Christian Regions Cooperation Agreement - Proposal [OOC]

[Christadelphians]

Hi everyone, so here is a forum for us to discuss this proposal - much better than doing it via telegram.

Here is a link to the factbook: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=619217.

It seems that Empire of Constantinople has requested for a passage to restrict proselytising. Whilst I agree with the principle, how can we do this without restricting freedom of religion and speech?

[Empire of Constantinople]

The way that proselytising can be restricted is that the region must give permission to anyone seeking to bring converts to their respect branch or denomination. That way, regions know when things like this happen. Now there will be regions who will refuse to allow proselytising, but it is better to have it in procedure (i.e. a need for permission to do such a thing from the founder) than to have it be taboo.

[San Juan de Sinka]

Hello,

I come to present the conclusions so far in my region. In the poll they are mostly FOR joining the CRCA. However, some of them have asked to recognize the Nicene Creed as the accepted and official one.

And about proselytising, I think it should be regulated, of course, but not banned at all. I think some healthy debate will be good to contrast our creeds.

Brothers in Christ, best regards,

Princeps Mario I of San Juan de Sinka

[New Jordyn]

CRCA Statement of Revision

Greetings, Brothers and Sisters in Christ Jesus!

We want to thank you, to the host of the CRCA proposal and all who are involved in the joining and process of this new and fresh idea. We thank you for your hard work, for keeping Christ in Government and Culture.

As a brothern in Christ, I agree and think that most of the CRCA documentation is good and ready to go, but we have a few suggestions, from myself (Noah de Castro -- Prime Minister of New Jordyn) and citizens of the New Christian Confederation that we would like to share.

We agree with most documentation of the Statement of Faith in the CRCA. However, it states that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. Yes, Jesus is the Son of God and was conceived by the Holy Spirit, but not all denominations who may join the CRCA believe that Mary, the mother of Jesus, remained a virgin forever. I just want to clarify, and state that maybe we could somehow modify how that is said, to make it "neutral"? What do you think?

I want to tell you, thank you very much for stating that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, because it is true and it is fundamental doctrine of our faith!

I think that is all the suggestions we have to announce at this press meeting. We will have more to say, soon! Jesus bless you!

Also -- Our region will be apart of the Unaffiliated Conference when the CRCA program is activated. I like that idea!

Thank you!!! Jesus bless!!!

Noah de Castro

[San Juan de Sinka]

Well, in the name of my region, The CCS, we cannot accept to deny the Holyness of Our Lady, the Mother of God, and the Inmaculate Conception. I think it is good as it is stated in the dispatch without further specifications.

[Christadelphians]

This discussion is really awesome.

Okay, regarding the proselytism clause. I feel like we're all agreeing that some form of agreement is required about blatant proselytism. For example, one region cannot send nations to member regions with the aim of converting. This I think makes sense. Form my current experience, that doesn't happen too often but it would be good to get something solidifying this in the agreement.

San Juan de Sinka, I do agree with you that we need to be careful to not restrict the discussion of our faiths as I do believe there is a difference between proselytism and discussion.

Empire of Constantinople, would you like to draft a clause to go into the agreement, perhaps to go into Article 3 regarding proselytism. Once we have a framework to work off, we can then start discussing it and amend as necessary with input from everyone.

New Jordyn and San Juan de Sinka, regarding the clause regarding the Virgin Mary. I do not believe that Mary remained a Virgin for her whole life. I realise however that the Immaculate Conception and Mary's life long virginity are central tenants of the Catholic faith. Forgive me New Jordyn however I thought the wording was fairly neutral? However, if not I understand the need to make sure that this is ammicable to all. The Immaculate conception is really only a Catholic doctrine so to make it neutral, it's best we are silent on it. Perhaps I could suggest these amendments. San Juan de Sinka, let me know if none of these reads well for you:

...born of a Virgin birth to Mary
...born to Mary, who was a Virgin.

