thesmellypocket

TO HIS HOLINESS, Jude II, present Pontiff of the Church of the Canon. May Almighty God continue to shower you with many blessings, Holy Father. Your continued fatherly watch over the flock God has committed to you, namely every rational creature breathing under the Skies, is well shown by the fact you readily listen to even the slightest, littlest and most foolish of your subjects. Being all three of these, I, with confidence and love, write this brief little note to you, and submit it to the consideration of Holy Church. You will, of course, be aware of that heroic model of Bishops, Saint Kristoff of Hanseti. He is an example of charity and courage for all of our Priests and religious, and a worthy patron for all within the bosom of Holy Mother Church. God favoured him with so many special graces that they truly are innumerable to count, and we had sooner count the number of the stars than the vast plurality of his virtues. But what is less well known is that he had a son, Jurgen. (Of course, before he had sworn a Vow of Celibacy.) This Jurgen is well remembered in Savoyard folklore (For that is where Kristoff settled and became known and loved), as a brave soldier, a compassionate physician, distinguished in all manliness, but, and this is what concerns us, he could also be called the worker of at least one miracle in his life. This is well recorded in the most authentic account of a knight called Francois de Argon, who fought in the Dukes' War and was squire to Augustus, first Duke of Lorraine. Although weighted toward the Savoyard side, Blessed Pius of Sutica in his Life of Ven. Olivier trusted its reliability (He contrasted it with von Manstein's history of Savoy which was another pro-Savoyard account); Francois simply relates the plain truth as he saw it, and therefore examination has vindicated the honesty, if not the objectivity, of his autobiography, The Annals. This Francois himself was known for keen observance to the Code of Chivalry to the point of "Scrupulosity" (Life of Ven. Olivier 4.9), which states: "[A knight shall] at all times speak the truth, even under pain of death." According to this account, this Francois began to lose the feeling in his arm. He had made friends with Jurgen, a garrison soldier among the Savoyards and camp physician (His father, Saint Kristoff, had been a famed medical doctor himself.) Now this Francois confided this problem to Jurgen, who, taking compassion on him, could see no other explanation but that leprosy was taking hold. Now Jurgen, far from being repelled, urged Francois that leprosy was in fact far less contagious than is often-times feared, and kept it a secret. And trying divers cures to no effect, however, after a long period, Jurgen was rewarded with a miraculous cure for his "diligence" and "charity", and the disease receded. (Francois, Annals, V.) Now this Jurgen is also recorded for his heroic charity in the records. The historian Manstein, as well as Francois himself, tell of his great courage in fighting the undead, his charity toward the poor, and his great humility is shown also in a correspondence between the two. Jurgen rejected any veneration for his part and asked Francois not to speak of it, saying that the Author of the miracle was God, and that it owed more to the faith of he who believed in the miracle, then he through whom it was affected. One folk song spoke of universal mourning upon this holy physician's death, saying: "[Jurgen], God knows of your devotion, as a defender of His notion." With this miracle, faithfully recorded, and several faithful witnesses to his great holiness, not least Saint Kristoff himself, who trained him in the physician's art, I beg that Jurgen's cause be opened, and that he be declared Venerable. This means that people will venerate him and ask for his intercession, and, God willing, God will grant so many numerous miracles that he will be crowned together with his father by Holy Church. And please also remember little Philip in your prayers, for he has need of them. I remain the least of your children, Philip Romolo Vaz. P.S. If indeed his testimony is worth anything, let it be noted that the author of this letter himself has a special devotion to this holy man, and has received many graces through his intercession. P.S. AGAIN: I apologise, Holy Father. I am very forgetful. I must not neglect Jurgen's great cheerfulness under pain, suffering and danger. I think such holy cheerfulness is the best medicine for today's so-called rationalists.

"This is a most prudent man!" Exclaims Philip.

Likes feminism but dislikes empty headed twittering?

"What is this? I am not referring to a specific duel, but condemning the practice in general. I am condemning the practice of duelling to the death as a sin, which leads souls to the Void. You speak of weakness. It is weakness to TOLERATE sin, not to destroy it. It is weakness to kill a man out of nothing more than ones one Ego and self love, to be ruled by passions instead of God's law. You have written much, Signore, but you have said nothing. I remain your humble servant, Philip." P.S. I am a true child of Holy Church and willing to be corrected by her. I am merely upholding and applying her law. She despises needless killing, else why would Blessed Virosi have written of Just War?

