Bogatyr

Who's this handsome devil

THE COLLECTED WORKS of Mtr. Adolpha Yohānāh Mother Adolpha Yohānāh (born, von Alstreim) (1951–2062) was a Priestess, later Magistra, theologian, dialectician, and author of many works contributing to the teleology of God. Parented by H.P. Harrentzedak I, permitted by St. Caius I, and ordained by Deunoro I, her times may be summed in brief words and of briefer character: preaching, teaching, writing, journeying. With the support of Fr. Wenceslas Bainbridge, she founded the Priestly Philolexian Fraternity of Saint Jude (FSPST) for love of the marriage between the Word and reason. Adolpha maintained that the priest was succeeded by his contribution to dialogue and deconstruction, void of novelty, polity, and vanity, to which ends she wrote: “Inasmuch as the Lord speaks once, and Man must yearn to hear twice, so it behooves the lover of the Word, the philolexian, to incline himself to what is spoken from on high.” In this pursuit, she formalised the dialectic, also, the Form of Intention, which forms the backbone of theological dialogue. She rejected office, rank, signification save for philolexian, for which she is buried on Lemon Hill without headstone, her face toward the earth and away from the world. Heinrich, her father, was Prince of Merryweather; Alexandra, her mother, was Princess of Merryweather. Born to their domains, she renounced her possession between 1966 and 1967, hence we find her successively at Veletz, the Apostolic Commonwealths, and finally at Lemon Hill. Her noble person repudiated, she was founded in juridical tutelage and substitute care by H.P. Harrentzedak I until her ordination in 1986. Death prevented the friends of the FSPST from the completion of her monument work, the Canonis Apologetica, which was detailed and accepted only as far as the end of the first question. On the day of 12 Hash-shel Ovyn, 2060, she set aside the pen and would write no more. Gone of her strength, she is remembered as decrying, “Whence comes this honour that servants of God should carry wood for my hearth!” She died the next year, weakened significantly by malnutrition. Her bedside was attended by none sans one nun to whom she dictated her final proclamation of faith: “I receive Thee my Lord, the price of my redemption, for Whose Love I have watched, studied, and laboured. I submit all wrongs, lapses, and erroneous bills to the correction of the Temple of the True Faith, by whom they will be publicised.” THE FSPST: RULE AND DEVOTIONAL THE RULE OF THE FSPST (2026). A rule of the conduct and detail of the Church dialectic. Successively supported and expounded by the work of Fr. Wenceslas Bainbridge. CANONIS THEODICAE (2026). Fr. Bainbridge systematically explores the Problem of Evil, the interpretation and signification of Canonist theodicy. LEX THEODICAE (2036). Disputations against the fragility of Tiberias I’s law, Fr. Bainbridge. N.B. Many of Adolpha’s works after the establishment of the FSPST are contained in its canon, but are discounted for their classification in other sections. THE APOLOGETICS Consisting of the capstone of Adolpha’s corpus, the incomplete Canonis Apologetica and supporting tracts. CANONIS APOLOGETICA (1987). The first part in Adolpha’s intended apologetic canon. Details the ontology of God. THESES AND SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY (DEONTOLOGY) ON INNOCENCE: THE NECESSITY OF GUILT (1981). Commentary on the interaction of guilt with how to lead a virtuous life. ON FREE WILL: HOW WE EXIST IN GOD'S BREATH (1985). Commentary on the metaphysics of providence. JUSTICE AND LAW: PREDICATION (2036). Counted toward her polemical works. POLEMICS DIALOGUES WITH AN ACOLYTE: APOLOGETICS FOR THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN (2019). Adolpha debates a complementarian. TRACT: REGNUM DEI (2019). In response to Fr. Bainbridge’s treatise on the predestination of unity. JUSTICE AND LAW: PREDICATION (2036). How can human law be fair if lawmakers are fallen? Of foreign authorship; ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PRIESTHOOD (2023). Transcribed and published by Ilia Aeneth, lifelong friend of Adolpha. THE HOMILIES Written as polemicals, by Adolpha, under the nom-de-plume Fr. Abraham Sheen. HOMILY I: LOVE AND WAR (2021). God is not contingent, emotionality in wartime is idolatry. HOMILY II: MARTYRDOM IS ONLY HOLY WHEN ORDERLY (2026). Distinguishes martyrdom in confessio recta from martyrdom in causa recta. And all ye Holy Innocents, Pray for us.

In the compact of her hand, a mountaingirl loosed the noose knots of her rosary. Many beads—one for every soldier fought and been fought—strung together and forming a lattice in her palms. And then the rosary did what strawberry plants often would before they shot out their thin vines: the quality of the string changed. In strawberry plants, the vine threads came after that, then the buds. By the time the pale petals shrunk and the mint-coloured berries bounded out of the plant ovary, the leaf shine was gilded tight and waxy. That, also, was how Julia looked on her prayer beads: her mountainperson eyes were gilded tight and waxy. And, in each bead she looked on the blood-smeared face of a man God made none sweeter than demanded more. A face reddened like fresh strawberries and scant of their tartness.

Mother and girl alike, of different dispositions but charged with mutual post of FLEEPER, prayed the old Judite rosary in this time. The mother picked her cuticles, and the girl picked orange peels. On the font of a Vander inheritance, they cradle the kohen's horn between puerile palms. One would say, of the mission, "This is good." And, the other said, also, "This is right."

