Jump to content

PRIMUS OECUMENICUS CONSILIUM ALBAROSA - 1804, 357 ES


Draeris
 Share

Recommended Posts

jwb02x6ueG9tFirpXHndzFBtd22uGhmyVaCK3_cdX8w_jMQtaRke5KKbd9eSiOwz5K9IKMXj-rvgt--Q-B7YgNvksl7apVkjFJOeMlI_wuaY0ooZIyEe-2L1InqbD5jQA9KOQZB-

THE FIRST ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF ALBAROSA
IN THE DIOCESE OF HYSPIA, OSANORA

 

 

The citizens of Hyspia looked confused, as carriages upon carriages would park around the bustling Sutican city of Osanora. With candles and oil lamps lighting up various sections of the large desert: the crews would work to install one grandiose tent rivaling the size of palaces. Jokingly, this monstrosity of a tent would be called ‘Fort Hyspia’. It was placed in the desert to serve as a neutral ground between all dioceses.

 

tIwVWYzhNvCfJKlqNtO5rCCHJfD_-_MLjneNrGD88JBF5V_n7c2oygYOnCNzPPCiXXHHvM5pw66c4OdGB1I-tMz2TuQ_cIJ2Ai6lBItc96z6zL_53G2JFuW9gR3EGMO-8IqbEsla
‘Fort Hyspia’ in the desert besides the City of Osanora, 1804

 

As the framework of the tent began to take shape, crewmen & caterers would work to prepare the interiors: lavishly decorating the walls with silken curtains, the tables with crystal glasses and ashtrays. Carriages carrying barrels of water and other beverages were brought, as a separate tent functioning as the kitchen was constructed besides it. There, the local cuisine of each delegation would be made: in hopes to make this five-day stay bearable.

 

It would take a day before everything was finished, for the esteemed papal delegations from all dioceses to arrive. His Holiness, flanked by his Monsignors & Chamberlain Carlos, would slowly walk towards his throne within the tent. After taking off his Roche-bans and placing his cane against the table, he would beckon for all attendees to sit down. 

 

The nuns then hurried to bring the documents to every delegation, while the hired caterers poured a variety of local drinks all around. The Pontifical Chamberlain @Proddy took this opportunity to read out the guest list, asking if they were present: 

 

r2kJmMaiFiQcgDlffSPptzCCL0uaEpSBrVWlADOtmB-d34DA4eQfES6ZChYeviKPXVZAMeODOSr2qVkUQwk2TSJmkAb-CXnS_MOrTaq26r58OtmgL94YFYH5ZZ2xx0Ut_MYWuyQr

DELEGATION FROM PROVIDENTIA 
His Eminence Manfried Cardinalis Providentia @GoldWolfGaming
His Eminence Amadeus Cardinalis Nescia @Caranthir_

 

His Excellency the Apostle-General Armande-Philippe Episcopus Metz, @LithiumSedai

 

S67ENr7tM39arUN6sj-FHyEIcbX_VaW8yBt5k19E77CoSEa9d5BWe5h_9j5rOrF8MVYsnn9mWUPyQW_2olFsXNhuxIAAemYj0MZmTKtbhDRilq1DoETEbduHDNaunoa1piERpAtT

DELEGATION FROM JORENUS
His Eminence Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus @Piov
His Eminence Ailred Cardinalis Reinmar @argonian

 

The Right Reverend Alfred Episcopus Henrikev @repl1ca
The Right Reverend Otho Episcopus Valwyck @Drumoldth

 

BcTdQ61MkVNlosIgUulSGXyfvIhquunEl4JJQ7qstNTP-y29s9niEAQiBIKaTZJDfSvL3CN6-jGUbXC5bUKeRE1Qw6XNGMgHk_SfXFVG2w9rMuQhq0a-usL1Zd1Knnd8Xeu_9It0

DELEGATION FROM ALBAROSA
His Eminence Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa @Julio ツ

 

The Right Reverend Francisco Episcopus Hyspia @Timer5011
The Right Reverend Vicary Episcopus Rochefort @frill

The Right Reverend Adelric Episcopus Esbec @MadOne

 

OBSERVERS [Can participate, but cannot vote].
The Esteemed Monsignor Robert de Bourdon @Tiresiam
The Esteemed Monsignor Edmund Myre @Old Man Boiendl
The Esteemed Monsignor Fiske Vanir @Sander

 

After all delegates were accounted for, His Holiness would rise from his throne to address the delegations: 

 

“Dearly beloved, 

 

Our High Pontificate has shown a continuous effort to reform the Holy Mother Church into an institution that can compete with the rampant secularization of our congregation’s governments. We have achieved historical levels of inter-diocesan cooperation and the expansion of our faith. 

 

Today, this council is summoned to set forward the direction of our Holy Mother Church. With our petitions, proposals & reforms together: we shall chart a course of great importance in our fight for humanity’s soul. I ask of all my esteemed Eminences & Reverends to put the faith and wellbeing of your congregations first, and to vote in absence of temporal influences and allegiances. 