An exhortation to the people, against duelling. "Raise not your hand in wrath, nor in anger, nor in any kind of sin."-Virtue 5:9. The catastrophe of duelling cuts down the lives of young men like so much unryed wheat every year, and casts their immortal souls straight into everlasting death in the Void. Need anything more be written? Is there cause for anything else to be said? This alone should move Holy Church and her Bishops and Priests to wholly condemn this shameful practice. It is indeed lamentable that I, who am a man of little knowledge, despised rightly as a fool and with no priestly formation, should be moved to make this point, due to the silence of the clergy. Point I. Fighting Duels is a Sin not of Manliness, but Effeminacy. But alas, I am forced to expand upon this point, due to the machinations of the Father of Lies, who has persuaded the people by deceitful argument. Lest I should be accused of weakness, or pacifism, I have three answers. Firstly, I would rather be known as weak, scheming, evil, malicious, haughty, cowardly, unfit to be the food of rats, then that one of you, one of the immortal souls God has made, should go to the Void. And that is the second answer: you will not complain of weakness, nor think God "soft" if, by your foolish duelling, you be cast into the Void. Then shall the soft, the meek, and those who showed mercy in this life have mercy shown unto them, and they, receiving an inheritance with the Saints, shall not move so much as a finger at the eternal torment you shall face. Then you shall beg for softness, but softness will not be given you, simply because you never showed it to those whom God loves, and therefore have chosen to face God's justice rather than His mercy, in that you chose to sin against mercy. Cease, then, this line of questioning that calls opposition to duelling soft. No, rather, it is hard and just, as: "There can be no laxity in Faith for any reason." (Spirit 2:13.) No compromise whatever can be made with sin. Better to be light of burden and forgive injuries in this life, then having injury done you eternally in the next. For, I beseech you, how trivial shall these so-called "matters of honour" seem, when you come before the Judge? Life passes away like a wisp in the wind; your earthly life shall dissipate like smoke, like the rest of the world. At that time, the worldly honour you coveted on this earth will seem so immensely trivial to the eternal dishonour you will have reaped for yourself, when you shall be deprived of the blessedness of the just. For Saint Jude calls the Void "eternal damnation"; Scripture calls it "darkness." (Auspice 1:30) Do not think that, because the servants of the Enemy are forever destroyed, that there shall be an end to the damnation. No, indeed it shall be eternal; for you shall be eternally in a state of hatred, destruction and evil. And know that human language cannot adequately describe either the blessedness of the Skies, nor the torments of the Void. For, I enjoin you, ask yourselves: how are the slaves of Iblees, the deceivers, described as having wings of "Cold fire?" (Auspice 1:9) Do you not see that it is worse than both cold and fire? Do you not see that it shall be both darkness and everlasting fire? How can it have in it, the torment of both darkness and of fire; or cold and fire? Only in that it somehow, mystically, will be worse than both, in a way that the Flexio language cannot express. And the same truth applies to the joys of the Just in the Skies. Would any man, therefore, acting on the grounds of these eternal truths, ever sin? It would be insanity. If a man has these things ever before his eyes, he would not be covetous whatsoever of worldly honour. And yet men raise their hands in sin, I mean in wrath due to an inordinate desire for revenge, they duel; I mean in pride when they are covetous of their own reputation, they duel; I mean in lust and envy when they fight over the hand of a woman, they duel; and I even mean in sloth, when men, being in idleness with neither work nor wholesome place, seek pleasure in fighting and sinning; they duel. And this is the third answer: yes, there are legitimate uses of violence. But it is to be by lawful authority established by God (Virtue 6), and for a just and virtuous cause. But observe these causes for which men fight duels. Personal honour? This is nothing but pride! Revenge? That is nothing but wrath! And over a woman? That is nothing but envy! Men fight for a just and lawful cause, to kill criminals, and to protect their country. But make no mistake: there is no such cause for duelling. It is completely unlawful violence and almost always sinful. This means that, if one or, as has happened sometimes, both men fall in the dispute, we have two men who die in these terrible sins. There is, therefore, no fate left for them but the Void, although Divine Mercy might ****** souls from that fate, we cannot fall into presuming that, which would be a mockery of God, and an outrageous blasphemy. These eternal truths in mind, namely, that personal honour, worldly wealth, a woman's hand and so on, are so much straw in comparison to our eternal fate, no man unless possessed by these things would go to sin in this manner. I mean to say, those who fight duels are weak men, I mean weaker than school-girls. They know the truths which I have enjoined, and profess them: and yet they choose these inordinate desires over what is truly good. Brethren, see the effeminacy of this. We call a man, unwilling to undergo any kind of pain or hardship for a greater good, a wimp, and unmanly. Is this not a prime example? He is a slave to desire, and, losing track of what is important; unable to retrain himself, in a fit of rage, or lust, or envy, or pride, he loses his command of reason and will, and allows himself to be dominated by alien forces. This is a weak and effeminate man: this is a duelist. Point II. Renounce Idleness, and Seek Charity. And men ought to know that one of the chief causes is this: boredom. Yes, it may sound absurd that men duel to the death out of boredom. But idleness is the devil's workshop. In it, he makes for us a breastplate of pride, a helmet of envy; gauntlets of greed. It is only when it is too late - or now, if you are wise enough to hear - that we have also adopted him as our squire, to put upon us this heavy plate armour. And when he has outfitted us, paying little attention, we look down and see that he has put shackles upon us, and now we are the basest slaves of his. And not only that, this armour shall have so perverted our desires that we shall want the evil, and refuse the good, but inwardly shall be utterly miserable in this state of pride. It is in the free and self-forgetting air that we avoid this workshop. I mean by three things: our work, our prayer, and our play. When we give ourselves over to these activities, we become self-forgetful and lose ourselves in them. Children who play cheap ball games have not time to envy, but, humbly giving themselves up to their merriment, they cast not a glance to the evil of the gambling-house or the duel-clearing. Are they not wiser than we are? They are content with the free air: we delude ourselves that we are too old and wise to enjoy it, and therefore deprive ourselves of happiness, seeking consolation in illicit pleasures instead (Which lead to our destruction.) A man who is too self-wise to find fun in a child's game is very far from God. I say that those who cannot play like children, will have a very hard time praying like them, because "I am your Father, and the Father of all things." (Virtue 1:6) We are, therefore, His children. He who cannot play well, cannot pray well. Let us, then, be good children to the best of parents, and lose our nothingness in His infinite goodness, by enjoying the things He has made for us, firstly, by prayer, the treasure-chest of Virtue He has left planted in our hearts, (Virtue 2:5), secondly, by doing the daily the work He has allotted for us (Virtue 4:5), and finally in enjoying the true and honest pleasures He has made for us. (Virtue 4:5) Hear the admonition of God. I see so many of you walking around the public square, doing nothing. Go and play catch or something! Yes, run, jump, leap, dive, sprint, catch, shout, wave your arms, dress up like a clown, eat on the floor, sleep on the table, do your work in bed; make love to your wife, do whatever of these things and more, if only it keeps you from SIN! Take this seriously: "BE. NOT. IDLE." (Virtue 4:8) If sloth were not a deadly sin, if would not be in the Top Seven of God's commands! So give yourselves up. Do not become self-wise or self-referential, do not become covetous of honour or take yourselves too seriously, but give yourselves up to playfulness and prayerfulness, and then you will perfect all the virtues. And give yourselves up to charity. Will the good of others and strive to do it. Think that the other man has a mamma and a padre, signore, a wife, a sister; a brother. Think of the tears you will cause, and stay your hand. Can any worldly honour pay the price of that wretched sight? And then, being merciful in this life, confidently expect to receive mercy in the next. Forgive your enemies, and do not sin against charity by duelling against him, for it is an evil thing, and a way to Hades. And begin by praying for me, I am very frail and prone to sin so keep me always in your prayers. Bye now, and God love you. Philip Romolo Vaz. Saint Julia, pray for us. Saint Jude, pray for us. Blessed James II and Pius, pray ye for us.

