MadOne 3386 Share Posted May 1, 2023 ON RULERSHIP Issued by Brandt, Knight of the Black Sepulchre. FOREWORD To His Eminence, Armand Cardinal Allobrogum, the Ecclesiastical Auditor and His Eminence, Cyrus Cardinal Albarosa, Prelate of the Clergy. @MCVDK@Mordhaund With the advice of my friend, Father Arnaud of Minitz, I have decided to apply to the Church of Canon with intent of being a part of the Blessed Diaconate of the Holy Mother Church. While I look forward to taking the examination for this ordeal, I should like to publish the truths that have been revealed to me as a Canonist Prince, in the form of a thesis, in order to complement my coming exam. Below are the works that I have undertaken as a private student of the Canon, in which I reflect on the duties of rulership. Let this be an adequate inclusion to the swathes of theses that have been penned by minds much wiser and blessed than mine. INTRODUCTION As a child, born to my late Father, Duke Leon, at a young age have I been thrust to take the mantle of rulership, and of being a warrior. While conducting my duties as the New Duke of Minitz, I have been exposed to the musings of great minds such as that of Venerable Fabian the Lesser, as well as that of Blessed Pius of Sutica, which have helped me to reinforce my worldly rule with the divine commands that our Lord bestows upon us. In this thesis, I will argue for the existence of a prophesied 'Kingdom of God' - a theoretical concept aimed to demonstrate the duty of a ruler in swaying their domain with inner piety, in order to commune and come closer to the laws applied in Canon Law. I argue how the fickle deeds of man will never be able to bring about a true 'Kingdom of God', while also highlighting why it is important for rulers to try their utmost nevertheless in the pursuit of such a high-minded, idealistic goal. ON DIVINE RIGHT As I continue to ponder the nature of the fate I have been entrusted with, as the Duke of Minitz, I have come to develop my ideas on the concepts rulership and piety. During my reign, my actions, I am constantly reminded of the authority that has been bestowed upon us, the ilk of Horen in dynastic and civil positions of power. Truly, as it has been since the dawn of Horenic tribes, it is a weighty responsibility to govern others, and it is one that must be approached with the utmost care and attention. In the teachings of our Holy Scrolls, I am reminded of the true nature of all all authority; It has been evident to Canonist scholars, that all authority in the temporal realm has ultimately derived from God, and it is only through His divine will that rulers are able to exercise power over others. This, throughout the ages has been interpreted in the form of a Divine Right by Kings, that the ruler has a supposed right, through the nature of being chosen by the Lord to be born into the Crown, to rule above others. Indeed, we see the Flexio suffix 'Dei Gratia' being utilised by various monarchs and rules in Almaris and the realms that have come before, as an implicit argument that monarchs make to signify their status as the representative of the Lord in their respective realms; His Royal Majesty, Georg I, by the Grace of Godan, King of Hanseti and Ruska His Royal Majesty, Georg I, By the Grace of God, King of Sutica and King in Atheran Salvus Her Royal Majesty, Johanna I, By the Grace of God, Queen of Sutica and Queen in Atheran Salvus His Royal Majesty, Adrian I, by the Grace of God, King of Balian His Majesty by the Grace of God, Tar-Uriel King and Protector of the Adunians Her Grace, Renilde I, By the Grace of GOD, Archduchess of the Petra In my thesis, I rely on the Scroll of Virtue extensively in order to highlight the nature of rulership and the duty that the monarchs are bestowed with God, since the Scroll of Virtue asserts that the very concept of virtue itself is in fact universal; applicant to everyone and everything; "And so I shall guide you in a theater of virtue, and the virtuous shall not live except by My Word." (Virtue 1:7) However, the issue with universal claim to a divine right and rulership is disputed within the Scroll of Virtue, through the very assertation by our Lord that all virtue is universal, and applicable to all; "I am the Lord GOD without peer. I created the earth, the seas, and the heavens. 