Barlaam

Jurgen rests, wherever his God sent him, for better or for worse. Yet, of the few things he knew for certain, one was this: he had died defending Princess Catherine Barclay, and those that killed her were stranger Orenians. And indeed, many of those that had signed the Chancellor's declaration against the Prince, had been involved in a coup against the last Prince, which he himself had stopped.

He had never asked for recognition, but the idea that he would be condemned for defending the Princess of his realm, and indeed somehow accused of murdering her (against all reason), by his own Chancellor... that would be beyond reason. And yet so it happened. He was accused of murdering the woman he died protecting, and his accuser lived even though she was executed. But at least now she, mayhaps, would **** off, and let his soul rest.

The Primal Saints

Although selfish and omphaloskeptic scholars of the modern age may find comfort and peace in their ‘own’ knowledge and wisdom, believing themselves enlightened and having surpassed their ancestors, in truth they could not be further from the truth. The history of this world is a history of a descent. A decline from an ancient bliss. A degeneration from the heroes of yore. And most of all, a dereliction of faith and duty. 

Learn the stories of those greatest among us, those heroes of old fables, those sacred fathers of our people. Pay heed to the great deeds and foolish mistakes of the fathers and uncles of all Descendants, of those to whom we owe the greatest respect and pay the least. Venerate the Primal Saints.

St. Urguan of the Depths

We begin with St. Urguan of the Depths. Born in the deepest parts of Aegis, those great caverns and ravines where the Sun did not shine, Urguan Father of Dwarvenkind was hardy from birth. There was not a moment of the prototypical Dwarf’s life, though he was not yet a dwarf, that was not dedicated to his labour. To travel, he mined and dug great tunnels. To earn his keep, likewise. To build great halls and chambers for his family, his parents, brothers, and later his children, to enjoy, he did the same… with his own blood, sweat and tears. He was strong, but he took no pride in it. He was diligent, but he did not know it. His endurance was unparalleled, but he would not brag of it. His brothers walked easily in the light, but he would not begrudge them it. 

St. Urguan knew not sloth, pride, nor envy. To gluttony, wrath and lust, he was yet a stranger. But, alas, even the most diligent of the sons of Man could not resist a reward for his efforts. Young Urguan, father of the Dwarves who were not yet dwarves, fell to the grave sin of greed. After all, he laboured hard, and these gems were but rare respites in an otherwise thankless toil. He had earned his reward. 

And indeed it is true, he had. To every man the fruit of his labours, so say the wise men. But as Urguan did not understand, there is more to life than wealth, and more to wealth than hoarding it. When Iblees offered him wealth beyond his imagination, he accepted, seeing it his due. And even when former’s horrid true form was revealed, while Urguan fought Denier with all the fury and strength of an angered Dwarf, he committed not fully to this fight--for he still hid his treasures in the ground, hoping to preserve them even in case of defeat. His love of wealth overcame his love for his kinsmen, offering his riches to the soil before them, the brothers he bled with.

For this grave sin, God allowed Urguan to be cursed with squalidity and ugliness, and so the Dwarves became dwarves. Yet, Urguan the Great was neither vengeful nor angry after his punishment. He did not resent or curse God for letting him be punished in such a way, but rather he accepted his fate with humility, acknowledging his misdeeds. He lived the remainder of his life in great faith, imparting it to his people, and indeed the Dwarves remained devout Canonists until at least the 1300s. For his gracious apostolate to his people even in spite of his curses, which lesser men would have resented, and in recognition of his role in Auspice,  we recognise Urguan as a Primal Saint.

St. Malin of the Woodlands

Malin, Father of the Elves. Where to begin with him? As the title suggests, he was born in the forests of Aegis, sheltered by the great canopy of those primevals woods. Perhaps it was this environment, surrounded by nature, which instilled in him such a great deal of care and compassion for all things. This was what Malin saw himself as first and foremost: a caretaker and a custodian. To his children he was a doting patriarch, and the great forests of Aegis were their patrimony, which he swore to defend for their sake, but also the sake of the forests themselves.