Regarding the Nicene Creed. I saw how sensitive this was on the RMB of your region. I really didn't want the Statement of Faith to be so contentious. The Problem with the Nicene Creed is that as soon as you use it, you cast out too many people. Baptists, Churches of Christ and Pentecostals are thrown out as they do not recognise the Nicene Creed not to mention a large portion of Evangelicals and my own faith, Christadelphians. The Statement of Faith was meant merely as a catch - all thing that all Christian Regions could agree to so that we didn't have single-issue regions and non-christian regions posing as Christians entering. I studied the Nicene Creed as I went to a Catholic School and nothing in that Statement of Faith goes against it. In fact, It's pretty consistent with the Nicene Creed and the Apostles Creed. The idea of this is not to come up with a 'pure statement of faith' but find something which we can all agree on as a basis of belief. I can talk with your region about this however I think you'd be best suited. I will reiterate...This is about agreement, not doctrine. But the CCS MUST be a part of this because I can see your enthusiasm and support.



San Juan de Sinka, I see what you have written about the Nicene Creed and see what has been written in your region.

[New Jordyn]

I think that born of a Virgin birth to Mary would be a fine way to state that, and it seems to be okay with all denominations.

Jesus bless you,

Noah de Castro

[Christadelphians]

I think that born of a Virgin birth to Mary would be a fine way to state that, and it seems to be okay with all denominations.

Jesus bless you,

Noah de Castro

Perhaps 'born to Mary of a Virgin birth' would read better, not just in general, but would probably be more acceptable to Catholics?!?! Am I correct San Juan de Sinka? I may be getting this wrong however....

[San Juan de Sinka]

I agree with that last option.

[Christadelphians]

I agree with that last option.

Sorry, do you mean: 'born to Mary of a Virgin birth' ????

[San Juan de Sinka]

Yes, that one, which seems impartial to everyone.

And I want you, brothers in the same Lord, to have patience as this may take time. I have been labeled of 'liberal', 'heretic', 'a traitor to my faith' and so on. I want to struggle for this as God wants us unite, but, as I have said, we will need patience. I will try to set some order in my region.

God Bless,

The Chancellor of the CCS, Princeps Mario I

[Empire of Constantinople]

Here is my draft for proselytisation:
Proselytisation is only acceptable if the region allows it and it is done not in secret.

The reason I brought this up is because of the amount of Antiochene and Jerusalemite Orthodox being converted to Evangelical Protestantism due to a lack of knowledge of their faith, courtesy of the Islamic violence. I also want to make sure that conversion is an educated decision, not a decision made through manipulation. It happened to me once when I was force converted to Protestantism when I moved to the USA, and I don't want anyone to have to go through the process of rediscovering the Orthodox Church.

[Christadelphians]

Here is my draft for proselytisation:
Proselytisation is only acceptable if the region allows it and it is done not in secret.

The reason I brought this up is because of the amount of Antiochene and Jerusalemite Orthodox being converted to Evangelical Protestantism due to a lack of knowledge of their faith, courtesy of the Islamic violence. I also want to make sure that conversion is an educated decision, not a decision made through manipulation. It happened to me once when I was force converted to Protestantism when I moved to the USA, and I don't want anyone to have to go through the process of rediscovering the Orthodox Church.

Going to be the devils advocate here: What if say someone from my region is seriously interested in the beliefs of the Orthodox Church and telegram you. I take it that if that nation were to telegram you, you'd have to say, sorry, we need to have this conversation on the RMB as it can't be done 'in secret'

Perhaps we go with something more like,
F) Proselytisation is only acceptable if the region allows it and it is done not in secret.
i)This clause shall in no way restrict the open discussion of religion between members of regions.

Open is the key word there.

San Juan de Sinka, I certainly sympathise. If I got a dollar for everytime someone called me a heretic, I'd be rich. I'm with you on this one

So are we all in agreement to change the 2F to:
F) Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah, Son of God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born to Mary of a Virgin birth and remained sinless.
If so, I will change it within the 24 hours. Once we reach consensus regarding the proselytism clause, I will change that in the agreement as well.

Also notice that there has been some contentious discussion regarding the Catholic/Orthodox Conference. Do we think it'd be better to have 4 Conferences: Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Unaffiliated with say 3 1 month terms or are the current terms sufficient??

