July 10, 2020 at 3:54 pm #38592
With authority invested by the Comitia Curiata and Comitia Centuriata, I summon the Senate of the Respublica to assemble for session XIII on XV Kal. Sext. (July 17). I will be chairing the meeting as the summoning magistrate and consul.
Auspices will be conducted by an augur P. Iunius Brutus.
The meeting will occur online at this location: http://romanrepublic.org/roma/fora/forum/governance/senate-curia/
The debate phase of the meeting will occur from July 17 until July 28.
The voting phase of the meeting will occur from July 29 to August 7.
I request that all citizens submit items for discussion for they may be considered on the agenda. Any magistrate who is not a consul or praetor will need their proposal sponsored by one of the following major magistrates first before being added to the agenda: Consul Sex. Decius Mus, Consul. Q. Furius Camillus, Praetor A. Iulius Caesar or Praetor Ti. Terentius Varro.
The current agenda as of today is displayed below.
I. Lex Hostilia – On the Sacra Publica of the modern Roman Republic –
PRESENTED BY SEX. DECIUS MUS COS.
II. Senatus Consultum – Establishing magisterial budgets for the remainder of Sex. Decio Q. Furio Cos. (2020) – PRESENTED BY SEX. DECIUS MUS COS.
III. Senatus Consultum – Establishing the modern Palladium – PRESENTED BY TI. TERENTIUS VARRO PR.
IV. Lex Terentia – Establishment of the Collegium Pontificum – PRESENTED BY TI. TERENTIUS VARRO PR.
V. Senatus Consultum – appointment or provincial governors for Sex. Decio Q. Furio Cos. (2020) –
PRESENTED BY Q. FURIUS VARRO COS.July 12, 2020 at 12:42 am #38615
Praetor Ti. Terentius,
Thank you for spearheading this first senate meeting of the year. Ti. Terentius Varro has agreed to chair the meeting. I will not be available for the full period.
I would like to add two items to the agenda.
VI. Lex Decia – Creation of a marketplace
VII. Lex Decia – Establishment of Collegia / Provincial Activity Rewards
Correction, proposal V will be presented by Consul Q. Furius CamillusJuly 15, 2020 at 5:50 pm #38726
Titus Flavius SeverusDenarii: 𐆖 1,161.20PatriciusSarmatia
Severus Sen. sal.,
I will express my humble opinion. We will again find the same mistakes, it seems the past does not teach us anything, although it would seem that the Senate should be an abode of rationality and piety.
As we all know, the initiative of Scaura has already been put up for discussion, however, it was withdrawn from consideration by the Comitia Curiata precisely because such a voluminous, important and significant document is simply impossible to consider in such a short time. In Sarmatia, it took several years to solve the theoretical problems of the Sacra Publica for the erection of the only one altar, and we just started the practical part … but our magistrates plan to solve everything in 10 days … this is a little presumptuous, as in my opinion.
Again, during the initial discussion of the Scaura initiative, I already paid attention, and again I say this here – you cannot solve such issues without the involvement of specialists. The existing Senate majority is quietly lobbying for any project, and then the document as a whole will be put forward to vote, that is, it is impossible to vote selectively for certain parts, only “yes” or “no.” I suggested and am proposing to put the discussion of this project into public discussion, and in the course of an open discussion with the involvement of specialists, begin to formulate this document, and after that submit this document in Senate, and then put it to the vote of the people to follow the procedure. This is the best solution to this problem.
Lex Terentia – Establishment of the Collegium Pontificum is certainly a good initiative, but what’s the point of considering it separately from Lex Hostilia – On the Sacra Publica of the modern Roman Republic? Sacra Publica is not just a beautiful word, it is a set of rules and principles, and it is also a system of institutions and bodies. In other words, we cannot discuss Sacra Publica without one of its key institutions – the Collegium Pontificum. In general, this lex is covered by the Scaura lex. I see the advisability of considering the Lex Terentia – Establishment of the Collegium Pontificum separately only if Lex Hostilia – On the Sacra Publica of the modern Roman Republic is put up for public discussion, then the Lex Terentia – Establishment of the Collegium Pontificum will create the legal basis for Collegium Pontificum as an expert body, until the Sacra Publica Lex is adopted, and then the current Collegium Pontificum will simply start functioning on the basis of the new law.
