#Its the worldly priest

[shewhomustnotbename]

I wrote that post literally on EP 5, so now that I've seen it through I have more thoughts!

! SPOILERS !

First I must say this as a long time spn hater (by hater I do mean I love this show in an obsession type way) :

I think Fellow Travelers is obviously a more important statement, and with that in mind I want to be clear that these are apples and oranges.

But the way both Skippy and Cas make me feel is the sameee

Something about "Beyond Measure" fits Cas so well too.

Being a small part of something big,

Looking for God, finding a broken man

Soldiers

Their hope, kindness, and work towards positive change despite continued suffering.

Their hope to find something "right" to believe in, over and over again.

Their drive to do right by others, and the gut-wrenching guilt they feel if they think they fail.

Their belief in those they love, like they couldn't do anything to hurt them even though they have before.

Their torturous love and resentment of God

Just their final monologues are so **so** SO:

Tim

"I spent most of my life waiting for God to love me. And then I realized the only thing that matters is I love God. It's the same with you. I have loved you my whole life. I've never loved anyone but you. You were my great, consuming love. And most people don't get one of those. I did. I have no regrets."

Cas

"But I think I know... I think I know now. Happiness isn't in the having, it's in just being. It's in just saying it.

... Knowing you has changed me. Because you cared, I cared... I cared about the whole world because of you. You changed me, Dean.

I love you."

An idea-

Skippy/Cas parallels.

Just hurting my own feelings

[ryuzakemo128]

Beneath Your Depths ..... Do You Feel Anything?

Pairing: Poly! 141 x Reaper! Forensic Pathologist! Female Reader

Masterlist - Prequel - Part One - Part Two - Part Three - Part Four

Content Warning: Graphic description of you and what you really look like. You are Death aka the pale horse, the grim reaper, the main dude bossing around the little reapers under your employ thing. Prequel to the series of one shot parts I have written before this one.

Note: If you prefer to remain unaware about how I want to depict you. Feel free to skip this one. It won't affect the future parts or anything. Just like an extra plate of food, you are always free to say no thanks, I already have enough here.

I won't add a summary either because I don't want to spoil anything for this one, and I want to know if anyone will like this or not.

You are always certain you knew everything there was to be in life and death. Knowing both worlds so intimately. What else could you be?

Abhorrent. Antediluvian. Colossal. Eldritch by some people's standards. The creature standing before the four of them, the four men, it was nothing like they have ever seen before.

Ethereal. Most of the time you are formless. An incarnate of death in flesh, a silent spectator of mortality's dance. But now, as you stand before the creature, the air thickens, and your form solidifies. Price's eyes narrow, taking in your sudden presence. Soap's hand tightens around his combat knife. Ghost's grip on his rifle relaxes slightly, his gaze flicking to the side to assess the new player. Gaz's eyes, however, light up with an unreadable emotion.

Necromantic as you are in fact one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. You were huge. Bugger than any monster they have come across in the past. So otherworld, outer worldly and powerful, you could feel the tremor of fear emanating from the men. Fear of death. Common among humans. Uncommon amongst other monsters.

What did they have to fear from you? You were just as freakish as they are right?

A primeval they called you. A creature related to the beginning of everything. A creature so old none could possibly comprehend you without taking the overarching risk of madness over taking them.

Some priests and nuns claim you as unholy. But you are as natural as the earth beneath their feet and the air in their lungs.

After you consume someone or something a putrid smell clings to you, your flesh, your bones and the essence of your blood. Yes. You have blood. Yes. You can bleed. No. You are incapable of dying. But you are able to appear dead to anyone who would have or have tried to kill you in the past.

Your exoskeleton is there if someone where to squint hard enough to see the shape beneath the endless smog surrounding your gargantuan form. Born of star and moon, you have no reason to harm outside your predefined nature.

You have no reason of knowing why they were there before you. They weren't supposed to die just yet. There time had not come close to arriving. You knew this. Your body knew this and your soul declined their intrepid touch.

Necrotizing the living and bringing them unto the other side where they were supposed to come to when it was their time to go. Ritualistic in behaviour but never quite fitting in. This creature before them is you.

Predatory in nature much like the sharks, the bears, the wolves, and the many animals that kill in order to endure.

Insidious, malevolent, deranged and yet eerily benevolent. Not outright kind mind you. Death is anything but kind in the hearts and minds of mankind. But for you? It's a job. Its a promise. Its a wish. Its a release.

You don't wish to end things for the sake of ending them. No matter how many might find that hard to believe or reject it completely.

The ghastly chthonic array of the deceased walking past you like you weren't even there. Like you weren't the only who brought them there. A cycle of nature you were in tune with without having to remember the tune or even explain the why of it. Wave after wave like the ocean eroding away stone and metal beneath its watery depths.

Macabre. Visceral.

Charnel. Sepulchral. Thanatoid.

Abysmal in some aspects and reflected in most cultures as something or someone most feared. Yet here you are, a being of the void, standing in front of men who have seen hell and lived to tell the tale. You look into Price's eyes and for a moment, you see a flicker of recognition, a glimmer of understanding that you are not here to do harm but to uphold a balance that has been skewed.

It didn't matter what they thought of you, You have a schedule to keep in time with. You can't afford to mess any of it up. With each heavy footstep away from the four men. Each thump on the ground beneath your feet resonated through the air like a silent drum beat. You felt the tension ease slightly as your form grew more indistinct.

Price spoke up, his voice a gravelly rumble that seemed to echo around the abandoned warehouse. "What the fuck was that?" Soap's eyes didn't leave the spot where you had been standing, knuckles white around the grip of his knife. Ghost was the first to move, holstering his weapon and walking towards the spot where your ethereal presence had been. He knelt down, inspecting the ground with a keen eye.

"Looks like it left something behind," he said, picking up a small, gleaming object that looked out of place amidst the dust and grime. It was a tooth, shaped unlike any creature they had encountered before. The serrated edge and crystalline sheen hinted at a power that was beyond their understanding.

A small piece of obsidian with red under glow just beneath the surface.

[barbiesmuse]

FINE LINE. ₊˚⊹♡

;ֶָ 𓂃⊹ ִֶָsimon riley + reader

summary: you knew it was over, in fact, it never really began. but in your heart, it was oh-so-real.

tags: introduction to a new series! there is cliffhanger smut and talk of religion but that's mostly all!

head barbie's announcements: i'm back! after a long break that was totally needed because my brain was fried!! my masterlist will be updated, this will be a series so just think of this as the backstory, anddddd that's all! kisses and hugs for u always. if this is offensive or makes anyone uncomfortable i apologize and i will take it down without a problem!! this is just an idea for a fic! if you like it maybe i'll continue! “Am I making you feel sick?”

The hate you had for Simon Riley ran deep. Before you met him you were a good girl. You went to church every Sunday, volunteered to help in youth groups, and were the Priest's daughter. It was a life filled with love, community, and toxicity. Your father had been waiting to auction you off to his favorite usher's son. Your father judged a book by its cover; unfortunately for you, that meant almost no friends.

