L'Eglise Aristotelicienne Romaine The Roman and Aristotelic Church

[Kalixtus]

It is always the same problematic with seculars in high positions - you can excommunicate them, but what will come next. The Empire would perhaps ban the entire Aristotelian religion, imprison clerics, blacklist them, and the faith and its spread would become impossible.

We should think about such scenarios. I believe that the spiral of provocations will not end and that the conflict between the Church and the Crown will escalate at the end of the day because neither side is ready to change anything.

What do we know?

We know that the attempt to establish an efficient registry office has failed. Because it hardly resonates. People have no need at all to be married by the state, because there are enough clerics who choose an Aristotelian wedding or a Spionozist or Averroist wedding.

At least outside of Germany, I don't know anyone in my geodogmatic zone who does this.

That is, the damage of this imperial decree is limited and in all probability will not become established.

Therefore, I think it is more prudent not to deepen the spiral of violence further, so as not to tempt the Empire to overreact, which can undo the work of those who have been working for a decade for a strong position of the Church in society.

The empire has not yet even extended its powerful guns, and Rome has its most powerful weapon in the form of excommunication.

In addition, Empress Adalina is not unpopular. With such a decision, we can hardly hope that people will understand it, and what people do not understand leads to a loss of trust and affection, and thus we cut into our own flesh.

We need to find another, more sensible and less potentially destructive way of responding.

_________________

[Pie de Valence]

Once is not customary, I agree.
_________________
"Le modernisme n'est ni une dérive, ni une horreur, ni une maladie honteuse. C'est le terreau de la rénovation de l'Eglise, la terreur des conservateurs, l'air pur qui vivifiera la foi" (Pie II de Valence)
"On n'est jamais dans le mensonge quand on prêche la paix et l'apaisement, toujours quand on prêche la haine d'autrui" (Pie II de Valence)

[Urbain_mastiggia]

- Il faudrait donc laisser n'importe qui bafouer le sacrement du mariage inscrit dans le Dogme et le Droit Canon pour ne pas heurter des susceptibilités avec une excommunication ? Il faudrait être conciliant ? Comment pensez-vous qu'il soit possible de le faire, sans que l'Eglise ne paraisse concéder une once de terrain aux pouvoirs temporels, éminents frères ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Should anyone be allowed to flout the sacrament of marriage, enshrined in Dogma and Canon Law, so as not to offend sensitivities with an excommunication? Should we be conciliatory? How do you think it is possible to do this without the Church appearing to concede an ounce of ground to the temporal powers, eminent brothers?
_________________

[Kalixtus]

But how, brother Urbain, how do we archive what you demand and that I can understand.

We don't have a powerful political entity that will fight for us - like the Kingdom of France as an aristotelian shield. After all it seems more, that they follow the example of the SRING.

We don't have an army that is strong enough to send some secular pressure towards the Empire.

We don't have the standing within the society to force a revolution against the political powers.

So what options we have?

_________________

[Francesco_maria]

"Cardinal Kalixstus' speech makes sense. We must also consider that the choice of the so-called "civil marriage" was not made openly against the Aristotelian marriage. Clearly this decreases the value of our sacrament but thinking of an excommunication for the Empress for this act seems to me a disproportionate reaction. I think it is right to point out the value of the sacrament of marriage and to encourage the Episcopal Assemblies to be clear in announcing these things to the faithful, but it does not seem to me the best way to open a war with the Empire."
_________________

[Kalixtus]

I remind you of Saint Barnabas' Eleventh Meditation on the Four Candles:



Citation:

C'est avec étonnement que je dévisageais cet homme, décidément très énigmatique, qui s'approcha soudainement vers la table. Je pensais qu'il allait me demander de lui servir à boire et à manger mais il regarda les bougies, en pris une à la main et me lança : Citation: "Vois-tu cette flamme ? Elle symbolise la paix, personne n'arrive à la maintenir allumée." Puis, il souffla sur la flamme et la bougie s'éteignit. Il pris une seconde Bougie: Citation: "Vois-tu cette flamme ? Elle symbolise la foy, si elle n'est plus indispensable, rien ne sert de la laisser allumée." Puis, il souffla sur la flamme et la bougie s'éteignit. Il pris une troisième Bougie: Citation: "Vois-tu cette flamme ? Elle symbolise l'Amour, si les hommes la laissent de côté et ne comprennent pas son importance, rien ne sert de la maintenir allumée." Puis, il souffla sur la flamme et la bougie s'éteignit. L'homme commençait à me faire peur, j'étais sur le point de lui demander ce qu'il mijotait et lui signifier qu'il allait nous plonger dans le noir, mais aucun son ne parvint à sortir de ma bouche. Me dévisageant, il pris la quatrième et dernière Bougie et me dit: Citation: "Vois-tu cette flamme ? Elle symbolise l'espérance." Puis la saisissant de sa main, il ralluma les trois autres bougie avec elle. Pour conclure, le pèlerin ajouta : Citation: "Ainsi, chaque Aristotélicien incarne l'espoir, et l'espoir est ce qui maintient la paix, la foi et l'amour. Angelo, dévoile aux enfants du Très haut la onzième méditation que Barnabé t'a expliqué. Que l'espoir guide leurs âmes et brille dans leurs cœurs."

