Acolyte Thesis | MUNUS ECCLESIAE - The Role of the Church

[Crevel 7557]

 

MUNUS ECCLESIAE

The Role of the Church

Die Rolle der Kirche

 

PREFACE

This thesis shall address the Church’s history as an institution, particularly in its foundations and preservation of its objective. Further, the latter portion of my text shall include my insight on the direction that our Church ought to follow to ensure the spiritual sanctity of the Church remains a constant until the end of time. Consider this thesis not only to be an introductory process as I aspire to enter the priesthood but also a statement of which all clerics regardless of rite should aspire towards for we ultimately share the same singular and unchanging Holy Father that is our Lord God. I dedicate this thesis to my late grandfather, King John of Aaun, for it would be without the lasting impression of his piety as told by my father and his own service as a priest before ascension as king that I would likely not have taken up this vocation as a humbled servant of our foremost Father in Heaven. This thesis, being quite lengthy already, has been shortened to fit the Church's more historical role for the sake of brevity. It is likely that topics of importance such as the Laurel of Horen, and those glanced over in the endnotes, shall have separate essays dedicated to the topic in the future at some point after ordination. If I mentioned it all in this beginning thesis, I would have brought myself to infirmity before I could even begin the work of a priest.

 

EARLY MISSION OF THE DIVINE MINISTRY

As shepherds of Humanity, we possess an institution that has far exceeded all our lifetimes. For all many care, it always was, it always is, and it always will be. However, like all things on the earth, it had a beginning. While divine ministry began with Horen,¹ it wasn't until Owyn that we saw the formal establishment of a priesthood through the commandment of God after being reprimanded for the slaying of Harren: “But you remain My prophet. And that My word is kept, you shall anoint servants in your lineage. For you are their lord, and bear the laurel of Horen.”² It was then the earthly Church formed with Owyn as its progenitor with the virtuous freedmen of Alduun as its first priests.³ The laurel of Horen, as referenced by God, is known to have become the divine ‘seal of office’ bestowed onto a prophet by an angel of the Lord to divinely accentuate them for the virtuous to follow in a mission to combat the world’s iniquity.⁴ However, it does on untold occasions pass through mortal hands or go missing. This shall possibly be covered in a later thesis.

 

God’s commandment regarding the purpose of the anointments were clear: “that My word is kept”. The Owynist⁵ priesthood was to keep His word through the two scrolls of Virtue and Spirit. A seemingly simple task, but evil in the world remained and so did sin among men. The Lord kept a sacred silence of a thousand years which likely served as a testament to the spirit of the faithful when left to their own inclinations without His direct revelation apart from the scrolls.⁶ How did they fare? Owyn anointed the twins, Evaristus and Clement, as his successors and instructed them to instruct their brethren to live holy lives and to shepherd the faithful in anticipation of the second son of spirit. They did so faithfully, but as it is told with each generation the number of faithful grew lesser and lesser. Virtue had come to be preserved only by keepers of ashen urns,⁷ paupers,⁸ and ‘princes of piety’.⁹ Virtuous priests continued to read the Spirit, and yet the world continued to distance themselves from God as it seemed that He and His virtue had runs its course as they adopted false faiths and corrupted holy wisdom to create strange practices. In spite of the priesthood’s attempt to preserve His word, they had allowed it to be corrupted and unheard. The world could not see the presence of the Lord and His virtuous works, and so they forsook Him in favour of heresy and apostasy so that they could feel a spiritual comfort to help them endure only for it to bring them far from Him.¹⁰ Despite this, the Gospel tells of no effort, minor or otherwise, that the priesthood made to correct such deviations from the Lord. By making no considerable effort, the Owynist priesthood arguably failed in their divine mission. They may have preserved His word in a literal sense that the Virtue and Spirit was maintained within their limited priesthood, but they did not keep His word in the world as it had become spiritually destitute to the point that Iblees had once again struck the lands with chaos and corruption where even the King of Men bowed before Iblees prompting the Lord God’s intervention¹¹ to save them from themselves. 

 

Despite this being such a vastly overlooked failure in our contemporary reflection, it needs to be considered why such a failure occurred so that such similar instances do not occur. We are in our own period of silence where we hear not from God, but from angels and ‘holy’ men who are themselves subjected to a concerning degree of scrutiny due to their own involvement in worldly affairs rather than strictly spiritual matters.¹²

 

EXCLUSIVITY, APATHY, AND SLOTHFULNESS OF THE OWYNIST DIVINE MINISTRY

While grounded in a solid foundation which was the keeping of the Lord God’s word through the scriptures revealed to the world in the form of the Scroll of Virtue and Spirit, it was quite clear that there was something lacking in the priesthood that deprived them of the means to fulfil such an easy mission. The priesthood was not charged with upholding an obscure fantasy, their mission was to continue making known the inalienable truth of God and His Virtue which is inseparable from life itself. His miracles were and are plentiful. The victory of heavenly Virtue over lowly sin was self-evident in the defeat of Iblees, his minions, and his influence. For the Owynist priesthood to fail in keeping His word in the world despite having great advantage is nothing short of an injustice for all those who could have and should have been brought closer to God through their influence but were not. 