Senatus Consultum – Establishing the modern Palladium – with this item everything is about the same as with the previous one. As I understand it, few magistrates bother reading discussions in other institutions of the Republic, because this point is already specifically covered in the draft of Sсaura, which she published in the Comitia Curiata, and which served as the impetus for submitting her draft for consideration by this session of the Senate.
Lex Decia – Creation of a marketplace – is an interesting initiative, I hope you take into account the failure of a similar initiative in the past, and do not repeat the obvious mistakes. I would like to believe that you will attract specialists and interested people to work on this project, apply some new schemes and work approaches, otherwise, another law that is not needed by anyone will result, overloading the already inflated legal system and stillborn project.
Valete!July 16, 2020 at 7:02 am #38789
Caeso Cispius LaevusDenarii: 𐆖 842.10PlebeiusBritannia
I’m not a neopagan. I’m also not looking to be some sort of Neo-Amish cultore.
I seek to develop a community tradition that is generally acceptable to the majority of members of the community it serves. It needs to be mindful of the history. It needs to be willing to evolve the evidence towards modern needs. Otherwise, we are reenactors playing 1st-century cultores or some sort of Roman Luddite cult (which is fine, but good luck building a large international community around that premise). Bottom line, sacra publica needs to be accepted by most of the public who recognize the gods. If such a basic premise can be agreed upon and proven as such, great, we got standards for sacra publica. More strict standards are probably also not wrong. But deviating away from whatever standards are agreed upon in a new manner would probably be disqualified as sacra publica as it would not be a formula recognized by the majority of the community.
Romans were innovators. Their first altars were mounds of sod. They initially rejected all images of the gods. They took bits and pieces from all over to evolve a tradition towards the needs of the times. We are no different now. Like our forbearers, we must always remember our past and traditions. We should not sell out our history or dismiss it. But evolving the sacra publica into the present is a crucial topic. We equally must not make the focus so strictly towards history that we forget the gods. The tradition must have relevance to the community today, the people living today. Otherwise, is it sacra publica? I think not.
I support debate on this topic in the Senate. I think the people should equally debate it as the Senate deliberates. I believe the tribunes must provide such a means for such general feedback. Maybe the religious items may not be ready for a vote. But I feel this meeting is a start. A long overdue one. So let us talk sacra publica. I think the Roman Republic is phenomenally qualified to deliberate on this matter.
It should be an exciting meeting. I eagerly await the discussions.
July 16, 2020 at 7:18 pm #38804
- This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by Caeso Cispius Laevus.
Titus Flavius SeverusDenarii: 𐆖 1,161.20PatriciusSarmatia
Laevus, I understand what you are talking about, unfortunately, a significant number of citizens of the Republic think the same way. This is exactly what I’m talking about – people who consider themselves adherents of the Roman Religion have rather low knowledge of what the Roman Religion is in general, about its rules and principles. This leads to the fact that people have a wrong idea and opinion about the Roman religion. Most often this is added to the fact that people see the Roman religion through the prism of other mainstream religions, such as Christianity, because in this way gaps in knowledge are filled. This is completely wrong, since this approach is completely inconsistent with the foundations of the Roman Religion with extremely strict rules and principles.
Given the above, you need to understand that the Roman Religion itself is complex and burdensome, and the Roman Religion does not care at all whether you consider it strict, and some provisions are outdated or unnecessary. The practices of the Roman Religion were already archaic in the time of Cicero, and the content of the rituals is not entirely clear, however, it never occurred to anyone to abandon them, just to adapt the Roman Religion to the modern world of that time.
It is not at all important for the Roman Religion to attract new followers, the Roman Religion is simply a tool for reaching the Roman community (Civitas) Pax Deorum. The Roman Religion is a means of communication between the two partners Civitas and the Gods. The Roman Gods are the Gods of the Roman Civitas, this is not the religion of individuals, this is the religion of a particular Roman community – Civitas.
You, me, or millions of people may disagree with the strict requirements of the Roman Religion, we can make whatever decisions we want, changing and adapting the Roman Religion to the requirements of the modern world, however, all this will be completely insignificant, incorrect, meaningless, because we are not able to change the rigid formalism and ritualism of the Roman Religion, and if we do this, then it will already be anything, but clearly not the Roman Religion. It’s just a fact, whether you like it or not, it’s pointless to argue with it. This is obvious to anyone who understands the basic principles and rules of the Roman religion. Roman Civitas had negative consequences for the most insignificant violations of formalities and ritual, but here more significant and conscious adjustments are proposed that are completely inconceivable for Roman society.