"Based." Says a man.

"Noble and learned Eminence," writes one man "what do you mean, voluntary and involuntary sin? Whence does this distinction come? For without consent, surely there can be no sin? I do not think we need complete consent of the will and intellect, but surely the assent of the will in some way is necessary? Otherwise, it would be unjust for us to be punished for them, and, moreover, we could not be forgiven them, because we have not done them."

Peter writes a letter to High Pontiff Jude II @GoldWolfGaming. "Holy Father, My family recently heard of the death of an holy Priest, Padre Javier. My children were very enthralled by his courage in the last moments, though we never met him. In the last few weeks, we have been unable to bring ourselves to pray for his soul; no, it is certain that he is with God, having the pledge of holy martyrdom, and he must needs pray for us. We have erected an image of Javier in our home and we venerate him as a holy soul. My wife, as a token of her devotion to him, has drawn this engraving, which we send to your Holiness' pleasure, that you might be strengthened by the example and prayers of this holy servant. I remain your humble servant, Peter the Akritian."

""Ven. Fabian says: “In addressing the righteousness of war, we will first look to the admonition against violence in the Canticle of Patience. Here, the Lord commands that the virtuous “shall not raise a hand in wrath, nor in envy, nor in any kind of sin.” He thus indicates that violence, or the raising of the hand, is not sinful under circumstances where it is not connected to the other sins, such as wrath or avarice. The astute religious scholar will then determine that it is permissible for a Canonist state to wage war where the war’s essential goal is a virtuous one.” (Jus Bellum Justum.) Hence the fact that God prohibits violence in certain instances (in wrath, ain varice and in sin alone and not generally) by necessity implies that violence can be justified in other instances. The best guide for this is the Church, to whom alone God has committed the interpretation of the Scrolls."" A man quotes Bl. Pius of Sutica's Canonist Commentary on Sacred Scripture. "This is why people should read the Scrolls with the Commentary, they don't appreciate the original language or in light of authentic teaching, and thus fall into errors," he adds.

"That's a wonderful choice of motto," says one man, "If ever I saw one." This is same man who wrote Jude II a letter asking for his prayers in response to "Eternity with Him." He, in celebration of his prayer-friend becoming Pontiff, paints an image of the Pope with a note. "Your Holiness, an inspired motto and name. Please continue to pray for me and my children and accept this portrait. We hope that it will remind you of us and so present us before God. We pray that it will be surpassed in the next life when your countenance will be enhanced by the vision of that Good God in whom we would restore all things. I remain your obedient servant, -Peter." ((Btw I didn't make this lol got it off the internet))

"Pray for me your Eminence, and I for you, and we shall share together our Eternity with Him." Says a letter addressed to the good Cardinal written under the name "Peter."

"I shall spend my Heaven" prays Ven. Pius in the Skies, "doing good on earth."

Father Pius of Sutica, also in the Seven Skies, understands now that people still say stupid things, even in the Skies. He looks down and blesses his old friend Father Dima Carrion-Tuvyic. Then he goes to talk to a King about whom he wrote a detailed biography, Venerable Olivier de Savoie, laughing happily as Olivier corrects all the facts he got wrong.

A man quotes the Dialogue which says that Malgath clearly said "strong will and intellect", not merely bodily, indicating that strong will was also not a good criterion of worthiness, because many mages, undead and so forth, possess strong wills.