 

To some extent, any conclusion on the matter requires supposition. We are talking of a period that is over a millennium ago, we do not have written surviving records of every notable factor that may have played a significant role in the priesthood’s failure whether there may have been an ideological dispute, problematic internal processes, obstructive individuals, and so on. The sacking of the Priestly See of Pontian I under the administration of High Priest Liberius destroyed a large portion of the records. However, there is still documentation from the First and Second Interregnums that give us a glimpse of what the early priesthood may have been like. In the Bull of Augustine, decreed by High Pontiff Owyn I towards the end of the First Interregnum in the 1430s, a full hierarchical reformation for the Church of the True Creator was conducted which created a hierarchy very similar to what we have today. Pairing that with an overview document titled ‘Church of the One True Faith’ laid out by his successor,¹³ High Ecclessiarch Radomir, identifies the early priesthood as being “unsophisticated and simple, possessing [sic] of little hierarchy. For several centuries the Church kept the Faith powerful and prevalent under the Horen dynasty.” While it is evident that the early priesthood did not keep the faith powerful, from the perspective of a church that supported a doctrine espousing human supremacy it would be. However, the other comparison is that the early priesthood was considered unsophisticated and simple with a limited hierarchy. It makes sense in context to the squabbling priests of Godfrey's time before the appointment of James as high priest and pontifex.

 

Without an established hierarchy which is important for identifying obligations and duties to assign to different roles in the priesthood, there would have been a lesser degree of cohesion which would have dampened the united direction that the priesthood ought to have taken in the preservation of His word in the lives of men. With the commandment given to Owyn that was likely followed by his predecessors, the priesthood would likely have been entirely occupied by humans, and this seems to be the case as supported by the human supremacist support of this failed priesthood. This was, of course, at great detriment to His word and His Virtue. Our Lord God is not exclusive. His word is not exclusive, and neither are His virtues. He breathed the same breaths into the raised faithful as he breathed into the raised apostate. He gave blessing to the tribes of Malin, Krug, and Urguan, as well as Horen’s own.¹⁴ By thinking ourselves more worthy of His blessings is arrogance and a disservice to Him. All are capable of receiving His blessings, and all are capable of forming a deeper connection to Him through following his Virtues. The Owynist priesthood neglected this heavily. While mankind performed corrupted rites during the Lord's silence, it was the other races who abandoned Him entirely through the adoption of false faiths¹⁵ because they never came to know His word because it was never taught to them. They weakened the faith through their narrow interpretation of His divine will at best and possible prejudice at worst. By our births, we are all privileged as God's creations to the opportunity to live a life of discipline and virtue with our holiest Father as our guiding light. It is a mercy that even the most wicked cannot infringe upon because the fruit of virtue cannot rot.¹⁶ We all bear the capability to turn our back on and condemn sin in all its forms. 

 

While the earliest formal priesthood failed, its surviving remnants would go on to build the foundation of what I would label the Godfreyist priesthood who would unite under the eponymous second son of spirit.

 

GODFREYIST PRIESTHOOD

With the return of a son of spirit, the Lord had once again given the world a mortal arbiter to vanquish the influence of Iblees and worldly sin. As we know, his means of restoring the Lord’s virtue to the world united mankind once more and shattered the sway of the ruinous powers. His rule was that of peace and holiness, that the remaining priests of the world were once again able to speak of God’s Word in temples and court in safety. However, as it is told to us in the Book of Godfrey, the priests were divided and quarrelsome due to their varying rites and cultures. With no existing hierarchy, they were troubled and had to rely on Godfrey’s role as prophet to lead them. As they met for seven days and seven nights with no agreeance on standardised rites and hymns, it was James Hightower¹⁷ whom was a priest and nobility of Godfrey’s kingdom who humbled the priests and Godfrey saw fit to appoint him as high priest and he had been named “pontifex” or “bridge-builder" which is where our common understanding of High Pontiff¹⁸ comes from, and in this the faithful were united.