4 And I breathed life into the beasts of the earth and the men who rule them. 5 And as I am eternal, you are transient, and there is no eternity without Me." (Virtue 7:3) The transient nature of all men who rule, the implication, nay, the assertation that all is fleeting would go to imply that no man has universal right to enact their will on the populace, for the transient nature of authority means that it can be taken away, redistributed, repurposed. A sceptical reader may point out; 'Verily, brother Brandt, for authority vested upon the monarch is transient because of their mortality; the authority that they once derived from the Lord transfers into their heirs! Thus, one man may hold universal claim to Dei Gratia!" Indeed, dear reader, such claim is true, and the necessities of managing a realm in a stable manner beget hereditary rulership, I point out to the succession traditions such as that of the Kingdom of Kaedrin through an elective monarchy. If the individuals, such as King Peter of Kaedrin, the Emperor of Oren have not earned their divine right of rulership through their birth into that status as an heir, then where do they garner their divine right from? And even if not elected, wouldn't the overthrowing of unpopular monarchs such as that of Philip II, being overthrown during the Aster Revolution be in clear violation of this supposed divine right? To this, one would argue that the very nature of a man being elected as a monarch is betwixt with the Lord's Plan, and the very fact that they were fated to be elected, or fated to overthrow the ruler garners such an individual to hold the Divine Right of the Lord, wouldn't that serve to delegitimise the very point that a misguided reader might make? Wouldn't this delegitimise the dynastic claims of House Barbanov as the rightful rulers of Haense, Novellen as the rightful rulers of Balian, et cetera? For any lowborn man who holds a sword may march and take what they seek, and if succeeded, they would garner the divine right of the Lord. This assertion goes against the very essence of the Scroll of Virtue, which emphasizes that all individuals should universally work towards virtue in the theatre of meritocracy. The notion that someone is inherently superior due to being the incumbent monarch is inherently flawed and goes against the very principles that the Scroll of Virtue preaches in all-encompassing justice and fairness. Moreover, the idea of divine right through inheritance also assumes that the offspring of the monarch will necessarily have the same virtues and abilities as their predecessor, which is not always the case. It is entirely possible for a monarch, and his heirs to lack the necessary qualities to rule justly and effectively, leading to poor governance and ultimately harm to the populace. I point out towards the contrasting reigns of Heinrik II of Hanseti-Ruska, and his subsequent heir, King Sigismund III. To refute this, an astute Scholar may point out towards the very Scroll of Virtue that I examine; "For I have ordered your station and birth, and I have established the order of things. 7 And you shall not envy the lives of others, for all virtuous paths are equal in My eyes, and all shall be rewarded not according to their station, but their virtue" (Virtue 6:6) Indeed, this section of the Canticle of Fidelity preaches against envy, and reasserts the legitimate status of rulers on this Earth as the custodians of their populace. However, I point out that this part of the Scroll contends that 'all virtuous paths are equal.' Ergo, to use this section to justify the Divine Right of the Kings is refuted when the path of the monarch is not in line with virtue, implying that not walking such a path instantly revokes the access of Kings to their divine authority. Yet, when has it been seen from man to be infallible? From my rule, I have seen that I have faltered in the path of virtue myself, and even our Vicars of Gods, our Kings, our Emperors are fickle and fallible. I point to the dethroning of High Pontiff Owyn, who has been coronated as the Vicar of God under the emanations of glory. Which Monarch can honestly and justly claim that they have never strayed from the path? Archduchess Renilde took her penance for her supposed infidelity, King Heinrik was widely known to have clashed with his wife, King Karl III has often been criticised with heavy-handed, my own predecessor, Leon Barclay had been headstrong and had a fiery temper, and I find myself bearing much the same human faults as all of us do. Does that mean that when we falter, our right to rule is taken away, only to be reasserted when we walk the path once more? Doesn't the claim of an universal right to rulership refute the Orthodox teachings of the Canon, that our Lord God is ultimately mysterious and incomprehensible? As Saint James II wrote; "Such is the divine mystery of the Virtue, that it brings contentment even when our own mind cannot." If virtue is a divine mystery that cannot bring contentment to our mind, how can we then claim that we know God's intent in proclaiming monarchs to be propagated by Divine Right? How can we even fathom, or claim to speak for the Lord's will? THE IMPLICATION AND SOLUTION While some may interpret my previous writings as a call to end hereditary rulership altogether, this is not the case. Rather, I believe