post-war governance of the Temple Lands

The difficulty with this, going forward, would be to demonstrate that the Writ was modified after the WarATF - after, IOW, Langhorne's departure. To be generally accepted as a basis for discussion, that demonstration will have to be from a source clearly independent of Charis. Preferably, the depths of the Temple Library, but there might be one or two other locales where one is preserved

Once that hurdle is crossed, the debate becomes whether the Archangels were overzealous in their attempt to protect man from the consequences of the Fall, or whether _God_ decided that, as a consequence of the Fall, man had to be kept on the straight and narrow willy-nilly. Which simply means that the existing Staynairite-Clyntahnite debate will continue with a textual basis. And that leaves me wondering where the Clyntahnite hold-outs will be taking refuge when the Fleet sets off to smite the Gbaba.

Tonto Silerheels wrote:PeterZ wrote:

Indeed it is possible that the God of the Writ does want man to be coerced...logically anyway. Whether this coincides with or is contradicted by what else is written in the Writ is for RFC to say.

I agree.

It is however, easier for the layman to believe that God prefers willing obedience rather than compulsion. That preference of God's would then create a hierarchy of values to argue for a given position pending the great reveal.

I agree.

Yet the point is not really to present an unassailable argument but to create a forum where the fundamental values of the Writ atre discussed openly in this fashion.

I see.

The method to separate the secular from the sacred is simple. Engage in these discussions and undermine the perception that CoGA interpretation of doctrine is the catholic one. It may be the correct one but it is not the universal one. These sorts of logical exercises are but one of the many simple but difficult ways in which Safeholdians will define what is sacred and what is secular about the religion they give their faith to.

I agree. On balance I would have to say that God's grant of free will to man provides strong evidence that God doesn't want the Church of God Awaiting to be coercive, depending, as you say, on what else is in the writ.

~Tonto

I thought it was Church canon that the Archangels added books to the Writ after the Fall of Shan-Wei. Am I misremembering?

I think you could make a case that God prefers free obedience, hence free will, but uses the church as his agent to protect the faithful from the fallout and bad example of those who want to live way off base, hence coercion is both legitimate and required. The authorisation for this was clarified when it became especially necessary after Shan Wei rebelled and her tempting influence began to have an effect on the behaviour of the faithful. So the additional books are not a failure of original omniscience but are added ex eventu (from the human POV) when required. That is, the Fall fundamentally changes spiritual conditions on Safehold so new revelation facilitates dealing with it.

Avocatus Diaboli

It is too bad we can't actually study the Writ. As it is, we are discussing the teachings of a book we've never read. The result is that even more than normal, we bring who we are along with own biases to the discussion.

As for the Temple Lands, I think that, as Randomizer said, it's going to get really messy. Will there be an allowed church there other than the COGA? If you leave the COGA in place as a governing authority, that inevitably leads to the COGA collecting taxes to pay for the essential services that societies normally provide. If you do have an allowed church other than the COGA, that means that you have people financially supporting a church with which they disagree. That means that nothing has really changed at all in the Temple Lands.

Back to my first paragraph, my own biases prejudice me against that. Too many people came to America to escape the oppression of state churches in Europe for me to see it any other way... Just what is it about the history of the COGA that could pursuade us that she wouldn't oppress, given even the slightest opportunity?

I understand the church's strong role in governance in the past, esp. in the Temple Lands. I know it's going to be difficult. But I still think that a separate governing structure is needed to collect taxes and administer those functions of society that all citizens need and benefit from. Then the COGA would have its own structure and would do those things together that its membership would be willing to voluntarily support.

Don

n7axw wrote:It is too bad we can't actually study the Writ. As it is, we are discussing the teachings of a book we've never read. The result is that even more than normal, we bring who we are along with own biases to the discussion.

As for the Temple Lands, I think that, as Randomizer said, it's going to get really messy. Will there be an allowed church there other than the COGA? If you leave the COGA in place as a governing authority, that inevitably leads to the COGA collecting taxes to pay for the essential services that societies normally provide. If you do have an allowed church other than the COGA, that means that you have people financially supporting a church with which they disagree. That means that nothing has really changed at all in the Temple Lands.