 

In this first round, we shall discuss and organize all petitions, proposals & reforms that we wish to vote on in this council. Then, in the second round, we shall provide them in a listed fashion for all attendees to vote on. Let me now begin this week’s affair by introducing a document outlining my own.”

 

His Holiness would nod towards the clerical staff, who would quickly pass on the papers around the tables. In the meantime, delegations were busy sorting their own proposals: awaiting their turn to speak. Once the attendees received the document, it would look like this:

 

99Xa_ckToD4bvRuMzqprwNUHMep4K-pu7hShKDye4HIURIPgJNtNTxi3v_dY5PuqgNcmW-uI-JPiGQrSobOWoGQ7HBRBw85ZCvgugJUoQE299QW2RFi3NPHPQ12cDnrd1qaTcjrl

 

 

"To the esteemed attendees of the first ECUNEMICAL COUNCIL OF ALBAROSA
Do find the listed proposals of
SANCTITAS PONTIFEX MAXIMUS OWYN III below.

 

I). To receive a mandate to completely overhaul the structuring & typography of the current Canon Law.

 

II). To add a stipulation to Canon Law that makes the (Princely) Archdioceses of Providentia, Jorenus & Albarosa permanent within the Holy Mother Church, in name and in scope. 

 

III). To update the definitions in Book II, Title II. Chapter III., expanding the Curia roles currently present & outlining their tasks more concretely. This involves the addition of the new roles already granted, and to add onto the existing descriptions the de facto tasks of each curia role as well. 

 

IV). To change in Book IV, Title IV, Chapter III., that only one attributable miracle is necessary for sainthood: as not all current saints have two.

 

V). To add in Book V, Title II, Chapter I that inciting sedition against, questioning the legitimacy of or conspiring to harm the High Pontiff commits a crime and excommunicates himself automatically. This would involve a law stipulation that specifies what circumstances would justify such: such as disputing a legitimate election, or inciting violence against the High Pontiff as a person.

 

VI). To add in Book V, Title II a chapter that describes Papal Briefs. 

 

VII). To overhaul Book VI, Title II. Chapter III., rendering Minor Bulls ‘Archdiocesan Decrees’ and further streamlining them with the Golden Bulls of His Holiness.

 

VIII). [REMOVED]

 

IX). To add in BOOK VII, Title I, that the High Pontiff may, on his own accord, assume the role of judge within a trial, and overturn the ruling of a lesser judge with a majority of the cardinals backing such. This would require prior approval from the College of Cardinals and should principally be only used in severely important procedures. 

 

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen 
X.II). His Holiness the High Pontiff James II
X.III). His Holiness the High Pontiff Pontian III
X.IV). Governor-General Richard de Reden
X.V). Vicar Lemuel de Langford

X.VI). Father Pius of Sutica

X.VII). Anton Barclay

 

XI). To beautify
XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves

XI.II). Queen Viktoria var Ruthern of Haense

 

XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize
XII.I). Andrik ‘I’ Vydra 
XII.II). John of Carnatia 
XII.III). Jasper of Renzfeld

XII.IV). Otto II of Haense

 

XIII). To Canonize, 
XIII.I). Vytenis of Luciensport
XIII.II). High Pontiff Everard II

 


Te Deum.

 

GODANI JEST WIELKI 

 

PONTIFEX MAXIMUS
OWYN III"


---
[ONLY MEMBERS OF THE CLERGY MIGHT COMMENT OR ROLEPLAY TO HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DISCUSSIONS IN THIS MEETING]

[ROUND I. - Collecting proposals, reforms & petitions]

[If you have nothing to propose yourself, say so on the thread].
[ROUND II. - Voting list formed, vote on each point].

 

ROUND I. 

ALL ATTENDEES ARE INVITED TO SPEAK ON THEIR OWN PROPOSALS, PETITIONS & REFORMS.

 

 

Edited by Draeris
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Draeris said:

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen 

It is the opinion of Adelric Episcopus Esbec, that this selection is permissible to go forth, if his Holiness is able to name  an example of what Anne of Novellen did during her reign, since the Bishop of Esbec is ignorant on the subject!

2 hours ago, Draeris said:

X.IV). Governor-General Richard de Reden

While the Governor-General was a virtuous statesman and a Canonist, it is the opinion of Episcopus Esbec that his work persecuting heretics and the enemies of the Church is not an extraordinary act of piety. Episcopus Esbec further argues that, the duties that the Governor-General carried out are duties expected of any virtuous Canonist invested with his temporal position. His Holiness, the High Pontiff is petitioned to consider the fact that any statesman, not carrying out his duties for the Church in the manner that de Reden did would be frowned upon by the flock.

 

2 hours ago, Draeris said:

X.V). Vicar Lemuel de Langford 

Episcopus Esbec further believes that the case of the Governor-General Richard de Reden also applies to the Vicar. While it is respectable that the Vicar had diligently put in work within the Diocese of Ves, the act of being diligent is a virtue, thus expected of any Canonist person, let alone a man of the cloth. His Holiness would expect any of the clergy to put such diligent work as the Vicar, while this does not qualify those who have and are performing the acts for veneration.