And, while he may not have the same reputation for it as his brother Urguan, Malin was quite industrious too. It was he who first explored all the bounties of Aegis, naming all the creatures and inhabitants of the land. And it was by necessity for this task that his people created the first tongue, the other brothers apparently having not yet a need. He delighted in seeing the world and all that dwelled in it, in naming and describing them, and most of all in protecting them. The world was good, and St. Malin endeavoured to keep it that way.

Alas, Malin was simply too fond of the world. The Lord God delighted in creation, and we all ought to appreciate this great gift, but what Malin lost sight of was what lay beyond. This world is only a transient thing, a mere ember that burns out too quickly, in the vastness of time. For all the world’s great bounties, one must never lose sight of the greatest reward of all, the Heavens all men were born to long for. Malin did, however, and he paid dearly for it. Worldliness was his downfall.

For, indeed, men are caretakers and custodians of nature, as St. Malin exemplified. But this world only exists as a testing ground, a place for the Descendants to face trials of faith and virtue, and to overcome them. Therefore, there is no commodity in all of Creation which could ever be traded for loyalty to God. What one may think, and which Malin thought, is that it is licit to trade one’s own devotion to the Lord to provide for one’s offspring. For after all, what greater sacrifice could there be, to trade one’s soul for their children’s sake? 

But in truth, this is nonsense. No worldly benefit could ever be of any more use to the children of men than the example of their father. What good is it to protect and nurture them, if by doing so, you show them an example of cowardice? Malin hid from his battle, believing to protect his children was his greatest calling as a father. But his children’s lives were worth nothing compared to their souls, which he thrust into jeopardy, along with his own, by refusing to lead them against evil.

Nevertheless, the Lord God scorns no man for good intentions, and St. Malin remained a faithful patriarch to his people. Though he was punished with infertility, for allowing his offspring to take precedence over his faith, he did not scorn this. Instead, he used his blessing of immortality to guide and teach his people to live well and love God for many centuries, before finally departing into the seas at peace. As the patron saint of nature and fathers, we honour St. Malin.

St. Krug of the Desert

Oft maligned as he is, in truth, there are not enough words in all the world’s languages to sing the praises of the desert father. It is impossible to speak of St. Krug without doing so; there is hardly a word to describe him which is not a compliment. Do you not know, children of men, that St. Krug was the one and only Brother to resist Iblees? We humans, in our ARROGANCE, speak of Ex. Horen as the one good faithful Brother, but in truth it was Krug and KRUG ALONE who rejected the Denier and all his false promises. No bribes or gifts, no promises or compliments, nothing could convince the desert father to accept Iblees.

Whereas Malin was swayed by the promise of children, Urguan by wealth, and Horen by immortality, there was not one thing that could tempt Krug. Born in the harshest climes of Aegis, living the most meagre existence he could carve out, luxury was foreign to him. And yet, he never faltered. His faith in God was too strong. The desert saint knew that God would provide, even in the hottest of days and the coldest of nights, and what God would give would be enough. With this pure faith, nothing could tempt him.

Alas! For his great faith and virtue, Krug was hated the most of all by the Denier, and he suffered greatly for it. First, as Krug charged against Evil itself, his skin was burnt, turning green and molten for his troubles. But later, even as the Denier was defeated, Krug suffered a great curse he had done nothing to deserve. 

Availer 1:63
“And you Krug, the most hated of The Descendants, you shall always have the lust of war. You are strong? Well the strength shall be used against your brothers, used to pillage and murder! Your lust for battle shall be unsatiated and your descendants shall grow ugly and heartless.”