Back to my first paragraph, my own biases prejudice me against that. Too many people came to America to escape the oppression of state churches in Europe for me to see it any other way... Just what is it about the history of the COGA that could pursuade us that she wouldn't oppress, given even the slightest opportunity?

I understand the church's strong role in governance in the past, esp. in the Temple Lands. I know it's going to be difficult. But I still think that a separate governing structure is needed to collect taxes and administer those functions of society that all citizens need and benefit from. Then the COGA would have its own structure and would do those things together that its membership would be willing to voluntarily support.

Don

Safehold's traditionally had the Church to provide social services (take it broadly enough to include cartography, farming advice, plumbing help, and lotteries, please) and "conscience services", helping you get right with God as revealed unto Safehold by His Archangel Langhorne. (And a lot of banking services too, but those aren't crucial here.) In addition, secular governments have been doing most "force services", keeping control over the use of violence by (approximately) monopolizing it and punishing unauthorized use, under the auspices and with the permission of the Church.

On Earth, we've had governments for force services and (varying amounts of) social services, and churches (and parents, neighbors, advice columnists, etc.) for conscience services or their counterparts, at least in the rough layout we've gotten around to since the Enlightenment. And most of us like it, if we zoom out this far and squint and avoid the politics forums for messy details. Mixing force and conscience services works out poorly - we lose all sorts of take-it-or-leave-it we like with our conscience services when the preachers have guns and the authority to use them, and the force services folk suffer/inflict a lot of mission creep when controlling what people think is on their plate.

Charis still has Safehold's basic division of services, but (1) the secular government isn't taking its license from Zion at least, (2) the national church and national government are working on a more equal basis but also with a bit more distinction of spheres than elsewhere on Safehold, (3) force is off the table for conscience services - they're really free to be conscience services rather than orders under the Church of Charis, and (4) it may be that the split between the Church of Charis and the Temple Loyalists there is more pronounced among the conscience services elements than the public services one. I doubt anyone has to be sure their Pasqualate healer belongs to the Church of Charis or is a Temple Loyalist the way it will matter where you go to hear a sermon on Wednesday. (It's a guess, I could be wrong, I welcome correction, but it's the impression I've had and haven't come across anything contrary.)

You've still got taxes going to the government and tithes to the Church there, and authority flowing from both of them. (Well - arguably, the authority of the state is still derived from the national Church, but that seems to be taken more pro forma rather than as a tight leash that may be tugged at any time.) It's not the spread of functions we've had on Earth, but it's working decently in the Empire, with a whole lot of prep-work, good-will (even out of the Temple Loyalists, really!), and inside information on both the Church and state sides. Maybe the easiest way of getting Safehold to some sort of arrangement that gets people what they need and minimizes abuses is moving to something like Charis' model - even if it still makes some of us itchy - but it's a huge step for the most open-minded but sincerely faithful sorts on the mainland.

We should expect messiness.

On this business of the EOC and Siddarmark playing conquistidore for reasons other than self defense, I would remind us that armies and occupations are expensive, esp. for the occupier. Unless there are compelling security interests for doing so, it's usually a bad idea.

As for the EOC, the empire has already reached its natural boundaries according to no less of personage than Earl Grey Harbor. There is no compelling interest at all in any sort of military presence on the mainland once the power of the church is broken. Her primary security interest lies in continuing to rule the waves with her navy.

Siddarmark, on the other hand, has a very strong interest in controlling that neck of ground between Howard and the Havens. My own thought is that given both Silkiah's and Siddarmark's common interests in commerce and finance, along with both side's interests in making sure Desnair stays put in Howard, it could be in everybody's interest for Silkiah to join Siddarmark (voluntarily, not by conquest). But one way or the other Siddarmark needs control of that area between the mountains and the Salthar Canal to prevent further Desnarian adventurism. At minimum, Siddarmark needs a friendly agreement with Silkiah allowing her to garrison the neck.

