Draeris 3124 Share Posted April 19, 2020 RESPONSE TO THE EPISTLE Dearly beloved, While it is honorable to find such vigilant defense of our clergy amongst us, we find it unfortunate that it has manifested itself in this particular fashion. We therefore felt that it was expedient to respond to your epistle seeking intervention from His Holiness. First and foremost, we wish to reaffirm that the clergy are subject to imperial law and its courts as much as mere citizens. The defendant Friar Boniface has, in the eyes of the Commonwealth of Kaedrin, broken laws and neglected his duties as mentioned in the subpoena. It is therefore within the right of the Commonwealth of Kaedrin to seek justice regarding their experienced infraction, and adhere to secular proceedings as is the norm with an Imperial subject. May we remind you that Krisztián Károly was also tried in a secular court, due to allegedly committing crimes in the city of Helena. Secondly, we wish to reaffirm that it is perfectly normal for the clergy to partake in secular organizations, such as the Imperial courts or government. We have a Cardinal that is Vice-Chancellor of Oren, a Supreme Court Justice or the Premier of Kaedrin. They often act, either directly or indirectly, in a fashion that affects men of the clergy as well. Should Hugo Wright resign when his government signs into law legislation that furthers secularization? Should Jasper de Sarkozy have resigned if he ruled Krisztián as guilty? Should now Cardinal Ves resign due to his role as attorney within his trial? Why must the clergy reside in a parallel Empire to the actual one: having no connection with the plane of existence that our congregation exists in? For it is these secular professions that one partakes in outside of the cloth, that grants the Church the necessary harmony and cooperation with the Empire: so that both can maintain strength and prosperity in ever changing times. Friar Boniface will face justice in secular courts, as he is brought to trial by an Imperial subject. To render participation of other clergymen as inappropriate, and demand a monopoly on justice for men of the cloth, is a mentality of radicalism unbecoming of our clerical intellectuals. To demand that His Holiness intervenes in a legitimate legal procedure is inappropriate. We therefore hope that the signatories of the Epistle see the light of reason and retract their troubling outcry. IN NOMINE DEI His Eminence Cardinal Ves Secretariat to His Holiness Laurence August Pruvia His Eminence Cardinal Renzfeld Jasper de Sarkozy His Eminence Cardinal Selm Hugo Wright His Grace the Bishop of Jorenus Monsignor to His Holiness Anton Barclay The Reverend Monsignor to His Holiness Amadeus d’Aryn The Reverend Vicar of Ves Monsignor to His Holiness Lajos Sándor Károly The Reverend Prelate of Ves Erasmus von Getreide Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMacMoMo 214 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Father Erasmus signs the paper with a great flourish Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipps 726 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Bishop Anton talked to Laurence after the Everardine convention. Putting his signature on the letter himself! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
osumanduas 1442 Share Posted April 19, 2020 “What is truly a SIN is the misuse and ABUSE of clerical authority. To try and revoke the right to trial, how inane! Many before and in future will be of the cloth; many still will be called to answer for wrongs committed!” issues the Count of Rochefort from his office in Varoche Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrownedLime747 162 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Vicar Lajos would sign the paper shortly after the Everardine convention. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.gif.5ceba2d01f50d0d25c87532ab910c11a.gif)
.thumb.png.4e5370fc69f142d96a905e477cd5dd97.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.