zompist bboard

Does the Avelan Church believe in apostolic succession traced back to the Twelve Apostles of Iesu? If so, who was the link to Oikumene? I don't think you've mentioned of any ordained members of Mihel's crew before, zomp... so I was curious if there was some 'secret priest' that you've neglected to tell us about who went ahead and ordained members of the early church.

I think that having a valid clergy would [at the very least] be of great importance to the Elenicoi. Without ordained priests, there is no-one to confect the sacraments. And those are mighty important...

I suppose there could have been some sort of and "Ordination by Fire" event in which Mihel and the other Elenicoi were ordained by the Holy Spirit (Although maybe only God the Son could/would do ordination... I don't know, I'm no theologian). That might be a way to wiggle around the issue.

Anyways, back to the subject. Whether or not there is a valid priesthood, do the Eledhi place a high importance on a continuity of succession, or is that not as important?

Related to this, what is the signifigance of the Kebreni Primate essentially declaring himself 'pope'?

Kudzu wrote:Does the Avelan Church believe in apostolic succession traced back to the Twelve Apostles of Iesu? If so, who was the link to Oikumene? I don't think you've mentioned of any ordained members of Mihel's crew before, zomp... so I was curious if there was some 'secret priest' that you've neglected to tell us about who went ahead and ordained members of the early church.

Hmm. I think they'd have problems maintaining the doctrine in its Orthodox form. First, though it seems reasonable that the ship would have some priests aboard, surely it wouldn't have a bishop. Second, the merger with the Arashei explicitly recognized the inspiration of the Arashei tradition, which of course does not go back to Iesu.

I think they'd maintain that the Miracle of the Translation itself consecrated their mission— if God himself exerted himself to establish the Avélan church, it lacks nothing in authority.

Certainly once they'd arrived in Érenat they organized a church very much on Orthodox lines, with priests and bishops, and seminaries to ensure doctrinal conformity. So continuity of succession certainly is important to them.

Related to this, what is the signifigance of the Kebreni Primate essentially declaring himself 'pope'?

As a practical measure, it was considered necessary to allow evangelization in Kebri, which was still suspicious that Eledhát was simply an anti-Kebreni conspiracy. Sevasto is said to have disliked the Avélan Patriarch anyway, so his self-elevation was not without personal gratification. However, there is no doctrinal difference, and Avéla has never suggested that the Kebreni church is in any way illegitimate.

Maybe Zomp could state that some Eled'i believe this particular ship was selected for the Miracle of the Translation precisely because it happened to have a bishop on board.

(It's not like bishops don't ever travel, right? But, still... a bishop traveling by ship is a heck of a lot more probable than a ship getting yanked to other worlds Narnia-style.)

I don't know if it would violate canon by making Mihel a bishop, or simply say that he was a secular officer who happened to have a lot of fire in the belly.

BGMan wrote:(It's not like bishops don't ever travel, right? But, still... a bishop traveling by ship is a heck of a lot more probable than a ship getting yanked to other worlds Narnia-style.)

Impossible to say, since from our perspective it's simply a missing ship. Who knows how many missing ships actually made interdimensional voyages?

Having a bishop on board would make it more believable that a Bible would be on board too.

Shm Jay wrote:Having a bishop on board would make it more believable that a Bible would be on board too.

If there was a ship of 4th-century Christian traders, it's hard to believe that there wouldn'y be a Bible, surely.

So Haleza Grise wrote:

Shm Jay wrote:Having a bishop on board would make it more believable that a Bible would be on board too.

If there was a ship of 4th-century Christian traders, it's hard to believe that there wouldn'y be a Bible, surely.

Allow me to disagree - before printing, books were awfully expensive things. Even in many churches, the only book available may have been a gospel text for reading at services, not a full bible.
And bible reading by lay persons was not very far-spread before the reformation. So I'd expect a bible (or a gospel text) on board only if there would have been a priest. (Of course, if the Lord provided for Christians to be transferred to Almea, he might also have provided them with a bible, or a very good recollection of its text).
Best regards,

Hans-Werner

hwhatting wrote:(Of course, if the Lord provided for Christians to be transferred to Almea, he might also have provided them with a bible, or a very good recollection of its text).

That’s why He provided a bishop too: to carry the Bible. (Would it have been a codex, or a big box of scrolls?) And, oh yes, to consecrate priests. (I hope that’s the word; I’ll feel very foolish if I’ve forgotten what it is.)

Shm Jay wrote:That’s why He provided a bishop too: to carry the Bible. (Would it have been a codex, or a big box of scrolls?) And, oh yes, to consecrate priests. (I hope that’s the word; I’ll feel very foolish if I’ve forgotten what it is.)

Close. One makes a priest by "ordaining" him... "to consecrate" means "to make a priest into a bishop".

hwhatting wrote:

So Haleza Grise wrote:If there was a ship of 4th-century Christian traders, it's hard to believe that there wouldn'y be a Bible, surely.

Allow me to disagree - before printing, books were awfully expensive things. Even in many churches, the only book available may have been a gospel text for reading at services, not a full bible.
And bible reading by lay persons was not very far-spread before the reformation.

This sounds like medieval times, not ancient. My chief source on ancient life is Ariès and Duby, A History of Private Life; they don't answer all the questions I have, and hint that some are unanswerable. But a hallmark of the ancient notable was literacy. As an example they show a painting of a couple from Pompeii; as signs of their social status they hold a scroll and stylus.

