Figure of eight - Revision history

Hailmur: /* Idolatry */

2026-04-20T00:24:24Z

Idolatry

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:24, 20 April 2026
Line 203:		Line 203:
	If the General Assembly approves this judgement, then it will no longer be legal to create statues of an eternal. It won't be legal for the Senate or for anyone else to make sacrifices to them. Magicians will still be able to negotiate with eternals, but they won't be able to offer them veneration or sacrifice in return for their favour. It wouldn't be illegal for artists or actors to portray an eternal, but it would be illegal to create a [[Edifice#Grandeur\|grand statue]] of an eternal or commission any [[edifice]] clearly intended to honour them.		If the General Assembly approves this judgement, then it will no longer be legal to create statues of an eternal. It won't be legal for the Senate or for anyone else to make sacrifices to them. Magicians will still be able to negotiate with eternals, but they won't be able to offer them veneration or sacrifice in return for their favour. It wouldn't be illegal for artists or actors to portray an eternal, but it would be illegal to create a [[Edifice#Grandeur\|grand statue]] of an eternal or commission any [[edifice]] clearly intended to honour them.

	Pragmatists may argue that such restrictions tie the hands of the [[archmage\|archmages]] who are often forced to use flattery to convince eternals to favour the Empire. There is no doubt at all that passing this judgement will make life considerably harder for the [[Conclave]] - there absolutely will be situations where magicians are forced to forego the help of an eternal because this proscription would make it impossible to meet their price. Arguably, that is why so little has been done to stop the practice in recent years. Traditionalists argue that is ''exactly'' why it is so important for the Synod to act ''now'' to ban the practice - otherwise people will always find a way to justify it when the opportunity presents itself. The best time to clamp down on this behaviour was centuries ago; the second best time is now.		Pragmatists may argue that such restrictions tie the hands of the [[archmage\|archmages]] who are often forced to use flattery to convince eternals to favour the Empire. There is no doubt at all that passing this judgement will make life considerably harder for the [[Conclave]] - there absolutely will be situations where magicians are forced to forego the help of an eternal because this proscription would make it impossible to meet their price. Arguably, that is why so little has been done to stop the practice in recent years. Traditionalists argue that is ''exactly'' why it is so important for the Synod to act ''now'' to ban the practice - otherwise people will always find a way to justify it when the opportunity presents itself. The best time to clamp down on this behaviour was centuries ago; the second-best time is now.

			It has been pointed out that the wording of this judgement could be interpreted as including orcs, given that it references an "inhuman entity". The magistrates hold the opinion that the [[The_Doctrines_of_the_Faith#The_Doctrine_of_Enlightenment\|Doctrine of Enlightenment]], proposed by '''Lady Clarice Novarion''', more clearly demonstrates that the Synod do not hold that view. The wording of this judgement would not proscribe the creation of statues meant to honour orcs.

	If the Synod declines to proscribe the practice, then it is difficult to imagine the law of idolatry having any teeth in the future. Few people are going to accept the idea that it's illegal to venerate an inhuman power, but it's acceptable to build a giant statue or sacrifice a ship full of treasure to them. If the judgement does not pass, cases of idolatry will inevitably continue to rise. Trouble-makers like [[Sadogua]], [[Janon]], or [[Jaheris]] are likely to view it as an open invitation to seek the veneration of those to whom they offer their patronage.		If the Synod declines to proscribe the practice, then it is difficult to imagine the law of idolatry having any teeth in the future. Few people are going to accept the idea that it's illegal to venerate an inhuman power, but it's acceptable to build a giant statue or sacrifice a ship full of treasure to them. If the judgement does not pass, cases of idolatry will inevitably continue to rise. Trouble-makers like [[Sadogua]], [[Janon]], or [[Jaheris]] are likely to view it as an open invitation to seek the veneration of those to whom they offer their patronage.