MALGATH OF SUTICA: DIALOGUES. PART THE FIRST: BJORN. Fraternity Publications, Dobrov: 1804. ABOUT THE AUTHOR. Malgath, later called Father Pius, was an High Elf convert to Canonism. These Dialogues were written before his conversion, at Sutica, probably in the mid-1700s. He had studied under an Akritian philosopher called Pythagoras (where he probably got the Dialogue genre), but left him around this time, for it is at this point he has embraced monotheism. PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The addition of the name of the character speaking (e.g. BJORN:) is an editorial addition, and was not part of the original Dialogues. The same is true of the sections. BJORN. The scene is probably Pius’ little house in Sutica. Bjorn is an All-Fatherist; a member of the Red Faith. This Dialogue shows why Pius rejected AllFatherism and believed in what he calls “The God of the Philosophers”; later identified with the God of Canonism. I: THE NEWS. BJORN: I had to come at once, Malgath. I heard my friend had left the service of Pythagoras and was embracing monotheism. I fear it will lead you to worship the Cross-God. MALGATH: I do not think you need fear that, Bjorn. I cannot foresee myself ever becoming a Canonist, and putting my trust in relics and Saints like they do. But what I do confess is the existence of the First Cause, omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient, the Supreme Good; Pure Being, from whence all beings derive their being. The Canonists also worship this same: and therefore we do believe in the one and same God, as also of the Rashiduns, but I do not claim to have been vouchsafed any Revelation from Him, and that is where I differ to both. II: On Belief in the All-Father. BJORN: At least I can be assured of that. For I despise the Canonists. They pride in weakness, and call it humility. But I still do not understand how you can believe in the omnipotence of God. The god we worship, we call the All-Father, and he is not omnipotent, for we do not see how an omnipotent god would not destroy evil; for if he so willed (as surely he would) there would be no evil. And therefore we confess that the All-Father is the strongest being, but not supremely strong in the sense of omnipotence. You should therefore join my religion. MALGATH: You say that your All-Father does not destroy evil because he is not able? BJORN: Yes. MALGATH: Then why do you accuse the Canonists of weakness when they acknowledge their own weakness? Because your god himself is weaker. BJORN: You better explain this blasphemy before I become violent, you imprudent weakling. MALGATH: You say that God cannot be all-powerful, else He would remove evil. BJORN: Assuredly. MALGATH: It therefore follows that your god is not all-powerful because he cannot remove evil. BJORN: Yes, it must be so. MALGATH: It therefore follows that evil is stronger than he is; darkness is stronger than light. For if he is willing to remove evil, he is deficient only in the strength to remove it. And therefore evil must be stronger than him. If you would worship that which is strong, and hate that which is weak, does it not make more sense to worship evil, since evil is stronger than your god? BJORN: I'd never really thought about that. MALGATH: Well now you have. What do we do? BJORN: We...we do the best we can. III: On the First Tenant. BJORN: But he created us, and gave us his light, and told us to suffer not that which is unworthy; this is the First Tenant of our Red Faith. MALGATH: Whom do you define as unworthy? BJORN: I say some races, the undead, Canonist clerics, khas, the impure fornicators of mixed races and their offspring, and other manner of weakling creature. And those who, possessing reason, allow themselves to be conquered by the flesh. MALGATH: You call them weaklings, is lack of strength and intellect that which renders them unworthy? BJORN: Yes, I would say lack of strength and intelligence makes one unworthy. MALGATH: But how can this be? You yourself were a baby once. You were weak in body, and possessed no intellectual ability of reason, but lust for food and so forth, only. Were you, therefore, unworthy of life, and ought to have been given over to death? BJORN: Yet this is not so, because I could have grown to become worthy in due time. Therefore, there was the possibility of worthiness, and to kill would have been a sin against the Worthy One. MALGATH: Yet many of these unworthy creatures are strong, and are possessed of strong will and intellect, and suffer not the temptations of the flesh. For example, many men of mixed breeding, and even the undead and the wicked have been known to possess strength and reason. Wherefore do you call them, unworthy? BJORN: No, Elf, you have the wrong of the matter, revealing your ignorance. MALGATH: I am ignorant, which is why I ask. BJORN: Indeed. I would say rather that worthiness is defined by the relation to the All-Father. That which the All-Father loves, is worthy, and that which he hates, is unworthy. MALGATH: Why should you follow him, when he calls this worthy and that unworthy? Why ought his commands to be followed; why are they good? BJORN: Because, as the name implies, he is our Father, who created us, and gave us life. In him we live, and move, and have our being, and therefore ought we to follow him. MALGATH: Do you love your mother? BJORN: No, I hate that *****’s guts. MALGATH: Wherefore so? BJORN: Aye, because she is a drunkard and given to pursuing vile perversities. MALGATH: Would you follow her, if she commanded you to follow her in her path? BJORN: Certainly not. MALGATH: Then why say you this? She gave you life, and yet you despise her commands. And so I am free to despise the commands of your All-Father. To give life, therefore, is not sufficient reason to follow commands, or to call these commands good. The commands must be good in themselves. The tenants of the All-Father must be judged according to the Good, to which he is inferior and junior. For to be judged, implies inferiority. And this Good wherewith we judge, or rather He Himself judges, we call God. For it is clear that your god commands these things because they are good, not they are good because he commands them. IV: On the Third Tenant. BJORN: The All-Father is the life that gives light! Wherefore are we commanded: “Stand against the long dark.” This means to live a life full of light, to stand against the encroaching darkness. One of our writers has said: “The Long Dark is that dreaded moment when the firmament fails and life on Terra is snuffed out forever.” This is the Third Tenant of our Faith. MALGATH: What do you mean, full of light? BJORN: I mean a life that is strong. You see, we despise peace, and love war. I rejected Canonism the moment I read an “encyclical”, or bull, or whatever manner of thing it was called, from one of their Pontiffs. For he wrote of “peace” as a good thing! But peace is no doubt an agent of darkness, for it suffers the weak to live. War culls the weak and allows the strong light-bearers to live. MALGATH: But you have already said that certain creatures that are strong, are unworthy; therefore strength and survivability is not the measure of light. BJORN: But it is written into the Law of Nature that