 

2 hours ago, Draeris said:

XI). To beautify
XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves

The case of clergymen performing their duties can also be noted here, in the matter of Cardinal Erasmus, which doesn't necessarily show any extraordinary acts of piety, but a man embodying the core virtues, that all Canonists should strive to do so.

 

Any other candidates proposed by the High Pontiff, who did not receive a comment are seen appropriate by the Episcopus Esbec.

 

 

Edited by MadOne
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Draeris said:

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen 

Alfred Episcopus Henrikev ponders for a few brief moments, approving the ignorance of Episcopus Esbec. The Bishop expects to get an answer on what Anne of Novellen did during her reign !

 

After a short break, the Bishop takes a moment to propose, in his opinion a significant person for veneration. Rising to present the facts he has, the bishop mentions the name of Anton Barclay. "I don't look at this because he was my grandfather. I propose this with a pure heart and a calm soul because Anton spent his whole life piously, doing what he loved and what God rewarded him for!" the bishop goes on to speak and state the facts, addressing His Holiness "Most Holy Father, if you understand what it means to be pious, and I know very well that you are very familiar with it, then you will agree with me that Anton deserves to be venerated." the bishop says, bowing deeply before sitting down.

Edited by repl1ca
Link to post
Share on other sites

After another short break, Alfred Episcopus Henrikev stands up once again, now proposing a beatification of the late Queen of Haense, Viktoria vas Ruthern.

"Brothers, give this letter a read, where I wrote about our late Queen Viktoria, who was indeed very pious lady and a brave soldier for her homeland." the bishop says, presenting the letter which he wrote for High Pontiff Owyn III.

 

"This would be my last proposal, faithful brothers.Shortly, I will bring my opinion on the mentioned proposals and information of his High Holiness."Episcopus says with a satisfied smile, taking a seat finally.

Edited by repl1ca
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manfried Cardinal St. Julia would speak out across the tent's interior to the others of the Priesthood, "For Proposal I of His Holiness, I do not see a necessity for this to occur. If I could hear the plans you have, Holy Father, for this overhaul of the Codex's structure, I believe my opinion could be swayed but it was ratified but a mere few years ago."

 

"For Proposal II, I am not in support with the stipulation that the Archdiocese of Jorenus's name be made permanent for it's historical and cultural significance. However, it is my opinion that both name and scope but certainly more so scope should be permissible to change under future High Pontiffs and should not be made permanent."

 

"As for the third proposal, I am in support."

 

"The fourth..." he looks it over once again, "I am not supportive with the stipulation that if the necessary miracles for beatification are altered in line with this change for Sainthood, I may reconsider. Beatification and Sainthood, even with beatification remaining to be more lax on miracles then canonization, should not be equal in regards to attributable miracles for the beatification or canonization of a faithful person."

 

"The fifth, sixth and seventh proposals. I am supportive of these."

 

"Proposal VIII..." the Cardinal's gaze once again returns to the page, "I will need an explanation on the necessity of this proposal but for now, I am not supportive."

 

"And lastly, the ninth proposal on Canon Law is something I am not supportive of."

 

"As for the venerations, I am supportive of all but the late Governor-General and Vicar. I require a further elaboration on these. Along with this, I will require a further elaboration on the Cardinal Erasmus for beatification but for now, instead support his veneration or if already made venerable, for him to remain such. I am supportive of all other beatifications."

 

"In regards to the canonizations, I am in support of Blessed High Pontiff Everard II's canonization but not Vytenis of Luciensport's canonization, requiring a further elaboration on his life and virtues before I offer my support."

 

"As for proposals of my own, I request of His Holiness to venerate Father Pius of Sutica. Besides that, I shall bring forth further proposals if any do come to mind at a later time in our debate here."
 

Edited by GoldWolfGaming
Link to post
Share on other sites

The construct of this council is lacking and its content outrageous. It is the nature of an ecumenical council to have quorum of three-quarters of the priesthood and we have severely restricted the presence to five cardinals of the septarchy and five bishops. To be both binding by the laws of the faith and keeping in harmony enough that the bishops are both aware of and accepting of the laws they expect their own flocks to follow, you must allow them to be present among us.

 

I see no part of this council that is either a folly, already existent and a redundancy to accomodate twice-over, or an affront to the sensibilities of the church. 

 

I). To receive a mandate to completely overhaul the structuring & typography of the current Canon Law.

No -I see no reason to call an ecumenical council to change the font or aesthetics of script of the current codices. 

 

I). To add a stipulation to Canon Law that makes the (Princely) Archdioceses of Providentia, Jorenus & Albarosa permanent within the Holy Mother Church, in name and in scope. 

No - Both Jorenus and Providentia are states ruled by a Canonist monarch so fulfil the criteria of prince-archdiocese. The only defining extent documents for Albarosa do not qualify it as such.

 

II). To update the definitions in Book II, Title II. Chapter III., expanding the Curia roles currently present & outlining their tasks more concretely. 