 

This new title restored the priesthood’s hierarchy insofar as bringing a leadership figure that was not the son of spirit, however it also brought a new depth to the role of the priesthood and particularly its leadership figure. To build bridges between the faithful so that regardless of our rites, provided that they are done in worship to God and according to His Word and Virtue, we are to be united because it is from being united in His virtue that we find our strength. From that point, sparing a few periods of our history, the Church has committed to the objective of uniting the faithful on top of preserving His Word. While it is certainly tradition from Godfrey rather than a divine commandment as was the priesthood directly assembled by Owyn, it has nevertheless become an important point in keeping His virtue strong in the hearts and mouths of the faithful. It's continuing in these traditions that we should continue to act.

 

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS, & THE WAY FORWARD

Our priesthood is one that has been willed under divine commandment, but it is vital to realise that despite this we are not infallible just as the Exalted themselves were not infallible. Infallibility derives from our Lord God alone, and thus we should not call ourselves infallible. It is only through the Spirit of God Himself that something can be made infallible. As the priesthood, we are merely advocates and preservers of His word with an understanding greater than most with a developed institution but it is not a mission that we carry alone. It is the obligation of every member of the faithful to act in a manner according to His Virtue and to demonstrate the goodness of His Word. If our priesthood were to fail in preserving His word at large as the early Owynist priesthood once did, whether through negligence or corruption of His virtues for personal ambition, there will inevitably be a congregation of preachers that will preserve His Word. However, this is no excuse to be slothful. In fact, it should encourage us to instruct others to keep to a disciplined lifestyle of virtue because the eternal good of His virtue rewards those who follow it and those who teach it. The Church must, in accordance with our obligation, preserve and preach His Word in a manner according to His Virtue and adhere to the traditions of uniting the faithful regardless of tribe so that we shall all live eternally in His grace as His creation.

 

Acolyte Martin Alstion

“Lebe nach Gott”

 

ENDNOTES

¹ Gospel 2:78

² Gospel 5:56-58

³ These virtuous freedmen were former subjects and slaves of the mixed blood lords who themselves were subjects of Harren who fled with his death. This comes with an implication that the freedmen were human with God’s commandment to anoint in Owyn’s lineage, reinforcing a human-centred clergy as the Flexio for “lineage” is synonymous with “race” or “kind”. However, we know that non-humans are still capable of understanding virtue and acting within a virtuous capacity despite esteemed cases of piety being much rarer.

⁴ In all circumstances that the laurel is offered, it is after a period of iniquity has struck the world. With Horen, it was Iblees directly tempting Horen’s tribe with sin through Saul. With Harren, it was following the destruction of the holy city which seemingly led to widespread desolation of virtue. With Owyn, it was when Harren turned away from God, embraced heathenry, persisted in sin, and massacred the virtuous of both Godwin and Joren’s realms in conquest. While not directly referenced, the laurel would have been bestowed in Gospel 4:30: “There he fasted for three days, and on the third he was blessed with true holiness.” With Godfrey, unvirtuous men ruled tribes and lesser kingdoms who hated the Lord and outnumbered the virtuous kingdom of Renatus. With the third son of spirit, whether it is acknowledged to be Sigismund or not, it is said that they will receive the laurel as the faithless wreak havoc in the kingdoms of men, the virtuous are persecuted by the people of Idunia through false prophets, and vengeful nations shall strike in wrath and retribution. The difference between Harren and the acknowledged prophets is that despite Harren voicing what seemed like early concern about the holy city’s occupation by the accursed, it was in truth all a matter of a greater pursuit of personal ambition and glory rather than being a humble servant of the Lord’s divine will.

⁵ Not to be confused with the Owynist rites and sects as we know them in a modern sense which largely accentuate the role and methodology of Owyn as an exalted, sometimes minimising the role of the other exalted and on some occasions are heretical in nature through their rejection of certain Church doctrines. The usage here in this thesis refers to the priesthood as appointed by Owyn and his direct successors.

⁶ God putting individuals and the world into predicaments as a trial of faith and fortitude is something that we learn happened from the very beginning of our existence, and we can see it throughout the Gospel as well as in our own personal lives. We enjoy the hindsight of the Scroll of Gospel to learn upon our history textually, however the very early history of the faith would have been enshrined primarily in oral tradition outside of the Scroll of Virtue and the Scroll of Spirit. Our shared history with His Virtue was very likely kept to a select few until Godfrey was commanded to author the Gospel to give the extensive history which includes the times of the first man and woman without language, the trial of faith imposed on the first woman by trusting in the Lord and her sons, the trial imposed on the sons with their uncovered imperfections, and the allowed altering of the sons and their tribes by Iblees as scars of evil before bestowing them divine blessings to permanently demonstrate that His divine grace and Virtue is counter to all sin and evil so that they may find their own hearts emboldened with Virtue and return to Him in spite of persisting sin. Without trials to test our faith, we possess no true scale of our dedication to Virtue and no justification to the Lord of how we made an effort to bring ourselves close to Him. As it is said in Virtue 5:7-8: “For I have given you the pains of the world, and I have given you their cure. And you shall know the trials of this theater of virtue, and know that they shall strengthen you.“