Notables made up perhaps a tenth of the population, and there was no great distinction between nobles and bourgeois. Landowners speculated in business and started commercial or trading enterprises; rich merchants bought themselves land.

The expedition of the Elenicoi, though it was not intended to find new lands, must have been a project of a wealthy consortium; I don't think it was that unlikely that it would possess a bible.

zompist wrote:

hwhatting wrote: Allow me to disagree - before printing, books were awfully expensive things. Even in many churches, the only book available may have been a gospel text for reading at services, not a full bible.
And bible reading by lay persons was not very far-spread before the reformation.

This sounds like medieval times, not ancient. My chief source on ancient life is Ariès and Duby, A History of Private Life; they don't answer all the questions I have, and hint that some are unanswerable. But a hallmark of the ancient notable was literacy. As an example they show a painting of a couple from Pompeii; as signs of their social status they hold a scroll and stylus.

Notables made up perhaps a tenth of the population, and there was no great distinction between nobles and bourgeois. Landowners speculated in business and started commercial or trading enterprises; rich merchants bought themselves land.

The expedition of the Elenicoi, though it was not intended to find new lands, must have been a project of a wealthy consortium; I don't think it was that unlikely that it would possess a bible.

I agree that the situation in late antiquity was different from the Middle Ages, and I don't doubt that a wealthy merchant would have been rich enough to own and literate enough to read a bible. But I don't know whether they would take a valuable manuscript on a dangerous sea journey, especially if it'd be not for sale, but for reading.
Anyway, my points were addressed mostly against So Haleza's "hard to believe that not"; they were supposed to show that a bible on the ship was not a matter of course, not to mean that this would have been totally unlikely.
And now, ad auctorem: there was, or there wasn't?
Best regards,

Hans-Werner

hwhatting wrote:But I don't know whether they would take a valuable manuscript on a dangerous sea journey, especially if it'd be not for sale, but for reading.

Additionally, was it as common among lay people to read the Bible in private devotion as it is now? On the other hand, I don't believe Zomp says anywhere exactly what the merchants were carrying- perhaps among their goods they were carrying supplies for a new church?

hwhatting wrote:And now, ad auctorem: there was, or there wasn't?

Since you ask, yes. I think a reasonable scenario is this: the merchants were intending to reach the Christian community in India for trade, and since the council of Nicaea had settled the discussions on the canon, they made sure to take along a copy for the Indian church.

(From my reading, it's not clear if the Indian church actually existed in the 4th century... but it does seem that the Greek church thought it did, which is all that's needed here.)

zompist wrote:(From my reading, it's not clear if the Indian church actually existed in the 4th century... but it does seem that the Greek church thought it did, which is all that's needed here.)

Certainly a lot of modern Indian Christians claim that the church has been around since the 4th century...

Debegduk ing Debegduked wrote:

zompist wrote:(From my reading, it's not clear if the Indian church actually existed in the 4th century... but it does seem that the Greek church thought it did, which is all that's needed here.)

Certainly a lot of modern Indian Christians claim that the church has been around since the 4th century...

There are people who believe that Jesus wasn't crucified, but went to and died in Kashmir, where he is buried:

http://www.tombofjesus.com/home.htm

Ask yourself what Jesus would do ... for tourism.
Hans-Werner

Debegduk ing Debegduked wrote:

zompist wrote:(From my reading, it's not clear if the Indian church actually existed in the 4th century... but it does seem that the Greek church thought it did, which is all that's needed here.)

Certainly a lot of modern Indian Christians claim that the church has been around since the 4th century...

Since the 1st, in fact. St Thomas is supposed to have founded the Church in India.

So Haleza Grise wrote:

Debegduk ing Debegduked wrote:

zompist wrote:(From my reading, it's not clear if the Indian church actually existed in the 4th century... but it does seem that the Greek church thought it did, which is all that's needed here.)

Certainly a lot of modern Indian Christians claim that the church has been around since the 4th century...

Since the 1st, in fact. St Thomas is supposed to have founded the Church in India.

Where, according to the Gospel of Thomas (Apocrypha), he was taken by an Indian merchant, to whom Jesus had sold him as a slave.

Great stuff, the things that didn't make the cut to get into the Bible!

So then is the Avelan Church/ the Elenicoi in communion with Rome? Or is the situation more like the Eastern churches (e.g. the Maronite Church in Syria and Lebanon), or a seperate entity, like the various Orthodox Churches?
On the same subject, are they considered Nicaean? I notice the ship left Egypt in 325 AD, which is the same year as the First Council. Have there been any theological developments over time?

They haven't been in contact with Earth since then; the development is all independent from there.

Boy #12 is right: they're not in contact with Rome, and of course they've had both their own development (notably, the union with the Almean Eledhi) and been untouched by developments in terrestrial Catholicism, including priestly celibacy, the adoration of Mary, and the supremacy of a single pontiff.

hmm, I was just wondering, what with the Swedish embassy thing, if there had been any recent contact between the two, but I guess that pretty much answers my question.

Thought I post that here instead starting a new thread:

The way religious communities normally work, I would assume that there was resistance to the Eled'at union? Are there any significant groups of Christians or Arašei left who reject it? I'd expect that to be the case, as the Eled'e church cannot rely on state institutions to enforce unity, at least outside of Avéla...