[Empire of Constantinople]

Here is my draft for proselytisation:
Proselytisation is only acceptable if the region allows it and it is done not in secret.

The reason I brought this up is because of the amount of Antiochene and Jerusalemite Orthodox being converted to Evangelical Protestantism due to a lack of knowledge of their faith, courtesy of the Islamic violence. I also want to make sure that conversion is an educated decision, not a decision made through manipulation. It happened to me once when I was force converted to Protestantism when I moved to the USA, and I don't want anyone to have to go through the process of rediscovering the Orthodox Church.

Going to be the devils advocate here: What if say someone from my region is seriously interested in the beliefs of the Orthodox Church and telegram you. I take it that if that nation were to telegram you, you'd have to say, sorry, we need to have this conversation on the RMB as it can't be done 'in secret'

Perhaps we go with something more like,
F) Proselytisation is only acceptable if the region allows it and it is done not in secret.
i)This clause shall in no way restrict the open discussion of religion between members of regions.

Open is the key word there.

San Juan de Sinka, I certainly sympathise. If I got a dollar for everytime someone called me a heretic, I'd be rich. I'm with you on this one

So are we all in agreement to change the 2F to:
F) Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah, Son of God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born to Mary of a Virgin birth and remained sinless.
If so, I will change it within the 24 hours. Once we reach consensus regarding the proselytism clause, I will change that in the agreement as well.

Also notice that there has been some contentious discussion regarding the Catholic/Orthodox Conference. Do we think it'd be better to have 4 Conferences: Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Unaffiliated with say 3 1 month terms or are the current terms sufficient??

That sounds good. I like it.

[Christadelphians]

Okay everyone so here are the proposed changes. If I hear nothing against these in the next 24 hours, I will change them and assume we're all happy with it.

Article 2F)
From:
F) Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah, Son of God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary and remained sinless.
To:
F) Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah, Son of God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born to Mary of a Virgin birth and remained sinless.

And adding to Article 3
F)* Proselytisation may only be conducted if the region allows it and it is not done in secret.
i)This clause shall in no way restrict the open discussion of religion between members of regions.

[Terra Principalis]

Brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus,

On behalf of the Commonwealth of Catholic Nations, I would like to express our thanks for the invitation extended to us-ward to become part of this agreement.

I have only one doubt (or objection, if you'd like to call it that way): namely, whether it is right to separate Christians in conferences according to denomination, when the goal of this co-operation agreement is to bring more unity. For Paul the apostle writes: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28).

Now therefore I'd say that we would be better off without these unnecessary divisions. The most important thing is that we all believe that Christ is our Redeemer: "Cleave unto him: for the Lord Almighty is God alone, and beside him there is no other Saviour" (Ecclesiasticus 24:24).

Whether we call ourselves Catholics, or Orthodox, or Protestants, we all belong to the one sheepfold of the one Lord and giver of life. Did not the prophet Isaiah tell us, that "One shall say, I am the Lord's; and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand unto the Lord, and surname himself by the name of Israel" (Isaiah 44:5)?

"Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen" (I. Peter 5:14).

[Raer]

Not to throw a wrench in things, but I've just got a bit of a pedantic problem to point out: While the actual location of Canaan is contested (along with whether Moses actually ever entered Canaan), it is a fact that the Israelites were not even at Canaan's border when Moses was given the Commandments¹. So it would be inaccurate to say that they were given in Canaan. A more appropriate way to phrase this would be:

D) Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai where the Law and 10 Commandments were revealed.

or, if it is important that Canaan is mentioned:

D) Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai where the Law and 10 Commandments were revealed, after which he led them to Canaan.

Though that second one is a bit ugly. Hopefully these don't step on anyone's toes. It isn't that big an issue, we're all pretty clear on what happened, but it may be worth it to buff out the edges on this. You might also notice that I changed 'Jews' to 'Israelites' there. Also just to be pedantic, I simply haven't been able to find a translation that lists them as anything other than "Israelites," "people of Israel," "children of Israel" and so on. "Jews" is also not necessarily a nice word (depending on your tone), and I'd prefer to avoid shooting our own foot. If that requires an obscene amount of red tape around the gun and a trigger lock, so be it. Of course, there is such a thing as too much.