No - This proposition is dangerously vague and I cannot assent to it without exhaustive clarification of what is to be modified, to the exact wording.

 

IV). To change in Book IV, Title IV, Chapter III., that only one attributable miracle is necessary for sainthood: as not all current saints have two.

No - It is the nature of those blessed by the church to be responsible for one miracle. It is not the criteria for sainthood but the sainthood of these individuals that must be redressed.

 

V). To add in Book V, Title II, Chapter I that inciting sedition against, questioning the legitimacy of or conspiring to harm the High Pontiff commits a crime and excommunicates himself automatically.

No - There are already provisions for those inciting contempt of or sedition against the Church. It is the first crime against virtue in Canon law. Refusing communion for those that express doubt will turn the faith into fools and dogmatists as even the most pious and reverent question things. I am at all impasses against enshrining contemporary politics into law and see this as nothing more than a will for the Pontiff to expedite the removal of dissenting voices from the fair courts of the Mother Church. To increase what penalty there is from a hearing of the ecclesiastical court to excommunication ad initio is a folly that will send every acolyte out of the faith within weeks of them joining it. Only fools do not have doubts and we do not want to be a faith of fools, the tools of the faith allow us to mediate and find right penance for those questioning the legitimacy of any organ of the church. Excommunication does not meet that healing end and simply removes them from communion and the eye, a sweeping under the rug.

 

VI). To add in Book V, Title II a chapter that describes Papal Briefs. 

No - The canon law already outlines and clarifies the purpose of pontifical letters. To refer to them as breve is a description of their nature; they are brief and subsequently not as solemn as bullae.

 

VII). To overhaul Book VI, Title II. Chapter III., rendering Minor Bulls ‘Archdiocesan Decrees’ and further streamlining them with the Golden Bulls of His Holiness.

No - Book VI, Title II. Chapter III is explicit in its reference to the purpose of minor bullae as those issued by provincial pastors for their provinces for matters that may not supersede or conflict with canon law or golden bullae. They are minor in their nature due to being promulgated by a pastor instead of the pontiff himself, so the name minor bull must remain and be used in writing.

 

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

Yes - I raise no issue with venerating previous pontiffs as shepherding the faith is a venerable and pious deed. It was until recently a tradition for a pontiff to show unity with the faith to venerate his predecessor, except in the case of schismatics and those in a state of undeath, and it would be wise to restore this tradition and allow good men access to skies further. These men were the venerable by any definition and it is my greatest sin to have never met either.

 

No - Richard Reden and Lemuel Lengford, whoever these men may be, have no record of active worship nor interacting with the faith so I would struggle to acknowledge them as possessing virtue more than the average man. In the case of your friend Lengford, would pity what fool who prays for the intercession of a politician through prayer. Veneration is final and may not be revoked unless there are factual errors at play, to use it as a folly and political reward to your Everardine political era peers is a stain on the escutcheon of this pontificate. I understand that you may have longing for nations of yore and a love of old homes, but the church is not a tool of personal reward for old peers. Do not sully the realm of the spiritual with rewards for your temporal friends and venerate those worthy of veneration instead.

 

XI). To beautify
XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize
XIII). To Canonize, 

No - you ascribe no miracles to these people, just a list of names. There is far more to sainthood than being a name alone. Should these become private petitions that the curia may work over, investigate and vote upon, then that will be a worthwhile cause, but it is a fool’s errand to busy an ecumenical council with matters so spurious, vague and severe. Those interested in beatification or canonisation of these individuals may make individual petitions that elucidate their merit but it is not the place of an ecumenical council to expedite them so.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I shall concur with the Auditor on Proposal IV, excluding myself from any chance to reconsider such a proposal as I stated prior, but do not agree that the Sainthood of those individuals should be redressed. If they were canonized in the past, it should remain so. Instead, a permissible solution would be to look through accounts of their lives and see if any valid miracle could have taken place to reaffirm their Sainthood in the eyes of the faithful but it should not be revoked or changed."

Edited by GoldWolfGaming
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Draeris said:

I). To receive a mandate to completely overhaul the structuring & typography of the current Canon Law.

 

II). To add a stipulation to Canon Law that makes the (Princely) Archdioceses of Providentia, Jorenus & Albarosa permanent within the Holy Mother Church, in name and in scope. 

 

III). To update the definitions in Book II, Title II. Chapter III., expanding the Curia roles currently present & outlining their tasks more concretely. 

 

IV). To change in Book IV, Title IV, Chapter III., that only one attributable miracle is necessary for sainthood: as not all current saints have two.

 

V). To add in Book V, Title II, Chapter I that inciting sedition against, questioning the legitimacy of or conspiring to harm the High Pontiff commits a crime and excommunicates himself automatically.

 

VI). To add in Book V, Title II a chapter that describes Papal Briefs. 

 

VII). To overhaul Book VI, Title II. Chapter III., rendering Minor Bulls ‘Archdiocesan Decrees’ and further streamlining them with the Golden Bulls of His Holiness.