This curse was unique. Unlike the others, which merely cast afflictions upon the Descendants, this curse was equal parts prophecy and affliction. For the Denier knew the results of his curse, he knew the evils his curse would drive Krug to commit. The third-born son, furious at the destruction his brothers had caused, and at Horen’s place as prophet when he had betrayed God for worldly boons, went to war against the tribe of Humans. God had favoured weak, faithless traitors over his own people, who stood steadfast in the face of all adversity. Commanded by his curse to yearn ever for bloodshed, Krug could only settle this one way. 

And so, the last faultless Brother did sin, as he marched his forces to spill the blood of his kinsmen, and led them into a pointless battle. It is from this date that we count our years, as during this fruitless assault our great father, Horen himself, was murdered in his sleep by the first goblin. And Krug wept, for the dearest of his brothers had died by his own bloodlust. And so Krug the Warrior became Krug the Kinslayer.

And yet, cursed with bloodshed as he was, Krug was also blessed by the Aengul Availer with the gift of honour. And so when the armies of Harren, firstborn of Horen, marched against the Orcs at Kramoroe, Krug would not see his nephew dead. Three times Krug threw Harren to the ground in their duel, and three times Krug relented to let his nephew regain his feet. When Harren slew the Kinslayer, he went gladly, apologising to his kinsman and to God as the colour drained from his face. Krug sinned once, and sinned terribly, but he repented as an example for all of us.

The desert father serves as an example for how even the most virtuous of us may fall to sin, but also for how we may recover from it, for God rejects the repentance of no man, not even the greatest of sinners. And so we look to St. Krug to teach us how to resist temptation, how to endure punishments we may not deserve, and most of all, how to repent for the evil that we may do.

Ex. Horen of the Plains

There is not much need to speak of Ex. Horen. Any man even faintly acquainted with the faith knows of the first prophet and his life. There is no simpler or briefer way to describe our father than as “Leader”. Leadership was at the core of Horen’s being. He, more than any other Brother, exemplified statecraft, and sought more strongly than any to lead his people into a brighter future, even once he was gone. Indeed, it could be argued that the man had no concern other than the future of his kingdom. Whereas Malin was a custodian, and Urguan and Krug merely saw themselves as teachers to their people, Horen was king. He was forward-looking in a way none of his brothers were, and saw himself as the founder of a society that would have to live on long beyond him. 

But this, alas, was where the trouble lay. Statebuilding is a difficult task and Horen saw, perhaps prophetically, that no state that was not perfected would live on beyond him. He needed time to build his country, his Oren. But time is a precious resource, and our dear father had not nearly enough to achieve his aim. So, when the Denier promised him immortality, he jumped at the opportunity--seeing a chance to offer all his people a stable and happy forever.

But, of course, nothing is that simple. Paying homage to a worldly spirit in search of worldly pursuits is no way for a king to behave. A king must seek the best for his subjects, sure, but his subjects’ souls come before their worldly livelihoods. It is better for a man to suffer a thousand pains and be saved, than to live luxuriously and be damned. Horen did not understand this, and he and his people suffered greatly for it. Although he made the deal to help them, it ended up harming them. There’s a lesson in this: the road to the Nether is paved with good intentions.

Yet, as we know, God chose Ex. Horen as his prophet. The Lord God does not choose perfect tools, for none exist, but rather he appropriates imperfect tools to do his perfect work. When we look to our imperfect father, our prophet, we see leadership, we see simple yet strong faith, we see concern for one’s subjects, and we see love--love for his people foremost. To me, it is a mystery why Horen was chosen as the prophet, for God’s plans are beyond our understanding, yet chosen he was, and so as the foremost primal saint we honour him.
 

"Blood for Ashford; Bargains for Barclay," says Jurgen Barclay von Savoy.

8 minutes ago, Luminaire said:

"Because a rally matters so much when all they do is lock themselves up in Reinmar. Perhaps this should be a reminder that vyr attitude towards vyr peers, along with vyr contributions are what matter here. If vy aided the Kongzem more than House Baruch, then vy would have kepy vyr Duchy." Jan Otto Kortrevich remarked, staring at the missive with an amused smirk. "Quality over quantity!"