So when a young man and his mother come to church for the first time, your father is less than thrilled. His mother was known around town, she was a sleaze. She was outgoing, boisterous, and sometimes flirty. Your father called her a jezebel, although you tried to ignore his rude comments and welcome them into the church. Simon's mother thought you were the cutest thing since Polly Pocket, although you didn't quite resemble Polly your tiny stature was often compared to her. Her son, Simon was the complete opposite. He was quiet, shy, and often never spoke. That was comforting to you, everyone in the church always had something to say, except for him. You had tried countless times to invite him to youth groups and asked him for dinner! Your father scolded you, although you didn't care what he thought of the new followers, to you they deserve all the love. Once Simon had gotten to know you more, he had liked you. You were small, and kind, and your big eyes made him groan internally. You were the perfect kind of toy for him to play with. Gullible and bashful. The more you hung around Simon the more worldly you became. Your father took notice and made sure you knew how disappointed he was. Not only did he ground and ban you from seeing your new friend, but he also forced a purity ring onto your hand. Your father was a sick man. There have been many scandals surrounding him. He simply shushed them away with money. His only way out of any bad situation. In a way, Simon reminded you of your father before the church. Loving, caring, and gentle.

You had often snuck out late at night to visit Simon. The two of you would meet up at a park called “Condamnée.” The park was a safe place for both of you. After your father had put the purity ring on you, you needed to speak to Simon. Only he could make your sweet little heart feel better. To say you felt like a sinner would be an understatement. But you couldn't help it. Simon was like a bad habit, something you kept running back to. You didn't know if it was possible to let him go, you felt like there was a strong connection between the two of you. When Simon sees the ring on your pretty finger he can't help but smirk. You looked up at him with teary eyes and he caressed your cheek gently. “You've let a silly little ring get you all worked up like this, peaches?” He would say in a condescending tone. You simply nodded with a pout. What he did next surprised you, but you couldn't ignore the wet feeling in your pink panties as he did it. He slid the ring off of your finger and took off the silver chain he wore. He slid the ring onto the chain and then clasped it around his neck. You looked at him with wide eyes and he simply chuckled. “Oh my gosh, I'm going to hell!” You said with a quiver of your lips. He chuckled and pushed you onto the bench. He bent down in front of you and kissed your ankles.

“Y'r here for a good time, not a long one peaches.” He said as he kissed up your legs. It felt wrong, it was wrong. Yet the feeling of his tongue gracing the inside of your thighs made you squirm. He looked up at you with a sinister smirk. He had his hood on so all you could see were his honey brown eyes and the skull imprint of his mask. Sick. This was sick. You tried to tell yourself to push him away, but you couldn't. He felt too good. As his tongue reached your panties he looked up at you, asking for permission. “Can I touch you, sweet girl?” He asked, you could tell he was practically praying for a yes. So of course, you gave him a soft nod. He looked up at you, the pretty little sinner in front of him. Oh, what a fucking sight.

[megyulmi]

➠ Symbolism of Yuuji’s childhood memories in Chapter 265 and how it connects to his conversation with Sukuna:

I was rereading the latest chapter and ended up dwelling on how the order in which certain things appear along the path Yuuji and Sukuna are walking connects with the progression of their conversation and the outcome of it, so I want to point out a few of such details in case someone else finds it interesting.

First, I will start with Morning Glory (asagao, 朝顔, lit. morning face) Yuuji mistakes Ajisai for. Asagao was brought to Japan with the advent of Buddhism and came to represent Enlightenment. When one thinks of the flower, an old line often comes to mind: [Asagao blossoms and fades quickly to prepare for tomorrow’s glory]. It is the theme of one of the oldest songs on the morning glory, written by the Chinese priest at the temple of Obaku near Uji, who is said to have been the first person to introduce the flower to Japan. Since its arrival, it has been a frequent theme in Japanese Buddhist poetry, particularly when writing on the fleeting condition of human lives, as the poets found a congenial subject in the morning glory, for they considered no flower has a briefer life and beauty, and the buds of yesterday are flowers to-day, but only for a few short hours, and then nothing will be left but ruin and decay; though how quickly fresh buds will appear and fresh flowers open to be the tomorrow’s ‘morning glory’. Therefore, in Japanese culture, asagao is a symbol of new beginnings. The flowers open in the morning, representing the dawn of a new day, and close in the evening, symbolising the end of the day and the passing of time.

Next comes Ajisai (紫陽花), the Japanese hydrangea. The flower has both positive and negative connotations in Japanese tradition, symbolising both deep or heartfelt emotion and also a fickle or changeable heart. However, I mentioned in this post that the blue hydrangea (I am assuming blue, because Yuuji mistook it for asagao) can mean sincerity, forgiveness, remorse and spirituality. Ajisai are also an important part of the ceremony in celebration of Buddha’s birthday (Kambutsue), where his statue is washed with sweet hydrangea tea by the visitors of the temples. As such they are often found at shrines and temples.

After that, Yuuji and Sukuna catch Crayfish. Interestingly, Buddhist philosophy references the crayfish when speaking about the temporary nature of existence. All that seems solid and permanent, like the crayfish shell, eventually disappears. There is a famous painting of Priest Xianzi (Japanese: Kensu) by Unkoku Tōgan from the Momoyama period. It depicts a seated figure of a Buddhist monk who appears to be contemplating the large crayfish (or shrimp). Kensu or Xianzi is a semi-legendary eccentric priest of the Tang dynasty, who spent much of his time wandering along riverbanks, eating crayfish and clams. He allegedly achieved Enlightenment while catching a crayfish.

Later they come across Horses, which hold a special place in Buddhism, embodying spiritual virtues and the timeless quest for Enlightenment. The story of Siddharta Gautama Buddha’s renunciation and his separation from his beloved horse, Kanthaka, is a significant story in Buddhism. As Siddharta decided to leave behind his life of luxury and embark on a spiritual journey, he faced the task of saying goodbye to his beloved horse. The separation from Kanthaka symbolises the profound sacrifice he took when he renounced worldly attachments in the pursuit of Enlightenment. Additionally, in the Shamanistic tradition of East Asia and Central Asia, there is a concept of the Wind Horse, a flying horse that is the symbol of the human soul. In Tibetan Buddhism, it was included as the pivotal element in the centre of the four animals symbolising the cardinal directions.

After the horses, we see them engage in Archery. As a Buddhist symbol, the bow and arrow are found throughout the art, mythology and theology; held by gods, part of vivid legends, lauded in sacred texts and painted on the walls of the temple fortresses. They are symbols of the wisdom and compassion of the Buddha. Just as the arrow flies straight to its target, so too must the mind of the archer be focused and free from distractions.

And lastly, Snow. As a symbol of purity, it is taken as representative of naive innocence behind heroic undertakings. In this regard, it is also a subject of paintings in special combination with cherry blossoms as a symbol of what is ephemeral and transitional as is the life of the hero. However, snow is often associated in the Japanese short poetry with the Zen notion of Emptiness. This is because, to quote the poet Naitō Jōsō, snow covers and clears everything: [fields and mountains / all taken by snow / nothing remains]. From the lens of Buddhism, as the defilements—greed, hatred, and delusion—melt away like snow, the process of purification speeds up our relinquishment of impurity. To do this, one needs to be able to feel their humanity from within, where the invisible factors of mindfulness, clarity, faith, energy, concentration, and wisdom can dismantle and dissolve years of deluded ways of perception, of relating to life. Only then will the ground of awakening begin to appear.

