church reacting badly to that, they should've formed as a theocracy. Now they should deal with the consequences, and expect angry reactions when they demand to benefit from privileges given to the theocracies. It doesn't help that they tried to lead their armies against faithful to usurp a city for a heathen, and again were seen to be consorting with multiple enemes of the church.

Ironic that when everyone wanted Farronite to be the newest theocracy, they went republican, and now that they're a republic, they yearn to be recognised as a theocracy. If they'd been a theocracy from the get go, they'd have everything they wanted- a cushy seat on the elder council, their fancy republican titles, and their voting system.

See, this is the type of stuff I've been wanting to steer the church away. Granted, a few benefits should be reserved to theocracies, but they should be awarded based on merit. Having a republic devoted to SA is as useful to having a theocracy, it is the responsibility of the theocracy to show they are more involved (and a better investment) than the republic (as a theocracy should entail).

The issue with Farronite marching against the faithful (Sevastian) was a secular issue which was immediately quashed by the church. More faithful supported the use of Farronite forces than the amount of heathens who were involved. It left the faithful in Swordfell feeling ostracized and limited. This was before he was Consul or priest, so I could understand involvement now but now then. Granted, I appreciate the inter-politics of SA, but it seems toxic to the church.

Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), and to allow those who are involved in SA freedom. Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow. I'd still prefer to see SA as a third party to be called upon for faithful realms as a guaranteer rather than a ruler of nations. Too much micromanagement seems to be hurting the faith. 

[Indirik]

See, this is the type of stuff I've been wanting to steer the church away. Granted, a few benefits should be reserved to theocracies, but they should be awarded based on merit. Having a republic devoted to SA is as useful to having a theocracy, it is the responsibility of the theocracy to show they are more involved (and a better investment) than the republic (as a theocracy should entail).

The problem with a "faithful republic" is the with the frequent changes in ruler, it is entirely too possible for the realm to end up with a non-SA ruler. Realm laws such as "only an SA member can be ruler" are just words, and really have little or no power. And once the ruler is non-SA, the realm is no longer a "faithful republic". You'll end up with someone like Bowie in charge, who will backstab the church the instant it becomes advantageous to him, and he thinks he can get away with it.

Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), and to allow those who are involved in SA freedom. Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow.

That's not really the way of the church. Conversion by conquest doesn't work, unless someone stands up and puts on the red shirt. Then all bets are off.

I'd still prefer to see SA as a third party to be called upon for faithful realms as a guaranteer rather than a ruler of nations. Too much micromanagement seems to be hurting the faith.

SA doesn't rule realms. If you think it does, then you have a deeply rooted, fundamental misunderstanding of how the church works.

[Perth]

This conversation makes me want to join SA.

[vonGenf]

Enoch is pushing to see the church unite against the other (heathens), (...) Those who have not converted should feel the wrath and angry attention of the church...not those who follow.

So, what you really mean is "Death to Bowie!"? That's a program I could rally behind! 

[Stabbity]

Creed wasn't just a heathen. He's a known heretic. Its not toxic to prevent your enemies from marching an army on your own. Its common sense.

As for this Farronite "we want all the privelleges of a theocracy" stuff. If the Farronites, I don't know... Listened to the Church without having to make an ordeal out of it every time. The difference between the theocracies and the Farronites is this:

Prophet: Don't put your hand on the stove its hot.

Theocracies: Okay.

Farronite Republic: I'm gonna put my face on it!!!!

Elders: Hey, don't do it man, its a bad idea.

FR: You're not our Dad!

Elders: Listen mister, keep this up and you're grounded.

FR: NO!

Elders: Alright then you and D'hara can't have your sleep over then...
 

FR: Come on...

Elders: Get away from there now...

FR: Okay...

[Chenier]

The problem with a "faithful republic" is the with the frequent changes in ruler, it is entirely too possible for the realm to end up with a non-SA ruler. Realm laws such as "only an SA member can be ruler" are just words, and really have little or no power. And once the ruler is non-SA, the realm is no longer a "faithful republic". You'll end up with someone like Bowie in charge, who will backstab the church the instant it becomes advantageous to him, and he thinks he can get away with it.

That applies to everything, and everyone. Elections do happen in theocracies as well. If not every month, when the ruler needs replacement. And having that government system in no way binds elected rulers to do anything in particular. Nor does it prevent faithful rulers from going rogue. Morek had non-faithful government members, after all, that very same Bowie you seem to dread.

The ruler is really often mostly a figurehead, you give too much importance to rotation of power in republics. Most republics just elect the same guys over and over and over and over anyways.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Creed wasn't just a heathen. He's a known heretic. Its not toxic to prevent your enemies from marching an army on your own. Its common sense.

As for this Farronite "we want all the privelleges of a theocracy" stuff. If the Farronites, I don't know... Listened to the Church without having to make an ordeal out of it every time. The difference between the theocracies and the Farronites is this:

Prophet: Don't put your hand on the stove its hot.

Theocracies: Okay.

Farronite Republic: I'm gonna put my face on it!!!!

Elders: Hey, don't do it man, its a bad idea.

FR: You're not our Dad!

Elders: Listen mister, keep this up and you're grounded.

FR: NO!

Elders: Alright then you and D'hara can't have your sleep over then...
 

FR: Come on...

Elders: Get away from there now...

FR: Okay...

Ok, now you're just being a dick. Furthermore, we don't want the "privileges" of a theocracy. Khari might or might not, I don't know, but Gustav and the rest of the realm sure as hell doesn't. "Oh god, that realm's a republic, JUST LIKE TERRAN AND D'HARA. It's truly spitting in our faces that they have a government type like other realms!" Hypocrisy much? What right do you have to tell us what secular decisions we should make? Swordfell I can understand, but being a Republic is suddenly bad? I could understand if the argument WAS that we had an elected ruler IF other theocracies didn't already have that. Instead the argument that is spouted most is "They aren't a theocracy."

Perhaps I'm just venting my anger about what happened in Boston towards this, and if so, I'm sorry, but I'm really, really not in the mood for !@#$ for brains idiocy like I quoted above from Stabbity.