"My favourite moment in Kortrevich history is when Rodrik defected and invaded Haense." says Jurgen Barclay.

The attributes of GOD, as revealed in Scripture:

• GOD, and only GOD, is uncreated and had no beginning. Provenance II: "In the beginning, the glory of GOD was singular and whole, and there was naught but Him, and thus there could be no pain or iniquity."
• GOD is all-powerful. Provenance I: "Lo, in the name of the Lord GOD, the Most Merciful, Singular, and Omnipotent, listen and attend with pious heed to this inspired text."
• GOD is infinite. Elves V: "So I find that thou exaltest the beasts and trees, and impugnest the work of man, and each act is alike in folly. For the glory of God is pervasive and universal, and divine grace suffuses all things. And to divide holiness is to dismiss it, for the qualities of the Lord GOD are infinite and eternal. Where art thy spirits in the great underground domiciles of the dwarves? In the wastes of the south, where no being dareth flourish?"
• GOD is indivisible and not composite. Magi VII: "So to ye magicians I admonish: GOD is unknowable. He cannot be divided nor made again, and His mysteries are the holy mysteries, and no art is alike to His boundless ability."
• GOD is omnibenevolent. Orcs VII: "Verily, brother, the Lord GOD is the Most Benevolent, and giveth only mercy. And verily thou must find that pain cometh not from the wrath of the Lord, but as we reject him."
• GOD is immutable, He does not change. Jorenites VII: "There is no innovation in faith. For GOD is as he was and shall be."

Hence, we of the Canonist faith profess one GOD, indivisible and infinite, all-powerful and all-knowing, benevolent and ever merciful, unchanging and ever-present.

Now, in this age of reason and apathy to religion, sadly arguments from Scripture are no longer enough to convince men of the truth. Therefore I put forward the following arguments to demonstrate why GOD must be as Scripture describes Him to be.

Arguments from philosophy:

On the existence of GOD: As all men of reason and sound mind know, every effect must have a cause. A ball does not roll lest something pushes it. The entire world is in motion, but each and every motion is an effect of a cause before it, like a falling line of dominoes, where each domino is pushed by another. However, a line of dominoes is never, and cannot be, infinite. At some point far enough back, something from outside the system must have caused the original motion. This is the First Cause. For dominoes, it is someone's finger. For Creation, we call this First Cause GOD. 

On the eternality of GOD: Following on from the previous argument, a skeptic might counter that any finger which pushes a row of dominoes must itself have its own cause. A finger's motion must be caused by a tensing of the tendon up the arm, and so on. Indeed, this is true. Every effect must have a cause preceding it. And so too must GOD, is it not so? The resolution to this conundrum is that GOD is the cause of Himself. A ridiculous assertion, the skeptic might suggest, for we just affirmed that the cause must come before the effect. How can GOD be His own cause, lest He existed before Himself (a logical impossibility)? This problem is resolved by the eternality of GOD. For time itself is just a creation of GOD like any other. GOD exists outside of time, and therefore there is no before or after with Him. Where there is no time, the order of cause and effect is immaterial. There is no temporal order to anything. GOD wills Himself, has willed Himself, and forever shall will Himself to be for all eternity. As He exists outside of time, there is never a point, no matter how far back one goes, when the "first" domino was pushed, so to speak. Therefore we conclude that GOD must be eternal.