GuiltyConscience at 21:50, 18 April 2026

2026-04-18T21:50:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:50, 18 April 2026
Line 182:		Line 182:
	Perhaps the most dramatic instance of heresy in recent times is the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Yaelian_Schism\|Yaelian Heresy]], in which '''Yael of Felix's Watch''', a [[Highguard\|Highborn]] theologian, claimed to have received a [[past life vision]] showing herself to be the [[First Empress]] reborn. As her fame spread, thousands placed their trust in her, believing her to be the reincarnation of the founder of the Empire. Eventually her lies were uncovered through the discovery that crucial documents supporting her claims of a place beyond the Labyrinth, which she called the "Land Without Tears", were forgeries. She was ultimately condemned by the Synod and executed, but to this day there are folk who believe that Yael was the First Empress reborn, and her account of the Land Without Tears was a true vision. The Yaelian heretics have not caused issues in many years, and short of Yael herself being reborn, they are not likely to do so.		Perhaps the most dramatic instance of heresy in recent times is the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Yaelian_Schism\|Yaelian Heresy]], in which '''Yael of Felix's Watch''', a [[Highguard\|Highborn]] theologian, claimed to have received a [[past life vision]] showing herself to be the [[First Empress]] reborn. As her fame spread, thousands placed their trust in her, believing her to be the reincarnation of the founder of the Empire. Eventually her lies were uncovered through the discovery that crucial documents supporting her claims of a place beyond the Labyrinth, which she called the "Land Without Tears", were forgeries. She was ultimately condemned by the Synod and executed, but to this day there are folk who believe that Yael was the First Empress reborn, and her account of the Land Without Tears was a true vision. The Yaelian heretics have not caused issues in many years, and short of Yael herself being reborn, they are not likely to do so.

	If the General Assembly proscribes this heresy, then it will make it definitively clear that no part of Yael's claims were ever true. Anyone who professes such beliefs or worse ~~proselytizes~~ them will face prosecution under Imperial law. The magistrates won't actively seek out these heretics, unless given clear instruction to do so, since the cost and disruption would be significant, but it would allow them to act swiftly should there be any attempt to resurrect the heresy.		If the General Assembly proscribes this heresy, then it will make it definitively clear that no part of Yael's claims were ever true. Anyone who professes such beliefs or worse proselytises them will face prosecution under Imperial law. The magistrates won't actively seek out these heretics, unless given clear instruction to do so, since the cost and disruption would be significant, but it would allow them to act swiftly should there be any attempt to resurrect the heresy.

	There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.		There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.

Hailmur: /* Options */

2026-04-10T19:42:57Z

Options

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 10 April 2026
Line 186:		Line 186:
	There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.		There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.

	One issue that the Constitutional Court do point out is that it would not remotely be constitutional for the Synod to attempt to proscribe the expression or discussion of religious beliefs for some individuals but not others. In the past there has sometimes been a tacit belief that members of the Synod have special rights and the necessary training to investigate or contemplate religious heresies. That approach is directly counter to the ethics of Imperial law, which treats all citizens equally. Either everyone may use their judgement to consider the teachings of the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|Lucidians]] or nobody can. Any attempt to proscribe heresy for people who weren't priests would be immediately struck down as unconstitutional.		One issue that the Constitutional Court do point out is that it would not remotely be constitutional for the Synod to attempt to proscribe the expression or discussion of religious beliefs for some individuals but not others. In the past there has sometimes been a tacit belief that members of the Synod have special rights and the necessary training to investigate or contemplate religious heresies. That approach is directly counter to the ethics of Imperial law, which treats all citizens equally. Either everyone may use their judgement to consider the teachings of the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|Lucidians]] or nobody can. Any attempt to proscribe heresy for people who weren't priests would be immediately struck down as unconstitutional.

	There is arguably a much more complicated heresy active in the Empire at this time: that of the [[Mournwold_Orcs\|Marcher orcs]]. These former thralls, freed along with their human neighbours when the [[Mournwold]] was liberated, still trace their religious beliefs to their [[Jotun]] roots. They firmly believe that they will reincarnate after death, provided they do not take up weapons to fight. While strange, these beliefs form the cornerstone of their entire world view - and it was clear they would not give them up to join the Empire. Their spiritual spokesperson ''Hap the Soft'' made it clear to the Marcher and Imperial Orcs assemblies that his people would be prepared to face death, and reincarnate, if anyone tried to force them to abandon their beliefs. This is unfortunate, because they are flatly at odds with the [[The_Doctrines_of_the_Faith#The_Doctrine_of_the_Howling_Abyss\|Doctrine of the Howling Abyss]] which explicitly states that orcs live only one life. This makes them heretical.		There is arguably a much more complicated heresy active in the Empire at this time: that of the [[Mournwold_Orcs\|Marcher orcs]]. These former thralls, freed along with their human neighbours when the [[Mournwold]] was liberated, still trace their religious beliefs to their [[Jotun]] roots. They firmly believe that they will reincarnate after death, provided they do not take up weapons to fight. While strange, these beliefs form the cornerstone of their entire world view - and it was clear they would not give them up to join the Empire. Their spiritual spokesperson ''Hap the Soft'' made it clear to the Marcher and Imperial Orcs assemblies that his people would be prepared to face death, and reincarnate, if anyone tried to force them to abandon their beliefs. This is unfortunate, because they are flatly at odds with the [[The_Doctrines_of_the_Faith#The_Doctrine_of_the_Howling_Abyss\|Doctrine of the Howling Abyss]] which explicitly states that orcs live only one life. This makes them heretical.