“Mtr. Adolpha Yohanah, to Father Lüdiger, be this critique written (&del.), Ineffable Creator, Who, from the treasures of Your Wisdom have established many hierarchies of angels, have arrayed them in marvellous order above the fiery Heavens, and have marshalled the regions of the world with many treasures of taste and unsubtle intellect, You are proclaimed the true font of light and wisdom, and the primal origin raised high beyond all things. You make eloquent the tongues of neonates and infants and thereafter. Refine my lips and pour forth upon my lips the keenness of speech, which proceedeth from the goodness of Your blessing. Grant, O merciful Lord, that I may ardently enquire, prudently examine, truthfully acknowledge, and articulately accomplish what is pleasing to You for the praise and glory of Your name. Amen. (Mtr. Adolpha Yohanah, the Rosary Prayer) SIX SYLLOGISMS The True Nature and End of the Mother Church and its Government Without falling back on the perspective of textual fideism or hierarchical ecclesiology within the ministry— AS no city or village is redeemed without a magistrate, so the Church of God, as I have entailed before, cannot be redeemed without a form of spiritual government. When we say government, this term is altogether distinct from civil government; the power of jurisdiction within the Church is, in brief, nothing but the order provided for the preservation of spiritual polity. We will today respect, reaffirm, and expound the words of the Seventy Commandments in the text’s commendable commitment to the equality of persons and the egality of offices within the Church. However, it errs severely in concluding that equality precludes the necessity of office and governance even in function if not in hierarchy. Equality in dignity does not countermand the need for order in function. For it must be held, even in a Church where no man should stand exalted above his brother by nature or indelible rank, there heretofore have been and hereinafter must be appointed ministers for the sake of ministry, teachers for the sake of tutelage, and judges for the sake of justice. To this end, there were established in the ministry from its earliest, tribunals which might take cognisance of morals and exercise the office of keys who were joined with pastors, shepherds, and ministers in the spiritual government of the church (although they are not called magistrates); “[…] the brothers set shepherds over the flock of men, and so created a priesthood for their instruction, in anticipation of the second son of Spirit.” (Silence 5:5). Howbeit, we must caution that we do not attribute too much to ministers and the ministry insofar that we might mistake them for magistrates. With this standard in mind, we will proceed to outline some key syllogisms that may rectify the problematic articles of the Seventy Declarations; (1)THE ARTICLES: §6. The Rite of Universality, founded in the Virtue and Spirit, binds all men under one Church; no tribe, race, or house stands apart from this singular and holy order. The Church, as commanded by God through His Exalted, is universal not in name alone but in function, serving all peoples equally beneath the mantle of the Scrolls. §13. Ecclesiastical unity is not founded upon loyalty to any single seat or person, but upon shared reverence for the Virtue and the Scrolls, as all righteous paths are equal before the Lord God. §18. Without Canon Law, the Church must return to the law laid out by God Himself in natural ordinance, wherein all ordained priests hold equal voice and duty in electing rightful leadership. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (a) we hold the major premise that any society ordered toward a common good requires a principle of governance to advance toward its end, AND (b) that the Church is a visible, ordered, institutionalised society ordered toward the common good being the instruction of the elect (Silence 5:5) and the delivery of sacraments and preservation of the Word of God (5:24); ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, the Church requires governance even in function if not in office, such as in the ordered functions of teaching and ministering, to attain its end. The equality of the person and egality of offices does not countermand the need for ordered functions within a society as within the Church. Let there, therefore, be distinction of role—and, notice role, not rank—cura personalis, not for the sake of elevating one man over the other. In a vacuum, no elect could be instructed, no sacrament could be delivered, and no Word could be preserved. Even a church of equals would require governance in function, that no man should usurp greater authority from his fellow-bishops and that his primacy should proceed from unity in order that the Church may be shown to be one. (2)THE ARTICLES: §4. The Scrolls alone are the measure of the Church’s governance. All other decrees are secondary. The Scrolls must be read and preached in every place, for where they are hidden, error and heresy grow. No new scroll, no vision, no secret writing may annul the four Scrolls delivered to the Exalted. Any who claim otherwise speak as did Iblees in the time of Horen. §14. When the Pontiff errs, it is the duty of the Synod to correct him; when the Synod errs, the faithful must return to the Scrolls. §15. The office of High Pontiff is a charge to proclaim the Scrolls; all other powers are secondary and must not eclipse this holy mission. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (a) law, as an ordinance of reason toward the common good (supra), demands promulgation and examination belonging either to the whole people or to someone who is the viceregent of the whole people (Godfrey 6:50), AND (b) the power of the Scrolls is as divine law (James II, pref. Virtue) and requires, for their governance of the Church, examination and application adapted to protect and preserve the virtue and its parts for the body politic; ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, the Church requires ordered ministers, ordered of function if not of rank, class, or office, to promulgate, examine, interpret, and apply according to the Scrolls. The end of the ministerial exercise of the ordered ministers’ power and rule, by virtue thereof unto the Church, is the edification of itself. This was the especial end of all power granted by God to the Church ministers; namely, a ministry unto the edification of the law, the Word, and the Church itself, in opposition of all the ends whereunto it had been confused, such that “[the priests of the Church] were quarrelsome, for they had no lords, and they brought great confusion into Godfrey’s kingdom with their divisions […] the priests argued, and cried out about their wisdom and their love of the Lord […] So Godfrey said that none should leave until they had come to accord.” (Godfrey 5:49–53). There, ministerial equality alone could not preserve to the Church its order or promulgation of the law. The law could only be distributed in full when the power of office imposed upon the ministry concord. And, such an office or preeminence was good, just, and ordered to justice and righteousness in itself, not ordered to dominion, even that God would ask the twins Evaristus and Clement to sit on the left and right hands of His Kingdom and the rule thereof. In these parts, we see that the rule of the Church is in role, not rank, and in the guiding of the ministry toward service, humility, and the promulgation of law, while not power or preeminence. (3)THE ARTICLES: §8. Let all remember that the first man and woman walked in Virtue without churches, without priests; it is the law of God that sanctifies in the foremost, not the structure. §23. Clerical offices exist as burdens, not as honors. Let every priest remember that his service is to God first, and man second. §68. Synods and councils must be convened with prayer, fasting, and solemnity, seeking not human advantage but divine wisdom. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (1) all communities composed of men [bound by the Covenant of Horen] demand governance chiefly ordained to the common good, and governance necessarily assumes offices for the exercise of edification, instruction, promulgation, interpretation, and application of the law (Horen 2:78), AND (a) the Church is a community composed of men [bound by the Covenant of Horen] who are directed toward the common good of edifying the Church toward itself, instructing the elect according to the Word, promulgating law in the City of Men, interpreting the Word for the promulgation of law, and administering sacraments, AND (b) edification proceeds from Canon Law, but the application of Canon Law within the City of Men requires ordered ministers and not merely the existence of the law (Silence 5:23), AND (c) ministerial offices are not instituted as honours but as burdens, but burden presupposes duty, and duty requires offices to be exercised lawfully (cf. §13), AND (d) synods and councils are necessary to glean divine wisdom, but said synods presuppose the existence of a lawful authority ordered to convene, moderate, and ratify their wisdoms (cf. §68); ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, though the Church’s ministers are equal in dignity and their offices serve for burden not for honour, the Church requires, regardless, a structured and ordered spiritual government for the ratification of the law as communicated through the Word, for the calling of synods, and for the shepherding of the elect. The government of a ministry within a rational and rightly ordered society precludes the private conscience of the ministers equal in dignity on what pretence soever. The power of rule in the Church, then, is nothing but a right to yield obedience unto the commands of God; offices must be established to carry out the burdens entrusted to them, by such rules, and for such ends, as wherein and whereby their authority is to be acted; councils cannot be convened by impulse, but by authority; government must ratify divine law through ordered function i.e., Canon Law. Equality of persons and humility of office-bearers is reaffirmed, but does not diminish the nature of authority within the Mother Church. For what mother would endure that any power should be exercised in her family as to the disposal of her children and her estate, but her own? (4)THE ARTICLES: §33. Let all clerics remember that their words hold weight only when they flow from the Scrolls; personal wisdom must bow before divine instruction. §35. When clerics impose penalties of their own invention, exceeding what is written in the Scrolls, they sin not only against man but against the order established by God Himself. §36. Let it be known that no man, even the High Pontiff, holds the authority to declare a soul lost where God has not so judged, as judgment belongs only to the Most High. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (1) law, as an ordinance of reason toward the common good (supra), demands promulgation and examination belonging either to the whole people or to someone who is the viceregent of the whole people (Godfrey 6:50); the force of a law depends on the extent of its justice, AND (a) the ministers are charged as lawful judges within the demesne of the Church and the Faith to interpret and distribute Canon Law judiciously, not merely to echo it ad rote (Godfrey 6:50), AND (b) judgement belongs to God absolutely (Virtue 7:8), but God exercises judgement within the Church demesne through the appointed offices interpreting His Law within the limits of office (Godfrey 6:23), not within private conscience or invention, AND (c) clerical penalties preclude invention when they proceed from lawful and judicious authority interpreting and distributing Canon Law to particular cases; and in such judgements, ministers act not presumptuously in God’s stead but ministerially under His ordinance (Godwinites 1:19; Jorenites 2:10–17); ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, the ministers do act lawfully, judiciously, and lowly toward God when, within the limits of their offices, they interpret and distribute the law in particular cases, including their penalties, judgements, excommunications. Law is rendered ineffectual when this authority (solely and foremostly for edification, and not for ostentation or abuse) is denied. All those, by whom the ordinary rule of the Church is to be exercised unto its edification, are as to their offices not as lords of their faith, but as helpers, shepherds, teachers of their joy. Authority is not by quotation alone which diminishes the law’s (and, by virtue whereof, the office and duty of pastors, the minister’s) capacity to prudential application and correction. For hardly shall we meet two cases of any kind, that will exactly be adjudicated by the same rule; all manner of circumstances giving them variety, of which exercise requires prudence but not parroting. Authority interprets law to circumstance. Where-for it is true as stated that no man, even the High Pontiff, holds the authority to declare a soul lost where God has not so judged (cf. §36), but ministers chiefly observe among all churches to judge exterior communion and not the end of a soul’s fate; excommunication excludes visibly from the Church’s order here and now, while not excluding eternally, which belongs to God’s hidden judgement alone. Hence, without the necessary exercise of this lawful judgement by an ordained office, governance might remain impossible. In no cases is this authority exercised to rival God’s judgement, neither could any authority at all be exercised through merely reciting the law, but the authority tends to reconcile the peace and edification of the Church under God’s prescribed order. (5)THE ARTICLES: §36. Let it be known that no man, even the High Pontiff, holds the authority to declare a soul lost where God has not so judged, as judgment belongs only to the Most High. §37. Forgiveness is a gift from God, given through sincere repentance and amendment of life, not through gold or transaction; any other teaching is false. §38. Indulgences, where given, are to be signs of intercessory prayer, not substitutes for true penance, lest the faithful mistake the symbol for the thing itself. §39. To sell the Spirit’s mercy is to trample upon the wealth of the Spirit, exchanging incorruptible treasure for corruptible coin, which is forbidden by both law and conscience. §40. The state of purgation, wherein souls are prepared for the Skies, is ordained by God’s mercy; it must not be used as pretext for worldly gain or clerical manipulation. §41. The Church’s duty is to pray for the dead, not to tax the living in their name; for as Exalted Owyn taught, “Holiness cannot be divided or sold.” §42. The wealth of the Church must serve not itself, but the poor, the widowed, the orphaned, and the stranger. To do otherwise is to violate the Canticle of Charity. §68. Synods and councils must be convened with prayer, fasting, and solemnity, seeking not human advantage but divine wisdom. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (1) the abuse of a thing does not invalidate its rightful use (Sixtus VI, the Eleventh Bull of Holofernes sec.3 §3); what is abused can be corrected by all means of confession and sanctification, but not abolished, AND (a) the ministerial offices, disciplines of penance and intercession, and the apostolic constitution on the liturgy are ordained for the common good of the Church and the laity i.e. their mutual edification (supra. §3), AND (b) the abuse of these offices for private or meditated asset gain is contrary to their ordained end and must be corrected, not abolished; ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, the ministerial offices, disciplines of penance and intercession, the apostolic constitution on the liturgy, and all other charges of ecclesiastical governance remain necessary and good, even if they have been abused. Whereas it is agreed on all counts that, the Church pontificates, judges, and administers communion, not eternity; the clergy do not barter nor serve, but sell; indulgences are intercessory and may not be substituted for penance; the bartering of mercy is sinful; the end of purgation is not gain; the Church prays but does not tax; the Church’s wealth serves the poor, the abuse of the station does not countermand the virtue of the station in the first place. An action, law, station, office, or charge, is seen to be virtuous in two chief ways. The first, from the fact that a man does something virtuous; thus the act of justice and equality is to do what is fair: in this way, law prescribes certain acts of virtue. Secondly, an act of virtue is when the man proceeds the virtuous action, law, station, etc. in the way that a virtuous man does it. Such an action, law, station, etc. always proceeds from virtue regardless of its abuse: it does not come under a precept of the law, but is the end at which every lawgiver or lawmaker aims, abusus non tollit usum. (6)THE ARTICLES: §69. Let this letter be proclaimed in all churches and assemblies, that all may hear and understand the true order of the Church and the nature of God’s law. §70. And so let all who hear or read these declarations hold fast in patience, diligence, and fidelity: striving always to enter into the Skies, not through false peace or worldly indulgence, but through steadfast adherence to the Holy Scrolls and the Rite of Universality. THE SYLLOGISMS: SINCE (1) offices, ministerial or magisterial, are enshrined in any society not for the superiority of persons but for the functions by which the society is ordered toward its end (Everard IV, Pontifical Encyclical: Justice in Our Time sec.1), AND (b) the Church is a visible, ordered, institutionalised society ordered toward the common good being the instruction of the elect (Silence 5:5) and the delivery of sacraments and preservation of the Word of God (5:24), AND (c) the Church is a visible, ordered, institutionalised society in which all persons and offices are equal before God; no office holds in contempt or self-service ontological superiority over another, AND (d) functions i.e. apostolic constitution for the liturgy, must be distributed among persons for the exercise of ministry, instruction, judgement, and spiritual governance, which are necessary to order the Church to its end of edification and goodness; ∴ EX QUO SEQUITUR, the Church must preserve in itself ordered, officed, stationed functions in the exercise of ministry, instruction, judgement, and spiritual governance, without any hierarchy of dignity in or between its ministers. A due meditation of these things is enough to make the wisest, the best of men, and the most diligent in the discharge of the pastoral office to cry out, ‘and who is sufficient for these things?’ For no sense of insufficiency, the forethought of abuse, of hierarchy, of superiority, can completely discourage any in the undertaking of a work or office, which he is assured that God calls him to. Where God calls to a duty, he gives competent strength for the performance in it. His Grace is sufficient for us. Insofar that law cannot apply itself, neither can Scripture interpret itself, or councils and synods gather themselves without ministers distinguished not for the elevation of purpose but for the distinction of service, et Deus optime scit. Great art Thou, O Lord, and greatly to be praised, my Mercy, who didst create me and didst not forget me even when I forgot Thee. O true Light, to You I lift up my heart and mind lest it should teach me vanities. For in the restless misery of fallen spirits, which expose their darkness stripped of vesture of Your light, You clearly show how great You made the rational creature, since for its repose and beatitude nothing less than You suffices, and from Thee shall arise our vesture of light, and our darkness shall be as midday. Since he is the Alpha and the Omega, this apologetic is ended thus with God, who is blessed throughout the ages.