On the infinitude of GOD: It is pleasing to reason and the rational mind of man, gifted to us to separate us from the beasts, that Our Lord GOD is infinite. For, if GOD were not infinite, then it must logically follow that there exists something that is outside of GOD. But if there exists something outside of GOD that He Himself did not create, then He is not the creator of all things. And if He is not the creator of all things, then He cannot be the First Cause(and therefore cannot be the creator GOD), and He, as well as that which is outside of Him, must have their own creator. This creator would then need to be the infinite GoD, and if He were not, then His creator would have to be, or else His creator, and so on ad infinitum. Now it could be that the GOD who created us is ten or a hundred gods down that list from the infinite GOD, but when faced with multiple hypotheses, the one that requires the least assumptions is to be picked. If we know that there must be an infinite GOD, it requires less assumptions to believe that our GOD is that GOD than to believe there are more gods in between. 

On the indivisibility of GOD: If we suppose that GOD is infinite, as we attempted to prove above, then it also follows that GOD must be indivisible. For the sum of finite things, no matter how large or how numerous they may be, can never add up to an infinite whole. And if a part of GOD was infinite, then it would not be a part at all  - it would be the whole. Therefore we can conclude that GOD is not made up of parts, but rather is one indivisible whole.

On the benevolence of GOD: To this writer, it seems self-evident that GOD should be omnibenevolent. For what does it mean to be benevolent? To do good, and to wish to do good. To be kind, but to also have that kindness tempered by justness and fairness, for evil ought to be punished. Yet all these things are subjective. Men quarrel and disagree on these topics unendingly. The Creator of all things, however must be just and good because, by virtue of having created all things, He defines what justice and goodness are, and therefore to be good is to be godly. Any human conception of what it is to be good can be dismissed as subjective. The morality of the Creator however, which is embedded into Creation itself, cannot be. 

On the immutability of GOD: As we have established, Our Lord GOD is indivisible and not composite. This means that traits like the infinitude of GOD and the omnipotence of GOD are not separate and independent attributes or powers of GOD, but indeed are within GOD one and the same. GOD’s infinitude is his omnipotence, and his omnipotence is his eternality. While we, in our limited human comprehension, see these traits as separate aspects of GOD’s power, in truth these things are all just what it means to be GOD and they cannot exist without each other. Indeed, have I not proven already that the First Cause(who we call GOD) must be eternal and infinite, lest He have His own cause(and therefore not be the First Cause)? Therefore, does it not stand to reason that if GOD were to somehow become finite or transient, that He would no longer be GOD? Furthermore, if GOD is omnibenevolent, perfectly and infinitely good - any change to His being would therefore make Him less good, as such a change is the only change possible. As such, if GOD were mutable, He could not be omnibenevolent. Therefore I assert that GOD cannot change, as His Godhood and existence are dependent on the core attributes of His being, which in Him are co-dependent and one.

“I thank you for your kind words, Your Excellency.

That Salvia has an allegorical meaning makes sense to me, and fits well with the imagery and message of the poetry. As for the origins of the 14^th Century Salvus, I did a bit more reading on the matter, and as it happens that kingdom’s founding coincides with both the Phoenix Rebellion and the Undead horde’s descent upon Al’khazar. In that context, I’d wager that the name refers to salvation their new home provided the Sheffields and their loyalists, from both the revolutionaries and the Undead. In a similar vein, the capital of Salvus in Asulon was called ‘Solace’ after the peace and comfort they had found. So it seems the Sheffield’s naming scheme was more in line with the worldly circumstances they found themselves in, rather than the religious meanings we might have hoped. But such is to be expected of that accursed house – Enor’s father is recorded to have killed his wife and joined the Undead. Still, it is satisfying nevertheless to know why the Kingdom of Salvus was called such.

As for Al’khazar, well, I’ll wipe the dust off the books.”

"A marvelous discovery, there are so few documents of any kind surviving from this period, let alone ones so beautiful. It also has a few interesting implications for our understanding of history. The mention of Salvia seems strange for such an ancient document, and clearly it must be ancient, as this scroll contains a wealth of knowledge that had been lost to man before the Church’s restoration by Exalted Godfrey and Sigismund. But then, as you know, Salvia/Salvus both just derive from the Flexio ‘salus’, salvation, so it is quite possible that its sharing of name with the later Kingdom of Salvus is a mere coincidence. Although... it would be quite strange that a place known as ‘great Salvia’ would have been forgotten to history - perhaps further research is needed. It is quite possible King Sheffield chose to name his kingdom after the more ancient one, perhaps it is where the Sheffields originally hailed from. I shall endeavor to look into it.