I find Yuuji’s conversation with Sukuna to be rich in symbolism, each element along their path reflecting deeper themes of compassion and Enlightenment. Their journey begins with the morning glory, symbolising a new beginning and Yuuji’s offer of redemption to Sukuna. The hydrangeas, mistakenly identified as morning glories by him, signify Yuuji’s readiness and offer of remorse as he sincerely reminisces on his childhood with him. The appearance of the crayfish continues this theme, highlighting that this conversation is a chance for Sukuna to contemplate the temporary nature of existence and the path he wants to continue leading from there on. The horses, embodying spiritual virtues and the timeless quest for Enlightenment, appear as Yuuji’s way of asking him to renounce his old ways in pursuit of Enlightenment, followed by Archery right after, emphasising his readiness for compassion despite all Sukuna has done to him, mirroring the Buddhist ideal of a concentrated, undistracted mind. And lastly, comes snow as a symbol of purity and the potential for redemption, evoking the Zen notion of emptiness and the purification of defilements. Yuuji, by invoking these symbols, offers Sukuna the last chance at redemption and Enlightenment. He shows Sukuna the final act of compassion if Sukuna shows remorse, which Sukuna refuses.

In the end, Yuuji and Sukuna walk the same path, but their choices lead them in opposite directions. Yuuji embraces the symbols of Enlightenment, striving for a higher understanding and compassion, whereas Sukuna rejects these ideals, choosing instead to renounce the path to Enlightenment.

[serpentface]

Do you have any information on the root scholars that you can share? They’ve always been a cool cult/organization to me

Ok it’s a facet of the Eterhimhamdli religion, which is The most widespread single belief system east of the inner seaway (which isn't saying much in terms of scale but it's still pretty significant) and also one I've barely introduced so I'll go over it a bit here.

Eterhimhamdli has spread past its initial sphere of old (~500 years BP) southern Lowlands Yuroma kingdoms, has many folk practices, and has schismed a few times, so there's a good deal of cultural variation. But its basic tenants/tendencies are:

-Creator deities are wholly rejected, the universe is an interplay between non-personified dualistic forces of Body(evil)/Mind(good). In one schism, the interplay of these two forces is the Dream, in others dreaming is an aspect of Mind.

-Deities in general are not wholly at odds with Eterhimhamdli, but their importance is de-emphasized and worship is usually discouraged in favor of making them objects of contemplation and/or tutelary figures.

-The Mind of the universe exists as a collective soul from which human souls emanate

-every person has two souls: an egoistic soul that animates the body and an ethereal soul that animates the mind. The latter is conceptualized as a single drop from a greater sea of the collective soul.

-belief that true wisdom is derived through access to this collective soul.

-belief that the trappings of the the ego-soul and the body's demands inhibits access to said collective soul.

-belief in the concept of enlightened beings who gain full experiential knowledge of the collective soul while remaining in a body, thus becoming capable of directly communicating aspects of their wisdom to the masses.

the biggest schism in this religion is over whether enlightenment just means experiencing full knowledge of the collective before you die, or whether it means transcending the limits of the body entirely and functionally becoming an immortal, godlike being.

deities of older/other religions absorbed by Eterhimhamdli are often reframed as enlightened mortals.

-most sects believe that only sophont life (or sometimes Only humans) have a etherial-soul along with the ego-soul, while animals exclusively have the ego-soul. Plants and inanimate objects Usually aren't ascribed souls outsides of heavily syncretic folk practices.

-belief in a fundamental good-evil cosmic dualism, though in a fairly complex way (evil is a necessity for life that is to be tempered and grappled with, rather than outright vanquished from the world entirely). The notion of 'evil' here is most associated with bodily desires (this includes all bodily needs like hunger and thirst, necessary to support life but viewed dangerous in excess, and being the root of conflict and pain).

the evil nature of bodily desire is not About sex, but does translate to non-procreative sex being frowned upon to varying extents.

-belief that life is a state of internal warfare between the evil ego-soul and the good ethereal-soul, with the former being more powerful and influential. To lead a good life is to bring the ego-soul into equilibrium with the ethereal soul. To live a wise and venerable life is to fully tip the balance in the latter's favor (this is not an expectation for lay followers, as it is considered profoundly difficult and requires separation from worldly life).

-lay followers practice forms of temperance to bring these forces into equilibrium, priests practice forms of asceticism to subdue the ego-soul and gain experiential wisdom in the process.

-The way you balance your life has consequences for the afterlife. An evil life causes an eternal death (this is usually posited as an underworld), a life in equilibrium causes one to be reborn into a new human body (a neutral fate), and a good life results in full return to the collective soul (this is a state of complete peace and contentedness and access to infinite wisdom).

-A selection of hallucinogenic plants are central to the monastic/priestly aspects of the religion, being seen as the key method through which the body can be transcended and the ego-soul can be quieted in order to tap into the collective. Lay followers do not participate in this facet on a regular basis.

-Priests also participate in self-flagellation, as the struggle with physical pain is a key microcosm of the broader internal war with the ego-soul, and can be a source of wisdom and contemplation. They are extensively tattooed for partly related purposes. Laymen are not expected to flagellate as a practice but rather to apply teachings to/learn from struggles with everyday pain.

-Very complicated relations with violence as a concept. Some strains of Eterhimhamdli philosophy see violence as an exclusive result of evil to be avoided whenever possible (usually more completely by priesthoods than the wider societies they live in), others see it as a neutral tool in of itself that Can be a force for good when used wisely. (Large scale 'wise usages of violence for the sake of good', shockingly, tend to favor the in-group's position in preexisting ethnic/religious/territorial conflicts).

-Most sects are proselytizing and see conversion as a necessity to create a better world, and have broadly unfavorable views of other religious practices.

This does not extend to seeing all societies that practice Eterhimhamdli or even The Same Schism Of Eterhimhamdli in a positive light (the birthplace of this religion is currently about 60 semi independent city-states organized into leagues that are frequently at war with each other)

-Highly favors education, literacy, rhetoric, debate, and the acquisition of material knowledge along with deeper spiritual wisdom. Knowledge and wisdom are venerable traits and societies should be led by the learned, or at least by people under their guidance.

---

The Scholarly Order of the Root is one order of Lowlands Eterhimhamdli monastics, functioning as a closed cult/mystery religion. They’re based out of Suurota (one of the biggest Yuroma city-states and dominant member of its league). They're at the top of the league's hierarchy of monastics, very wealthy, and have some involvement in governance (being an advisory body to the magistrate).

The Scholars primarily interact with the general public by hosting many of the league's institutions of scholarship and philosophy, and some of the biggest libraries in this part of the world. Their institutions are used by laymen Suurota citizens and members of government for study, and they host monks and priests (uninitiated to the inner cult) in their halls.