_________________

[Fenice]

From the monthly report of the Imperial Council, February:

[Ulli]

I see it like Brother Kalixtus, what use is it to us if we insist on our dogma with all our might and the gap between the empire and the church gets even bigger. We should rather try to mend this gap.
You can see from Nurse Fenice's answer that there are hardly any requests to use this possibility.

[Richelieu1]

La question est de savoir quelle position adopte l’Église sur le plan général. quand le temporel vient à contrer le Dogme.

Selon Kalixtus, étant donné que nous n'avons pas de force il faut plier. Soit c'est une position. C'est une règle générale ? Si demain, le temporel crée un baptême civil. On accepte ?
Si demain le temporel décide que les biens du Clergé sont passés au temporel. On accepte ?
Si demain, le temporel décide qu'un des apôtres n'est plus sain. On accepte ?

Sur quoi sommes nous prêts à céder ? Le droit Canon ? Le Dogme ? Tout ou partie ? Quelle sera la limite ?

The question is what position the Church takes in general when the temporal comes to oppose the Dogma.

According to Kalixtus, since we have no strength we must bend. Either that is a position. Is it a general rule? If tomorrow the temporal creates a civil baptism. Do we accept it?
If tomorrow the temporal decides that the property of the clergy has passed to the temporal. Do we accept?
If tomorrow the temporal decides that one of the apostles is no longer healthy. Do we accept?

What are we ready to give in on? Canon law? Dogma? All or part? What will be the limit ?
_________________

[Kalixtus]

Strictly speaking, that is not what I said Richelieu, and it is precisely this simplification that always worries me because it is so polemical.

I have said that we must always base our actions on whether the problems we want to solve are solved or whether they create new, dramatic and toxic problems that we can no longer solve.

This spiral between church and crown will lead to no result if we continue to fuel it.

Suggestions on what we should do instead come from you, unfortunately, none at all.

The fact is, what Ulli and Fenice say, - the damage of this Civil Marriage is minimal, what the state had in mind does not apply.
We have to state that cleanly, unemotionally and clearly.

Our response to this problem, therefore, cannot be the maximum force of arms of Rome. Our responsibility is more extensive than just looking at the moment.

If we punish one Aristotle who then slaughters thousands of Aristotles, the suffering is not ended but increased.

This logic should be obvious even to you.

_________________

[Richelieu1]

Je n'ai peut être pas de solutions miracles ou de propositions.
Mais quelles sont les vôtres ? Ne rien faire ?


I may not have any miracle solutions or proposals.
But what are yours? To do nothing?
_________________

[heldor]

Sorry brothers and sisters, I hope I misunderstood... Are we the keepers of the Dogma of the Aristotelian Church or have we become mere bureaucrats scared of what might or might not happen?
What Sister Fenice told us is that in the month of February there were no requests for a "civil marriage", maybe it will be the same in March, but sooner or later someone will make a request and what can we do? Nothing!!!

Now, since I took my priestly vows and even more since this assembly welcomed me into its bosom, our task has been to defend the interpretation of the Books of Virtues and Dogma, which are the pillars on which it is founded our faith! And now rather than trying to change things from within, bringing people closer to the Church, do we decide to drop our pants and lift up our tunics so that they can do what they want?

But are we crazy? Let's get to work, hear what people expect of us as a Church and try to meet their expectations! Maybe streamlining the bureaucracy a bit or simplifying things a bit so they don't see us as a bloody bunch of bureaucrats who only think about their own share of power!
And with regard to this last point, it would be appropriate to start having proactive discussions here instead of spending time massacring each other, otherwise how can we expect that outside of here they follow what we say if we don't even agree on the color of fried air!
_________________
+S.Ecc.Ill.ma frà Tebaldo Foscari detto Heldor il randello
Cardinale Vescovo Emerito di San Domenico in Burgos
Primate delle Venezie e Stato da Mar
Legato Apostolico per le Venezie e Stato da Mar
Patriarca Metropolita di Venezia
Arcivescovo Sine Cura di Gorizia
Padre Generale dell'Ordine di San Domenico,
Conte di Sezze
ecc.