 

VIII). [REMOVED]

 

IX). To add in BOOK VII, Title I, that the High Pontiff may, on his own accord, assume the role of judge within a trial, and overturn the ruling of a lesser judge with a majority of the cardinals backing such.

 

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen 
X.II). His Holiness the High Pontiff James II
X.III). His Holiness the High Pontiff Pontian III
X.IV). Governor-General Richard de Reden
X.V). Vicar Lemuel de Langford 

 

XI). To beautify
XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves

 

XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize
XII.I). Andrik ‘I’ Vydra 
XII.II). John of Carnatia 
XII.III). Jasper of Renzfeld

 

XIII). To Canonize, 
XIII.I). Vytenis of Luciensport
XIII.II). High Pontiff Everard II

 

 

Monsignor Robert de Bourdon strode into the tent in his full glory, the sweat heavy on his brow after having rode through the hot-climate outside the bounds of the tent; a cold shelter from the scalding heat outside. As he sat down and heard each topic he'd give his opinion in good time.

 

"Much of these things we discuss are of little import, clerical in a sense that does not apply to the theological nature of our fair church, administrative concerns. I am obliged to offer however and agree with the following proposals which I will annunciate for you my brothers of the cloth in the following terms: I, III, V, VI, IX. These without stipulation deserve our Pontificate's assignment, for the bureaucratic element of our positions need not be debated endlessly. There are some too that I agree with under scrutiny however: VII and of course X through to XIII.

 

On the matter of VII I personally believe it is a mockery of our dear Church to express the decrees of those below the station of our Pontificate in terms which should be preserved for the Holy See alone. A Papal Bull in any form is the distinction of GOD's chosen, not his subordinates. A defined term is fine, appropriate even, but there should be no more a 'Minor Bull' as there could be a Bronze or Silver Bull. There is one decree alone that may be considered as such and it belongs to the words of the Pontificate itself.

 

To the final and most specific of avenues all except the Vicar Lemuel can be argued for he is of very suspicious origins, I do not agree with my colleges on the subject of de Reden. Folk are quick forget that he fought in the War of Two Emperors as a soldier of GOD, that it was he alongside Sir Commodus Marna in Ves who were crusaders dedicated to the Church at that time and bore Owyn's flame upon their breast as they brought justice to the schismatic Renatians of the time. On the subjects of XII I must disagree heartily with the inclusion of John Kovacs of Carnatia at all. Do not forget brothers! Our histories! For it was he who went with the orders of the Emperor to Istria and put an entire pious village of Alsace to the torch, there the family of Falkenrath and their kin were butchered and put to Martyrdom! Perhaps in his stead Augustus Falkenrath, proud priest of the Canon who was captured and killed after surviving that event in the pages of the Everardian period."

 

"My final word to you brothers is one again of unconditional support, a positive note here before I let other man speak within this delegation: I fully support the Canonization of our long held Luciensport Crusaders. Vytenis was a great companion to the Pontiff Everard II, as all of the Black Cross were in those ages. None are more deserving than they, except maybe the good King Andrik Vydra. Our Pontiff Everard II of yore is a well-known figure in our history, the progenitor of a Golden Age for the Church, who raised to glory much of the figures venerated on all levels in the Canon today. He was the son of our dearest ST. EMMA VLADOVIC. He taught the likes of ST. JOHANNES OF AESCULUS and ST. MICHAEL OF CORDOBE in their piety, HIGH PONTIFF ST. SIXTUS IV and Bl. High Pontiff Daniel II were his mentors when he was simply Edmund de Montfort. When all were slaughtered in the Redmark Massacre he alone survived and was sped along by GOD to give account of the slaughter to the King and the Pontiff, he jumped from the top of the castle and outran then men who gave chase. When his Cathedral in Brelus was sacked in the War to come he remained there in that place of God burning alive trying to extinguish the flames until he was dragged out by the skin of his teeth, the LORD saved him from the flame. That was before he had even attained the Pontifical Throne, when he ascended he brought forth the first idea of Canon Law in the Exalted Codex, gave our faith it's first settled and truly independent Holy State. Crowned and supported the first Horen Emperor since the days of Exalted Godfrey. In Luciensport the Archaengul Michael came down and asked aid against his brother the Aengul Gabriel. There is no more holy a man that we can all agree has attained his place among the Holy Calendar."

 

de Bourdon then sat back down like a good boy sealing his speech with a nod

 

 

Spoiler

 

I). To receive a mandate to completely overhaul the structuring & typography of the current Canon Law. SURE

 

II). To add a stipulation to Canon Law that makes the (Princely) Archdioceses of Providentia, Jorenus & Albarosa permanent within the Holy Mother Church, in name and in scope. NO

 

III). To update the definitions in Book II, Title II. Chapter III., expanding the Curia roles currently present & outlining their tasks more concretely.  YEAH

 

IV). To change in Book IV, Title IV, Chapter III., that only one attributable miracle is necessary for sainthood: as not all current saints have two. NO

 

V). To add in Book V, Title II, Chapter I that inciting sedition against, questioning the legitimacy of or conspiring to harm the High Pontiff commits a crime and excommunicates himself automatically. YEAH