Actual membership to the Scholars cult is limited, they neither expect nor want associates to participate in their rituals. Rather, they position themselves as teachers- revealing small aspects of their secret knowledge to laymen and the lesser monastics as a form of guidance, while keeping dangerous knowledge for only the trusted inner circle.

Their baseline belief system aligns with the general schema of Lowlands Eterhimhamdli (one of three major schisms of this belief system), but their closed cult practices revolve around fairly unique interpretations, understood to be the ultimate underlying truths of this worldview.

The Scholars focus on an extention the Mind-Body model of the universe where their synthesis is the Dream (this itself is not unique to this cult, but the depths of their focus is). Under this model, the world is the dream of the collective consciousness, and achieving enlightenment or even temporary lucidity can allow the dream to be shaped to one's will.

One of their most secretive practices is god-building, in which they utilize altered mental states to shape the fabric of the dream into entities they can use as personal teachers of secret knowledge (also as a type of magic in general, they use it to 'build' guardians and curses and the like).

The process involves using mild doses of Ur-Root brew (mostly derived from roots of the clonal Ur-Wood colony, whose bark has notable concentrations of dimethyltryptamine and also hosts milder fungal hallucinogens) while maintaining an object and concept as a focal point of concentration. The altered state provided by the Root allows the user some access to the wisdom of the collective soul, and they will experience secret knowledge and revelations about this object, how it can best be used (this will be supplemented by material knowledge about the subject). This process is repeated until the user experiences a sense of Presence in the object, which must be interacted with, given a name and a face. Through more repetition, the object is believed to be shaped into a sort of thoughtform god which has come into material existence via manipulation of the dream.

This is considered to take immense time and effort to come to completion, god-building projects can last for years and be the combined effort of multiple Scholars. In the end, you have shaped an entity to your will that can operate independently of you.

The Ur-Wood itself is the center of Scholar cult practice, as it is both the purveyor of their most important hallucinogen and believed to have been the first god ever shaped by this form of lucid dreaming (it's a pilgrimage site for Eterhimhamdli where thousands of followers have undergone Ur-Root trips over the past four centuries, using the woods as an object of contemplation). To them the Ur-Tree is the ultimate teacher of their cult, an extremely powerful built-god that has been involved in almost every journey to enlightenment and contains all these journeys within its substance.

They believe that communing with the tree via Ur-Root can grant access to all enlightened mortals- full trips (with a DMT breakthrough type experience) will often involve sensations of encountering entities, which they interpret to be these historical figures. Within their religious framework, they're kind of speedrunning enlightenment. Under most conventional frameworks, the teachings of wise and/or enlightened people are conveyed in writing or speech as things to Contemplate on one's own journey- you might be able to understand them Conceptually but true understanding is Experiential, a process that can take a lifetime. In their framework, they're both receiving these teachings directly AND embodying states in which they can experientially comprehend them.

That summarizes most of their secret practices, and the rest of their practice is pretty standard for devout Lowlands Eterhimhamdlist priests. They live a partly ascetic lifestyle, they bear extensive tattoos as a contemplation of pain and marker of their journeys, they flagellate, they use tutelary hallucinogens, they refine their non-experiential body of knowledge through debate and rhetoric, they work to accumulate both worldly and spiritual knowledge, they work as scribes, etc.

[whencyclopedia]

Protestant Reformation

The Protestant Reformation (1517-1648) refers to the widespread religious, cultural, and social upheaval of 16th-century Europe that broke the hold of the medieval Church, allowing for the development of personal interpretations of the Christian message and leading to the development of modern nation-states. It is considered one of the most important events in Western history.

The dates of the Reformation are not universally agreed upon. Some scholars date the event 1400-1750 (from the dissent of Jan Hus to the end of the pre-industrial society), while others suggest 1517-1685 (from the dissent of Martin Luther to the revocation of the Edict of Nantes), and there are many other claims regarding dating which have equal merit. The dates 1517-1648, however, are the most widely accepted, setting the beginning of the Reformation at Martin Luther's dissent and the end at the Treaty of Westphalia that concluded the Thirty Years' War which started as a dispute between Catholics and Protestants.

Although the Reformation was previously understood as a monolithic event, current scholarship interprets it more as Protestant Reformations, a series of protests against the corruption of the medieval Church, seeking reform and, initially, the leaders of these protests had no intention of breaking away from the Church. A prime example of this is the Bohemian Reformation (c. 1380 - c. 1436), precursor to the Protestant Reformation, which initially only sought to remedy unbiblical practices by the Church.

By the 15th century, corruption in the Church was widespread and devout believers sought to rectify this. The refusal of the Church to address these criticisms eventually led to the schisms that would establish Protestant Christian sects which developed into denominations such as Lutheranism, Calvinism, Anglicanism, and others.

The Protestant Reformation completely changed the European cultural, religious, social, and political landscape and is often referred to as the birth of the modern age as it coincided with and was encouraged by the Renaissance of the 15th-16th centuries. Although there were earlier movements in response to the corruption of the Church, modern technology in the form of the printing press allowed for the dissemination of protestant literature and the publication of the Bible in the vernacular, resulting in widespread support for the cause and the end of the monolithic religious, cultural, and political authority of the Church.

The Medieval Church

The Church dominated medieval Europe (c. 476-1500) as the sole authority on spiritual matters and, as it became more powerful, influenced the spheres of politics and culture. In time, the pope became a significant political presence and, generally speaking, spent more time and effort on worldly affairs than religious matters. The hierarchy of the Church – pope, cardinals, bishops/archbishops, priests, and those in monastic orders – began to exercise their authority more for their own personal gain and comfort than the spiritual well-being of the people.

The Bible was only available in Latin – which laypeople could not read – and the Christian Mass was also recited in Latin as were the prayers (such as the Our Father and Hail Mary) taught to the people. Although the Church mandated adherence to its vision of Jesus Christ's message, this did not resonate with many laypeople who practiced a kind of blend of Christianity with pagan folk belief. The inaccessibility of church teachings, coupled with the obvious display of luxury and comfort by the clergy, led to reform movements as early as the 7th century, and according to some interpretations, even earlier.

Continue reading...

[rainbowolfe]

Random Fun Fact, In Massive Monster's Merch Section, there's a Goat T-Shirt that if you look closely has Shamura on there. Specifically you can see them on the Goat's robes. Not sure if that means anything, since Lamb's T-Shirt has Mini-bosses instead of Narinder. But it's kinda sus that we got two separate occasions where Shamura's seemingly connected to the Goat.

hmm hm.

I've never looked very hard at the Unholy Merch cause I think the "metal" art style is... ugly, but that is weird. It's commissioned artwork so its pretty up in the air if the meaning is intentional or not, but I'll proceed as if it is!

Knowing that Goat and Lamb are meant to be parallels [duality, Two sides of the same coin, etc], the meanings we can derive from the Lamb's shirt are going to mostly apply to the Goat's shirt too.

They're both wearing a sash—specifically a stole. These sashes represent their religion/beliefs and are typically made of silk. In denominations that have them, stoles are worn by priests, deacons, or bishops. In denominations that don't, they're worn by higher-ranked members of the church. Effectively, disciples. Those who have been anointed with consecrated oil. [eyeballs emoji]

Stoles that are embroidered/decorated are called "vesper stoles" and worn for special events of the same name. Vespers is a communal ritual of evening prayer that begins around sunset. In certain Roman rites, it would last the entire night.