a.Mtr. Adolpha Yohānāh, FSPST, to Father Wenceslas Bainbridge, FSPST, be this open response written (&del.), Love not the world, nor the things therein, but if you have need to love anything, then love Our Heavenly Father alone. For, if any man among you should love the world, then the love of the Father is not with him. And when you pass away and the lust therein; the will of the HaShem abides for-ever (even so that HaShem abides for-ever). Ineffable Creator, Who, from the treasures of Your Wisdom have established many hierarchies of angels, have arrayed them in marvellous order above the fiery Heavens, and have marshalled the regions of the world with many treasures of taste and unsubtle intellect, You are proclaimed the true font of light and wisdom, and the primal origin raised high beyond all things. You make eloquent the tongues of neonates and infants and thereafter. Refine my lips and pour forth upon my lips the keenness of speech, which proceedeth from the goodness of Your blessing. Grant, O merciful Lord, that I may ardently enquire, prudently examine, truthfully acknowledge, and articulately accomplish what is pleasing to You for the praise and glory of Your name. Amen. (Adolpha Yohānāh, daughter) b.Since I am charged with the part of philolexian, I will endeavour to corroborate, enquire, and trial the positions of the addendum to the Lex Theodicea alone as opposed to its parent. Of which agreement, I claim no sympathy nor concern nor passion for lawyering and earthly legal contracts; JUSTICE AND LAW: A QUESTION OF PREDICATION? i.In any discussion of polity, we must probe the principal question of how Man can conduct himself rightly, justly, orderly in the state of nature viz. how he can order his tribe toward egality and virtue. We know that these qualities constitute the end of the state of nature, inasmuch as it is affirmed that “[God’s] law is the virtuous law, and all the blessings of the Virtue shall serve the righteous kings and servants alike,” (Virtue 6:9). CONFER, it is evident that the distribution of justice—which is the law—presupposes as its formal cause both the equality of the persons before the law and the moral disposition of virtue in those who administer and receive it.1 In light thereof, we must accurately define justice and how we know that things are just. ii.The question of justice turns on the logical problem of predication. The disagreement between predicates is between those that are predicated in quid and those that are predicated in quale—the difference, in short, being between those that tell us what the object is, what pertains to its nature (e.g., the existence of justice), and those that attribute incidental properties, relations, etc. (e.g., the property of being just). When we say of someone or something that they are good or just––let us say the Canonist––it is much like saying, “the Canonist is a carpenter.” The predicate of being a carpenter seems to inform us of what kind of thing the Canonist is. He could not be without that predicate and still be a man. However, it seems more that the predicate is an accidental quality. He had to exist in order to acquire this skill and would continue to be who he is if all his knowledge of carpentry suddenly deserted him. Thus, we treat carpentry as a quality rather than a substance, and therefore a predicate in quale. Carpentry is a habit, as a sort of accidental form the subject takes on, not part of his essence. iii.This form can be applied to the idea of justice also. Justice is a habit in the same way that carpentry is. Neither is what the Canonist—or any man—is essentially, as the Doctors may call it, his quidditas, but rather what he is like by his disposition. From this dialectic, we can arrive at the definition that justice is a habit whereby a man renders to each one his due by a constant will. The precepts of natural law and justice sometimes are in it only habitually, even though they are sometimes actually considered by reason, thus justice can be called a habit. iv.By outlining justice as such, we can revisit Bainbridge’s responsio a Qs.1&6; “It must be held that human law, though imperfect in origin, may be truly just insofar as it reflects divine providence and seeks the common good under right reason. The law does not derive its justice from the personal sanctity of the legislator, but from its conformity to the eternal law (lex aeterna) which is God's will itself (cf. Apologetica I.I). Thus, the Emperor and his ministers, even as fallen instruments, may serve as valid conduits of divine order so long as they do not legislate contrary to virtue. […] Though human law is finite, it may participate analogically in divine justice when it is rightly ordered to the good, tempered by mercy, and shaped by reason. The law need not be perfect to reflect the perfect; it need only strive to conform itself to the will of God as revealed in nature, reason, and the Scrolls. In this striving, law becomes not merely functional, but sanctifying, a pedagogue unto righteousness and a mirror, though dim, of heavenly order.” (sec.i,vi) Human law may be just, although strictly by its participation in the divine will through rightly ordered habits. And, justice, being a habit underpinning human law, allows this participation. Bainbridge gestures toward this, in brief, as saying “The law does not derive its justice from the personal sanctity of the legislator, but from its conformity to the eternal law (lex aeterna) which is God's will itself [cit.].” (sec.i, res.). This judgement seems to distinguish: a) what the legislator is, essentially, as in quid, i.e. fallen, unsanctified, and b) what he may do or participate in accidentally, as in quale, i.e. acting justly, legislating rightfully. Both of which Bainbridge treats functionally but not formally, which I hope to have grounded ontologically as explained in the above articles. We see this gesture mirrored also as, “even fallen man retains participation in divine order.” (ibid.), to which ends we see the word participation hinting toward a relation between the essential divine justice and the habitual human justice. v.Bainbridge also sets up, in Q.6, the interesting argument that human law may analogically reflect divine justice: “it may participate analogically in divine justice when it is rightly ordered to the good.” (sec.vi, res.). But, this only makes sense if justice is not a purely divine essence, but something which can exist in degrees, save in imitation, which is resolutely false as considering, “For His power is not parted among His many servants, but imitated, and in His multitude of ways, He is above them all.” (Dwarves 5:19). As in Q.1, Bainbridge leaves the mode of this participation, or analogy, unexplained. But, by defining justice as habitual and participatory, we can conclude that the law and lawmakers are not essentially just, but that their justice arises by habitual conformity viz. a quality in quale, not strictly a divine essence. vi.This ontological correction also helps in addressing the objection that, “Moreover, man legislates in time, whereas God judges outside of time. Therefore, no law of man can reflect His eternal judgment.” (sec.vi, ob.ii). A temporal agent, a man, can predicate justice of his acts, without being justice itself. CONCLUSIO: Justice is a habitual quality rather than an essential property, and thus, fallen man can enact justice without being essentially just (the predicate is in quale). 1:In this respect, I agree with the Lex Theodicea’s parent judgement concerning the automatism in punishment and the collapse of discretion, though I prefaced that this response would not touch on the original legal work; “[…] ii. This practice contravenes the ancient principle that punishment must be proportionate not merely to social station but to moral guilt. It substitutes social appearance for culpable act, and procedural convenience for divine equity. iii. As the Canonis Theodicea teaches with solemn authority, justice is not an act of destruction but a work of restoration. It seeks to elevate man, not degrade him (cf. Theodicea IV–V). A noble punished automatically is not purified but humiliated. The result is not obedience but alienation, and from alienation springs sedition.” (sec.c.ii—iii, res.)