the strong survive, and the weak die. Therefore it is the will of our creator that this be so. Moreover, the end of life we are called to stand against, and therefore the prolongation of life is our purpose. MALGATH: What is the animal that is very long-lived and survivable? BJORN: I am told by many men of learning, that turtles live seldom less than two centuries. MALGATH: Should you not therefore worship and revere turtles? BJORN: What manner of nonsense do you speak, Malgath? MALGATH: Hear what I say, Bjorn. For they live longer and survive all the storms of the world. If the “Long Dark” is to destroy all men, then turtles shall have done a better job than men in standing against it. Men drop like flies. Ought you not then, to revere turtles and to discard men? Why do you raise men as paragons instead of turtles? BJORN: The life of men is higher than the life of turtles. MALGATH: Why? BJORN: Men are possessed of reason. MALGATH: So what of an “unworthy” creature possessed of a greater intellect, who is also strong and survivable? Is he not more full of light than you? And moreover, are not Elves possessed of long life and great intellect? Wherefore, are Elves not superior to men according to your view? They “stand against the darkness” far better than you, and therefore you ought to serve and grovel before the Elves. I do not hold to this position, to be sure. BJORN: I trust that you never never did! MALGATH: You are rather my equal, being made by God as a rational creature with gifts of your own, mine being long-life, but it seems to me men being possessed with greater wisdom, because I actually believe your short lives make you live better and seek philosophy more than the Elves who delude themselves too often and go either prideful or insane. And surely, if “quality” of light is more important than “quantity”, what is it that makes rational life higher than irrational? V: Bjorn Counters. BJORN: But this is all superfluous, Elf, for you have not addressed the cause of our disbelief in your God. For you define God as all-good and all-powerful, and yet evil exists. But if evil exists, and He has both will and power to destroy it, why does it exist? And how can Supreme Goodness begat evil? If evil therefore exists, there can be no Supremacy of the Good. MALGATH: What is evil? BJORN: Evil, we call the “Long Dark.” MALGATH: Is “darkness” the absence of light? BJORN: Certainly. MALGATH: So darkness has no positive existence, but is a lack of light. And so evil, which you define as darkness, is an absence of the Good. BJORN: What do you mean? MALGATH: Take food. Food is a good thing. It sustains life, and brings delight. But a lack of food is starvation; an abuse of good is gluttony. BJORN: And how does this alter our position? MALGATH: It means that, right as you are to say that God cannot create evil, so true it remains. God permits evil, in that He permits those good things He has made to be deprived or perverted by the will of creatures. BJORN: What is your implication whence following? Why would God suffer evil in the first place? MALGATH: I would answer that: what is better, to live a horrid, inconvenient truth, or a comfortable lie? BJORN: I would say the truth is better than a lie, however comfortable it be. MALGATH: Have you not then made a differentiation, highlighting an hierarchy of goods? That truth being better than comfort, when you say it is better to live honourably and harshly than deceitfully and comfortably, and with great suffering? BJORN: Illustrate with an example. MALGATH: Would you say that “Courage”, is a virtue and good? BJORN: Indeed, it is the highest. MALGATH: Whence does the necessity of courage spring? BJORN: I would say, adversity. MALGATH: What mean you, by “adversity?” Would you agree that adversity presupposes an overcoming of suffering? And that suffering is evil? BJORN: Yes. MALGATH: Is not therefore the higher good of courage dependent upon the lower evil of suffering? Can God not therefore suffer this privation, which we call evil, so that the higher good of courage might exist? I cannot justify to you why each and every evil exists in such terms, but I can demonstrate that evil permitted can lead to higher goods. And therefore, evil and God are not contradictory, for He, being, as you say, "the One in whom we live, and move, and have our being," knows our greatest good better than we ourselves do, and that infinitely so, and therefore any evil in the world is not incompatible with this belief. VI: Malgath Argues Against the Fatherist Scriptures. BJORN: But verily, Malgath, our scriptures are far superior and evidently divine. MALGATH: On the contrary. I said that evil has no positive existence, but is a plague on the Good. In the same way, your alleged Revelation is a plague on that other alleged Revelation, Canonism. Your scriptures are moreover, cryptic and barely to be understood, whereas the Canonist Scriptures instruct men plainly in virtue. BJORN: I will thrust this dagger through you and pull out your lungs if you continue in the manner of my fathers, you naughty fellow. MALGATH: Then do so, for the unexamined life is not worth living. I would rather die in pursuit of truth than kill in a fit of rage. BJORN: These are your last words; so make of them a prayer! MALGATH: You say call your god the All-Father. But do you not know that this originates in Canonism? For it is written in their Scriptures, in the Book of Virtue: “I am your Father, and the Father of all things.” In Flexio, the resemblance between the two terms is closer. For I met one of their Priests who had the original Flexio Scrolls, and, being a student of that language, read in Virtue “PATER RERVM OMNIVM.” And this title has been used by Canonists for centuries. BJORN: Sheer coincidence! MALGATH: Is it so? And moreover, you can see the author you cited spoke of the earth as Terra. Terra is Flexio for the earth, and the first recorded use is the Scroll of Virtue. So both the name of your deity and your name for the world, were first Canonist, and then Norlandic. So it is clear that the Norlanders took things from the Canonists, rather than the other way around. So it follows that the Red Faith is a corruption of the original religion of Man, Canonism. BJORN: This rather speaks in our favour, and for this cause we call Canonism “outdated!” MALGATH: What do you mean, by that? Does something becoming new make it good, and something old, bad? We may have had good times of plenty replaced by plague, but novelty does not suffice for us to choose plague over plenty. And does not religion make eternal claims? How does, for example, the doctrine of omnipotence, a belief outside of time, become more or less true based on the year that we live in (little more than a number)? Right is right even if everyone hates it; wrong is wrong even if everyone loves it. If a polytheistic religion were to be created tomorrow, could they not call your belief on monotheism “outdated” by measure of yours being the older? BJORN: I shall suffer you no longer. EVARIR: Hail, Malgath. Son of man, Bjorn, why do you brandish a sword about you? BJORN: I was merely showing off my new sword, trust in that! I shall presently depart! MALGATH: May God lead us closer to the truth!