What Haborym and Eligos are classified as in-game are "non-believers" (Aka skeptics), which distinguishes them from the cultists and the Bishops, who are classified as Heretics.

They're both the second boss for their respective realms. And, they're both "hybrids". Eligos is a frog-bat (and has ~things~ growing inside of her), while Haborym is an octopus-jellyfish mix. I think. Even still, he's very clearly two or three beings sewn together.

There's the implication that they weren't always Like This, but were turned into monsters solely for the sake of fighting for their cult leader.

The Lamb's sash has the basic pentagram on it associated with the Old Faith, while the Goat's sash has the crossed-out circle associated with Wrath and The One Who Waits.

What I'm hearing is that the Unholy Lamb is Heretic Red (who worships the Lamb) and that the Unholy Goat is Heretic White (who worships themselves/worldly pleasures). [These titles are from the kickstarter] What I'm also hearing is that this Lamb is associated with Anura and Anchordeep, while this Goat is solely associated with Silk Cradle.

When it comes to the comparison being made between Shamura and Eligos/Haborym, it seems like further reinforcement that Shamura is 2+ entities that have been combined into one thing. And that Shamura wasn't always this monstrous spider, but was turned into this using the blood of the Great Ones/a ritual involving it.

What stumps me is how Eligos and Haborym are representative of the worship of the Lamb. There's just not enough info available to deduce that. Were they previous lambs? Previous Red Crown vessels?

Also, this Goat is our (Narinder's? The Crown's?) enemy. And is likely the figure depicted in the bone sculpture. If not simply just part of that entity's group. The entity associated with doubled lifespans.

What's extra interesting is that Lamb's background is a half circle. This is most likely the half-moon symbol that is notably absent from the Bishop's lineup. The Unholy Lamb's colors are red and orange. Instead of a collar, their bell is attached to a beaded necklace.

This means the Unholy Lamb is the Heretic Lamb. (The beaded necklace and the way their sash is worn unevenly may also be implying the Heretic Lamb was also the Anchorite) Also known as the Ignoble Lamb.

The Unholy Goat's colors are magenta and white. Their background seems like it's calling on the funeral/ascension rituals. This Goat is also, notably, dead/undead. Their head is alllll bone. Their bell doesn't seem to be attached to anything at all.

The Lamb of Death, and the Goat of Conquest. Two sacrifices, one more into it than the other. The pinnacle of obedience, and the pinnacle of rebellion. Potentially both actively possessed by their respective deities.

//squints

Conquest's Goat addresses the God of Death. But Shamura addresses the Ignoble Lamb. (which means Shamura's initial death/near death experience was caused by/involved the Heretic Lamb)

Follower of Death -> Lamb of Death -> God of Death -> Death Death being the horseman, and the God being their vessel. Meaning a Lamb isn't necessarily always a vessel.

>therefore Conquest's God/Vessel would be the God of either Pestilence or Chaos. >therefore Conquest's Goat doesn't have a Crown of their own. But maybe had one. >Conquest's Goat killed the God of Death's four other siblings to prevent a prophecy. They lose this fight at the last boss lmao >The ignoble Lamb is also a Death God, considering they wear the Red Crown. They also stole/wield the Fanatic's Crown. >Alternatively, Conquest's Goat succeeded in their mission and killed the fifth boss, but the Crown then went to the Ignoble Lamb instead of being destroyed. Since the God of Death makes explicit reference to having a Lamb of their own.

The question that remains is if the Goat in the trailer is Conquest's Goat. A gentle maybe.

The Goat 2's Crown is Purple, but it contains pink inside of it. So it could just be a borked resurrection. Or Goat 1's ticket out of Purgatory/Hell was letting this funky-eyed nuisance pilot them like a mech. This Goat also wields an axe, so that makes them an apostate, which tracks with everything else so far.

hum.

Kinda sounds like the Goat's the Fanatic.

[psalm22-6]

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 June 1864

The readers of Victor Hugo's last romance, Les Miserables — and they are many, and the work, with all its faults, is a striking one — can hardly fail to have been impressed by the portrait of the lowly, self-denying Bishop of D— ; the 'bishop' to whom his affectionate flock could find, in one of his own baptismal names, so appropriate an epithet, that he is represented as having been familiarly known amongst them as Monseigneur Bien-venu — Monseigneur Welcome. To many, and to English readers especially, the character may appear forced and fanciful; and yet, allowing for the not unnatural exaggeration of a novelist, exaggeration which has unfortunately a tendency to throw upon an otherwise charming character on air of ridicule, the portrait of Monseigneur Myriel is no unfaithful sketch of the life and character of the prelate who for the first quarter of the present century (from 1806 to 1838) adorned the episcopal throne of Digne, in the south of France. Those who have had the courage to wade through the formidable array of volumes of an author of undoubted talent, but of extravagance of style and imagination unbounded — an author who mingles in one marvellous amalgam the true and the false, good and evil, the pathetic and the horrible — with a bad taste disconcerting to those most disposed to admire his real ability; will perhaps gladly learn something more of the true history of the saintly bishop whom Monsieur Victor Hugo has brought before us as fulfilling so touching, but at the same time so singular a part.

There is no concealment about the matter. The prelate introduced by our author to serve as the framework for his socialistic and pantheistic theories, and called by him Monseigneur Charles François Bienvenu Myriel, Bishop of D— , is none other than the late Charles François Melchior Bienvenu Miollis.Bishop of Digne. The most cursory comparison of the facts of the venerable prelate's life with the portrait drawn by the novelist is sufficient to establish this. Born at Aix, in Provence, in the year 1753, of pious parents, his father being a zealous and conscientious magistrate, he was ordained priest by the Bishop of Carpentras, in the year 1777, and sent forthwith to fulfill the functions of the priesthood at Brignolles. The strange story of his marriage, and of his worldly and dissipated life is due entirely to the vivid imagination of the novelist, and is a libel upon the character of this good man, who from childhood manifested the most earnest piety; piety which we may well believe to have been fostered by that pure home life to which his father had accustomed him, and of which that father had set the best example, by the praiseworthy practice of daily family prayer, and of other works of virtue and religion. At the epoch of the Revolution, Mons. Miollis, who was conscientiously unable to take the oath required of the clergy by the Revolutionary Government, appears to have emigrated to Rome, and, during his residence in that city, to have devoted himself to researches into the history and antiquities of the Christian metropolis. Eleven manuscript volumes remain to attest his industry, and contain the most interesting results of his enquiries. Upon his return to France, he became attached, in the capacity of vicaire (curate), to the parish of Saint Saviour, at Aix, where he had long been known for his devotion to works of charity, and his zeal for the instruction of the young in the principles of Christianity. It was with regret that, in 1894, he left this modest post, to return to his former cure and it was at Brignolles that, two years afterwards, the episcopate, literally, sought him out. Far from seeking this promotion, he never ceased to reproach himself with having allowed a burden, which he esteemed beyond his powers, to be laid upon him nor was he fully reassured on this point till after he had completely freed himself from the yoke. When the Emperor Napoleon came to a rupture with Pope Pius VII, Monseigneur de Miollis made on concealment of his sentiments. Summoned to the Council of 1811, with his colleagues, his bearing was firm and honourable. The following anecdote is wonderfully characteristic of the man. The Emperor, having had with him a long private interview with the object of gaining over the Bishop to his own views, the prelate replied, with deep respect but perfect firmness, "Sire, It is my, rule and practice to come to no decision in matters of moment without taking counsel of the Holy Spirit. Allow me time." The following day, the Emperor again accosting him, as follows: " Well, Monsieur, and what says the Holy Spirit ?" "Sire," replied the Bishop of Digne, "not a word of what your Majesty was pleased to say to me yesterday." When the Emperor, on his return from Elba, passed through the city of Digne, the Bishop, insensible alike to fear and favour, remained at home in his palace. The Emperor, respecting the noble independency of the Prelate, continued his course, the course which, though he knew it not, was so soon to terminate on the field of Waterloo.