HOMILY II. Martyrdom is Only Holy When Orderly Written by Fr. Abraham Sheen VERILY, BROTHER, THE LORD GOD BREATHED LIFE INTO THE AENGULS AND DAEMONS, AND HE PUT INTO THEM THEIR POWER, AND MADE THEIR HOMES IN THE SKIES. AND VERILY THE VIRTUOUS DEAD ARE WORTHY OF OUR REGARD, FOR FROM THEM WE MAY CLAIM PRECIOUS WISDOM. BUT THE LORD HAS ALSO CREATED THE HOLY WORD, AND BREATHED LIFE INTO ALL THINGS. WHAT BREATH AMONG ALL THE HEAVENS IS SO SACRED? THERE IS NONE TRULY ALIKE TO HIM. THE LORD IS THE LORD GOD WITHOUT PEER, BUT YOU HAVE DIVIDED HIS INFINITE AUTHORITIES AMONG MANY BEINGS, AND IN SUCH YOU PROFANE WHAT IS HOLY. THIS IS A GRIEVOUS SIN, FOR IN PARTING HOLINESS, YOU DESTROY IT. YOU HAVE TRADED ONE GOD OF INFINITE POWER FOR MANY OF LITTLE WORTH. AND MORE SO, THE DENIER IS WICKED, AND HE TAKES MANY GUISES. SOON, FOR THEIR WEAKNESS, HE MAY CREEP INTO THE IDOLS OF YOUR TEMPLES, AND INTO THE VAST HALLS OF YOUR FALSE GODS, AND LITTLE BY LITTLE TAKE MANY ROLES. HE WILL BRING GREAT INIQUITY. SO I FIND THAT YOU RAISE UP WHAT IS STRONG IN YOUR OWN EYE, BUT WEAK BEFORE THE LORD, AND SOON YOU SHALL FIND THE DENIER AMONG YOU. —Dwarves 5:3-15 —————————————————————————————————————————— “Fr. Abraham Sheen, an open address— I.Friends, I write unto you, little pupils, because your sins are forgiven through His Name. I write unto you, fathers, because you have professed to know Him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men and landlords and princes and kings, because the Word abides in your strength. Love not the world, nor the things therein, but if you have need to love anything, then love Our Heavenly Father alone. For, if any man among you should love the world, then the love of the Father is not with him. For all that is in this world, is the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, which is not of the Father, but is of the world. And, pharisees also among the children and the fathers and the men and landlords and princes and kings, I write to you also, because your love is not in the Lord but in yourselves. And when you pass away and the lust therein; the will of the HaShem abides for-ever (even so that HaShem abides for-ever). II.Let no man think to storm Heaven by disorderly death viz. Without obedience to divine ordinance. In these latter times, I have seen that men plainly and comfortably caution that the struggle, suffering, privation of the body sanctifies. That men should challenge and wrestle with blood and bones and all because, if they should challenge and wrestle with a cross around their neck and the Word on their tongue, it may merit the crown, may make the man a courtier of Heaven. But, the Lord is not the God of disorder, but of peace (cf. Godfrey 6:47); and no challenge sealed in blood and anger and disorder ascends to his font. Withal, we appreciate, admire, and reflect on the relations from the Thesis on Anger; “Those who act in anger often claim to be acting as instruments of God's vengeance, righting the wrongs of the nation and world, working for God's justice. But the question is: when does God's justice end and MAN's anger begin? It seems to me that we should be very cautious about using anger, as any passion […] Thus it is evident that the anger of man worketh not the justice of God […] And I have noticed that Men engaged in political affairs often use God's justice as a justification. They write God's Name in their fancy titles but refuse to show His mercy to any; they exercise their own anger and desire for revenge and claim that it is God's anger, not their own.” (sec.ii, par.i) II.Sanctification requires order, and order proceedeth from reason; but where there is disorder, there is no participation in divine similitude. To these ends, I caution that it is a manifold error to confound cause and end, and to confuse passion with virtue, and to mistake fervour for obedience. It must be distinguished, precisely: a.that martyrdom is in itself not entrance but return, b.that the return to martyrdom constitutes not only death on the font, but in bearing death in right forma, right causa, and right subiectio which is submission, c.that passion without virtue viz. obedience without ordinance, is disobedience, not sacrifice, d.that struggle, suffering, privation without lawful confession scilicet. the accurate confession of faith under lawful authority, is deficient in merit. III.Wherefore it will be demonstrated: primo. that martyrdom demands ordered submission of intention, of opinion, and of will. secundo. that martyrdom is consummated by lawful witness. tertio. that not every death for a holy cause is itself holy. And to the ends that martyrdom, rightly so called, need imitate not only the bodily and faithful struggle of Owyn against privation and suffering, but his obedience. Death without order profits to judgement, hence that “verily you must find that pain comes not from the wrath of the Lord, but as we reject Him” (Orcs 6:16). I.CASTIGATIO I.The assumption that all struggle under a holy cause profits to virtue is erroneous. This is because the imperfect man, inclined to justify himself by reason of malum metaphysical which is the inherent imperfection to all (cf. Canonis Theodicea: the Problem of Evil in Canonist Thought, sec.i, par.iv), confounds his passion with righteousness, he commonly holds that where the heart is earnest, the act is holy. Likewise, because the public judges not by interior conformity to the Word, but by the appearance of endurance through loss, death for a cause—no matter its order—is praised indiscriminately. II.However, we find that piety is not measured by its sincerity but by its accordance with order viz. The disposition of things according to their end, that each nature moves according to the course and trajectory appointed for it. Order is the appearance of the Intellect in material things; hence that, there is privation of likeness to the Lord when order is absent. Therefore, holiness presupposes order. To these ends, I find it of value that the Doctor Ven. Humbert, in his commentary on Godwinites (Spirit 1:4), recognises the importance of order hence that “the Prophet is praising them specifically for keeping fast to [the sustenance of order] and is applying it to them,” (cf. Capitulum I: Lectio Epistulae Owaini Prophetae, ad Filios Godewini, i.iv, footnote x). Thus it is known that piety is not in suffering per se, but in the continuation of order appointed by God. Such that it was called on the Godwinites, stressing upon their steadfastness to the Canticle of Fidelity, that they be praised not merely for their suffering, but because in their suffering, they sustained the order of things. III.Therefore it can be parsed that: a.struggle, suffering, death, or privation seen without a conscious continuation of divine order is no sacrifice but profanity; b.and that he who struggles, suffers, or dies but does not, with conscious intent, preserve the Word, does not ascend but is scattered. IV.Consequently, it is revealed that martyrdom is not a natural consequence of suffering, but its elevation under and in accordance with (submission to) order. Many may die for causes touching the name of the Lord, yet are not and should not be canonised, because their deaths are not rightly ordered for lack of obedience. Thus, martyrdom is a work of order more than it is of self-will. In the same work, the Ven. Doctor parses Godwinites 1:22 as saying: “The Prophet admits that the men have power and virtue, but that it belongs to God ultimately. Therefore to raise up men, or any creature, to the honour due to God alone, is a grave sin. Furthermore, since God is the author of all our capacities, we see the nature of true humility, which is in realising their origin of which we are not ourselves responsible. This means that a man can be proud of intelligence or achievement with the same lack of justice as he would be proud of his own eye colour, viz. It is an evident absurdity to be proud because your eyes are blue, because you did not earn it. In the same way, humility does not consist, as is erroneously said, in beautiful women trying to convince themselves that they are ugly, or clever men that they are unintelligent, on the contrary, the humble man recognises he has been given these capacities, but knows that he can claim no credit for them just as he can claim no merit for having blue eyes.” (ibid. i.xxii, footnote xxii) Here, it must be affirmed that martyrdom for earthly kings and excellences is no true witness but for counterfeit. As, they who die for such things die not in the witness of holiness, but confusion (Spirit 1:13-17). Even while he invokes the Name, he who should venture to suffer for the sake of his human greatness dies in vain, not martyrdom. V.We therefore affirm that not all who die in earnest die in holiness; not all who are written as martyrs by men are received as martyrs by the Lord. II.CORRECTIO I.Since the error is recognised, it remains to set forth its correction which is, that the true signs be laid by which true orderly martyrdom may be known. There are three signs which martyrdom profits to, without which canonisation is usurped and not enjoyed upon: Confessio Recta (the Right Confession)—that the steadfast profession of the true Faith is given, and without admixture of error. A man who should die in separation from the body of the Mother Church is only a juror of his own disorder, as “And you shall give your fellows the abundance of the spirit, which is My Word. For the abundance of the spirit is never divided, but multiplied […] and My wealth is the virtuous wealth, and all the blessings of the Virtue shall fall before the righteous who share it.” (Canticle of Charity, 2:8-11). Whereby, it is outlined that the threshold of righteousness is the charity of witness to the Faith. Causa Recta (the Right Cause)—that the death is suffered for the continuation of truth and the gloria Dei and not for private or political ambition or faction or principle. Since martyrdom is a work of charity, charity seeks not its own. If the cause for one’s martyrdom should be sedition, that martyr bears no witness, even that Owyn raised the sword not for faction against his uncle, but to reproof wickedness and continue the Word (Owyn, 4:29-35) (Silence, 5:16-22). Subiectio Recta (the Right Submission)—that the death is borne in obedience to the authority of the Lord, and not by private and moreover rashful determination. For Owyn became obedient unto death when he went into Edel and was made into the Mercyflame, thereby sanctifying death itself by submission. Even that High Pontiff Caius I wrote, "the ascension of the Faithful for its embrace is embroiled with a justification for that ascension in the first place […] and Man may ascend to the Second Sky by being 'Justified in Faith' […] Thus, I find that the true test of the realm Mundus is not that one must be justified in faith, for we have seen wicked men who are otherwise justified in faith, but that the true and righteous test given and mandated by the Lord is Virtue." (cf. the Creed of Redemption: Lex Redemptoris Codex Honoris Pro Militibus Shcris, sec.i, par.x). III.EXEMPLARE I.In these parts, I will outline the cases of martyrdom and canonisation—ordered and disordered—to resolve (Legenda Sanctorum; or, the Lives of the Saints, vol.iii); Depiction of St. Carolus of Carrenhall, in the Akritio-Raevir tradition. II.We examine first the case de Martyrio Perfecto, that is the Perfect Martyrdom scilicet. true orderly martyrdom, which we see in the life and death of the Saint Carolus of Carrenhall. In the Sack of Adria by the Savoyards, St. Carr bore witness not in private armament against revolt, rather by the defense of women, children, and retinue in the shadow of the Cathedral. In continuation of the parameters outlined in sec.ii, St. Carr’s confession was right, Confessio Recta, as he died in the open witness of the Faith and in the threshold of the Cathedral. His cause was right, Causa Recta, in the selfless abandon of his own security and defense and the charity owed to the helpless women and children. His submission was right, Subiectio Recta, being that he did not fight in private passion but in selfless, public, and obedient emergency. Therefore, the case is true and orderly. Depiction of St. Arpad of Vilacz, in the Akritio-Raevir tradition. III.Second, we examine the case de Morte Inordinata, that is the Imperfect Martyrdom scilicet. false disorderly death, which we observe in the life and death of the Saint Arpad of Vilacz. During the Coup of Adelburg, St. Arpad entered an unlevel single combat with the boy-emperor John VI Maximilian, thereby invoking the justice of his own hand. While we may forgive that he arrived on a full surrender of his station to pilgrimage and penitence, his violence abandoned the parameters of martyrdom. His confession was not right but obscure, as he went in dynastic vengeance against the House of Barbanov and defended, in the Coup, in service of the Houses Romstun and Pertinaxi militarily, politically, as a partisan of cause, This service was not ecclesiastical, but plainly political, thus his confession was not primary. His cause was not right, as the Coup of Adelburg was secular and partisan in the dismantlement of Imperial Oren for the Renatian King Aurelius, not for the crown incorruptible and the glorification of the Kingdom of Heaven. He thus died for the civitas Terrena which is the City of Earth (Tract I: the Kingdom of God, par. i.v), not for the eternal Kingdoms of Grace and Glory. His submission was not right, as he acted in self-will in the entrance to regicidal combat without sanction from the Church. It may not be charitied that he asked for penance from the Bl. High Pontiff Everard IV, as this indulgence was granted retroactively. Therefore, the case is false and disorderly. IV.Third, we examine the case de Causa Ambigua, that is the ambiguous cause, which we observe in the life and death of the Blessed Father Carolus de Cordoba. Bl. Fr. Carlos was martyred at the Diet of Karosgrad, borne witness against heresy. His confession was right as he stood in fierce resistance to manifest error including the resistance of the Diet to the call for crusade and its reckless designation of churchpeople as Darfeyist. Likewise, his cause, being in faithful and civil obedience, was right, as it was nearly allied to the defense of clerical and ecclesial truth and authority—even if that authority was skewed. However, his submission, with personal intention and obedience to the Church as sincere, should be judged with more scrutiny in the political context and climate of the Diet in combat against High Pontiff Owyn III. It is easy that, with little or reckless judgement, ecclesial action may twist into political submission. Therefore, the case is ambiguous. IV.CONCLUSIO: MARTYRDOM IS ONLY HOLY WHEN ORDERLY I.We caution Man, by means of this, that you go out to fight in the way of the Lord desiring His pleasure, not wanting anything of the goods of the present world nor will you return to it. So know that you are already killed and have no return to this life; you are going forward and will not turn away from righteousness till you come to Him. All ye Holy Innocents, Pray for us.”

