When will we get a revised writ? (Spoilers)

Archbishop Staynair has set aside the book of “Schuler”, though Clyntahn is very fond of it, and both sides have danced around the proscriptions of Jwo Jeng. EOC and COC (Church of Charis) are in a brutal holy war with the COZ (Church of Zion) but the propaganda war for the hearts and minds of Safeholds citizens is also very important. EOC should not refer to its Church as Church of Charis but something like the True Church or Church of God and the other church as the Gang of Four Church or better yet the Church of Clyntahn.

At some point, all the citizens of Safehold are going to have to be told the truth but to reduce fanatical opposition and the numbers of Temple Loyalists this will have to be a gradual process. All their lives they have been told that the ArchAngels and God created the world. Langhorne has been elevated to a Christ like figure, complete with martyrdom in the war against the fallen, while Shan-Wei is the very devil and all who fought on her side were arch demons. The first step in this process has been the exposure of the corruption in the Zion church. A good next step would be the introduction of a new Holy Writ. Whether or not it should just be the same writ with the worst parts removed or should include parts of the original writ stored in Nimues cave or some parts of other holy texts or the documents of St. Jherneau or the SSK is an open question in my mind.

I would very much like to read a scene of Maikel Staynair standing solemnly at the pulpit on Gods day, opening a jewel encrusted copy of the Holy Writ and ripping out the pages of the books of Schuler and Jwo Jeng and the fiery sermon which follows, lol. That would get the attention of the temple loyalists and make the reformists think seriously about just how much reform they are willing to accept.

As much fun as this would be it would also harden the opposition of the temple loyalists. Currently the Temple loyalists are slowly losing ground and people to the reformists. The extreme atrocities of the inquisition have most people convinced that at least the removal of Clyntahn and reform of the inquisition is a good idea but the Church of Safehold needs to go much further than that. The people of Safehold are deeply religious, even those that know the truth, so something must replace the current church. A new bible and a rational religious alternative, based on love and kindness, rather than brutal punishment needs to be established on Safehold and a new version of the writ is needed to accomplish this transition.

I've always thought that instead of calling itself the Church of Charis, it should have called itself the "Reformed Church of God". This make clear the distinction between them and the Church of God Awaiting (CogA).

There was a comment about that in an earlier book.

Part of the reason not to was that no matter what the Charisian Church called themselves, outsiders would call it "Church of Charis" (or worse).

fallsfromtrees wrote:I've always thought that instead of calling itself the Church of Charis, it should have called itself the "Reformed Church of God". This make clear the distinction between them and the Church of God Awaiting (CogA).

DrakBibliophile wrote:There was a comment about that in an earlier book.

Part of the reason not to was that no matter what the Charisian Church called themselves, outsiders would call it "Church of Charis" (or worse).

fallsfromtrees wrote:I've always thought that instead of calling itself the Church of Charis, it should have called itself the "Reformed Church of God". This make clear the distinction between them and the Church of God Awaiting (CogA).

Understood. I remember that from an earlier book. I still think that it was a mistake, since we are talking about reinforcing the image, and if they want the church to advance past the Empire of Charis, having a different name will help. Just as the Church of England is known as the Anglican or Episcopal Church outside of the UK.
And repeatedly calling itself the RCG will help reinforce the seperation between Charis and the church itself - leading eventually to a separation of church and state.

I remember that conversation as well, with Archbishop Klairmant, and the reasoning behind the whole Church of Charis thing. I see and understand the arguments, I just happen to disagree with the final decision of the logic. I think the situation in Siddimark argues quite strongly for going with a less Charis centric name. It was commented on by Archbishop Klairmant for exactly the same reasons in the relationship with Corisande.

It is an interesting notion though, officially cutting out the book of Schueler. What could the Go4 do? Accuse them of Heresy?

You guys are, I suspect, missing the point. Maikel was at first not disagreeing with the Writ. He was rejecting the CoGA hierarchy's authority within Charis. The name Church of Charis was chosen to emphasize that. Later doctrinal differences arose, but those differences were not the stated initial reason for the schism. Changing that name now would emphasize the youth and potential impermanence of the Church of Charis.