 

VI). To add in Book V, Title II a chapter that describes Papal Briefs. NO

 

VII). To overhaul Book VI, Title II. Chapter III., rendering Minor Bulls ‘Archdiocesan Decrees’ and further streamlining them with the Golden Bulls of His Holiness. YEAH BUT NO

 

IX). To add in BOOK VII, Title I, that the High Pontiff may, on his own accord, assume the role of judge within a trial, and overturn the ruling of a lesser judge with a majority of the cardinals backing such. YEAH

 

X). Although it is within the High Pontiff’s authority to venerate any Canonist at will, His Holiness seeks to gain popular approval for his nominees regardless: 

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen YEAH SURE
X.II). His Holiness the High Pontiff James II YEAH SURE
X.III). His Holiness the High Pontiff Pontian III YEAH SURE
X.IV). Governor-General Richard de Reden YEAH SURE
X.V). Vicar Lemuel de Langford  NO THANKS

 

XI). To beautify
XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves 
YES

 

XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize
XII.I). Andrik ‘I’ Vydra 
YES
XII.II). John of Carnatia  AUGUSTUS OF FALKENRATH INSTEAD
XII.III). Jasper of Renzfeld JUST BEAUTIFY

 

XIII). To Canonize, 
XIII.I). Vytenis of Luciensport 
YES
XIII.II). High Pontiff Everard II YES PLEASE

 

 

Edited by Tiresiam
Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to Monsignor Armas @frill, His Holiness would address the individual points mentioned.

 

"The construct of this council is lacking and its content outrageous. It is the nature of an ecumenical council to have quorum of three-quarters of the priesthood and we have severely restricted the presence to five cardinals of the septarchy and five bishops. To be both binding by the laws of the faith and keeping in harmony enough that the bishops are both aware of and accepting of the laws they expect their own flocks to follow, you must allow them to be present among us."

 

Such is allowed.

 

"No -I see no reason to call an ecumenical council to change the font or aesthetics of script of the current codices."

 

This council overlaps two procedures: that of Diets as we have witnessed in Helena, and that of econumical councils that we have witnessed in Providence. Henceforth, proposals such as these belong here as well.

 

"No - Both Jorenus and Providentia are states ruled by a Canonist monarch so fulfil the criteria of prince-archdiocese. The only defining extent documents for Albarosa do not qualify it as such."

 

Only Albarosa is a Prince-Archdiocese, the rest are not: this stipulation would make their existence and jurisdictions permanent, so that a future High Pontiff cannot weaken or strengthen one over the other without assent from his clergy.

 

"No - This proposition is dangerously vague and I cannot assent to it without exhaustive clarification of what is to be modified, to the exact wording."

 

The Prelate of the Sisterhood currently is not mentioned in Canon Law, neither is our Pontifical Legate. This is outdated and needs an update: you are looking into this wrong, Episcopus.

 

"No - It is the nature of those blessed by the church to be responsible for one miracle. It is not the criteria for sainthood but the sainthood of these individuals that must be redressed."

 

Sure.

 

"No - There are already provisions for those inciting contempt of or sedition against the Church. It is the first crime against virtue in Canon law. Refusing communion for those that express doubt will turn the faith into fools and dogmatists as even the most pious and reverent question things. I am at all impasses against enshrining contemporary politics into law and see this as nothing more than a will for the Pontiff to expedite the removal of dissenting voices from the fair courts of the Mother Church. To increase what penalty there is from a hearing of the ecclesiastical court to excommunication ad initio is a folly that will send every acolyte out of the faith within weeks of them joining it. Only fools do not have doubts and we do not want to be a faith of fools, the tools of the faith allow us to mediate and find right penance for those questioning the legitimacy of any organ of the church. Excommunication does not meet that healing end and simply removes them from communion and the eye, a sweeping under the rug."

 

Fair, although you have misunderstood this stipulation. We have seen that the definitions as perscribed in Canon Law are vague. When His Holiness, the entire Synod and Curia, all Archdioceses & dioceses agree that two individuals were schismatic -- but due to a technicality in wording, we could not declare them such, we should feel the need to resolve the stipulations that led to this ecclesiastically legal limbo. No, this would not mean that when someone signs a petition or disagrees with my policy, as you are now, would be excommunicated. It would however mean that if someone acts schismatic, but only targets His Holiness and not the institution as a whole, we can still prosecute him accordingly: or declare him as excommunicated, which a schismatic de facto is until penance.

 

"No - The canon law already outlines and clarifies the purpose of pontifical letters. To refer to them as breve is a description of their nature; they are brief and subsequently not as solemn as bullae."

 

There is no issue that I can foresee by including this new method of communication in Canon Law that describes all other methods of ecclesiastical correspondence. 

 

"No - Book VI, Title II. Chapter III is explicit in its reference to the purpose of minor bullae as those issued by provincial pastors for their provinces for matters that may not supersede or conflict with canon law or golden bullae. They are minor in their nature due to being promulgated by a pastor instead of the pontiff himself, so the name minor bull must remain and be used in writing."