Regardless, what I find more interesting is that the hymn also refers to Al'khazar, which modern histories assert was just a minor fishing town before St. Daniel expanded it into the bustling metropolis and capital of Oren it would become. That such a small town in the late 1200s would have existed or been notable at all to writers almost a millennia before that seems almost impossible. It seems likely then, that Al'khazar had been a much bigger and more important settlement in the centuries before St. Daniel, before for mysterious reasons falling into decline. The name 'Al'khazar' itself seems to have some origin in the Qali languages, or some other farfolk language like it. Perhaps research into the etymology and original meaning of the name would give us some hint as to the city's history before St. Daniel."

‘Reverend Father,
    
I hope this letter finds you well.

It is true that Horen was promised the Skies in Scripture, however we must interpret Scripture as the Church has always done. In the centuries old edition of Et Principia Ecclesiae Dogma , which we still use to this day, it states that this blessing refers to 'the ability to conduct in prophecy and be closest to God, particularly in the afterlife'. While humanity is granted a special place among God's people, the Church's traditional interpretation does not see this passage as granting some kind of exclusivity to the Seven Skies to Horen's folk. I accept that "closest to God ... in the afterlife" could be read as humanity gaining the Seven Skies, and the rest of the races going to this 'Limbo' instead, but this still seems to be innovation. I have found no mention of this 'Limbo' in any old catechisms or encyclicals, whereas catechisms new and old alike have declared that non-humans can reach at least the First Sky.

The only mention of a non-humans being sent to ‘Limbo’ I did find is in the teachings of a little known rite or sect called 'Lendianism', who believed that non-humans go to a limbo called 'Styniya'. However, to my knowledge, the Church has never officially taught or endorsed this belief. The closest is a document (enclosed in this letter) from the Ruskan Orthodox Church, originally published in 1452(the archive digging I had to do to find this!), where the author states that among the Orthodox there was a contested belief in Styniya. HOWEVER this very same author also teaches that non-humans can reach the lower rungs of the Seven Skies, and he did not reserve the "Limbo" for them. But rather, he said it would be heretics and heathens who went there, regardless of race. As for the Lendians, they also taught a number of heterodox positions(such as rejecting the dogma pre-destination), so their teachings hold little weight. Perhaps I have skimmed over mentions in my search, but as it stands I don't understand how you can claim Tradition backs a position that has never to my knowledge been taught, whereas the opposite has been taught down the ages? The current Canonist catechism is a merely updated version of one authored by Cardinal Fabian the Lesser in 1570. The teaching on virtuous and faithful non-humans being able to reach the First Sky has not been removed, and indeed has been approved multiple times, over the course of almost 200 years now. If partial salvation was truly the teaching of the Church, why has this apparently false belief not been removed from the catechisms in 200 years? Nor denounced by the Church for the nigh 300 since the Ruskan Orthodox theologian first taught it?

You may respond, "Well what of before this time? The Church has existed far longer than 300 years." In my research, I have looked over countless encyclicals, catechisms and lists of dogma dating as far back as the 1400s(little survives of Church documents before the rise of Exalted Godfrey in the late 1300s). So as far as I have seen, the only answer to the question of salvation regarding non-humans that the Church has ever taught, has been that of Cardinal Fabian the Lesser, which it has taught for the last 200 years, and that of the Ruskan Orthodox writer in 1452 who shared this belief.