that hereditary rulership is a practical necessity in certain contexts, and my aim is to present an alternative perspective on the origin of divine right. In my view, the idea of divine right can be traced back to a binding contract between the ruler and the people they govern. This contract involves a sacred pact between the two parties in which the ruled agree to relinquish certain liberties, such as the freedom to govern themselves, (rights such as this are guaranteed in almost all literature surrounding rights. See; Gradic Rights or the writings of Emperor Joseph) in exchange for the ruler's covenant to provide safety, justice, and rights for their subjects. The Covenant posits that the ruled give up some of their individual freedoms in exchange for the protection of their rights. This agreement creates an obligation to God on the part of the Monarch to protect their citizenry and to ensure their well-being. In this view, the Monarch can be considered as a servant of the people, charged with ensuring the common good and promoting the welfare of the citizens. The idea of divine right thus originates from such a pact. Instead of being tied solely to inheritance or election, divine right is a conferred mandate of God that is assumed through just governance. This means that a ruler must govern with justice and fairness, protecting the rights of the citizens, and ensuring their safety and well-being. In return, the citizens give their consent to be governed, and the ruler is entrusted with the responsibility of upholding the pact, thus earning their title of 'Dei Gratia'. To point out how this system is accurate to our context, I shall point out to various states who claimed to gave a Divine Right to govern, yet did not have the consent of the people to rule. The heirs of Frederick II of the Kingdom of Oren is a contemporary example, having been overthrown by the Harvest Revolution that My Father himself participated in. In every example we see, he, who claims divine rulership through birth, yet does not have the consent of the people have ultimately presided over ghost towns and dead cities; Kings, without Kingdoms. Such is a divine miracle that, when examined closely points towards the favour that the Lord God places into the consent of the ruled, that no man may claim rulership without it. To me, this approach provides a more nuanced understanding of the notion of divine right, which is not based solely on inheritance or election but is instead conferred upon those who govern justly and effectively. In essence, divine right is a responsibility rather than an inherent trait, and it is the responsibility of the ruler to live up to this divine mandate by governing with the best interests of their subjects in mind. To prove this point, listen not to my words, but to the Scroll of Virtue itself; "And I am the Lord GOD without peer, and My order is the holy order, and My law is the virtuous law, and all the blessings of the Virtue shall serve the righteous king and servant alike." (Virtue 6:9) Those who are righteous, not only earn the blessings of Virtue, but also the consent of the people, thus, the subsequent claim to their title of 'Dei Gratia'. Thus, I argue that it is important to recognize that the authority of rulers is not unlimited, and that they are bound by the laws and customs of their societies. For even though they may have the power to make laws and issue decrees, they must do so within the confines of what is just and fair. Therefore, let us always remember the divine nature of authority, and let us strive towards a world where rulership and piety go hand in hand. Let us pray for those in positions of power, that they may be guided by the wisdom and grace of our Lord, and that they may use their authority for the greater good of all. MAY GOD BLESS US ALWAYS IN OUR QUEST FOR TRUTH AND RIGTEOUSNESS, Knight of the Black Sepulchre 25 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sander 3155 Share Posted May 1, 2023 Father Arnaud was ecstatic to both see that the Duke had applied to become a deacon as well as to read such a splendid thesis! 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodGuyMatt 7062 Share Posted May 1, 2023 Ludrik von Katzak read Duke Brandt's thesis with great interest, his covered eyes scanning each page intently as he absorbed the Duke's words. As a devout follower of the Canonist faith, Ludrik was struck by how closely the Duke's research aligned with his own beliefs about the nature of God. Such was only natural, after all, for they were both Reinmaren "Truly, this is a work of great wisdom," Ludrik thought to himself as he finished the final words. "The Duke has brought to light many truths that we as Reimaren have long believed, but struggled to express in words." 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts