Castus

A letter is found in the study of Father Lars, sealed with the sign of Saint Everard. Upon opening it, it would read, "To the good Father Lars, I was ordained by the High Ecclesiarch Radomir I with my birthname of Castus. I was Archbishop of the Herendulian archdiocese before ascending to the papal seat, where I reigned as vessel of the grace of our omniscient and omnipotent Creator, who is lord of lords and king of kings. Following my crowning of Emperor Peter of the Imperium Tertius, I adbicated the papal mitre and took to the monastic life. After our just Creator saw fit to lead our people to Athera, I took up residence in the mountains of southwestern Aesterwald, maintaining no diocesan titles. May the Creator bless and guide you, -High Pontiff Emeritus Regulus Deus Magnus

H.P.E. Regulus applauds the event, the taking great joy in the virtuous man who now took the crown, a true heir to Godfrey and Peter. ((Latin is RPly Flexian, which is the Aengul language. Iblees was something of a fallen aengul, and while his undead legions spoke Flexian, it was not their language in origin. The human faith bases itself around the Holy Scrolls, a divine literature presented to pre-Aegisian humanity by Aenguls (thought to be divine immortals in service of the Creator). In this manner, Flexian (Latin), became the holy language of the humans. In human common law, it is taken that the right to rule is granted by the will of the people, and above all the will of the Creator. It is most logical that this language would then be used for official documents to lend them further legitimacy.))

I, High Pontiff Emeritus 'Regulus' Castus, ordained by his holiness, High Ecclesiarch Radomir I, possessing of the vestigial mitre of the Archbishopric of Herendul, having witnessed 83 Saints' Years and 83 Sun's Smiles, remain true to my oaths to whosoever wears the vestments of the True Church and has been granted the popular support by the seniormost ordained men of faith and the favour of our Creator.

Regulus is somewhat confused, having been under the impression that it was Basil and Simon who fought for the transition to caesaropapism, and is similarly amused that the man who called for the dissolution of the Church now claims to have restored it. He scratches his bearded chin and shrugs, happy that at least a Church free to interpret the will of the Creator independent of secular supremacists had returned.

High Pontiff Emeritus Regulus, who remains in the protection of an obscure seminary after being declared an enemy of the state church for his writings in defense church autonomy, receives word of the restoration. His wizened face cracks into a slight grin, and he glances up at the stained glass window depicting a scene of St. Everard-in-Persecution, and the crisp winter's sunlight shining through it illuminates Regulus's face with the dappled light of the new world.

A bird drops a neatly wrapped scroll with a small note fixed to the front.

Regulus cries to the skygods after hearing of the libricide, but would note he was baseborn as the third son Castus of the tenant farmer Petyr Empistos under the first lords of House Basileus over half a century ago.

Basil Sabris should reread the document, as the text magically changed before he made his thought.