Laevus, you write in your message “sacra publica needs to be accepted by most of the public who recognize the gods.” But Sacra Publica does not need anyone’s approval at all, and even more so from ours – modern people. Sacra Publica already exists, it is a whole system of rules, institutions, bodies, principles, etc., which were long before us. The only thing we can do is start implementing Sacra Public to achieve Pax Deorum. If someone does not want to accept Sacra Publica as it is, as we know from historical sources, then apparently the Roman Religion is not for such people. Moreover, it is not entirely clear who are “the public who recognize the gods”? Maybe I will open the eyes of many, but for the Roman Religion, by and large, it does not matter whether someone recognizes the Gods or not. The Roman Religion is not orthodoxy, it is orthopraxia, if you exaggerate. All that matters for Sacra Public is the accurate, correct and timely conduct of the rituals, the discrepancy entails the viciousness and insignificance of the sacred act, which brings negative consequences to Civitas.
Laevus, what you are talking about is simpler and more convenient, but that does not mean that this is correct. What I’m talking about is not my personal opinion, or some kind of preconceived opinion, this is just a summary of the views of academic science. We can discuss these issues endlessly, this will not change the Roman Religion. Have the Roman Gods changed in two thousand years, that they are ready to be satisfied with some other rituals or rituals, deliberately performed differently from the ancient Romans? Aren’t we now talking about the same Roman Gods who patronized the Ancient Romans, resented if they allowed even minor violations of the ritual? Then, if these are the same Gods, then why do we think that, unlike the Ancient Romans, they will forgive us for incorrect rituals, and even favor our community, which does rituals differently from the Roman Civitas in the past?
The point is not to always talk about the Roman Religion, deciding what to admit and what not, acting selectively, like a shopper in a supermarket – choosing from the window of the Roman Religion only what we like and what we have enough money for, closing our eyes for everything else that does not suit us. The point is simply to start realizing the Roman Religion, to perform the rituals of the Sacra Public. In this case, the only main issue that is worth discussing is how and when to start performing the Sacra Public, with the aim of reviving the Roman Religion, for the sake of achieving Pax Deorum. Although when asked when this is possible, I know the answer: “when the Roman Civitas will be revived / recreated”. But the question “How?” it would be worth putting it up for public discussion, with the involvement of specialists, and only then submitting it to the Senate, as a ready-made project supported by the people. So, we again return to my first message in this thread, because there I described the problematic issues on the agenda of this Senate meeting.July 16, 2020 at 7:19 pm #38806
In anticipation of the items to be presented, I have opened a discussion on sacra publica here. http://romanrepublic.org/roma/fora/topic/establishing-guidelines-for-sacra-publica-community-discussion/July 17, 2020 at 2:43 am #38810
Publius Iunius BrutusDenarii: 𐆖 1,135.58PatriciusPacifica
Good to see the wheels of the Senate turning.
A few comments. Take them as you may.
If the Senate seeks to form a CP then I think any guidelines on sacra publica should also be vetted by the CP first. The CP would have to consist of our most knowledgeable people and these individuals would be best equipped to draft such a policy for review by the Senate as a second step.
Consul Mus, I also remind you that any policy resulting in spending or collecting USD funds requires CC approval. I’m glad the topic of a market is being introduced.
Good work team, keep it coming!July 18, 2020 at 11:23 pm #38824
Quintus Furius CamillusDenarii: 𐆖 674.65PlebeiusBritannia
Based on the fact that Praetor Varro finds it wise to found the Collegium Pontificum, I must ask. Do we have anyone qualified for this role? Do we have more than one such person? Who is willing to be a pontifex? I think this is the first question to ask when debating this proposal.July 19, 2020 at 1:51 am #38825
Salve Camille Cos.
I agree. Praetor Varro started to work on his proposal independently of mine. The suggested Lex Hostilia proposal was drafted by Lictrix L. Hostilia, and she asked me to present this proposal. Now that I fully appreciate the nature of Varro’s proposal, I will table presenting Hostilia’s plan at this meeting.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.