Hailmur at 17:01, 9 April 2026

2026-04-09T17:01:23Z

Hailmur: /* Abuse of Powers */

2026-04-09T11:56:26Z

Abuse of Powers

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:56, 9 April 2026
Line 100:		Line 100:
	<div style="float:right; width: 250px; clear: left;">{{CaptionedImage\|file=Fintan Enemy of the Creator.jpg\|caption=Former [[Ambassador to Axos]] and condemned blapshemer Fintan Nighthaven.\|align=right\|width=250}}</div>		<div style="float:right; width: 250px; clear: left;">{{CaptionedImage\|file=Fintan Enemy of the Creator.jpg\|caption=Former [[Ambassador to Axos]] and condemned blapshemer Fintan Nighthaven.\|align=right\|width=250}}</div>
	====Options====		====Options====
	* '''The use of true liao for ~~any purpose~~ without a writ of consecration could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''The use of true liao for creating a consecration without a writ of consecration could be declared an abuse of powers'''
	* '''Consecrating any area without the permission of those who control that area could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''Consecrating any area without the permission of those who control that area could be declared an abuse of powers'''
	* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''

	Rumours suggest that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted blasphemer, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] dedicated to peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently, it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' ~~true auras~~ without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].		Rumours suggest that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted blasphemer, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] dedicated to peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently, it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' consecration without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].

	It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.		It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.

Hailmur at 11:46, 9 April 2026

2026-04-09T11:46:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:46, 9 April 2026
Line 98:		Line 98:

	If the General Assembly passes this judgement of proscription then it will become illegal to perform or participate in an excommunication ceremony unless a writ of excommunication has been approved of first. It will be treated as an abuse of powers and punished accordingly. If the General Assembly declines to pass this judgement, and doesn't pass a different judgement of proscription that speaks to this issue, then it will be legal under Imperial law to use the ceremony of excommunication without the approval of the Synod.		If the General Assembly passes this judgement of proscription then it will become illegal to perform or participate in an excommunication ceremony unless a writ of excommunication has been approved of first. It will be treated as an abuse of powers and punished accordingly. If the General Assembly declines to pass this judgement, and doesn't pass a different judgement of proscription that speaks to this issue, then it will be legal under Imperial law to use the ceremony of excommunication without the approval of the Synod.
	<div style="float:right; width: 250px; clear: left;">{{CaptionedImage\|file=Fintan Enemy of the Creator.jpg\|caption=Former [[Ambassador to Axos]] and condemned ~~heretic~~ Fintan Nighthaven.\|align=right\|width=250}}</div>		<div style="float:right; width: 250px; clear: left;">{{CaptionedImage\|file=Fintan Enemy of the Creator.jpg\|caption=Former [[Ambassador to Axos]] and condemned blapshemer Fintan Nighthaven.\|align=right\|width=250}}</div>
	====Options====		====Options====
	* '''The use of true liao for any purpose without a writ of consecration could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''The use of true liao for any purpose without a writ of consecration could be declared an abuse of powers'''
Line 104:		Line 104:
	* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''

	Rumours ~~suggests~~ that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted ~~heretic~~, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] dedicated to peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' true auras without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].		Rumours suggest that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted blasphemer, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] dedicated to peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently, it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' true auras without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].

	It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.		It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.