Reformers Basil of Sabris and Simon of Khazav, It touches the heart of an old man to see the youth engaged and active in such constructive dialogue with the Church. There are inadequacies in the Church. I do not debate this fact, and in my reign I worked to combat these with invigoration of the flock and doctrinal regulation of the powers. Note my final doctrine, an effort to limit the secular power of the Church and return it to the role it is ordained by the Creator to hold. Some of the concerns addressed within the presented theses are legitimate, and your help is welcome in their consideration and resolution. Yet, issue must be taken with certain falsities noted by yourselves as fact, out of ignorance not maleficence, I would hope. I have included within my reply transcriptions of each of the presented theses to better address each individually. Further, I will respond to each contention within each tenet. -The recentmost absence of the High Pontiff is one out of necessity of health, not of elected seclusion. His Holiness, High Pontiff Paul III, has served the Faith for more than ninety years, and he cannot be expected to be as spritely as an Auvergnian lad in his prime. While this is regrettable, it can not be called an offense to the Faith, for ours is an institution of the spirit, not of the body. -To the furthest extent of my knowledge, the Church nor its authorities have made any attempts to restrict the expansion of its numbers. It is a shortage imposed by disinterest in the ascetic and humble life of the cloth bestowed upon us by our Lord the Creator. You and yours are welcome to entry into the institution of the Church, for it is open to all who will take its vows and uphold its Faith. That you have made no efforts towards joining indicates a penchant for dramatism over constructive change effected from within the Church. -The actions taken by the Order of Saint Lucien, while reflective of the state of the Church, are their own and not to be conflated with the actions of the High Pontiff or his College. These complaints have not before been brought to my, nor I doubt, the attention of the other members of the College nor the Pontiff. These issues should have been addressed to us when those affected were made aware of them, otherwise no action can be expected. -While in present times the Faithful owe ecclesiastical allegiance to his Holiness, High Pontiff Paul III, incorrectly referred to by the location of his first Asulonian diocese of Darfey, as conduit of the Creator’s will, no secret scheming cult of the former Bishop John was responsible for the progress of the Church. -I myself was appointed to my former Archbishopric by his holiness, the High Ecclesiarch Radomir I, after demonstrating myself suitable for the position in the eyes of his holiness. I had never met Bishop John of Darfey before my investiture, nor were Wilfriche Buron, Balthazar Basileus, nor Cordal Winter present in the Church at the time. I maintained my position through the years by keeping myself free of damning improprieties and serving my archdiocese in a manner which lifted the souls of my flock. I was coronated as High Pontiff upon unanimous vote of the collected College when the High Pontiff Lucien II fell ill, as I was seen as the best chance to continue the good work of his holiness following his passing after a decade of service in my post. Neither Wilfriche Buron, Balthazar Basileus, nor Cordal Winter, pious men that they are, were preaching the Faith at this time. -The Bishop Henry was invested at the wish of his holiness, High Pontiff Paul III, who had observed his knowledge and dedication in those matters of clerical import. That his holiness was the illegitimate son of one of Bishop Henry’s distant relatives could have had little impact upon this decision. -That political machinations occur within the Church is an unavoidable truth. However closely the Faithful wish to follow our Creator, we remain lowly and human and subject to fault, even those of us who wear the cloth. This contention will be addressed more directly below, where the details of accusations are levied. -I have no concrete knowledge of the circumstances of Vittoria the Wench and Imperial Crown Prince’s wedding, but in the capacity of High Pontiff his only offense was to wed a couple at their request, and this is the only accusation relevant to the Church. -Whether or not I have been made pawn by the secret wishes of some Darfeyist conspiracy is unknown to me, but the only intervention of the Church in the affairs of the state has been the declaration of illegitimacy of the kingship of Prince Francis I and the ensuing actions of the True Faithful to counter this heresy, an illegitimacy rendered such by the appointment of a fresh priest of less than a week as an Anti-Pontiff. As it would have been against my best judgement to do so, I did not coronate a known heretic as king, and I then authorized the necessary secular force to enforce the will of the Creator for the purity of the kingdom, as historically demonstrated by the St. Owyn’s cleansing of the royal line. Any further involvement in secular politics was in the form of the regency which maintained the vital functions of the state before I coronated Peter Chivay as rightful Emperor of Oren. -I must repeat, for the sake of clarity, that Darfey is not a person, it is a place. On the topic presented, the Church should not come into conflict with any legitimate crown of Oren. The Emperor Peter is legitimate emperor, whose right to rule stems from his coronation by the Creator’s will. Therefore, the Order of Saint Lucien, an order of the Church, is no threat to him as it is sworn to uphold the will of the Creator. The only monarch with whom the church order has come into conflict was Prince Franz, or Francis I, whose crown was attained illegitimately and who publicly encouraged all his ‘subjects’ to pursue heresy. -It has been noted by the present High Pontiff that the will of the Creator is difficult to enforce if there is a rebellious population of heretics, and so the sectarian orders have not been dismantled. However, it should be noted that they have not been exercised by papal mandate except in the removal of a heretical prince who preached his heresy to the masses and in the hunting of heretics of inferior races who sought the downfall of the state. It offends sensibilities to suggest that the his Holiness, the High Pontiff Lucien II was poisoned by the hands of the Church, nor was he deposed by the College. No man of the cloth would resort to poison to achieve his ends, no poison was found to have any connection to the death of High Pontiff Lucien II, and to suggest such further propagates toxic and self-serving rumours. -The deposition of the High Pontif Pius II occurred after various improprieties by the Pontiff were discovered, the details of which I will spare due to their lascivious nature. He was in his early days an effective leader of our Faith, until he was lured into sin by his position and the promise of power. It was not doctrinal adherence that led to his removal, but instead dogmatic disobedience. -The “High Pontiff” Joshua was none such. He was an abomination in the eyes of the Creator and, while the Order of Saint Lucien gave aid to the innocent at the time of the named conflict, they did not fight alongside those who were in openly in the thrall of the Anti-Pontiff Joshua. -I find such accusations