 

I refer you to the words of the wise Monsignor de Bourdon. 

 

"No - Richard Reden and Lemuel Lengford, whoever these men may be, have no record of active worship nor interacting with the faith so I would struggle to acknowledge them as possessing virtue more than the average man. In the case of your friend Lengford, would pity what fool who prays for the intercession of a politician through prayer. Veneration is final and may not be revoked unless there are factual errors at play, to use it as a folly and political reward to your Everardine political era peers is a stain on the escutcheon of this pontificate. I understand that you may have longing for nations of yore and a love of old homes, but the church is not a tool of personal reward for old peers. Do not sully the realm of the spiritual with rewards for your temporal friends and venerate those worthy of veneration instead."

 

As for Richard de Reden, I again refer you to the words of the wise Monsignor de Bourdon.

 

As for Lemuel de Langford, he was the Vicar of Ves under my tenure as Prince-Archbishop of Albarosa & Erasmus' tenure as the Bishop of Ves. He aided greatly in the expansion of the Kaedreni clergy and ensured that the young Ministry of Justice honored ecclesiastical interests. He was the chief figure to normalize relations between these two institutions after the Károly trial, and during his tenure in the House of Commons he staunchly defended Canonist interests. 

 

I will tolerate your implicit jabs towards my integrity in the spirit of free discourse Auditor, but I implore you to inquire better about my relationships to these folk before tainting our discussions with weak presumptions on motive and character. Let us share a good drink and Hyspian meal after this. 

 

"No - you ascribe no miracles to these people, just a list of names. There is far more to sainthood than being a name alone. Should these become private petitions that the curia may work over, investigate and vote upon, then that will be a worthwhile cause, but it is a fool’s errand to busy an ecumenical council with matters so spurious, vague and severe. Those interested in beatification or canonisation of these individuals may make individual petitions that elucidate their merit but it is not the place of an ecumenical council to expedite them so."

 

 

For everyone besides John of Carnatia, we have received petitions and private letters outlining their miracles and histories: something you have had access to as well. In the case of John of Carnatia, we are awaiting for the author's petition to arrive: which should be well within the duration of this council. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I propose that the actual proposed amendments, and not merely the promise of such, be drafted before any definitive vote is made on them. 

 

Likewise, I propose that, for each of the cases of veneration, beatification and canonisation, documents be presented explaining these figures and their miracles before we vote on those.

 

Finally, I would like to put forward Bl. Otto II of Hanse for canonisation and Huron Silverblade for veneration. Naturally I'll present the relevant documents arguing their cases. 

 

Sincerely,

Ailred Cardinal Reinmar." 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Draeris said:

XI). To beautify
XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves

 

XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize
XII.I). Andrik ‘I’ Vydra 
XII.II). John of Carnatia 
XII.III). Jasper of Renzfeld

 

XIII). To Canonize, 
XIII.I). Vytenis of Luciensport
XIII.II). High Pontiff Everard II

 

Cardinal Pelagius-Albarosa would sit himself amongst the clergymen with a bottle of de Savoie 1657 Wine, seemingly surrounded by a sizable entourage of eye-catching Hyspianas. The Prince-Archbishop silently casts his votes on a piece of parchment, for the question of Beatification, being that of the following;

 

    -Vytenis of Luciensport

    -Andrik 'I' Vydra

    -Everard II

 

"I find these specific individuals fit for beatification due to them holding a fine signification amongst the common Canonist population, for them to be recognized as of importance would be a great benefit towards the Church."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Benedict Cardinal Jorenus rises to deliver his remarks.

 

Esteemed brothers in faith, I should like to give my responses to each of the initial proposals of this convocation. 

 

On the matter of the following: 

 

I) NO. The calling of this council did not outline a clear and present impediment of the current standing codex promulgated by the Pontifical predecessor James II. Whether or not such a clear and present discrepancy has been widely experienced by the flock, I affirm no need nor any mandate existing to “completely overhaul” the Canon Law. 

 

II) YES. With difference to my good friend, the Vice Chancellor, I rise in support of retaining the Archdiocesan title of ‘Jorenus’ as it stands for it has been instituted as the diocesan title since the time of High Pontiff Saint Sixtus IV. No Pontiff since has made any effort or saw necessity to alter such. As for Providentia and Albarosa, I do support a retention of significant princely archdiocesan jurisdictions. However, the point stands that these are named after secular cities or titles whereas Jorenus corresponds to a saint whom all Highlandic Canonists derive cultural origin. I move that if the Pontiff seeks to establish permanent names, they should be altered with a saint or holy entity corresponding to the region. 

 

III) NO. The expansion of the Curia is not an issue that I have seen as necessary. I warn against expanding bureaucratic institutions like those experienced in secular realms where there is a disconnect from popular concerns. The Church must remain sensitive to the faithful and must therefore erode any veneer of institutional barriers from the shepherds of the faith who report to the Pontiff with their communities. I recommend altering such and implementing a deputy title or reassign Monsignors without a portfolio to work within the curial offices. 