	A citizen can only be legally compelled to attend one [[inquisition]] per summit, to prevent vexatious use of the power. In the past there have been accusations that members of the Synod have or might deliberately ~~called~~ themselves to inquisition - to ensure that nobody else could then inquisition them. The Synod could declare such a practice to be an abuse of powers - they could even go further and declare that any attempt to use the power of inquisition to shield a citizen from the Vigilance of the Synod was an abuse of powers.		A citizen can only be legally compelled to attend one [[inquisition]] per summit, to prevent vexatious use of the power. In the past there have been accusations that members of the Synod have or might deliberately call themselves to inquisition - to ensure that nobody else could then inquisition them. The Synod could declare such a practice to be an abuse of powers - they could even go further and declare that any attempt to use the power of inquisition to shield a citizen from the Vigilance of the Synod was an abuse of powers.

	===Blasphemy===		===Blasphemy===

Matt: /* Idolatry */

2026-04-08T21:48:44Z

Idolatry

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:48, 8 April 2026
Line 199:		Line 199:
	Sadly, the Imperial legal system has struggled to hold the line on idolatry in recent times. There have been perennial problems in the Empire's negotiations with [[eternal\|eternals]], in which these creatures demand veneration, exaltation, adulation or sacrifice. [[Eleonaris]], the so-called "Queen" of the Fields of Glory, ''demanded'' that a statue be built in her honour. The Imperial Senate even passed a [[Senate motion]] approving the sacrifice of [[Construct_Treasure_Ship\|a ship laden with treasure]] to please [[Rhianos]] the "Regent" of the Eternal Sea. The Synod could put an end to all this, by clearly proscribing these acts.		Sadly, the Imperial legal system has struggled to hold the line on idolatry in recent times. There have been perennial problems in the Empire's negotiations with [[eternal\|eternals]], in which these creatures demand veneration, exaltation, adulation or sacrifice. [[Eleonaris]], the so-called "Queen" of the Fields of Glory, ''demanded'' that a statue be built in her honour. The Imperial Senate even passed a [[Senate motion]] approving the sacrifice of [[Construct_Treasure_Ship\|a ship laden with treasure]] to please [[Rhianos]] the "Regent" of the Eternal Sea. The Synod could put an end to all this, by clearly proscribing these acts.

	<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The General Assembly proscribes the creation of statues in the likeness of any eternal. It is idolatry to ~~build any edifice~~ designed to honour an inhuman entity.</quote>		<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The General Assembly proscribes the creation of statues in the likeness of any eternal. It is idolatry to commission a structure designed to honour an inhuman entity.</quote>

	If the General Assembly approves this judgement, then it will no longer be legal to create statues of an eternal. It won't be legal for the Senate or for anyone else to make sacrifices to them. Magicians will still be able to negotiate with eternals, but they won't be able to offer them veneration or sacrifice in return for their favour. It wouldn't be illegal for artists or actors to portray an eternal, but it would be illegal to create a [[Edifice#Grandeur\|grand statue]] of an eternal or commission any [[edifice]] clearly intended to honour them.		If the General Assembly approves this judgement, then it will no longer be legal to create statues of an eternal. It won't be legal for the Senate or for anyone else to make sacrifices to them. Magicians will still be able to negotiate with eternals, but they won't be able to offer them veneration or sacrifice in return for their favour. It wouldn't be illegal for artists or actors to portray an eternal, but it would be illegal to create a [[Edifice#Grandeur\|grand statue]] of an eternal or commission any [[edifice]] clearly intended to honour them.

Matt: /* Blasphemy */

2026-04-08T21:44:55Z

Blasphemy

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:44, 8 April 2026
Line 125:		Line 125:

	Currently there are four known false Virtues, anarchy, hatred, peace and vengeance. Other malign spiritual forces exist, but they are not considered to be false virtues because there is no evidence that people can be dedicated to them. If that were found not to be true, or if a new false virtue were ever discovered, it would automatically be covered by this proscription because of the way it is written.		Currently there are four known false Virtues, anarchy, hatred, peace and vengeance. Other malign spiritual forces exist, but they are not considered to be false virtues because there is no evidence that people can be dedicated to them. If that were found not to be true, or if a new false virtue were ever discovered, it would automatically be covered by this proscription because of the way it is written.