As for Dohlar, that would be hostile country which neither the EOC or Siddarmark should try to occupy. Dohlar has to be gotten out of the war, but after that, best to make nice with some favorable trade agreements and perhaps some defensive treaties to protect her against more powerful and potentially hostile neighbors.

Don

JeffEngel wrote:

n7axw wrote:It is too bad we can't actually study the Writ. As it is, we are discussing the teachings of a book we've never read. The result is that even more than normal, we bring who we are along with own biases to the discussion.

As for the Temple Lands, I think that, as Randomizer said, it's going to get really messy. Will there be an allowed church there other than the COGA? If you leave the COGA in place as a governing authority, that inevitably leads to the COGA collecting taxes to pay for the essential services that societies normally provide. If you do have an allowed church other than the COGA, that means that you have people financially supporting a church with which they disagree. That means that nothing has really changed at all in the Temple Lands.

Back to my first paragraph, my own biases prejudice me against that. Too many people came to America to escape the oppression of state churches in Europe for me to see it any other way... Just what is it about the history of the COGA that could pursuade us that she wouldn't oppress, given even the slightest opportunity?

I understand the church's strong role in governance in the past, esp. in the Temple Lands. I know it's going to be difficult. But I still think that a separate governing structure is needed to collect taxes and administer those functions of society that all citizens need and benefit from. Then the COGA would have its own structure and would do those things together that its membership would be willing to voluntarily support.

Don

Safehold's traditionally had the Church to provide social services (take it broadly enough to include cartography, farming advice, plumbing help, and lotteries, please) and "conscience services", helping you get right with God as revealed unto Safehold by His Archangel Langhorne. (And a lot of banking services too, but those aren't crucial here.) In addition, secular governments have been doing most "force services", keeping control over the use of violence by (approximately) monopolizing it and punishing unauthorized use, under the auspices and with the permission of the Church.

On Earth, we've had governments for force services and (varying amounts of) social services, and churches (and parents, neighbors, advice columnists, etc.) for conscience services or their counterparts, at least in the rough layout we've gotten around to since the Enlightenment. And most of us like it, if we zoom out this far and squint and avoid the politics forums for messy details. Mixing force and conscience services works out poorly - we lose all sorts of take-it-or-leave-it we like with our conscience services when the preachers have guns and the authority to use them, and the force services folk suffer/inflict a lot of mission creep when controlling what people think is on their plate.

Charis still has Safehold's basic division of services, but (1) the secular government isn't taking its license from Zion at least, (2) the national church and national government are working on a more equal basis but also with a bit more distinction of spheres than elsewhere on Safehold, (3) force is off the table for conscience services - they're really free to be conscience services rather than orders under the Church of Charis, and (4) it may be that the split between the Church of Charis and the Temple Loyalists there is more pronounced among the conscience services elements than the public services one. I doubt anyone has to be sure their Pasqualate healer belongs to the Church of Charis or is a Temple Loyalist the way it will matter where you go to hear a sermon on Wednesday. (It's a guess, I could be wrong, I welcome correction, but it's the impression I've had and haven't come across anything contrary.)

You've still got taxes going to the government and tithes to the Church there, and authority flowing from both of them. (Well - arguably, the authority of the state is still derived from the national Church, but that seems to be taken more pro forma rather than as a tight leash that may be tugged at any time.) It's not the spread of functions we've had on Earth, but it's working decently in the Empire, with a whole lot of prep-work, good-will (even out of the Temple Loyalists, really!), and inside information on both the Church and state sides. Maybe the easiest way of getting Safehold to some sort of arrangement that gets people what they need and minimizes abuses is moving to something like Charis' model - even if it still makes some of us itchy - but it's a huge step for the most open-minded but sincerely faithful sorts on the mainland.

We should expect messiness.

Yes, church and state are working together in Charis. I think that it is a less than ideal situation over the long term. But for now it works, the way greased by survival needs and good will on both sides.

But where are you going to find a reliable partner for any newly emerging state to work with in the Temple Lands? Given the reality that you are going to be dealing with the COGA, unless you separate the church as completely as possible from political governance it won't work. Otherwise you'd just as well hand the reins of political power back to the church and wouldn't that be just hunky dory...