The excellence of this thesis rises up as incense to the Skies. Fr. Pius savours its delightful savour, saying to his father, Malin: "A man can have no regrets when he is in the Skies, gazing into the infinite goodness of Almighty God. But if I could, I would say that now I thought the Tractarian Movement over. But now I see that in the excellent Cardinal Manfried, it has a spiritual heir who represents its true impulse better than ere we could. God always provides." Fr. Pius with the rest of the citizens of the Skies, blesses the good Cardinal and intercedes for him.

Pius of Sutica happily receives his brother into the Seven Skies. He turns to Blessed Seraphim and Goren, saying: "Now we just need to make sure that Griffith finds his way here, and we shall be all complete, we sons of Jude and Kristoff. And I shall look after Dima and Publius, too, though astray they have gone from the principles of our Fraternity..."

Pius of Sutica facepalms from the Skies as sedevacantism has been ruled to be basically licit.

Pius of Sutica, born Malgath, (1610-1803) was a Priest and High Elf convert to Canonism who authored a great many spiritual and theological works. His Holiness James II called Pius: “An example of humility whom I wish to emulate and a teacher to whom I submit.” Along with Bl. Seraphim of Leora and Fr. Griffith of Gwynon, he formed a spiritual movement called the ‘Tractarians’, a name which comes from the ‘Tracts for the Times.’ Pius believed that true spiritual reform did not start with high politics and cardinal’s hats, but with the humble parish Priest stirring the hearts of men, and to that end rejected any form of rank besides Priest. Pius believed that his death heralded only the beginning of his work. “On the wings of confidence and of love”, he experienced a serene and happy death, and told the Church he would be with them always: “I am your brother and your friend. I will never cease watching over you,” he said to his friends. “I shall spend my heaven doing good on earth.” THE CANONIST COMMENTARY ON SACRED SCRIPTURE: The Scrolls of Virtue and Spirit in their original Flexio text, presented with a detailed commentary both from Pius’ own knowledge of the text and language, and drawn from other sources. The Scroll of Virtue. The Scroll of Spirit. THE EPISTLES: Written to the Church about a specific need. An Open Letter to Confused Canonists. James II called it “surely the seminal work on the nature of holy obedience.” Second Epistle to the Church. On Trusting in God in Hard Times. Apologia Pro Epistula Sua. Response to Boniface’s Thesis on Obedience. Floodgate of Mercy: On the Nature of the Sacred Priesthood. This represents the Tractarian view of What a Priest should be. A letter to Acolytes. Epistle to Helena. On Living Out the Virtues in our Daily Lives. On the Rights of the Worker, Written to Political Parties about Workers’ Rights. Supports trades unions. TRACT III. THE FINAL EPISTLE. Pius dies happily and promises to intercede for the Church. THE TRACTS: Written at first anonymously, primarily by Pius, but with the help of the other two writers. From whence the movement gained its name. TRACT I: RELIGION OF THE DAY. Old religion had the deficiencies of fierceness and emphasised too much fear of damnation, but that modern religion is falling into an opposite and more dangerous extreme. TRACT II: THE CHURCH IS THE SWORD OF OWYN. The Church has a duty to anathematise heretics and has the power to do so. TRACT III: See On the Rights of the Worker. TRACT IV: FIDES ET RATIO. Response to James II’s The Age of Reason. Supports the use of reason in seeking religious truth. James II reacted very positively, their dialogue is also here attached. TRACT V: A DEFENCE OF THE SACRAMENTAL NATURE OF CONFESSION. Confession is not merely a devotion, but has a sacramental power. A passionate Defence of his life-work. THE THESES AND HOMILIES: Thesis on Divine Slavery. A commentary on and vindication of the use of the terms of slavery in the Scrolls, and by Ven. Humbert. Two Homilies on Gospel 2:36-39. Commentary On Horen’s Baptism. Essay on Patriotism. Pius’ Entries in the Proceedings of the Council of Providence. Pius defends the integrity of the Sacred Priesthood passionately. Response to Father Alfred’s “Thesis on Love.” In which he argues about the definition of love. Letters with Cardinal Goren on Free Will. HISTORY: THE LIFE OF VEN. OLIVIER. Biography of the holy Savoyard king. Well-sourced throughout. HISTORY OF JUDITE CHANT. LITURGICAL and DEVOTIONAL: THE SOLDIER’S PRAYER-BOOK. A Prayer book for soldiers. Published and distributed by Cardinal Goren. LITURGICAL CALENDAR OF THE FSSCT. Proscribes the liturgical seasons to be kept by the Fraternity. Based on the Judite Rite. RULE OF THE FSSCT. The rule of life Pius wrote for himself and his fellow priests. THE LITTLE OFFICE OF THE FSSCT. A prayer rule with readings from the doctors and Virtue. THE DANCE OF DEATH. A poem warning about the inevitability of death. THE APOLOGIES: THE FIRST APOLOGY: AGAINST THE SCHISM OF BONIFACE. Pius Refutes the Schism of Boniface. THE SECOND APOLOGY: TO THE HIGH ELVES. Pius writes and responds to his own race in his final year. One: A Response to “Uprooting Liberalism.” Two: A Response to “Man’s Discourse.” WHY I BELIEVE IN GOD. Written by Pius before he became a Canonist, in Sutica. (TBD) Response to the Prophet Melchizedeck.