	In each case, the magistrates would compare such auras to those known to be created with false virtues. Unfortunately, it is much harder to be certain of the source of spontaneous auras because of the way they manifest with unpredictable effects that don't match any known auras.
	====Options====		====Options====
	* '''The Synod would need to use a separate judgement for each false virtue to proscribe some false virtues but not others'''		* '''The Synod would need to use a separate judgement for each false virtue to proscribe some false virtues but not others'''

Teal: /* Idolatry */ punctuation

2026-04-08T21:42:42Z

Idolatry: punctuation

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:42, 8 April 2026
Line 199:		Line 199:
	* '''The crime of idolatry is defined as: ''Subsuming human will and destiny to any inhuman entity or force. This includes the worship, veneration or exaltation of any such being or power.'' '''		* '''The crime of idolatry is defined as: ''Subsuming human will and destiny to any inhuman entity or force. This includes the worship, veneration or exaltation of any such being or power.'' '''

	Sadly, the Imperial legal system has struggled to hold the line on idolatry in recent times. There have been perennial problems in the Empire's negotiations with [[eternal\|eternals]], in which these creatures demand veneration, exaltation, adulation or sacrifice. [[Eleonaris]], the so-called "Queen" of the Fields of Glory ''demanded'' that a statue be built in her honour. The Imperial Senate even passed a [[Senate motion]] approving the sacrifice of [[Construct_Treasure_Ship\|a ship laden with treasure]] to please [[Rhianos]] the "Regent" of the Eternal Sea. The Synod could put an end to all this, by clearly proscribing these acts.		Sadly, the Imperial legal system has struggled to hold the line on idolatry in recent times. There have been perennial problems in the Empire's negotiations with [[eternal\|eternals]], in which these creatures demand veneration, exaltation, adulation or sacrifice. [[Eleonaris]], the so-called "Queen" of the Fields of Glory, ''demanded'' that a statue be built in her honour. The Imperial Senate even passed a [[Senate motion]] approving the sacrifice of [[Construct_Treasure_Ship\|a ship laden with treasure]] to please [[Rhianos]] the "Regent" of the Eternal Sea. The Synod could put an end to all this, by clearly proscribing these acts.

	<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The General Assembly proscribes the creation of statues in the likeness of any eternal. It is idolatry to build any edifice designed to honour an inhuman entity.</quote>		<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The General Assembly proscribes the creation of statues in the likeness of any eternal. It is idolatry to build any edifice designed to honour an inhuman entity.</quote>

Twiggy at 21:42, 8 April 2026

2026-04-08T21:42:06Z

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 10 April 2026
Line 186:		Line 186:
	There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.		There are plenty of other historic [[Schisms and Heresies\|heresies, blasphemies, and schisms]] known to the Empire. The Synod would require a separate judgement for each heresy they wished to proscribe, but they would not need to provide any additional details if they wanted to outlaw [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|lucidianism]] for example, because the heresy is well known and detailed. If the Synod proscribed a new heresy that was not familiar, then the judgement would need to include a clear statement of the heretical beliefs, so that the magistrates could correctly identify it.

	One issue that the Constitutional Court do point out is that it would not remotely be constitutional for the Synod to attempt to proscribe the expression or discussion of religious beliefs for some individuals but not others. In the past there has sometimes been a tacit belief that members of the Synod have special rights and the necessary training to investigate or contemplate religious heresies. That approach is directly counter to the ethics of Imperial law, which treats all citizens equally. Either everyone may use their judgement to consider the teachings of the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|Lucidians]] or nobody can. Any attempt to proscribe heresy for people who weren't priests would be immediately struck down as unconstitutional.		One issue that the Constitutional Court do point out is that it would not remotely be constitutional for the Synod to attempt to proscribe the expression or discussion of religious beliefs for some individuals but not others. In the past there has sometimes been a tacit belief that members of the Synod have special rights and the necessary training to investigate or contemplate religious heresies. That approach is directly counter to the ethics of Imperial law, which treats all citizens equally. Either everyone may use their judgement to consider the teachings of the [[Schisms_and_Heresies#The_Lucidian_Blasphemy_/_Auran_Idolatry\|Lucidians]] or nobody can. Any attempt to proscribe heresy for people who weren't priests would be immediately struck down as unconstitutional.