Don

Don
The balance between the power of the state and the church is one of the major issues the series is addressing of course. As you realise your reaction is very grounded in the USA take on that. However 'if you step back and kinda squint' a lot of the secular countries we have, including the largest ones, seem not to be doing very well on human rights, restricting coercion, good government and service provision. On top of that the omnicompetent Enlightenment state seems to have the tendency to drive religion to the margins of life and out of the public forum, which is not a situation most believers conceive of as being God's will.

On Safehold the whole history, culture and experience is of Big Church and Small Government, they will find it hard to conceive of anything else far less why it should be such a great idea. I don't think Small Church and Big Government is really likely anytime soon. (I suspect lots of the folks around here aren't too keen on Big Government either )

Lots of the people who provide 'social' services as defined by Jeff, certainly the higher up and more skilled, do so as part of their holy vocation to serve God and his people. Why would they want to work for some Gummint run by know nothing aristocrats/plutocrats who will only interfere to promote their own interests?

On funding, Germany collects church taxes according to people's membership and distributes them to the appropriate churches; Safehold governments could do the same. On the Temple Lands, we have yet to see how the population will jump if there is a big upheaval in Zion. But if they do turn out to be solidly TL then the Alliance just doesn't have the manpower or money to maintain a permanent garrison to keep them out of CoGA control and would, moreover, be violating their right to choose their religion if they tried.

In the interim before the Big Reveal social systems which continue to reflect the Safeholders deep respect for God and universal faith have a lot more chance of working than ones that reflect our Enlightenment biased values.

Randomiser wrote:On Safehold the whole history, culture and experience is of Big Church and Small Government, ...

Actually, I think that would be closer to "Big Church AS Government" -- especially in the Temple Lands.

The further one gets from Zion, the less that's true, but Government has largely been subservient to the Church to the point that it is virtually a subsection of the Church.

Charis and Siddarmark have been the glaring exceptions to that generality and thus the targets of CoGA/Go4 attacks. Chisholm, Corisande and Emerald were lesser exceptions.

In the Temple Lands, there has been direct rule by Vicars of the CoGA, and virtually zero secular government. There is no practical way to change that state of affairs by fiat/conquest, so the best that can be accomplished is to force a choice: Vicar or Knight, one or the other, but not both. Take an oath of fealty from the succeeding Knight and monitor events for treachery.

Weird Harold wrote:

Randomiser wrote:On Safehold the whole history, culture and experience is of Big Church and Small Government, ...

Actually, I think that would be closer to "Big Church AS Government" -- especially in the Temple Lands.

The further one gets from Zion, the less that's true, but Government has largely been subservient to the Church to the point that it is virtually a subsection of the Church.

Charis and Siddarmark have been the glaring exceptions to that generality and thus the targets of CoGA/Go4 attacks. Chisholm, Corisande and Emerald were lesser exceptions.

In the Temple Lands, there has been direct rule by Vicars of the CoGA, and virtually zero secular government. There is no practical way to change that state of affairs by fiat/conquest, so the best that can be accomplished is to force a choice: Vicar or Knight, one or the other, but not both. Take an oath of fealty from the succeeding Knight and monitor events for treachery.

Actually, this is about as close as I've seen so far to an answer to the question we have been discussing.

What the rest of you guys seem to be coming up with seems to me like saying that since the chickens seem to be accustomed to the fox in the coop, once we've cornered and neutralized the fox, we should very politely put the fox in the coop and apologize to the chickens for disturbing the foxes normal routine of devouring chickens!

Randomizer, you keep comparing the situation with European churches who no matter how powerful they were at one time never had the reins of power to themselves. Ever at the very height of her secular power, the church always had a rival seat of power to deal with in the state, expressed in its various levels and forms That's very different situation from Safehold where the church reigned supreme with no check on her power.

I don't think that you can consider the COGA's political power broken as long as she is allowed anywhere near the reins of secular power. I recognize the difficulties you guys are stating. But assuming it turns out your way, where are the checks and balances that prevent the COGA from arranging a repeat act up the road?

Don