---

There are a few other pedantic concerns that are floating around, but I'll hold off for now. My main concern is that, while we can go ahead and make the belief statement as vague or detailed as we like, it means very little if there isn't a clearly defined objective for this CRCA group. What is it supposed to be? Outreach? Community? Perhaps it is better to define what the CRCA is meant to be, then modify the belief statement around that. It appears the statement as is is meant to be as inclusive as possible, which leads me to believe that the CRCA is about community and fellowship. This, I feel, somewhat contradicts the name of the group.

Christian Regions Cooperation Agreement. Cooperation implies working towards a goal as a team or community. What is that goal? Could the goal be something as simple as "making a big community" or is there an actual, actionable goal? To advertise the Christian nations to the world? To have a unified effort in the World Assembly and work to pass legislation that is parallel with God's will? To defend from hostile groups?

It is important to figure out the goal of this group, which seems to be something that has been overlooked somehow. Of course, I'm a newcomer to this discussion, so please ignore my passionate speech if you already have it figured out. And, of course, if you find anything in this untrue, please do let me know.

---

¹ Different accounts put the Mount in Egypt, close to Jersusalem, right on the shores of the Red Sea, etc. What we do know is "And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in the plains of Moab on this side Jordan by Jericho." (Numbers 22:1) They crossed the Jordan, which may or may not be the edge of Canaan, long after they received the commandments, placing the Mount of Sinai outside Canaan.

[Christadelphians]

After 24 hours and having no objections, 2F will be modified to:
2F) Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah, Son of God, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born to Mary of a Virgin birth and remained sinless.

We will also be adding Section F to Article 3 regarding sensible limits on proselytism:
3F)* Proselytisation may only be conducted if the region allows it and it is not done in secret.
i)This clause shall in no way restrict the open discussion of religion between members of regions.

Raer, your consideration is always very helpful to me and appreciate you having pointed out the issue with using Canaan.
The proposal is to change 2D from:
D) Moses led the Jews out of Egypt back to Canaan in which the Law and 10 Commandments were revealed.
To:
2D) Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai where the Law and 10 Commandments were revealed, after which he led them to Canaan.
Let's discuss this and see if anyone has any objections. This is probably one of our least controversial statements.

Terra Principalis, thank you for the affirmation of the agreement. How about we try to sort out this Statement of Faith and then we can focus on 2 other things: The Conferences and Aims of the Agreement. It may be easier in this case to divide ourselves into 2 committees to try to get this done faster.

We recognise that time is of the essence however this cannot be rushed. I will change those clauses now

[Christadelphians]

From all my reading on this forum, telegrams I've received and reading the RMBs of Christian Regions, Here is a list of contentious areas which we need to work through and address before we can attempt to sign the Agreement, arranged per article:

Aims - Create a more clearly defined set of aims, more than just 'for increasing cooperation.'

Article 1:
No areas

Article 2:
D - Currently up for vote (jews to Israelites)
E - Currently up for vote (jews to Israelites)
F - Resolved and ammended
The use of Creeds as a statement of faith - discussed - largely contentious amongst Catholic Regions

Article 3:
Discuss the merits of each proposal. Are they really beneficial and do they aid in the aim of the region? = Possible review committee to investigate??

Article 4:
Merits of the Conference System - Is this the fairest way to administer the agreement? = Possible Review committee to investigate??
The Catholic/Orthodox Conference. Should these be 1 conference or 2 separate conferences = possibly the Catholic regions and Orthodox region could have this discussion

Article 5:
No extra issues raised which aren't related to Article 4.

Let's first establish a Statement of Faith which we're making solid progress on. Then we can set up 2 review committees for Articles 3 & 4 if this is decided to be the best course of action. Discuss and amend, then vote!!! We should be done by mid-End of May for a historic agreement!!!

[Terra Principalis]

I agree with Raer's comments about article D of the Statement of Faith. It would indeed be better to substitute "Israelites" for "Jews", as this is in accordance with the wording used in Holy Scripture. I also agree that the Law was given on mount Sinai, which was, most likely, still outside of Canaan.