	There is arguably a much more complicated heresy active in the Empire at this time: that of the [[Mournwold_Orcs\|Marcher orcs]]. These former thralls, freed along with their human neighbours when the [[Mournwold]] was liberated, still trace their religious beliefs to their [[Jotun]] roots. They firmly believe that they will reincarnate after death, provided they do not take up weapons to fight. While strange, these beliefs form the cornerstone of their entire world view - and it was clear they would not give them up to join the Empire. Their spiritual spokesperson ''Hap the Soft'' made it clear to the Marcher and Imperial Orcs assemblies that his people would be prepared to face death, and reincarnate, if anyone tried to force them to abandon their beliefs. This is unfortunate, because they are flatly at odds with the [[The_Doctrines_of_the_Faith#The_Doctrine_of_the_Howling_Abyss\|Doctrine of the Howling Abyss]] which explicitly states that orcs live only one life. This makes them heretical.		There is arguably a much more complicated heresy active in the Empire at this time: that of the [[Mournwold_Orcs\|Marcher orcs]]. These former thralls, freed along with their human neighbours when the [[Mournwold]] was liberated, still trace their religious beliefs to their [[Jotun]] roots. They firmly believe that they will reincarnate after death, provided they do not take up weapons to fight. While strange, these beliefs form the cornerstone of their entire world view - and it was clear they would not give them up to join the Empire. Their spiritual spokesperson ''Hap the Soft'' made it clear to the Marcher and Imperial Orcs assemblies that his people would be prepared to face death, and reincarnate, if anyone tried to force them to abandon their beliefs. This is unfortunate, because they are flatly at odds with the [[The_Doctrines_of_the_Faith#The_Doctrine_of_the_Howling_Abyss\|Doctrine of the Howling Abyss]] which explicitly states that orcs live only one life. This makes them heretical.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, 9 April 2026
Line 48:		Line 48:
	The Constitutional Court have confirmed that no part of Imperial law will change before the end of the Winter Solstice. That means that the Synod may condemn citizens for any religious crimes they have committed at the coming Solstice. The magistrates will respond accordingly by trying anyone who has been condemned by the Synod.		The Constitutional Court have confirmed that no part of Imperial law will change before the end of the Winter Solstice. That means that the Synod may condemn citizens for any religious crimes they have committed at the coming Solstice. The magistrates will respond accordingly by trying anyone who has been condemned by the Synod.

	Any judgement of proscription that is submitted at this summit will not take effect until the end of the Solstice. To keep things simple the Tribune will ensure that all proscriptions are open for judgement until the end of the final session on Sunday. In future, a proscription will come into effect as soon as it passes the Synod.		Any judgement of proscription that is submitted at this summit will not take effect until the end of the Solstice. To keep things simple the Tribune will ensure that all proscriptions are open for judgement until the end of the final session on Sunday. In future, a proscription will come into effect as soon as it passes the Synod and has passed the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court.

	From the end of the summit onwards, the magistrates will use whatever proscriptions the Synod have passed to prosecute religious crimes. That means it won't be necessary, or possible, for a priest to submit a judgement of condemnation from that point onwards.		From the end of the summit onwards, the magistrates will use whatever proscriptions the Synod have passed to prosecute religious crimes. That means it won't be necessary, or possible, for a priest to submit a judgement of condemnation from that point onwards.
Line 56:		Line 56:
	* '''The Court will not pass a judgement unless it is consistent with the principles of the Constitution and clearly pertains to a religious crime'''		* '''The Court will not pass a judgement unless it is consistent with the principles of the Constitution and clearly pertains to a religious crime'''

	Any judgement of proscription will be [[Scrutiny#Scrutiny\|~~scrutinized~~]] carefully by the Constitutional Court to ensure that it reflects the principles laid out by the Constitution, is compatible with the existing body of Imperial law, and is enforceable. An ideal judgement of proscription will lay out a single action and state which '''one''' of the five religious laws it breaks. Priests are welcome to include text explaining why the action ''should'' be proscribed, but any proscription which tries to identify multiple laws that are broken is likely to fail. The magistrates need simple, clear language that makes it obvious which Imperial law has been broken - anything which muddies that makes a proscription more likely to fail scrutiny.		Any judgement of proscription will be [[Scrutiny#Scrutiny\|scrutinised]] carefully by the Constitutional Court to ensure that it reflects the principles laid out by the Constitution, is compatible with the existing body of Imperial law, and is enforceable. An ideal judgement of proscription will lay out a single action and state which '''one''' of the five religious laws it breaks. Priests are welcome to include text explaining why the action ''should'' be proscribed, but any proscription which tries to identify multiple laws that are broken is likely to fail. The magistrates need simple, clear language that makes it obvious which Imperial law has been broken - anything which muddies that makes a proscription more likely to fail scrutiny.