In the early years of his episcopate, the diocese of Digne comprehended the department of the Upper and Lower Alps, a sufficiently extended district. Moreover, during the prolonged vacancy of the Archbishopric of Aix it fell to the lot of Monseigneur Miollis to discharge, in addition, the episcopal functions in the dioceses; so that he had not only to traverse the rude mountains, intersected by torrents, and bordered by precipices, and for the most part trackless, of the Alpine districts, which he was accustomed to do either in a light car, or mounted modestly, like our Saviour, upon an ass, or even on foot, staff in hand; but it became necessary for him to take long journeys, even to the borders of the Mediterranean Sea, for the purpose of preaching and confirming; the consecration of churches, and the visitation of schools, hospitals, and the poor — duties, which he performed with indefatigable zeal. At last, in 1838, overcome by age and the laborious nature of his duties, he resigned the see, and retiring to the house of a married sister, in Aix, devoted himself to the preparation for death, and for the account which he would soon have to render of his long administration. During the five years thus spent, he was the admiration of the whole place, as well on account of his profound humility as for the incomparable patience with which he endured the pains and infirmities of old age, supported by an union with God so close, so constant that nothing could henceforth disturb him. On the 27th June, 1843, the venerable Monseigneur de Miollis slept the sleep of the just, at the age of ninety years and nine months; leaving to his clergy and his flock, together with the reputation of his lofty and beautiful holiness, the legacy of the inextinguishable memory of his works of piety and charity His funeral was a veritable triumph. The city of Digne, in the cathedral of which, by his own desire he was interred, was adorned as for a festival, and in place of the mourning and sadness which are the usual accompaniments of such scenes, there was a certain subdued and holy joy, a sort of spontaneous and popular ovation as to a saint already glorified. [. . .] The readers of Les Miserables, or of this brief sketch, may satisfy any interest in the life of the subject of these notes which may have been excited in them by reference to the Life of Monseigneur Miollis, by L'Abbé Bondil; an 8vo. of something under 300 pages, published at Paris (Repos. Rue Bonaparte) a year or two ago, and costing something less than half-a-crown. To those who have derived their notions of the Bishop solely from Monsieur Hugo, the perusal of his life may be recommended almost as a matter of duty, inasmuch as they will thereby learn that all the good attributed by the novelist to his priestly hero falls short of reality; while certain false ideas to which the romance can hardly fail to have given rise will be found to have no place in the reality. To all, the memoir referred to may be suggested as an interesting and well written account of one whom the staunchest "Protestant " will allow to have been a "good and faithful servant" of his Lord. L.H.R.

[thepatristictradition]

Veiling is not about Modesty (and it can even be Immodest)

What is the purpose of Veiling? If you were to look at some other religions, the answer you would get is "modesty". To discuss veiling, we must first discuss Modesty and "modesty". The idea goes, the more of the body covered = the more modest it is. But Christianity (and especially Eastern Orthodox Christianity) is much different than any other religion in the world. Thus, our view on Modesty is much different.

Modesty, in our faith, is not about being covered in the Worldly sense; it is about blending in and going unnoticed. This is where the middlingly correct idea of the "heart posture" comes into play(1). It is hypothetically possible to clad oneself in an ankle-length floral dress and a lovely veil and still be immodest if one is doing it with the intention of attracting the attention of pious men. It is always immodest to dress in a way that provokes, intentionally or unintentionally, such as overly flashy clothing or jewelry, or dress that is very foreign to the culture where you are visiting or residing. Likewise, it is also possible to be modest in a garment that leaves the wearer nearly naked, as in a swimsuit at the beach, where that is the expected attire.

The actual purpose of the Veil, especially in a Prayerful or Liturgical setting, is an expression of a portion of our Theology of the Church, the Eucharist, and Jesus. The Church is a woman, a Wisdom to whom all Priests and Bishops are married. All Orthodox Christians are the bride of Christ, though the men and women among us express this truth in different ways. The Eucharist is, theologically, the fruit of the marital union between the celebrant and the Church. Our Christian theology, down to its very core, is marital. The veil is marital garb.

The primary pieces of scripture Christians cite in favor of Veiling are 1 Corinthian's 11:5, " But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven," (KJV), and 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18, "Rejoice evermore. Pray without ceasing. In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you," (KJV). Taken together, many would say that women must, at least, cover their hair/heads in Church and during prayer in general. Many would further say that this implies women should veil all the time, or at least in public.

But why is that? Is a woman's hair immodest? Is it indecent to show one's hair or head in public? Fortunately, no. No part of the body in Christianity is considered intrinsically indecent or shameful. On the contrary-- every part of the body is valuable and good, and it is only the Fall that brings shame upon them. What is indecent and what is acceptable is determined by the society you find yourself in. If we find ourselves in a community that believes elbows are the height of inflammatory sexuality, I should hope we all cover them with only the thickest of wool shrouds.

In the Old Testament, a woman covering her hair is a symbol of marriage, first and foremost. This is not only true in the Hebraic culture of the OT, but also in most antique cultures across the Middle East and the Mediterranean both in the OT, and in the Gospels and the Epistles. Unlike what many young Orthodox women say, the veil is not a symbol of submission, either-- at least not any more than a wedding ring is today or the veil of Hebrew women was. The veil of a Christian woman is the expression of a theological truth-- wearable ecclesiology and Christology.

1) Much of the discussion of heart posture, especially in protestant circles, is simply an excuse to wear crop tops to Church in the name of personal piety. Another post on this shall follow. A good rule of thumb is that heart posture always condemns, never excuses.

[modern--nights]

Verily, the Lasombra stand as chieftains and seers, monarchs and sages, warriors and holy men. They weigh with care who merits the Embrace, yet show no mercy to those of their ilk who prove unworthy. Indeed, the sole menace to the dominion of clan Lasombra may well be clan Lasombra itself. Montano, eldest childe of Lasombra, now governs from the distant Castle of Shadows in Sicily, his rule extending as a shadow over his Sire's troubled repose, haunted by visions of darkness and the Abyss.