to be basely offensive attacks on my character. I had earlier hoped that the sectarian tensions would cool in time, but when this proved not to be the case, I called the leaders of the sects to parlay and released a doctrine with joint approval by the leadership of all sects abolishing sects and putting an end to sectarian violence. These tensions were only reignited when the Prince Franz named ‘Joshua’ as an Anti-Pontiff over his Raevir people, thus creating something far more schismatic than a sect, and provoking the conflicts which led to his death at the hands of the Decterum Order. The recreation of sects by their holinesses Pius II and Paul III reflected their judgement that sectarian tensions were at an end, and the renewal of the sectarian system would not serve to fracture the One True Faith as they threatened to do under my reign. This tenet is a great misattribution of blame and obfuscation of fact. -The coronation of the monarch by the High Pontiff is a tradition upheld unbroken through every true Orenian monarch. -That he was not coronated means that he was never a King, and thus the charge should be murder and note regicide. -The coronation of an Anti-Pontiff by the crown removed any hope of Francis’s rightful ascension to the throne, but his murder was not an action which I endorsed nor had any knowledge of until after its perpetration. Murder should never have been the answer to this situation, for Francis had pleaded for absolution from the heresy of creating an Anti-Pontiff. The killing of the so called “Franciscan Martyrs” was an objectionable offense by the Decterum Order and their fellow conspirators, and one which I to this day condemn. -Oren is under no threat from the Church, nor was Oren under threat from the Church in the time of the heretical Prince Francis, for his ‘state’ was an illegitimate one with a heretical fabrication as its only mandate. The protection of the true and legal state was the utmost interest at heart in the following appointment of our beloved monarch, his majesty, Emperor Peter Chivay. -As noted, the above offenses were committed by the Decterum and fellows out of their own self interest, no priest was seen walking around bludgeoning Lord Chancellors to death with their staves. While it has been suspected that there were Lucienist interests involved, the massacre was not in any manner sanctioned myself as Pontiff, and I was appalled to hear of it two days later. -No snowflake sigil was seen on the side of the Church until the Tetrarch Regency was established and most nobles swore fealty to the rightful king, who was later named Peter I. This house has committed no crime other than swearing to our beloved monarch after the death of Prince Francis. On their character, I cannot speak, for I am not a Winter nor have I had significant dialogue with their ilk. -Again, it is to be noted that the Decterum and fellows under command of Lord Ruthern committed this atrocity in the hopes of securing the crown for him. Men acting upon my command were not involved. -As noted before, no man acting under my command committed senseless murders. Any of Church affiliation acted unsanctioned and against my orders. This was a crime of the Decterum and their fellows, not of the Creator’s Church. -Note the above. -Roy Carrion was ordered by me to be made a ward of House Winter, of whom he shares half his blood, for his protection, as he was chief-most among candidates for the crown before the return of our beloved Emperor Peter. Any abduction was done by foolish souls making a mockery of an effort to protect the Crown Prince. -The Church created the Tetrarch Regency in the absence of a coronated king to maintain vital functions of the state while deliberating on the next monarch. It was not our intent to create an unlawful regency, but instead to keep a nation fractured after the murder of the heretic king from dissolving under Zionist threat until a new king could be named. This is why the Regency lasted for such a short time, before being dissolved at the timely arrival of his majesty, Emperor Peter from the lands of Aeldin. -The election of the Pontiff was a practice with historical roots in the Church. These rulings were implemented when the late High Ecclesiarch Radomir named as his successor Bishop “Rags”, to be called Alexios I. He was almost unanimously deemed unfit by the collected bishops, and so was refused anointment- as is the right of the bishops- and his holiness, the High Pontiff Lucien II was seated in his place. He was not removed, but instead passed and was replaced by the then Archbishop Castus, who is I. Pius II was removed for shocking improprieties, and in his place was seated Bishop John as High Pontiff Paul III. The election of the Pontiff is based upon the ancient common law of anointment by the bishops, which was extrapolated to form the system by which the electoral college of bishops refuses anointment until they come to an agreement on the best suited candidate. This all being said, at the time of its creation there were several electors, and the numbers have only whittled down once the sectarian conflicts began and fewer souls wished to take up the life of the cloth. To my knowledge no bribery was used. -I know nothing of the removal of Augustus’s sainthood, but recall his canonization to be part of a political deal made by the denounced Owyn I in one of his schemes to bring to power the Carrion Vochna, so the legitimacy of this can be called into question. -I did, as you state, unify the sects in the hopes of bringing the Orthodoxy back within the fold of the Faithful. This being successful, I can only assume that my successor reinstated the sects because the threat of schism was over. -The oaths made to the Tetrarch Regency were not to the members of said regency, but to the right of the Church to name the next monarch and fealty to whosoever is named. These oaths were thus to Peter Chivay, not to the Church. No coercion or bribery was used, if you accuse the lords of doing so out of their best interest then they did so because of weak will, not coercion or bribery. -This practice was common in the old imperial days, but I took issue with it in my Doctrine on Exaltation and Divinity which established Siegmund Carrion along with the classical divines as the four Exalted- above patron saints but below our Creator. -Clerical marriage is a precept of historical Lucienism that was considered too commonly risky to be effective. While the St. Lucien himself was a most virtuous man untempted by the mental ravages of the want of flesh, it cannot be held that all men of the cloth can put their Faith in the Creator above their lust for their betrothed. -The sanctity of marriage is preserved, and in my eyes the marriage of a human and dark elf is the sullying of the Creator’s chosen race. This specific incident will be addressed. -Papal infallibility is a historic tenet of all sects, but you are correct in saying that there is cause to doubt. I only exercised my right ex cathedra in the creation of doctrinal law, and the rest of my writing and speaking were done outside of the authority of the seat I held, for I remembered that I was mortal. Creator guide us in this time of uncertainty, -The High Pontiff Emeritus, Regulus I, OSE Writing in the absence of the High Pontiff Paul III, but not on his behalf. My views are not those official policies of the Church, but musings of my own.