FRATERNITAS SACERDOTALIS PHILOLEXIANAE S. THADDAEI The Priestly Philolexian Fraternity of Saint Jude AZURE, A FRIAR PROPER VESTED IN SABLE, WEARING SANDALS GULES, NIMBED OR, DEXTER HAND RAISED IN BENEDICTION, SINISTER HAND HOLDING AN OPEN BOOK ARGENT INSCRIBED IN SABLE "PAX TIBI MARCE EVANGELISTA MEVS"; BEHIND HIM IN SALTIRE TWO KEYS OR AND ARGENT, THEIR BOWS INTERLACED; BELOW, A CORD GULES ENTWINED IN A FIGURE-EIGHT KNOT; ALL WITHIN A DOUBLE TRESSURE OR. —————————————————————————————————————————— SURGAM SOCIETAS PHILOLECTICA COLLEGII SACERDOTALIS Lemon Collis Anno Domini MMXXVI. In cuius rei testimonium, Nos Praeses Scribaque a secretis, sociorum nomine chirographa nostra, Sigillumque societatis hisce litteris affigenda curavimus. PRAESES A SECRETIS I.Since it belongs to the nature of Man, that is the nature created in imagio Logos, it is fitting that the Church, being the earthwork and beaconhouse of Light and Logic, should not only disseminate, diffuse, and spread into the corners of the world faith. But, also, and in a manner superseding fervently, inspire, empower, and engender to her children an understanding of the faith that is not only holy, but orderly. In this respect, we, the Secret of the Priestly Philolexian Fraternity of Saint Jude, recall the lines of the Canonis Apologetica— Our chief objective in the initiation of the work is henceforth to expound the science of God, not only as He is in Himself, but also as He is the beginning of matters and their last end, in such a way as may tend to the capabilities of student scholars and priests. (praf., par.i) With especial concern to these latter times, we have considered with careful note the privation of Logic, the cheapening of discourse, and disputation profaned by vanity. And, because Man is created with the trace intellect of the Lord, we recognise and echo the pursuit by which the soul, in humility, pursues the knowledge and intellect of his Lord not by contradiction, but by conformation of intellect to truth. II.In this respect, we dwell on the title of this fellowship: philolexian. The root philo- as meaning he who loves and suffix lexis as meaning discourse, which is the love of the Word. Not of filibustering, but of that language which proceedeth from Adonai and without the shadow of error. Inasmuch as the Lord speaks once, and Man must yearn to hear twice, so it behooves the lover of the Word, the philolexian, to incline himself to what is spoken from on high. III.In this love of the Word, is contained not only the swell of Man’s knowledge, but the longing for the living Word, which is the Lord. We, the philolexians, are bound in this name to a twofold charity: the love of the Divine Word and the love of the Word by which divine things are lawfully sought and faithfully declared. IV.This fraternity is therefore dedicated to the reason of the Word by a deconstructive approach, which expounds the science of the Word through dialectic and logic and not by compassion solely. V.The ends of of our fellowship are outlined in the purpose of the priest, that he exercises reason as the handmaid of his inquiry to the analogy of the doctrine (a) that he cultivates level and unerrored dialogue which omits all novelty, polity, and vanities which introduce the word proceeding from the self into the Word proceeding from God (b) that he writes and teaches to the measure of his office and charism (c) that he rightly orders his intellect toward the Lord through dialectical inquiry (d) that he rightly orders himself toward interior discipline through sobriety from all manners of indulgence and through charity (e) that he does not endeavour always to softness nor warmth but forever to the goodness which is knowing the Lord and His Goodness (f) that he gives all his labours to the Lord, for the increase and edification of the Church and gloria Dei. VI.To these ends, the Fraternity obliges their members to a vow of poverty of opinion—that the brother renounces his intellectual property, and seeks not to possess his private opinion or interpretation. In which respect, the work of the Fraternity is not the personal conceit of the author, but the academic disputation of a studied subject, elsewise the brother would not follow the deconstructivism of the Society. A DISPUTATIO MINOR I.Because the ordered ends of this Fraternity are reasoned deconstruction, it should be held among members that discourse should not constitute the orderly procession of syllogisms, but a rational engagement with the Word. II.Therefore, the Fraternity recognises that the above engagements should follow a basic ontological structure and semantic return, wherein each act moves; (i) from the particular instance to the universal meaning, (ii) from the object encountered to the reason revealed, (iii) from the word spoken to the truth confessed. III.This movement of the philolexian is named the Form of Intention, which involves the detailed flow— Res—the object itself, received in its givenness; Singularitas—the instance or formulation presently under scrutiny; Universalitas—the genus to which it belongs within the body of doctrine; Telos—the destination to which reason tends in the Word: edification and glorification of and with the Truth. INTENTION → (Res) → Particular → Universal → Finalitas → REVELATORY RETURN III.Such that no disputation becomes self-contained, the brother should participate with the object by moving inward toward the Res and outward simultaneously toward the Finalitas, hence the intellectual return of Reason to its source. IV.Any engagement should begin with the Res, which is the Object, that is to behold the situation or rhetoric which is before the brother. The engagement begins with reception rather than immediate interpretation; an unembellished appreciation of the Object. Let us suppose, for example, that the question surrounds the matter of Grace. Receiving the Object, the brother begins with the recognition that Grace is a property enjoyed and disseminated by the Lord (not a thesis or argument but an object hence encountered and understood). V.The Object moves into the Singularitas, which is the Singular Instance, that is to move from a recognition of the Object to a consideration of the case before the brother. Continuing with the example of a question concerning Grace, the brother should consider what claim about Grace is being challenged. VI.The General Type, the Universality, follows the Singularity, wherein the brother must understand to which rule the matter belongs. Is it a debated question? Is it a canonical doctrine? What may be freely speculated should not be strictly treated as a matter needing defining. In the example of Grace, the brother should ask himself what kind of theological object Grace is and how it is treated. Whether there is Grace in God is a defined teaching which underpins the Church. Therefore, that is not a question open to dialectical challenge. Meanwhile, the brother may turn to whether one’s grace may be increased, which has been disputed and clarified by the Doctors of the church while not wholly defined. Therefore, that is a question open to measured challenge. VII.The Finality also means that, the brother directs his inquiry to the proper end by communion, clarification, and adoration. Every word is ordered to the end that it glorifies the Word and builds up the Body. Why do we speak of Grace? The brother may question himself thusly, when I am clarifying the question of Grace, is it to help my neighbour order himself to greater piety? Or, to appear clever? INTENTION → What am I approaching? → What is being asked about the object? → What kind of claim is being made? → Why or why not should I speak of this? → REVELATORY RETURN VIII.The Fraternity recognises the Doctores Ecclesiae, which is the Church Doctors: Saint Jude, Saint Pius, Blessed Daniel IV, Blessed Daniel VI, Blessed Everard IV, Blessed Brother Fabian the Lesser, Blessed Father Seraphim, Venerable Father Humbert, Father Goren RANK AND STRUCTURE I.Being that the aim of the Society is to promote and empower level discourse, the rank of the body is designated to create a clear economy of responsibilities to set the schedule of the day. The President will not style himself in any scholastic works such that he does not appropriate the work to himself. II.The president seats the Fraternity with no styles except those of his station (e.g., Father, Mother, Brother). He is deputised to bookkeep the minutes of the studiums and catalog the questions posed and reasons confessed, insofar that it edifies the Church and congregation of the Fraternity. And such that the believer preserves the Word proceeding from God, the president preserves the words of the brothers proceeding from the Word lest memory fails, but neither adds nor removes. The presidency will follow an electoral cycle conducted every fifteen years, chaperoned by the secretary of the fraternal body. III.The secretary is appointed by the standing president for administrative bookkeeping (e.g., overseeing studiums, the scholarship of the novitiate, the minutes alongside the president). He is not held by any substandard vows. Scholars of the Fraternity are beholden to the mutual scholarship and education of one another in scriptural semantics and the Arts. CONGREGATIONIBUS I.The brothers of the Fraternity agree to partake in a scriptural and theological studium henceforth named the beit midrash once every three Robert years, at the very least. Fraternity priests will choose a topical Object or doctoral question to raise in level discourse following the ontological formula of Reason. II.The brothers of the Fraternity agree to meet in structured, dialogic liturgical mass which engages the intellect of both brother and layman. The Fraternity permits and encourages the liturgical engagement of the unordained for the increase of the Faith and the continued influence of the Church catechism. III.The brothers of the Fraternity agree to meet in the scholastic tradition, but to resign themselves to privacy in all other traditions, lest over-fraternising should hinder their movement toward Reason. IV.Aside from their dialogic labours, Fraternity priests agree to meet in prayer communally and privately in the Judite tradition, following the Little Rosary and the Little Office of Saint Jude priorly adopted by the Priestly Fraternity of Saints Kristoff and Jude. V.The Fraternity sets its seal under the patronage of Saint Jude, for his scholastic influence and dedication to the scholarly proliferation of the Faith. ADMISSIONS AND INSTITUTIONS I.The Fraternity agrees not to democratise their membership, instead outlining by authority of itself the character which a member should uphold; II.That the member of the Fraternity places fidelity to the Church first, naming it as his Mother, and God as his father and home, III.That he places disposition second, and orders himself not only to great knowledge but to humility, charity, and patience, IV.That his humility precedes cleverness, and he prepares not only to correct but to be corrected, V.That he may order himself fully to a structured, coherent, learned movement toward the Word through Reason and semantic return (see, the Form of Intention), and submits speech to reverent inquiry, VI.That he lives publicly in virtue and not in scandal, polity, or contempt for ecclesial discipline. —————————————————————————————————————————

"It's so over," cries Mother Adolpha from the arcades.

ONION and other entries from Lemon Hill From the diary of Adolpha Yohānāh —————————————————————————————————————————— Between lamb-leather covers, there are pages unplundered of human curiosity. Ink and aquarelle percolate into dog-eared sleeves of paper and wash into the waxy cut of cardstock like stains of light-lipstick on tissue paper. It has evidently been unkept, not for many years and perhaps nary for many years to come. There had not been any fantastical nor over-emotional hints to interrupt the practical current of words, unless a kind of footnote scrawled into the last page counted for exposition of some human method. It is sterile, rain-slicked, and unpeculiar, time’s lichen sprawled over the unrifled but folded-over corners and into the unfilled indices and agendas for liturgical seasons: MCMLXX— I. HORENTIDE: …………………………………………………………………………... i (1st, Tobias’ Bounty). Fest on the spoils from the Rorate; liturgical readings follow the Virtue, etcetera etcetera; set the Asperges in the chapel, light candle wicks, refill font. ii (7th, Tobias’ Bounty). Prepare a black habit for the Lamentation of Horen and Juli’el; fasting to follow, do not include any game in the abbey’s pantry. Soak others’ black vestments in the bank. iii (15th, Tobias' Bounty). Collect cud and kosher from delicatessen for the Triumph—if closed for private celebration, take the route through to Enswerp, refer to Butcher Ephraim. iv (20th, Tobias' Bounty). Refill the sheep basins, trim the wool. v (24th, Tobias' Bounty). Go to Confession. II. OWYNTIDE: ……………………………………………………………………...…… i (3rd, Sun’s Smile). Collect firewood for the Owynsfeast; leave Asperges pamphlets in the chapel for attendants; speak to Groundskeeper Llewelyn to start the hearth. ii (15th, Sun’s Smile). Go to Confession. iii (16th, Sun’s Smile). Bring the kosher—kept in pantry—to Butcher Ephraim for gristle-trimming; pick up bread; pick the lemons, bring them to Groundskeeper Llewelyn. iv. … v (23rd, Sun’s Smile). Prepare shofar for Feast of Sts. Evaristus and Clement, find turpentine if the casing is dusted-over; talk to Callahan. vi (24th, Sun’s Smile). Go to Confession. III. SILENCE: ………………..…………………………………………………………… i (1st, Harren's Folly). Collect firewood from Groundskeeper Llewelyn; dust the curtains for the Great Feast; pick up bread; place hymnbooks in the chapel for the mass; read. ii. … iii (11th, Harren's Folly). Replace the book covers in the library—find the printer if new covers are needed. Go to mass. iv. … v (23rd, Harren's Folly). Try to eat—Feast of St. H.P. Everard—do not decline if offered. vi (24th, Harren's Folly). Go to Confession. IV. GODFREYTIDE: ……………………………………………………………………… i (1st, Horen's Calling). Congregate the choirboys for the Vidi Aquam; ring the bells for mass; go to mass; pick up lemons, groundskeeper is ill. ii (2nd, Horen's Calling). Unlock the doors of the seminary, tutelage starting today; till the fields, groundskeeper is ill; trim the sheep wool. iii. … iv. … v (11th, Horen's Calling). Prepare Groundskeeper Llewelyn’s funeral rites. vi (24th, Horen's Calling). Go to Confession. V. FLAME: ………………………………………………………………………………... No entries this month, save only for the turn of the season; i (24th, Owyn’s Flame). Go to Confession. VI. CHURCHTIDE: ……………………………………………………………………… i (8th, Godfrey’s Triumph). Replace icons for the Feast of Sts. Jude and Kristoff; liturgicals to follow the Spirit and Homilies and Tracts, etcetera etcetera; refill the font. ii (12th—13th, Godfrey’s Triumph). Liturgical readings to follow the works of Ven. Humbert, O.S.J, and St. Catherine—works of Ven. Humbert, the Spirit, etcetera etcetera. iii (21st, Godfrey’s Triumph). Till the fields; pick the lemons; trim the sheep wool; dust the apse; close the seminary doors, empty all the boards; talk to Callahan. iv (23rd, Godfrey’s Triumph). Replace icons for All Saints; see Butcher Ephraim for kosher. v. … vi. … vii. (24th, Godfrey’s Triumph). Go to Confession; talk to Callahan. Past the first year of its issuance, the agenda has not seen human maintenance. Only sparse entries to follow; Adolpha, five-and-ten, MCMLXX— (12th, Tobias’ Bounty) Midday mass was four minutes past schedule today. I timed it, but the clock on the eastern wall of the chapel is behind. The boys arrived with the father with mud in their shoes and molasses in their hair and the stink of the sheep from the field. They seemed in a rush. I was waiting, but I did not think to protest. We prayed the Asperges at mass today. I remembered it from Ven. Humbert’s prayerbook. Did not think to mention that, thought the father would groan at me. I think he is bothered by me. When we read the Scripture, I tell him I have done some note-taking. He is never thrilled to see my homilies. At least, not after the first few times. I place him for not being a reader. One of the seminary boys stared at me during the prayer. I think perhaps he was actually the groundskeeper’s son. It was not unnatural, only longer than was normal or necessary. When I ducked my head from the light limning my eyes through the veil and turned it his way, he pointed his face resolutely forward and hid it like a loping wolf. It reminded me of the way larks stand on fences and rooftops during a storm. They do not, or perhaps, they do not know, take off nor nest. But, with an impatient wriggle, twitch—neither our of fear nor instinct. He blinked that way. I think he believes I did not see. I did. It is difficult not to. After I noticed, he stared at and pored over his belt cord silently for a few minutes until the psalter concluded. He did not talk. We rose from the mass and he tipped his heel back a stretch more than he should have, and his shoes clipped the candle stand. I did not turn to look. I do not know why he was looking. There is a very particular, and what is more, very peculiar form of attention. That is not the reverent kind, nor even the desirous. It is a winged breed of attention. One that flutters and barrels toward and slams into the glass beak-first. I wonder if that is what the boy was. I don’t have a song for that kind of bird. I think perhaps I mouthed something in error. I will repent later. (15th, Tobias’ Bounty)—mid-evening I was in my dormitory last night. I overheard one of the seminary brothers from across the drywall. He was gossiping, not like boys are but more like my sisters often did and were often wont to; ‘I do not think she even eats,’ he whispered into the bunk, or something of that effect, no doubt half shut-eyed and half shut-eared, head pillow-snuck. I did not know to feel upset. I decidedly did not. It is something I have considered for some time. In truth, and to confirm his supposition—I do not know if I do. Or if I even need to. I want, I think, to be right. And, righteousness is a thing that is utterly disinterested as to whether I am glad, or grieving, or known, or loved, or pleased, or starving, or thirsty, or sick. What does it mean to be right before God? Not to be beloved. Nor even to be justified. Nor even to be happy. Just, simply, stilly—right. They must think of me, those boys, that I am cold. I have no way of confirming it, but I think that I must be burning. This morning, I went to fill the basins for the sheep. I thought about it for some time: what he had said, and what they had thought. It is a strange thing to hear myself spoken of aloud. I do not believe that I am often on or need be on the tongues of others. Even if they are more sigh than speech, his words, like those of my sisters, often do make the most unturned and stony among us feel like a nuisance. I do not think it matters—‘I do not think she even eats.’ I do not feel that eating is an action that affirms the body. Only one that affirms the time. We eat if it is breakfast, if it is lunch, if it is supper. We know that it is dawn, afternoon, and evening. We eat because it is ordered and because the hour requires it. If I forget the hour, I forget the act. I know that they mean it in jest, and that they find humour in their canine incisors as it treats on the skin of my back. I cannot help but feel, however, that they do not understand. I withhold myself from food because I simply do not find it useful most days. It is a loud and assuming act. Righteousness is quiet and unassuming. When they think I am cold, they cannot see that I am a heat that will not spend itself on comfort. That is a flame that does not smoke, does not crackle, does not spit, does not cry out. (24th, Tobias’ Bounty) I went to Confession today. I did not find the confessor to assign my quest. Instead, I went to the mess hall. I have realised this now, and operating in a tunnel of clarity, my body switching gears and replacing hunger with focus. I am an onion that has been peeled back all the way. But, it does not make you cry at all. You pick it back and take a fistful of rings and feed them to yourself because it will make your stomach feel a little more full, but no more than it needs be. Nobody, I think, realises this. They are slicing their onions with the same fingers they plug their eyes with and wonder why they are teary. Other entries have been started, but not substantiated enough. ——————————————————————————————————————————

HOMILY ON LOVE AND WAR Epistle to both the Pontifical States and the Haenseti Written by Fr. Abraham Sheen THE LORD IS THE LORD GOD WITHOUT PEER, BUT YOU HAVE CONJURED IN HIS PLACE A WICKED AND VENGEFUL HOST. THIS IS A SIN OF SENSELESS IMPRUDENCE, FOR THERE IS NO GOD BUT THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD. HE CREATED ALL THINGS, AND ALL THINGS ARE HIS CHILDREN. SO BEFORE THE LORD, ALL MURDER IS THE FRATRICIDE OF KRUG, AND INDEED YOUR OWN SPIRITS SLAY EACH OTHER, AND BID EACH OTHER TO SLAY. AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE? THERE IS NONE. SO I FIND THAT YOU SEEK POWER IN WRATH, BUT THERE IS NO POWER LIKE UNTO GOD’S. FOR HE IS THE MOST MERCIFUL, THE MOST POWERFUL, AND EVEN THE THOUSAND PETTY WRATHS OF THE SPIRITS DO NOT OVERCOME HIS MERCY. VERILY, BROTHER, THE LORD GOD IS THE MOST BENEVOLENT, AND GIVES ONLY MERCY. AND VERILY YOU MUST FIND THAT PAIN COMES NOT FROM THE WRATH OF THE LORD, BUT AS WE REJECT HIM. SO TO YOU SONS OF KRUG, WHO HAVE FALLEN TO OTHER FAITHS, I ADMONISH: GOD PUNISHES NOT, BUT PROTECTS. AND THERE IS NO PAIN WITH GOD, BUT WITHOUT HIM. 19 SO YOU SUFFER NOT IN RETRIBUTION, BUT IN SEPARATION, AND IN THE SKIES ALL SHALL FIND SOLACE. —Spirit 6:7-19 —————————————————————————————————————————— “Fr. Abraham Sheen, an open address— I.Friends, I write unto you, little pupils, because your sins are forgiven through His Name. I write unto you, fathers, because you have professed to know Him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men and landlords and princes and kings, because the Word of God abides in your strength. Love not the world, not the things therein, but if you have need to love anything, then love Our Heavenly Father alone. For, if any man among you should love the world, then the love of the Father is not with him. For all that is in this world, is the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, which is not of the Father, but is of the world. And, pharisees also among the children and the fathers and the men and landlords and princes and kings, I write to you also, because your love is not in God but in yourselves. And when you pass away and the lust therein; the will of God abides for-ever (even so that God abides for-ever). II.One of the pupils of my parish asked me today wondering why I have not commented as to the ongoing schism war. Even that I have not spared mention of it bar the plaintive scrunch of my long and unsavoury mug. I will answer you, my brothers, fathers among you and pharisees and Haenseni and Lemon Hill-ian and Numendilish and Norn and Elfish and Orkish and all the sons of all the nations alike; III.Because it is emotional. IV.In both halves of the field, I see that brothers fight for what they feel and not what they think, nor believe, nor think they believe. Sometimes, I wonder how people can fight for something they feel, but do not understand. Their belief is a privation of their happiness, their sadness, their anger, directed or misdirected. And, in that way, it is offensive. Not to me, but to God. What does it say about how you understand Him when you only understand how He makes you feel, how you feel Him when you are teeming with rage, groaning in upset, writhing in glory? Does that not besmirch a Being that is independent of emotion? That is Innocent without empathy, that is Merciful without pity, that is Powerful without rage, or bravery, or courage? God does not need you. I recognised that long ago, before I could write the a in Abraham the right way around. He does not feel for me. But, He understands me, He knows the architecture of my soul. And as such, we return the favour—we Understand Him. Many will tell you—’therefore, you do not feel God.’ Brothers and sisters of the nations, this is plainly unfactual. I feel Him in my head, but not in my heart. Because He cannot be expressed in that way. Because your heartstrings will never strum in a way that can contain Him. But, you can make an effort to know Him—in a way unstained, undictated, unexpurgated by the pitiful embarrassment of 'I believe in God because I feel He empowers me to partake a glorious war,' or 'I believe in God because I feel He makes me glad.’ V.It is unseemly that Men should lament schismatics and Darfeyists for the fact that ‘this man has said of my faith so and so which does not align with how I feel about God.’ And in regard to them, (a thing which you ought especially to note, and to commit to your memory, because that which shall make us strong against insidious errors, God has been pleased to put in the Spirit), we see that in Him we have nothing that we can handle, but have that which we may read. For if those believed only because they held and handled, what shall they do now? VI.The Lord is not moved as we are moved. In our joy, He does not exult. Not because He is without care, but because He is without passion that shakes the hearts of men. Shall we say God rejoices with you in your war? Then we make him small. What are your wars to him? You will say, ‘I believe because He comforts me’—and I will say, you have not known Him. Only yourself, and called it God. VII.I will not raise my flail or mace or disparaging word in this war, neither should any among you. I will not cry for God. Because, if you bring me your child fresh from the birthing pedestal, yet tender from the travail, and place it on the stoup and the font of the Almighty, I will not cry for it. Because, God does not cry for it, nor cry for you. God will not weep with you in your hour of need. God is not thrilled by your praise when you pray to him. When you win wars in His Name and holler in rejoice, God is not proud of you. God is not proud of us, and I will teach you to be okay with that. God is not proud of us, so we work to be better for Him. Not because He needs it, but because if there is even a morsel of shame in you, you will need it. It is time that we stopped crying for God, nor holding our swords ahigh for the passion which he purportedly empowers in us. It is time for us to know Him—because He knows us, but does not pity us. He knows us, but does not smile for us. VIII.Let only be known as the root of righteousness, that we may strive for Him without expecting reward. That we may be known, and not petted. And that, in His Silence, become righteous. All ye Holy Innocents, Pray for us.”

Mother Adolpha remembered a Vander parable; "There was once a farmhand who stood on his land and looked on his neighbour's field. He saw that his own crop was diseased, his barns an empty, his garden wall in pieces. Over the garden wall, he found that his neighbor's land was fertile, his storehouses full, that Man and beast sleeved into beds under his roof. And so, day in from his morning's labours, he told himself—of the neighbour's field, 'This land,' he huffed and puffed, 'was not built by leal and honest labours. This roof does not stand by merit, nary crops by honest watering nor cows milked and pigs oinked in earnest. If my own pastures be barren heaths and my farmer's house collapses, then surely it would be not by my own failing, but by his deceit. It is he who conspired against me in the quiet night. It is he who has stolen which is mine.' And so, rather than tend his groaning fields or mow his pointing weeds or put up his walls again, he sharpened his plowshare into a knife. His voice raised, nary for prayer but for grievance. Come harvest time, he stood in the ruin of his house and his neighbour's—and he named it justice."

“Harumph,” the Mother Adolpha simply kvetched.

TRACT I. THE KINGDOM OF GOD In response to Father Bainbridge’s Providentia Unitatis p.3 Mtr. Adolpha Yohānāh, by the grace of God— In the ecclesiastical register, the root “reg-“ means “to move in a straight line,” from which the postliminary and extant definition arrive: 1) to direct in a straight line, and thus 2) to rule, lead. The root reg- appears in the Gospel twenty-four times, corresponding to the Akritio-Flexic word regnum, or kingdom. Before engaging with Bainbridge’s premise that regnum is equivalent to a political singularity, I will address with scrutiny how the Gospel tackles the consecration of kingdoms and the service to which we owe a king, hence a director, ruler, or leader, and that which he owes us. I hope that you will excuse my theodical background if this feels a little technical. Semantically, it transpires that this is a rather manifold subject and there is a lot to unpack. I. THE CITY OF GOD VIS-A-VIS THE CITY OF MAN; the Two States of King-dom I believe the argument on which this thesis is predicated viz. that unity is achieved dialectically through spiritual and temporal singularity, has perhaps not completely distinguished the two theopolitical senses of the word kingdom that premise political unity and divine rule; Regnum gratiae (the Kingdom of Grace)—this refers to the present spiritual reign of God that uplifts, oversees, and presides over the elect ha-am ha-nivhar through providence and moral order, that is God’s intercession of our extant reality in His state as Holy Justiciar through sacraments and divine law. This is introduced earliest in the Gospel as, “But the Aengul Aeriel descended, and he was preceded by a ringing clarion […] Iblees was weakened, and the brothers cast him out, and his army fell into the Void with him. Aeriel came among them, and by God’s will the brothers were alleviated of the paints of their imperfection,” (Gospel 2:65-68), as Aeriel acts not only by order but by extension of God’s Justice ibid. “by God’s will.” We see that God administers His Regnum gratiae to preside over Horen and his brothers in extancy q.v. the descent of Artifai on Harren to administer Justice to his tribe (Gospel 3:41-50). We notice also that this point signals a volta in the Gospel, as God does not tabulate any kingdom nor tribe. Ergo, as God continues into the Book of Scattering, this point symbolically represents God’s entry into the regency in Regnum gratiae. Temporally, it is present and thus coexists with sin and evil. Regnum gloriae (the Kingdom of Glory)—this refers to the eschatological fulfilment of God’s regency as the completion of His prophecy, such that “So My promise is kept: the waters of prophecy are frozen until the last day, and My Seal is placed upon them. And with the third son of spirit, no more shall prophet rule as king,” (Gospel 7:58-59). God affirms His Seal on the prophecy, which completes it and ends the regency of Men. This is the City of God in its completion and triumph in the eschaton, where the Regnum gratiae is His City in pilgrimage. By contrast, Bainbridge’s position presupposes that the regnum must be political and juridical, which neglects that human polity, as we have seen above, exists in two phases: gratiae and gloriae, separately juridical and divine. To explain why this position may be presumptuous, we need also expound as clearly and concisely as possible that, within each phase of the regnum, there are two distinct senses of the word kingdom as realised by Man. We distribute humanity into two kinds of Men, one living according to Man, one living according to God. Mystically, we can call these the two societies or cities of Man, whose people are at present commingled in respect of bodies, but separated in respect of wills: Civitas Terrena (the City of Earth)—the earthly city where vanity and power reign, which is heralded by the Third Prophet, like the three kingdoms of Men and the kingdom of Harren (Gospel 3:23-67). This city is a resurrection to frustration and disgrace that the Third Prophet bears witness to q.v. “He shall take up holy pilgrimage to uncover my truths, but as he departs all seems lost and kingdoms burn,” (7:44). The impious people, who have kept the “old humanity” from the beginning to the end, will be raised in order to be precipitated into the second death. Neither ought we to be moved by the consideration that, in civitas Terrena, many consent unto the devil, and few follow God. Civitas Dei (the City of God)—the city where spiritual power reigns, hence that “You will know him, for he will mourn an ancient [regnum], though the world is his inheritance,” (Gospel 7:43). But from Horen to Godfrey they live the life of the earthly Mankind under a form of righteousness. The Gospel, in all uses of the root, thus does not refer to or mandate earthly dominion, but points to an eschatological realisation of civitas Dei in regnum Gloriae. Bainbridge seems to acknowledge the fulfilment of the regnum Dei hence as saying, “The Scroll of Spirit proclaims: ‘the righteous shall govern with wisdom, and the faithful shall follow with trust.’ (Spirit, 1:12). This is the divine order that shall be restored. No longer shall there be contention among kings, nor discord among the faithful. The just shall govern with righteousness, not with the selfish ambition that has so often led nations to ruin. The people shall not rebel against their anointed rulers, for they shall recognize that all authority is established by God alone.” (a.1) However, he distinguishes that the regnum Gloriae is realised through a dual commitment of the civitas Dei and civitas Terrena as temporal and spiritual fulfilment, hence; “Just as the soul must be reconciled to God, so too must the world be reconciled to His order. The final unity is not a mere abstraction of faith, it is a tangible, earthly reality, where the dominion of virtue shall reign in both spirit and law. The divisions of men are not only spiritual but political. The wars of nations, the greed of rulers, the quarrels of lords; these must all be undone in the final age. The prophecy of the Scrolls makes clear that a great ruler shall arise, one who shall restore the throne of Horen and gather all the scattered peoples beneath the banner of righteousness.” (a.3) The civitas Dei on earth—the Temple of Our Faith and the Mother Church—is governed by the regnum Gratiae, through sacrament, catechism, etc. Likewise does the Church exist as an institution in the history of our earth, but it does not fully realise God’s triumphant kingdom i.e. regnum Gloriae. That is the understanding of the root reg- in the regnum Gratiae, as our present reality is peregrinatio or in pilgrimage in the sense that it is only moving toward its final fulfilment. In this respect, I concur with Bainbridge as saying, “The fulfillment of unity must begin in the soul. The sanctification of mankind is the first step toward reconciliation, for only when men submit to the divine order can they be truly united.” (a.3.3). But, I will make abundantly clear: the civitas Terrena cannot be absorbed into the regnum Gloriae as Bainbridge’s dissertation suggests. The idea of a political, temporal fulfilment of unity is incompatible with our extant reality viz. regnum Gratiae because the civitas Terrena or City of Earth is inherently and irreconcilably corrupt as a city overshadowed by Gentiles, vanity, and pride. No political structure can yoke all of humanity into the civitas Dei, because entry thereinto demands a total uprooting and conversion of the heart by grace, not political alignment. While earthly rulers can implicate themselves in the distribution of divine justice if they rule in via Dei that is in line with God. Thus, it is somewhat incorrect to say that political unification, unless I have misunderstood Bainbridge’s premise, could lend to regnum Gloriae. In support of this, we consult the Sealing, which dictates, “With the third son of spirit, no more shall prophet rule as king; the crown and the laurel are two in harmony, like unto Evaristus and Clement.” (Gospel 7:60). Semantically, the crown—meaning the political rule—and the laurel—the divine rule, authority—are in harmony, but distinct from one another. The separation of prophetic and regal authority therefore does not align with the treatise’s premise that insists on political, theocratic unity. The earthly and heavenly kingdoms cannot be confused, lest we make a theologically erroneous conflation. II. TESTIMONIUM Let us look now to the Gospel for substantiation that Man’s dominion and God’s regnum are separate. In the exposition of the Book of Provenance, I find that the most tangible depiction of the regnum Gloriae insofar that we can see is presented in ki-se ha-ka-vod, that is the Throne of God (Gospel 1:3). While an argument can be made that, in “That which was farthest from the Lord became the Void, and that which was nearest became the Skies,” (1:4) may point that the regnum Dei is literally centralised, and by that precedent any human kingdom must likewise be centralised, I ask that we look to Godfrey. In Godfrey, the Throne of God is distinct from the Throne of Man, which tracks with our supposition that earthly and heavenly authority cannot be conflated. Moreover, let us consider, “And Godfrey set aside the Throne of Man for a holy purpose, consecrating it to God. Thus it was sworn that no Son of Malin, of Urguan, of Krug, or any magi shall hold it.” (6:36). The Throne of Man, that is earthly authority and polity in regnum Gloriae, is consecrated but not consolidated (politically). The Throne is committed to a divine purpose, but that does not mean or imply that all peoples need be politically absorbed into the Throne. I will now address the problem of the last son of Spirit expounded in the Sealing. Bainbridge argues that the prophecy means to address a political ruler mantled with divine law who will establish earthly-spiritual dominion; “This is the ruler who shall fulfill the work that was left unfinished by his forebears. He shall not conquer for his own glory, nor shall he build an empire of vanity. His reign shall be ordained by God, and he shall wield the scepter of justice, not with cruelty, but with divine authority […] This is the final victory of God over all things. The world itself shall be renewed, purged of the stain of sin. No longer shall there be doubt, nor struggle, nor temptation. The faithful shall inherit the earth, and the dominion of the righteous shall be eternal.” (a.3, a.4). I concur with Bainbridge’s latter point, but feel he may be misinterpreting the victory. We must first define the Sealing’s prophecy hence that “You will know him, for his name will mean victory.” (Gospel 7:51). Dialectically, we establish; The true victory means the realisation of regnum Gloriae, hence triumph of divinity over sin. The final son of Spirit is a redeemer who restores righteousness but, in line with the doctrine Terrena non potest esse regnum Gloriae, does not necessarily unite all people. Therefore, the Gospel does not suggest that there is a political or temporal victory; rather, it exists relationally to righteousness and virtue. To which we support, “And he placed the laurel onto James’ head, and thus it came that the faithful were united.” (Gospel 6:62). The triumph, in this case the laurel, is only realised through completion of the regnum Gratiae, which we earlier stated is delivered by the Church and sacrament, evidenced by James’ crowning therewith as pontifex. And, with the completion of this phase, not by kingly right but by spiritual resolution and ecclesiastical guidance, the regnum Gloriae in civitas Dei is achieved viz. “the faithful were united.” —————————————————————————————————————————— Great art Thou, O Lord, and greatly to be praised, my Mercy, who didst create me and didst not forget me even when I forgot Thee. O true Light, to You I lift up my heart and mind lest it should teach me vanities. For in the restless misery of fallen spirits, which expose their darkness stripped of vesture of Your light, You clearly show how great You made the rational creature, since for its repose and beatitude nothing less than You suffices, and from Thee shall arise our vesture of light, and our darkness shall be as midday. Since he is the Alpha and the Omega, this thesis is ended thus with God, who is blessed throughout the ages. Remaining the least of His children, Rev. Mother Adolpha Yohānāh. Saint Jude, Pray for Us. Saint Kristoff, Pray for Us. Blessed Pius and Seraphim, Pray for Us.

Mother Adolpha drops her stack of feminist literature, praying her staunchly PRO-WOMAN stance would not be lost on any laymen.