Deep-rooted in religious fervor, perchance due to their profound affinity with shadows, many among the Clan tread the Path of Heaven. This fervent piety kindles strife within the Clan, turning their gaze inward. In Iberia, the Shadow Reconquista rages—a clash between Christian and Muslim Cainites, dividing the Clan. Its echoes reverberate far beyond Iberia, ensnaring distant allies. Christian Lasombra within the Church rally resources for Christian forces, whilst Muslim brethren seek alliances, especially with the Assamites. They implore their Jewish kin to join their cause, for fear of dire reprisal should Christians seize power in Iberia.

Yet, the schism without mirrors the schism within. The Cainite Heresy festers within the Church, a heretical cult dominated by Lasombra priests and bishops. These apostates claim Cainites, marked by God, akin to angelic beings, with the Curse of Caine sanctifying them. Naturally, even non-Christian Lasombra decry this doctrine as blasphemy, striving to expunge such heresy wherever it takes root.

Moniker: Magisters Visage: The Clan of Shadows boasts a diverse assembly, with members hailing from Spanish, Italian, Jewish, North African, or Arabian lineages. Most Lasombra garb themselves in opulent attire, bedecked in silks from the Orient, sumptuous French brocades, or the resplendent fabrics of Arabia. Even those within the Church, though it eschews worldly riches, often don regal vestments befitting their high station.

Refuge and Quarry: Some affluent Lasombra opt to dwell amidst their familial estates, masking their true nature to retain control over their holdings. Here, they find ample sustenance amidst kin, servants, and retainers. Others, averse to the complications of concealment amongst throngs of mortals, establish solitary abodes of opulence, sacrificing convenience for secrecy and security. Some adherents of the Cainite Heresy feed upon their congregants, veiling their actions as sacred rites. Nonetheless, such practices demand utmost discretion, lest they incur the wrath of more orthodox Christian Lasombra.

The Embrace: Lasombra often select their progeny from among the affluent, powerful, or politically astute. Yet, Magisters may equally embrace those of humble origins, whose ambition and intellect shine bright. Birth alone cannot gauge one's mettle or capacity for leadership.

Clan Disciplines: Dominate, Obtenebration, Potence Weaknesses: Lasombra cast no reflection in reflective surfaces, rendering it arduous to conceal their supernatural essence from mortals. Moreover, they recoil from bright light, suffering additional harm from sunlight.

Organization: Within the Clan exists the Amici Noctis, the Friends of Night—an exclusive fraternity admitting only those who have proven their worth to the Clan. Presiding over the Courts of Blood, the Amici Noctis grants leave for Amaranth, serving as the final arbiter of its application. Unsanctioned Amaranth invites swift retribution, as decreed by the Amici Noctis. Predominant in central Europe, Montano staunchly opposes the Friends of Night, forbidding their presence in Sicily and the Castle of Shadows. In Iberia, the Shadow Reconquista impedes the Amici Noctis's authority, rendering it powerless to quell the discord.

Stereotypes: High Clans: A meaningless distinction, espoused by the equally pointless. Our ascendancy stems from merit, not lineage. Their classification as High or Low speaks volumes of their discernment. Low Clans: Let other High Clans spurn them. Only a fool rejects a valuable asset or indispensable ally. Assamites: More akin are we to the Children of Haqim than to most others. Let prejudice blind others. They are honorable and worthy allies. Ventrue: The Scions misconstrue power and position, to their detriment. Let them pursue lofty ambitions; it renders them pliable. Followers of Set: Let them strive to revive worship of their defunct deity. Time marches on, and those who resist progress are trampled beneath its stride. Tzimisce: Godless pagans, one and all. They spurned the chance to forsake their heathen ways. While we acknowledge their might, we cannot place our trust in them.

[late-to-the-magnus-archives]

Heretic - a Malevolent fic

What road remains for a man whose purpose abandoned him?

AO3

For @aktrashpanda, who drew this art:

What road remains for a man who lost his own? Who misplaced the one he was given? Who followed, sure, faith and sight fixed on what seemed narrow and true?

Aye, but that’s the wrong question. Here is the right one: what remains for a man whose road, narrow and true, abandoned him?

It’s an answer I never sought, for I did not know the road could refuse its rider. My purpose, my meaning, as I knew he was, left me behind. I woke without my road, and without my arm, my purpose run away. No one has seen him.

What road remains, then, for a man? The truest of all: seek and you will find.

#

‘Tis the newspapers which the Lord uses to shed light on my new way: the report on the mayhem up north, half of New York’s elite caught up in some scandal.

I recall… something about upstate. This is where my purpose was going next, and by God, it sure looks like he got there.

The story’s a good ‘un, rife with worldly intrigue, and the papers talk of nothing else. There’s murder, fire, underground rituals, strange masks and bodies no one can identify, and… Satan-worship? 

So it’s called in the reports about the mess our finest uncovered, yet that is not the devil’s symbol I see in these grainy photos. I know what I see, for it was in Arthur’s book.

I had time to study that book, to learn some new truths, and I remember what it was called: Malleus Monstrorum, the Hammer of Monsters. Between learning to live without my arm, and giving comfort to my sheep (who come to me for it, distressed by my injury and unable to offer their own), I take months to locate a copy. To track down the wayward brother in Dunwich who has one, and is willing to let me see.

And in that time, I find no comfort with my flock, or in my prayers, or on my knees. Neither with the host on my tongue, nor with sleep in my eyes. There is no comfort, for my road has forsaken me.

But the book. The book, blasphemous yet true: brother Andrew, muttering and mad, lets me see, and in it I find the symbol they saw upstate, and it leads me on.

He was not alone in his hard journey, brother Andrew, and from him, I receive names, clues, a way forward. I follow that symbol through paths and hints and secret codes, and I find the people who know what it means, and I walk this new road that seems to have found me.

Which it has.

And then, I find her.

#

She, who walks between. She, who thinks herself above creation, but is not; she, who, being so old, is so young, and has so much to learn. And I… know I am meant to teach her.

(Is it heresy to find a new purpose after yours got away? Is it heresy to seek a new path, to follow a different star when the one you knew has gone dark?)

She takes me from my life because I recall to her that same road which abandoned me; we’re both forsaken, left behind by him who gave us purpose and direction and hope. (Though she does not call it hope, I know what I see. What she lacks is not hope, but faith.)

She says he was her favorite. I say he was my purpose, and so condemn myself.

“I will keep you, little priest,” she says, not acknowledging that I sought her.

“I will use you, little priest,” she says, bidding me wield the skills the good Lord gave me, which she calls magic and I call penance.

“I will corrupt you, little priest,” she says, not knowing that I am already corrupted, and she can bring me no lower.

But I can lift her up.

Through her teaching, I learn to heal, and so can finally do good deeds to weigh against my bad. Through her, I meet and lead wild sheep who may never lay eyes on another shepherd through all their cursed lives. Through her, I travel, and see works and worlds unimaginable, and through her, I will be redeemed as I guide her to redemption.

(It is not the same as weekly confessions, the same humble faces masking repeated sins and perfunctory repentance. It is sanctification, active and pure.)