I suspect that the Reform Church in Siddarmark will be separate from the Church of Charis just as the Republic is separate from the Charis Empire.

IMO Archbishop Maikel isn't interested in completely replacing the main Safehold Church with his Church.

The Siddarmark Church may just call itself the Church of Siddarmark.

As for removing Books from the Writ, IMO that's a "step too far" for Safeholdians.

It's one thing to de-emphasize the Book of Schueler, but removing it (or other books) would be saying that the Archangels "make a mistake".

As others have said, Archbishop Maikel is publicly challenging the corrupt hierarchy of the main Church not "creating" a new religion.

Overtime (assuming the Return doesn't result in the revelation of the Truth), the Reform Churches could move in the direction of new religions but the leadership of Reform Churches can't go too far from what is written in the Writ.

Direwolf18 wrote:I remember that conversation as well, with Archbishop Klairmant, and the reasoning behind the whole Church of Charis thing. I see and understand the arguments, I just happen to disagree with the final decision of the logic. I think the situation in Siddimark argues quite strongly for going with a less Charis centric name. It was commented on by Archbishop Klairmant for exactly the same reasons in the relationship with Corisande.

It is an interesting notion though, officially cutting out the book of Schueler. What could the Go4 do? Accuse them of Heresy?

DrakBibliophile wrote:
As for removing Books from the Writ, IMO that's a "step too far" for Safeholdians.

It's one thing to de-emphasize the Book of Schueler, but removing it (or other books) would be saying that the Archangels "make a mistake".

The story of Shan-wei establishes right in the Writ that the archangels aren't infalible. I do think this isn't the right time for the grand gesture of tearing the book of Scheuler out of the fancy copy of the writ at the pulpit in Tellesburg Cathedral though. Too inflammatory.

Hi Drak,

I concur completely.

Maikel is being very subtle and above all rather slow in challenging the people's long held traditional beliefs.

We still don't know how the 'great reveal' will happen, but cushioning the eventual shock seems to be one of Maikel's main missions, by focusing people on their own individual relationship with god, downplaying the archangels role, etc.

I think Churches of each nation are quite possible, NTM popular with all the secular leaders who would prefer much closer consultations than the temple and vicarate in Zion who have their own agenda far different from local concerns.

That's one of the achievements Cayleb referred to with Sharleyan, that simply surviving would encourage other leaders to follow Charis's example.

Eventually the could be a Reform Church Convention [RCC] or Convocation annually or biannually, that might provide such a preferred umbrella to the CoC term.

L

DrakBibliophile wrote:I suspect that the Reform Church in Siddarmark will be separate from the Church of Charis just as the Republic is separate from the Charis Empire.

IMO Archbishop Maikel isn't interested in completely replacing the main Safehold Church with his Church.

The Siddarmark Church may just call itself the Church of Siddarmark.

As for removing Books from the Writ, IMO that's a "step too far" for Safeholdians.

It's one thing to de-emphasize the Book of Schueler, but removing it (or other books) would be saying that the Archangels "make a mistake".

As others have said, Archbishop Maikel is publicly challenging the corrupt hierarchy of the main Church not "creating" a new religion.

Overtime (assuming the Return doesn't result in the revelation of the Truth), the Reform Churches could move in the direction of new religions but the leadership of Reform Churches can't go too far from what is written in the Writ.

Direwolf18 wrote:I remember that conversation as well, with Archbishop Klairmant, and the reasoning behind the whole Church of Charis thing. I see and understand the arguments, I just happen to disagree with the final decision of the logic. I think the situation in Siddimark argues quite strongly for going with a less Charis centric name. It was commented on by Archbishop Klairmant for exactly the same reasons in the relationship with Corisande.

It is an interesting notion though, officially cutting out the book of Schueler. What could the Go4 do? Accuse them of Heresy?

I was thinking more along the line of the archbishop from Glacierheart would become the founder of a "Reform Church of Langhorn" (name changed after The Big Reveal, obviously) or something along those lines. Maybe that would just be the formal name for the Church of Siddarmark, but making it more generic might allow it to become a widespread church that focuses on temporal aspects rather than secular ones.