High Pontiff Emeritus Regulus I sighs wearily, and begins to draft an extended reply.

"By law of the Church as established in the reign of Ecclesiarch Radomir, the Conclave of Bishops has the true and rightful authority to depose of any Pontiff of his position if a supermajority is reached. This right is exercised in circumstances in which the Church is endangered by the leadership, decisions, or improprieties of its Pontiff."

The Archbishop Castus nods OOCly, as the Church of the True Faith is returned to its creator.

The Archbishop Castus would note that, although Bishop Henry released the announcement of the Conclave of Bishops, he is not Pontiff. The Archbishop Castus would note that the Archbishop John of Darfey, most tenured and wise of the clergy, has been named new High Pontiff ((and now is playing in game)). Further, the Conclave of Bishops does not need a secular trial to depose a Pontiff. The Creator is our judge. The Church of the True Faith needs not recognize the flaws and failings of the unfaithful. The Conclave of Bishops was a term used far before the Conclave of Malin, and curiously enough a Bishop of the Church was present at the Conclave of Malin's creation.

The Archbishop Castus scratches the side of his nose.

[[Nothing is dishonorable about passing away in office. You probably should have re-read it more closely, as two items were listed, death OR dishonor, and negative consequences were attributed only to the latter. Furthermore, precedence in procedure has demonstrated that death is not the only acceptable departure from the office of the papacy. You yourself would have left the office during life, except that you killed off your character before we completed procedures for your removal. The protection and sanctity of the office should be of more import than the pride of the man holding it. On a side note, I'm incredibly amused that every poster in this thread thus far is a former High Pontiff/Ecclesiarch.]]