	The Court will judge whether the proscription falls within the remit of the relevant Imperial law. For example, [[blasphemy]] is defined as "''The denigration of the paragons and the paths of virtue. This includes promoting false virtues and the teachings of false exemplars or false paragons."'' Attempting to proscribe an action as blasphemous will fail scrutiny if it is clear it is not compatible with the definition of blasphemy that the Imperial Senate has laid down. The Constitutional Court have a long history of jealously guarding the powers and responsibilities of each body of state - attempts by the Synod to encroach on the powers of other bodies such as the [[Bourse]], the [[Conclave]], or an [[Imperial sodality]], will be firmly rebutted.		The Court will judge whether the proscription falls within the remit of the relevant Imperial law. For example, [[blasphemy]] is defined as "''The denigration of the paragons and the paths of virtue. This includes promoting false virtues and the teachings of false exemplars or false paragons."'' Attempting to proscribe an action as blasphemous will fail scrutiny if it is clear it is not compatible with the definition of blasphemy that the Imperial Senate has laid down. The Constitutional Court have a long history of jealously guarding the powers and responsibilities of each body of state - attempts by the Synod to encroach on the powers of other bodies such as the [[Bourse]], the [[Conclave]], or an [[Imperial sodality]], will be firmly rebutted.
Line 104:		Line 104:
	* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''		* '''Calling yourself to inquisition could be declared an abuse of powers'''

	Rumours suggest that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted blasphemer, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] ~~dedicated to~~ peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently, it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' consecration without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].		Rumours suggest that the alleged corruption of the Assembly of Nine began when the convicted blasphemer, '''Fintan Nighthaven''', used a dose of [[Liao#True Liao\|true liao]] to create a [[Hallow#True_Liao\|blasphemous relic]] of peace. The magistrates have not raised a judgement regarding the use of true liao to [[consecration\|consecrate]] a location or [[hallow]] an item, but any priest could do so. Currently, it is perfectly legal to use true liao in this way without the Synod's approval - but the General Assembly could use a similar judgement to the one above to forbid the use of true liao to create ''any'' consecration without an accompanying [[writ of consecration]].

	It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.		It was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Senate\|made illegal to consecrate the Senate]] without the prior approval of senators in Winter 376YE, and that law was [[Auras_illegal_in_the_Civil_Service_hub\|extended to cover the Civil Service Hub]] two years later. A violation of this law is prosecuted as a [[List_of_Criminal_Offences#Crimes_against_the_Processes_of_the_State\|crime against the state]], rather than a religious law, because it involves interference with the business of these state bodies. The Synod could go further, and use a judgement of proscription to class the consecration of ''any'' location without the permission of those who control that area, as an abuse of powers.
Line 149:		Line 149:
	<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The desecration or destruction of any relics associated with a paragon or exemplar, or the destruction of any memorial associated with them, is proscribed.</quote>		<quote by="General Assembly Administrative Judgement">The desecration or destruction of any relics associated with a paragon or exemplar, or the destruction of any memorial associated with them, is proscribed.</quote>

	If this judgement is approved by ~~the~~ majority of the General Assembly then it will make it illegal for any individual to remove or replace an aura on a relic associated with a [[paragons and exemplars\|paragon or exemplar]], or otherwise destroy such an item. Likewise, removing spontaneous auras that have arisen in a place as the result of actions taken by an exemplar or paragon would be a crime. Spontaneous auras are often unique in nature, but their provenance can often be identified by magic such as [[Skein of Years]] or [[Clear Lens of the Eternal River]]- their historical association with such an important figure almost invariably leaves a trace. If the judgement is not passed, then the various relics and spontaneous auras will not be protected by Imperial law from destruction or desecration.		If this judgement is approved by a lesser majority of the General Assembly, then it will make it illegal for any individual to remove or replace an aura on a relic associated with a [[paragons and exemplars\|paragon or exemplar]], or otherwise destroy such an item. Likewise, removing spontaneous auras that have arisen in a place as the result of actions taken by an exemplar or paragon would be a crime. Spontaneous auras are often unique in nature, but their provenance can often be identified by magic such as [[Skein of Years]] or [[Clear Lens of the Eternal River]]- their historical association with such an important figure almost invariably leaves a trace. If the judgement is not passed, then the various relics and spontaneous auras will not be protected by Imperial law from destruction or desecration.

	====Other Potential Desecrations====		====Other Potential Desecrations====