Replacing the Statement of Faith with one's denomination's creed will undoubtedly lead to strife and discontentment. In my opinion, it is opposed to the goals of this CRCA. As a member of a Catholic region, I don't see the point of hurting other Christian's feelings by imposing my creed upon them. It is something which has already led to many splits and divisions in the past (splits and divisions which, more often than not, endure to the present day).

[Empire of Constantinople]

:) From all my reading on this forum, telegrams I've received and reading the RMBs of Christian Regions, Here is a list of contentious areas which we need to work through and address before we can attempt to sign the Agreement, arranged per article:

Aims - Create a more clearly defined set of aims, more than just 'for increasing cooperation.'

Article 1:
No areas

Article 2:
D - Currently up for vote (jews to Israelites)
E - Currently up for vote (jews to Israelites)
F - Resolved and ammended
The use of Creeds as a statement of faith - discussed - largely contentious amongst Catholic Regions

Article 3:
Discuss the merits of each proposal. Are they really beneficial and do they aid in the aim of the region? = Possible review committee to investigate??

Article 4:
Merits of the Conference System - Is this the fairest way to administer the agreement? = Possible Review committee to investigate??
The Catholic/Orthodox Conference. Should these be 1 conference or 2 separate conferences = possibly the Catholic regions and Orthodox region could have this discussion

Article 5:
No extra issues raised which aren't related to Article 4.

Let's first establish a Statement of Faith which we're making solid progress on. Then we can set up 2 review committees for Articles 3 & 4 if this is decided to be the best course of action. Discuss and amend, then vote!!! We should be done by mid-End of May for a historic agreement!!!

The conferences are good, except for one thing: I have trouble with the Creed. We had a Uniate who once used our embassy who tried arguing for the Filioque, and despite his claims to Orthodoxy, he would be anathema for 1) using the Filioque in the Creed, and 2) taking the Communion from the Latin (Catholic) Communion without permission from the Orthodox Church. The Creed needs to be be in two copies, one Orthodox, without the heretic Filioque, and one Catholic, with the Filioque. This is our best compromise I can think of, as it will be a point of contention for the AON and all other Orthodox Christians (and Miaphysites) if this appears to be Western dominated.

[Villareal]

Well, in the name of my region, The CCS, we cannot accept to deny the Holyness of Our Lady, the Mother of God, and the Inmaculate Conception. I think it is good as it is stated in the dispatch without further specifications.

Why not? You're a damn Protestant.

[Villareal]

The region of "Catholic" will not fraternise with heretics. And We urge all Christians here of good will -- true Catholics and true Orthodox believers -- to crush this Protestant-dominated proposal meant to undermine the True Faith.

[Empire of Constantinople]

The region of "Catholic" will not fraternise with heretics. And We urge all Christians here of good will -- true Catholics and true Orthodox believers -- to crush this Protestant-dominated proposal meant to undermine the True Faith.

If any of you here are Orthodox, we will acknowledge that this indeed is dominated by the people who continually, and most ignorantly, proselytise ancient Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere. However, we will not be able to bring our lost brothers back to the Church if we continue to declare they are damned. Yes, out of love, I declare all of the Protestants heretics. However, I see nothing wrong with working for unity, while making sure that I, and all others who are true Orthodox and Catholic, are not taken advantage by the liberalising effects of the Reformation.

[Christadelphians]

Hi everyone, so after an overwhelming consensus, 2D will now change to:
2D)] Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai where the Law and 10 Commandments were revealed, after which he led them to Canaan.
and by extension:
2E) After returning from Egypt, God led the Israelites through Judges, Rulers and Prophets.
(changes in italics)

I didn't note any other contentious articles in the Statement of Faith. Can we please raise them now if there are so that we can resolve them?

If not then, should we break up into 2 sub-groups on different forums to discuss those questions I raised regarding Articles 3 & 4? Nominate your preference for which committee!!

I'm not going to respond to unhelpful comment on this forum. I hope we all agree to do the same