⁷ ”Keepers of ashen urns” is supposed to refer to holy men, many of whom were likely ordained priests, that would be responsible for maintaining urns in temples containing the ashes following a funerary rite containing cremation. Cremation was very likely the preferred cultural method of dealing with the dead following the Harrenite conquests to offset the presence of plague and perhaps even to prevent sacrilegious handling of the dead with the presence of necromancers about who would eventually contribute to the fall of the kingdom of Oren after Daniel’s abdication.

⁸ ”Paupers” is most commonly used to refer to the financially and resourcefully destitute. Despite their lack of personal belongings and their hardship, their spirit was still nourished with the Lord and His Virtue because the pride that often comes with ownership did not cloud their worldly judgement. Some of these paupers of Aegis may also be the earliest examples of ascetics and monastics who engaged in self-imposed poverty so that they found themselves in a more humbling position to better act in accordance with Virtue.

⁹ ”Princes of piety” likely refers to the few landed rulers descending from Horen embodying virtue that survived in spite of prior conquests, plague and kinslaying. In this, King Daniel of Oren would be recognised as the last prince of piety in later Aegis period before Godfrey began his reign on the new lands of Asulon. Today, the very same Daniel is recognised as St. Daniel of Al’Khazar.

¹⁰ While they may have recognised God’s presence to an extent, by abandoning His guidance and corrupting Virtue for their own self-comfort they have forsaken God like a child shirking chores laid out to them by their father to instead listen impressionably to a charlatan speak falsely of his own father. To be a virtuous faithful is to commit to God and His virtue entirely even if inconvenient. If someone’s trust in the Lord is dependent on how well they are treated in a given moment, then it is not faith: it is an exploitation of His grace and mercy which is surely a sin of greed for a want of an undeserved overindulgence in His blessings.

¹¹ God’s intervention came in the form of sending forth two angels — the Wandering Aengul and Aeriel — who assisted the world physically, while He Himself likely spoke from the Skies into the minds of his creations as an extension of Himself rather than the voice coming from anywhere in particular. God has not credibly been noted to appear in any physical form at any point. His lack of a notable physical form in the past led to why so many of Godfrey’s subjects viewed him as God on earth when he united mankind in virtue after the long-term disastrous rise of sin prior to his reign. However, this is of course a heresy as Godfrey was merely a servant of divine will.

¹² No clarification shall be given to avoid dispute. All readers are likely capable of identifying without much thought at least one personage expected to act in a virtuous capacity yet neglects their obligation to do so. It is a timeless fault of which many are susceptible. Nonetheless, it is no excuse to allow ourselves to be vulnerable in such a way when we know the obligation we hold and the influence we wield, especially those among the priesthood and princes of renown.

¹³ Despite the contentious circumstances regarding the shift between the First and Second Interregnum, the historical insight they provide into the priesthood’s past form is enlightening nevertheless.

¹⁴ Gospel 2:62-69

¹⁵ Gospel 5:33

¹⁶ Virtue 1:2

¹⁷ While James’ surname and noble status is not alluded to within the Scroll of Gospel, historical records and archives have made reference to his status as a Hightower repeatedly in both domestic and Church-related collections, and even those intertwined as seen as recently in 1994 in the Historia Domus Virosi in the Church’s archives which documents the history of House Virosi and includes an explanation of why High Pontiff James II took on the pontifical name James as a callback to James Hightower. Hightowers themselves held significant influence in Renatus, with James’ father even serving as an earlier High Priest by the name of Everard. Outside of what is written in the Gospel, it is very likely that James’ appointment as high priest was partially rooted in nepotism and familiarity rather than being purely a judgement of James’ adherence to the Lord. Despite this, it seems that his appointment didn’t have any concerning side effects so the concern of nepotism is negligible.

¹⁸ Despite being named pontifex, there aren’t any early records to suggest that James adopted the title of Pontifex, Pontiff, or High Pontiff. The styling of High Pontiff only began with his successor, Gideon Silverblade, who took on the name Pius. Interestingly, what we know today as cardinals in very early forms of the priest hierarchy were titled pontiffs instead of cardinals. This also demonstrates the early importance of uniting the faithful Church-wide and not necessarily a duty attributed to only the High Pontiff or High Priest.

[Malins Welcome 1519]

Acolyte,

 

I am pleased to accept your thesis and approve your ordination to the Priesthood.

 

James Cardinal Malinor