The Verdict of the Trial of Fr. Dima and Cyril Cardinal St. Publius

[Lojo613 1420]

 

The Verdict

 

By the power invested in me by High Pontiff Owyn III as Auditor of the Tribunal, I hereby make the following ruling regarding the trial of  Cyril Cardinal St. Publius, FSSCT and Father Dima Carrion, FSSCT:

 

Being Schismatic: 

Regarding the crime of being schismatic, you are found NOT guilty. The reasoning on the ruling is as follows:

As defined in Canon law §I.I.2.1 the Church represents the body of the faithful led by the High Pontiff. Although the law is unclear whether this only pertains to the current High Pontiff or includes the office of the Pontificate as a whole and therefore also includes the rulings of previous High Pontiffs, precedent and context alleviates the problem. The college of Cardinals as seen under Canon law  §II.II.2.8 has the right to rebuke a Pontiff if the vote is unanimous. Under the interpretation that the faithful must be led by the current High Pontiff alone, such a proceeding would be impossible as these same said Cardinals would instantly be schismatic for declaring such an intent to both rebuke and remove said High Pontiff. Therefore, it is not merely the High Pontiff as an individual which leads the Church, but the High Pontiff as an office. This therefore means that so long as this disagreement with the manner by which the Pontiff is elected is promulgated by an active Cardinal (Which the accused is) first and foremost, and does not extend to the office as a whole, it is not considered schismatic. Since a Schismatic is defined according to Canon law as “One who worships God and recognizes the Holy Scrolls, but does not submit to the authority of the Church,” these individuals cannot be found to be in schism with the Church of Canon.

 

Falsification of a miracle

Regarding the crime of falsification of a miracle, you are found NOT guilty. The reasoning of the ruling is as follows:

Precedent dictates that the only requirement for the legitimization of a miracle is that there be multiple witnesses. Ironically, there happens to be two witnesses, both who stand accused today of lying in joint. There is no way to prove that this miracle did not occur, just as there is no way to confirm that many past miracles which were confirmed by the account of a few witnesses can be confirmed. 

 

Joining a group which has plotted against the Church

Regarding the crime of joining a group which has plotted against the Church, you are found NOT guilty. The reasoning of the ruling is as follows:

As noted earlier, the Church is defined as those lay faithful led by the High Pontiff. As also noted earlier, the fact that Cardinals may vote to rebuke the High Pontiff divests the High Pontiff as an individual from the position of the High Pontiff, which includes the authority as inherited from previous High Pontiffs. So long as the accused does not claim that they are no longer led by the High Pontiff, they are still active members of the Church, and the act of forming a synod to preserve the office and authority of the High pontiff does in no way harm the Church as previously defined. 

 

Inciting Sedition

Regarding the crime of inciting sedition against the Church, you are found NOT guilty. The reasoning is as follows:

 There is no proof that the statements made by the accused led to the incitement of sedition against the Church, since the church is defined above as being led by the office of the High Pontiff, but that questioning the aptitude of the individual occupying the office does not fall within the jurisdiction of questioning the authority of the position itself. Therefore, promoting such a question is not itself sedition. 

 

Violation of the vow of Obedience

Regarding the crime of inciting sedition against the Church, you are found NOT guilty. The reasoning is as follows:

The vows of obedience made by those being ordained, as defined by §VI.I.3.2,  are directly to GOD, and include instruction in the virtue, and guardianship of the holy scrolls. No explicit vow of obedience to the High Pontiff is made, and therefore no proof has arisen that vows have been violated.

 

In regards to the trial in absentia;

Due to being present, it is impossible to claim that individuals have evaded Church authority. Therefore, the accused rightfully preserve their Ecclesiastical offices.

 

Addendum:

An earthquake occurred during the Prosecution’s case in chief during a claim regarding the will of GOD. Although this is not necessarily definite proof of anything, this incident is significant enough to be noted.

[DahStalker 2839]

 Beatrice Virosi frowned in horror as the poorly constructed case given by the prosecution, until it came to defense where her eyes widened at the delivered performance by Law Attorney Hubert. Her mouth fell agape as tears sprout to her eyes with the final verdict. Perhaps the voices of the Virtuous would finally be heard.

Edited January 10, 2021 by DahStalker

[Publius 3666]

"Praise be to Lawyer Hubert - you would assume Seraphim appeared before him too, so impassioned were his prose." Commented Cyril Cardinal St. Publius, a broad smile splaying across his visage before returning his gaze to many more missives that reached him over the day's events...

[ReveredOwl 5314]

"A just verdict, I ought to start a law firm." Said Hubert.

[niya 180]

Elisebeth Louise looks up to Wihelmina, noticing she's in shock. The girl would mimic her, not knowing what was going on. 

[rukio 8909]

Ratcliffe claps.

[frill 2276]

"Truly the believers of miracles accept them as they see all of the evidence for it, the disbelievers of the miracles deny them because they have a doctrine against them. If a priest were to reject the testimony of another priest, we either deny the main principles behind the canonization all saints within the legenda sanctorum, or we affirm a materialism in the faith that supersedes the transcendental nature of the sacred. Much how one of those splendid Haense Royal Armyman would never be disbelieved by his peers if he said he saw a man murdered in the street, as he is trained well and member of one of the militaries best versed in the realm of combat, a priest would struggle to disbelieve his peers if the miraculous was stated to be witnessed. It would be a stain on the church to declare anything else and would surely bring down the papacy by taking the wind from under its metaphysical wings.

 

There is some praise to see these cardinals actions do little more than state an assumed miracle and deliver their speech at these basilicas. I do not see them when other men stir the winds for schism. All the cardinal and priest prompted was rightful scepticism of a new head of the faith." Rev. Monsignor Vicary H- Armas concludes with some muted happiness at the judgement. He gives his shoulders a rolling shuffle as he inks his reply to the papacy, a jarful of humbugs being pushed away from his bed-candle by the blunted nib of his quill. Wouldn't want those melting and getting all sticky, would make a mischief of his cassock.

[thesmellypocket 1839]

Pius of Sutica facepalms from the Skies as sedevacantism has been ruled to be basically licit.