[Kalixtus]

My suggestion is: To evaluate and base our decisions on reality.

Reality is:

The downward spiral of the Crown and the Church is neither beneficial nor helpful to our mission, Brother Richelieu and Heldor.

As I said before - if the Empire decides to ban the Aristotelian Church, to forbid preaching and proselytizing and to put it under treason because we think we can do something with our "weapons", then we harm not only ourselves but ALL believers.

I find that unacceptable.

_________________

[Adonnis]

I have been pondering this issue for a long, long time. I have already had the opportunity to talk with Kalixtus privately, when I said that I agree with the points he made.

I also tend to analyze my steps, in relation to the Church, in a very political way, especially since public relations and diplomacy is the biggest weapon we have.

However, after this time of reflection, I can also come to the conclusion that the situation discussed here is not that simple. We cannot simply say "if we punish the Empire, we will harm our faithful. If we do not punish the Empire, we will save our faithful."

We excommunicated Copona, we excommunicated numerous Kings of France, and we excommunicated the last Queen of Poland for serious attacks against the Church and the sanctity of the Dogma. Regardless of whether they were received as popular or unpopular decisions, the truth is that these decisions printed the image that the Church never intended to bow down or "turn a blind eye", as they say back home, to any attack on the sanctity of the Dogma and the spiritual attribution that belongs solely to the Church and the Roman Pontiff.

So, if on the one hand I understand that this civil marriage instituted by the Empire, sanctioned by the Empress, has not yet had great proportions, it is also certain that, one way or another, it has attacked the Dogma by regulating a situation that the Dogma and Canon Law are categorical in prohibiting.

We can't think of a punishment only when we'll have hundreds of imperial subjects adhering to this new institute, because it may have been months or years since its institution, which undermines the very Principle of the Temporality of the sanction, as well as the simple fact of allowing secular marriage, in itself, is already a serious attack on the dogma, whether there are adherents or not.

Of course, our relations with the Empire have long been shaken, and a negative reaction from the Church could further shake this relationship, alienate us, and thereby undoubtedly harm our faithful.

On the other hand, there is another point of view that also cannot be dismissed: what is the message that the Church will give to the whole world when it has previously been so adamant in not taking kindly to the attacks of secular Monarchs against Dogma and Canon Law, but now in an unheard of and unpredictable way, acts differently and takes no position at all?

Will we show the intention to try a new dialogue or will we simply show that we are a group of clerics in our red cassocks intimidated by the Empire because we admit that the Empire scares us and is capable of intimidating the entire Sacred College of Cardinals?

I admit that this thought does not make me want to support silence in the face of this decision by the Empress. Not because I don't agree with Kalixtus' very valid and coherent arguments; but because we will be radically changing the message we have been giving to the world until now.

I would really like to hear the opinion of other cardinals.

Given the compexity of the subject, I will extend this debate for another 3 days. Since there is obviously no consensus, after the 3 days, I will open a vote for the Sacred College to make a definitive decision on this matter: remain silent or excommunicate the Empress.

_________________

.....Cardinal-Presbyter of Saint Anthony of the Portuguese / Grand Audiencier of the Holy See / General Inquisitor of Portugal
...............Primate of Portugal / Metropolitan Archbishop of Braga / Bishop of Vila Real / Duke of Monte Real

[Kalixtus]

I have to say very clearly in the analysis once again that the only stable and powerful, because influential synod in the SRING is that of the Germans.

If we excommunicate the Empress and risk, say, a ban on the Aristotelian faith, this will also affect the German Kingdom and the entire German-speaking synod. The cataclysm would be so enormous that it will destroy the entire political structure of the German Kingdom.

I want you all to understand this very concretely.

The intertwining of church and state into a common political and social responsibility in which the word of the church is heard and respected would cease to exist and 15 years of work on this issue would be eliminated.

This is a risk that must be weighed in the balance.

What do we gain on the other side?

One more excommunicated empress? Who cannot cause terror from the grave. But if we force the Empire to break away from the Church, we will have no access to the faithful at all, because all access will be forbidden under threat of maximum penalties. All churches and cathedrals will be plundered and the Reformation will sweep over the fields and forests like a fire.

I expressly warn against indulging in an illusion. The Empire is not France, which is centrally governed and very pagan, or Poland, which is pagan - we are talking about the Empire with centers of faith in Italy and Germany the size of several thousand souls far exceeding the population of Spain or Poland or England.

Consider this.

_________________