Fr. Pius of Sutica was blessed by God with a serene death. At length, the knowledge came to him that he must die. His eyes were strewn with tears as he had just received the visit and heard the Confession of his dearest brother, Father Griffith. And now, he smiled, an angelic smile as he could only say profoundly: "God has been too good to me." "My good friends, I wanted to say how much I love you. I do not wish my love for you to cease upon the earth. I have spent these decades serving you as best I can, by consoling, teaching and admonishing where necessary. All this I have done through faith in God - yes, that, and nothing else. It's all been He who has deigned to enlighten my intellect. But in my last Epistle, for, as the Angelic Doctor, St. Jude, says, a man ought to leave his last mark in a positive way, I want to tell you now that I believe my service for you has just begun. Yes, you have all showered tenderness and love upon me, even when I have been as hard as stone. Even my heart of bedrock could only melt at that sustained assault of concentrated charity. You have received my rather imperfect works and ministry with kindness. But this is the least of the services you have given me: above all, you have given me your most availing prayers, for now I see that more is wrought by prayer than the world realises. For most of my Canonist life, I never experienced a single feeling of consolation during prayer or any good deed. I felt entirely dry. I prayed all of the Saints to help me, and, through their intercessions, tried to do my work with the firm and sole resolution of pleasing God out of love for Him, rather than getting any nice feelings out of what I do. Now, a feeling of angelic peace comes over me. I now see that all that time, though I felt it not, I was surrounded and protected by all the heavenly army. When you ask a Saint to pray for you, you might not feel they are there. But they are. And now I realise that, since the day of my Baptism, God has kept the heavenly army encamped all around me. And not just my Baptism. Through a special grace, it has been revealed to me that the Saints took an interest in me before ere I took an interest in they. No, it is not I that have a devotion to the Saints, but they that have a devotion to me. (St. Jude took a fatherly interest in me long before I became a Judite.) So that is where my new service to you comes in. I always suspected that I could never repay you all for you good turns you have done me this side of heaven. And now I realise it is true. For as the Saints have done for me, their little brother, I shall do for you. Yes, I am your brother and your friend. I won't cease watching over you. I'll pray for you, I'll do good for you. Yes, I'll spend my heaven doing good on earth! Yes, let any man who wills find refuge in my prayers; that will be my hymn of thanks to God. Now I fly to Him, carried on the wings of confidence and love. I go to join the Holy Father, James II, whose obituary I have just read, and Blessed Seraphim too; oh, and I wonder what details I got wrong in Ven. Olivier's life? I supposed I had best ask him, that will be amusing. But better than all this, will be the sight of the Good God Himself, oh, He alone will be my heaven! If only sinners knew how awesome His mercy is. For I declare and profess ex animo that, even if I had committed every sin it were possible for me to commit, I would still fling myself into His merciful arms. Your prayers for me would soon break me into contrition, and then I would flee unto my God, even the God of Horen, and of Owyn, and yes, of Malin too... I am your brother and your friend. I won't ever cease watching over you. Fr. Pius of Sutica, FSSCT."

Father Pius, FSSCT, receives the obituary as he himself is on his deathbed. "Have no fear, Father," says he, smiling fondly. "It won't be long before I join you to wave it away."

"Et Ego dedi Horeno uxorem primam." (Virtue 3:4) To Almighty God, be all glory, honour and empire, world without end. Amen. PREFACE. 'Friends, I recently wrote an essay in an Orenian column addressing the High Elven ideas of purity. It garnered some interest. But it lead me to consider the wider implications of patriotism, love for one's own race and nation. It is a virtue that my people, the High Elves, as you will know them, possess to an admirable degree, although, as I mentioned in that essay, we do take it to excess sometimes. This is not a thesis. I am a Priest, and the love of Almighty God permeates every single beat of my heart, therefore, of course, I dedicate this to Him. But this, rather than being a study of Scripture or the Holy Doctors, is more philosophical in nature. To God be all honour and glory, Amen. THE ESSAY. Patriotism is a virtue. As Almighty God gave unto Horen the first wife, so he instituted the simple but beautiful love of the family. It is truly the building block of the state. First of all, note that the word economy comes from the Akritian Oikos, which means household. The economy of the state, therefore, is in like manner to the economy of the household, being derived from it. Secondly, a virtuous family means virtuous men, without which no state can sustain itself. For men of this day covet liberty: but liberty without virtue is soon perverted into licence, and men, enslaved by lust and fear and hatred and appeased by bread and circuses, become either savages or slaves. Men will say: These are bad times. Say this not. For such are the men, such are the times. If men love liberty and have the virtue to lay down their lives for her, you shall have liberty. If men grow effeminate, then you have the ruin of the state. To have virtuous statesmen you must first have virtuous men; to have virtuous men you must have loving families. Finally, one might say that the household is the first unit of governance, and the most natural and loving. A village is formed together of families, and villages form a tribe, and tribes a nation, and so on. But in each upward gradient, the potential for personal interaction decreases heavily. A man will, please God, know everyone in his family, he will probably know all in his tribe, but he will not know every man in his nation, let alone his empire. At the family level, one encounters a person. At the national level, a name on a piece of paper, or even just a vague ideal of what the average subject of the state is like. We love persons, we do not love paper. If we love paper, we love paper for the sake of persons and not persons for the sake of paper. Hence it is that the family is the strong building block of the nation, a sacred precinct in which the domestic love first of man and wife, and then children and extended relatives, binds society together, in a rather natural and excellent way. Patriotism is therefore this principle of familial love extended. For just as men, belonging to the same family, are united by a common bond, so those who share common kinship in their race are linked by blood, by culture, and by locality. Of course, in this world where we seem to have to move to a new set of islands every century-odd (As an Elf I cannot tell you how annoying this has become, just as soon as you get used to a place!) that third one is probably the least important. Nevertheless, if patriotism is built up from this familial love, so ought it to be modelled upon it. I love my mother. The more I love my mother, the more I realise than it is a virtue to love one's mother. The more I love my mother, the more I realise that another man must love his mother, and even ought to do so. In the same way, the more I love my motherland, the more I realise that another man must love his motherland, and see it as good and healthy for him to do so. I love my people, but the more I, Pius of Sutica, love, the more I realise how much an Orenian loves Oren, or a Haenseman Haense, and the more I realise how much he ought to, and so, in seeing the patriotism I have for my country reflected in others for their country, the more I reflect that patriotism is, strangely enough, a universal virtue. Hence the type of patriotism which seeks to domineer and destroy other cultures cannot be accounted a virtue. Is that a love of one's own country, or a hatred of others? True patriotism is the one of hearth and home, rooted in families, culture, traditions and race. It is one that, whilst protecting one's own race and country, understands that a man will love and protect his also. The more a man loves his wife and children, the more he respects that in another, and as I have said, it is the same in the national life. If a man begins to slander, domineer, and hate other families, it is to be questioned whether that domestic love - that of Horen and wife - was real to begin with, but was rather built in the murky quicksand of sinful pride and jealously. Another type of false patriotism is that which says: "My country, right or wrong." How can any sane man say this, and say he loves his country? If your mother was an alcoholic, would you cease to love her? Of course not! And, in loving her, would you say "My mother, drunk or sober" and not seek in any way to cure her of that ill? Saints forbid! That is to reduce love to a mere warm feeling, when love is obviously more than that - it is a selfless principle based on putting the good of the other person first. The true patriots are often the most fierce critics of their own country. Not in a self-hating wise, but in a wise of that same domestic love of which I have written. A man who despises his own family, whom God has told him he ought to love, because he finds them despicable, is himself worthy of despising. And a man who despises his own country for her faults, rather than wishing to correct and reprove her like a good son would his alcoholic mother, is deficient in the supernatural Virtue of charity. For as I wrote to Boniface, it is in the extremity that the virtues are proved, like silver in the fire. Charity means not loving something that is perfect, but something that is imperfect. We are called to love our country in spite of her flaws, just as we are called to love our neighbour in spite of his. And just as the man who worships his own mother as the supreme principle of life would be clearly deluded, so the man who exalts his country to an idolatrous level, therefore distorting and destroying it, offends God. "For" writes his Holiness, James II "Any ideology followed too closely will become idolatry." Our only ideology is the love of God, and let us therefore love all the things with which He has deigned to bless us, for His sake. No man chooses his own family, rather it is chosen for him. And no man chooses his country either. Does it follow, that we ought not to love our country because we did not merit to be born in it? Not any more than we should cease to love our own family into which God has chosen us to be born. Let every man, therefore, love his own hearth and home, his nation and race, for the sake of that Supreme Love which begat all of these lesser loves. Let him love men of all nations and races for the sake of that God who made the Four Brothers. And let him cherish, protect and defend his own nation should the need arise, fighting not for the hatred of what is in front of him, but for the love of what is behind him. May Almighty bless you, forever and ever. Amen. (+)