 

IV) NO. Miracles should not be relaxed for the threshold for canonization. 

 

V) NO. I support the proposition, however I do not support its phrasing in the current form. I find that this statute does not provide adequate protection against those cardinals who might in future cases seek to raise a motion of rebuke for any Pontifical successor who may commit blatant injury against the people of God. 

 

VI) YES. I support Papal briefs as important delegations of duty to the Church.

 

VII) YES. It is mere semantics on the titles of archdiocesan decrees or minor bulls as such. I vote in support of the change if it is necessary, as it is inconsequential. Nevertheless, it is necessary for shepherds of their flock to be in constant touch with the church laity in their region through formal communiqué or newsletter. This must remain.

 

VIII) Removed.

 

IX) NO. I do not support this endeavor, as it places a compromise on the integrity of the Church’s judgment. This conveys a sense of disunion that the Pontiff may be employed for political purposes. 

 

X) The Pontiff should continue to consult in matters of veneration, and I am grateful he has opted to do such in this council. As for those listed; 

 

To venerate

X.I).Empress Anne the August of Novellen - YES

X.II). His Holiness the High Pontiff James II - YES

X.III). His Holiness the High Pontiff Pontian III - YES

X.IV). Governor-General Richard de Reden - NO 

X.V). Vicar Lemuel de Langford - NO

 

XI). To beautify

XI.I). Cardinal Erasmus von Getreide of Ves - YES

 

XII). To beautify, and then proceed to Canonize

XII.I). Andrik ‘I’ Vydra - YES 

XII.II). John of Carnatia - YES

XII.III). Jasper of Renzfeld - YES 

 

XIII). To Canonize, 

XIII.I). Vytenis of Luciensport - NO 

XIII.II). High Pontiff Everard II - YES


 

Proposition to add: XIII.III) King Otto II of Haense

 

Lastly, on a matter of personal privilege, I raise my support with Ailred Cardinal Reinmar on the advancement of Blessed Otto II of Haense for his fortitude and conviction during humanity’s greatest challenges. Surely in our time, few rulers exude great piety and fidelity to the Church. We must remind the Canonist princes of a model of true devotion and endurance in times of hardship. As King of Haense, Otto II's faith guided him toward enduring both a malaise within peacetime and the violent aberrant conflicts that engulf his people as King and as a devout Canonist. His notable actions as one of the crusaders during the Third Crusade which successfully inhibited the expansion of paganism within Norland and Santegia proved a vital test of his resolve to defend the Church and to serve in obedience to then High Pontiff Blessed Everard IV. Should further cause or information be necessary, I shall procure them for this great council.

 

I yield the floor.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Father Lajos would stand up and clear his throat.

 

"Recent events have shown that reforms are needed in these changing times, the trial of the schismatics Cyril and Dima being just one of them. As such, I support these proposals

 

I support the veneration, beatification and canonization of these listed individuals for their services to the Church, but I do concur with Ailred Cardinal Reinmar that documents should be presented of their history when they are proposed to be venerated, beatificated or canonized so that people may have a better understanding of them before voting.

 

Finally, I would like to propose the veneration of my brother, Krisztián Cardinal Károly of Ves."

Edited by CrownedLime747
Link to post
Share on other sites

[!] All ashtrays would be filled with cigarettes, as the fatigued nuns would scurry about to deliver the updated list of proposals from His Holiness. The Chamberlain @Proddywould speak shortly before the clergy gathered: 

 

"His Holiness has added the given petitions to the list and has, on the basis of your concerns, elaborated upon other points. I wish to remind everyone that you may not vote in Round I yet, and that only Cardinals can vote on the topic of canonizations, beatifications & venerations alone. On the new document, every edit is written in this colour." Padre Carlos would then proceed to show the green text to the room. 

 

THE CURRENT TALLY FOR CANONIZATIONS, BEATIFICATIONS & VENERATIONS: 

 

 

VENERATIONS:

Empress Anne the August of Novellen 

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

His Holiness the High Pontiff James II

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

His Holiness the High Pontiff Pontian III

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

Governor-General Richard de Reden

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

 

 

Vicar Lemuel de Langford

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

 

 

Father Pius of Sutica

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

 

Cardinal Anton Barclay of Reinmar

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

 

 

BEATIFICATIONS: 

Cardinal Erasmus von Gertreide of Ves

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

 

 

Queen Viktoria var Ruthern of Haense

AYE:

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 


BEATIFICATIONS FOLLOWED BY CANONIZATIONS:

Andrik 'I' Vydra

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

 

 

John of Carnatia

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

Jasper of Renzfeld

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

Otto II of Haense

AYE:

NAY:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

 

 

 

CANONIZATIONS: 

Vytenis of Luciensport

AYE:

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

 

 

High Pontiff Everard II

AYE:

Benedict Cardinalis Jorenus

Pelagius Cardinalis Albarosa

NAY:

 

@argonian@Caranthir_@Piov@GoldWolfGaming@Julio ツ

 

Edited by Draeris
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...