As for Provenance. I disagree with your assertion the idea Man and Woman were not human is ridiculous. On the contrary, the inverse is utterly ridiculous. Man and Woman begat all four brothers. Can a human couple birth an orcish child? Or an elf? Or a dwarf? Not at all. Certainly not all three. To be human means to be one of Horen's folk just as to be an elf is to be one of Malin's folk. Man and Woman do not fit that category. They were none of the four races, or perhaps a combination of all four(in their pre-cursed states). But certainly not purely human.

You also tell me that I misread and misunderstand Exalted Owyn. However, this idea that by 'salvation’ actually refers to 'partial salvation'(an idea I have heretofore never heard), is reading into his words. Perhaps that is what he meant, but that is an assumption that must be backed up by Church teaching. I have seen no evidence that the Church has ever interpreted this as referring to partial-salvation, nor have I seen evidence of the Church teaching partial salvation.

Then you speak of the timeless influence and teachings of the Holy Scrolls and the Sacred Tradition of the Faith. Reverend Doctor, where do you find mentions of partial salvation for non-humans in Tradition? I have found none. What certainly can be found going back through the catechisms and encyclicals of Church history, the teachings of our forebears, is that virtuous pagans and non-humans can reach the First Sky.

With that in mind, I close with a quote from the Epistle of Exalted Owyn to the Jorenites: "So to ye Sons of Joren I admonish: There is no innovation in faith. For GOD is as he was and shall be, and the holiness of Horen is as the holiness of all men, forever." ‘

((Woops didn't notice who it was addressed to lol, very dumb of me. 

Would you prefer me to respond again or just void it altogether?))

‘Your thesis, while well written, is wholly mistaken and contrary to the teaching of Scripture and the Most Sacred Tradition of the Church. The supposition that only Horen’s folk can enter the Seven Skies is contradicted by Scripture.As it states in Provenance XIV: “So the Lord was pleased to lay His favor upon the sons of His first man and woman, and He called the pair forth to reside in Sixth Sky and give the World over to the dominion of the Sons. And the first man held GOD with great fear and marvel, and did as he was bid, and rose to the Sixth Sky beneath the throne of the Lord.” Man and woman were the parents of all four brothers, and no more human than they were dwarf or orc or elf. Thus it is quite simply proven that to be a descendent of Horen is not needed to enter the Seven Skies, and that entry to the Seven Skies was not predicated on the human blessing. 

What then, does the blessing mean? What does it mean to “walk the Seven Skies”? Sacred Tradition has it that this blessing refers to ‘the ability to conduct in prophecy and be closest to God, particularly in the afterlife.’(Et Principia Ecclesiae Dogma). That is, all the prophets were humans, humans were chosen to lead the Church, and humans were chosen to reside in the highest skies as a reward for their unique faithfulness. That is not, however, to say that non-humans cannot reach the Seven Skies. I have already provided two famous examples to the contrary, but beyond that, it is also contrary to reason that only mannish souls should enter the Seven Skies. For, if such is the case, why did Exalted Owyn preach to the elves and the orcs? If they are outside of God’s covenant and can neither reach the Seven Skies nor be damned for their iniquities or disbelief, what then would be the point in condemning their pagan worship and teaching them of God’s glory? It would be an utterly pointless pursuit. Did Exalted Owyn spill his ink for nothing? No. Indeed, he explicitly refers to the possibility of elven salvation in his epistles. Elves VI: “Verily, brother, the Lord GOD is in all things, and He is eminent above them. And verily thou must find salvation and glory in His grace, not in His creations."

Furthermore, the official Catechism of the Canonist Church clearly states ‘The First Sky is the abode of virtuous pagans; humans who never received the chance to convert to Canonism but still acted morally, and any non-humans who obeyed the Virtue’. While catechisms, unlike dogma, may be in error, it clearly shows your position that non-humans cannot reach the Seven Skies is contrary to Church teaching.

I believe I have proven quite clearly the erroneous nature of your position, and I implore you to accept traditional Church teaching on this matter, and reject these innovations. 

Your humble brother in faith.’