"The Mali'aheral are right to care about purity, but wrong about the reasons." Father Pius of Sutica writes in an Orenian public journal. "That is why my blessed people are so severe in their actions. They think that this purity exists in a primordial state, that it is a gift that subsists in the Blessed Elven race, that it is the highest ideal, and that "our ancestors strove for purity", as our laws do say, and that therefore purity can be striven for and enforced. But really, barbarism and impurity are not things that can ever be behind us, but always beneath us. No man, whatever race he may be, is free from impurity. Therefore purity is not something to be found in any one race, only some may yet more embody it with a greater degree of, but never absolute, perfection. But in failing to recognise this universality of impurity, they fall to a greater sin yet: pride, impurity of soul; more repulsive than impurity of body. For the idea of purity in the first place pre-supposes that if only we get rid of the impurities, we will have something pure. And the idea that this purity is something that can be attained by our own efforts suggests that we can reach this purity ourselves. But we have to recognise that we cannot pull ourselves up by the lobes of our own ears, however pale and long they be, or lift ourselves by our boot-straps. We have enough moral codes, but we are powerless to enforce them. For no man can say he is without sin, and so guiltlessly condemn others of the impurity which is, in however small degree, in himself. We need a pick-me-up. All races are weak and cannot enforce their own moral codes; else there would be no need for laws in the first place. Something outside of ourselves, a force stronger than us, and a reality higher than us, to draw us to itself. And that is why we can sometimes seem over-proud, self-absorbed, and severe. In short, humility must be inculcated, for - glory be to God - is there any man or race that can strive for purity of itself, fruitfully? This recent essay which seems to support the mixture of the races and the monstrous and unnatural lusts of men, which has been the cause of so much controversy in Haelun'or, speaks of the High Elven ideal of "progress." "Progress" towards what? Will greater affluence, technological improvement, material benefits, and so forth, make a man more virtuous and pure? Often, quite the opposite. For where there is wealth there is contention: where there is gain, there is egotism. The woman who loves her husband in spite of poverty is of a purer love than the one who loves him in wealth, and I believe that it is harder for the rich to be virtuous. How can the sons of Malin progress, then, if they have not a goal? If you're not progressing towards something, you're not progressing at all, just arbitrarily moving. But as we have seen, material benefits are insufficient to of themselves constitute this goal. All brave men would rather live an inconvenient truth than a happy lie. All good men would rather live virtuously and poorly and primitively than with malice and wealth and all the technological advancement in the world. Progress must therefore be something higher than these things. In order to truly progress, there must be a transcendent idea of what Supreme Good, is. All of the Virtues: Benevolence, Justice, Prudence, Charity, and so forth, must subsist in this transcendence. For the ideal of purity suggests something pure, and therefore, something perfect. To root this purity and this striving to perfection in something contingent and fading, like a race of people, something clearly imperfect and impure, is a contradictory delusion. Material progress without liberality is greed; harsh law without mercy is severity; racial purity without humility is misery. Our ancient ideal that we can turn in on ourselves instead of looking upwards to the life that is above us, rooting ourselves in what is contingent and imperfect and expecting perfection, is why, however many executions there may be, the subversive and sinister promises of liberalism will not now cease to grow in Haelun'or, I believe, for the futile struggle begats a surrender attractive to many, and this surrender we call Liberalism."

Father Pius votes "aye."

"Most Reverend Father, I am delighted and thankful to hear of your request, and am happy to grant my consent. I remain your humble servant, Father Pius."