Arthur Lester was my purpose, but now, I see: he was not an end in and of himself. He was the road to my end.

“I should kill you, little priest,” she says, but she means it not at all. I am her purpose, and she’s mine, led together by one who had no faith of his own. The Lord works in mysterious ways.

“I will convert you, little priest,” she promises, low, and that I will not worship her makes her question what she knows.

In the end, we will save each other, or damn each other, and either way, Arthur Lester is to blame. I don’t know that he lives, but I have faith that he does—and I pray for him. I pray he finds his own road, and this time, that he stays true.

----------------

NOTE:

Psst… there's a way to support my writing now (and thank you Kraiva, Som, Charlie, Flamia, Bree, and more who encouraged me to do it).

[shadeslayer]

oc talk abt one of my older story ideas

most of my ocs are characters/verses ive had since like middle school and have been vaguely developing ever since. in the last years of doing stuff w the five/iseldre characters ive been focused a lot more on making them abt like. diversity of experiences all coming together. but also the original idea of it wasnt just abt that it was more abt like. every 100 years five babies born r chosen by the gods to be their representatives on earth and theyre supposed to vaguely all get together and kind of make decisions that will effect everyone in the world. and its a lot about the expectations people have for the next gen of chosen and that these kids grow up under that expectation and then have to become adults under this legend they physically represent

the original main character, riley, i had for it (though i want it to be ensemble cast of the five, really, but hes always gonna be the og) was a trans man who had to hide his identity both as the next chosen one and his gender because there was a belief that every generation of chosen would 'switch' genders and so this rounds space god chosen should be a girl But hes Transgender. Imagine. (lots of thinly veiled projection onto him and 'research for a story' abt him that was just me looking up how to transition) but now i Understand Things More im trashing parts of that/rewriting it

hes nonbinary, but hes still ~stealth as a trans man. hes still hiding his identity. now i think on it i think itll be that its Believed that the chosen 'switch genders every generation' but thats like. a pattern that doesnt exist that people are reading into things by selectively looking at recorded history that supports it and quietly ignoring the parts that dont seem to add up

but either way, it expanded into like with each of the five i wanted to explore a different tension/theme/problem. riley was going to be hiding his identity, laurie would be wrestling with religious beliefs/colonization (she grew up basically in a christian mission church raised by a pastor but also idk how that fits into the world at all lol i just wanted a character that wld hate priests.), ram would be dealing with being aromantic and low affect + low empathy so she just gets a lot of shit. and she can be kind of a dick but also she would "be cis" and then halfway to 2/3s of the way through realize shes transfem and start transitioning. chako is about leaving a home that they love and having to move forward despite never wanting to leave. and wind is like. idek theyre just around to be around. theyre the pinkie pie of this group atm

and i got so sucked into thinking about all those individual storylines and shit i forgot what i really wanted to do overall with this and it was like. i think i didnt know it fully but im reaching for something leaning into that loz-verse flavor of being forced by seemingly random chance at birth to be part of a great repeat of history that everyone says is Very Very Important but also it doesnt seem fair that its been put on You for no fucking reason + why does this need to happen at all

i was toying for a while of "shouldnt they have powers or something" but and this reminds me why they dont. because theyre not even that special. theyre chosen by specific symbol birthmarks in specific bodily locations, so they are explicitly "specially chosen" but like. theyre not. its random & they have no powers they have nothing but a birthmark that means theyre Worldly Important. there is no upside for them out of this, and it is somewhat easily faked via tattoos and other things so its a big point of what this world works on is a worldwide program to track births for this

and it also makes rileys shit a big problem in that his parents never reported him when he was born and had isolated him completely from the rest of the world. and the world is like wheres the space gods chosen this is sooo weird and every few years a faker turns up but gets disproven eventually. and his deal is kind of about familial abuse especially in a specific style of raising children in very isolated environments by homeschooling, controlling contact w others, and living rurally, (and denying his transition) and its about him escaping that finally and then coming into society and struggling to cope while also struggling w needing to compulsively hide himself from others for multiple reasons

[lena-kelley-oiar]

I think a lot about religion when it comes to my own life. My father was an atheist, my mother a Catholic. When my father passed away, she insisted I join the church.

I never believed in a literal God, though I found the concept fascinating. The idea of an all-powerful, omniscient higher power that will punish you if you disobey its holy word. After I left the church once more at the age of 23, just when I was starting my career at the OIAR, I soon realised I'd replaced that concept with the real thing. In this way, I had made God real. A God that monitored my every move. A God that punished me when I disobeyed. A God I worshipped out of fear. I was no longer a Catholic, but in a way, I was more religious than I had been back when I'd been studying to become a priest.

Another aspect of religion that fascinates me is the role of a man as compared to the role of a woman. The man, son of Adam, son of God, is a representation of humanity as a whole. Mankind. Whereas the woman is a mere extension of the man; Eve, Adam's rib, or a vessel for divinity; the Virgin Mary. The role of a woman is to be with a man, the role of a mother is to birth divinity into existence. Birth is an act of creation, and in this way, God is a mother, as well. The mother of all life.

My mother always treated me as her son. Her first and only child had to be a man, so she deluded herself into thinking I was something I wasn't, and made me play along. In the church, everyone seemed to accept me as a man with no further comment; I was an altar boy and a priest in training, I wore my father's old suits, I was the man of my household. The very image of the divine, holy, righteous masculine, in the body of a cisgender woman.

When I left the church, I didn't leave my cross necklace, nor my masculinity. These are things I held onto, things I gave a new meaning to. In this, I defied creation itself, I remade myself; the very image of ragged, contemptable, submissive masculinity. A man with no family, a man who worked on sundays instead of attending church, a man who turned to alcohol and lust to escape his worldly problems. A heretic and a sinner.

There is a pride in that, I suppose. In taking their holy masculinity, and twisting it to suit my own way of life. In knowing she's up there, shaking her head down at me in disappointment.

Look to me now, Holy Mother. Your firstborn son, with blood on his father's suit.

[haggishlyhagging]

A few years ago one Robert Byrn, a 40-year-old professor of criminal law at Fordham University, took it upon himself to represent all human fetuses between the fourth and twenty-fourth week of gestation scheduled to be aborted in New York City municipal hospitals. Byrn was himself represented by attorney Thomas Ford, who made the following statement: "The fetus might well be described as an astronaut in a uterine spaceship." As Ellen Frankfort aptly comments:

It takes a certain kind of imagination to assume guardianship for something lodged within another's body—a rather acquisitive proprietary imagination that fits right in with the conception of a woman as a spaceship and the contents of her womb as an astronaut.

The astonishing Byrn incident and the analogy made by his attorney merit some attention for the light they throw upon the deceptions of male myth. Since an astronaut is perceived as the captain of a "vessel," there is a desire to see the fetus as controlling the woman. Moreover, the image of the astronaut in a spaceship is interesting also because in this image the "captain" is very much controlled by other males outside the spaceship (for example, politicians, economists, scientists, flight surgeons, engineers). This makes the analogy particularly "appropriate" in its perverse way, for the fetus is maintained in control of the woman by males outside (for example, politicians, legislators, priests, doctors, social workers, counselors, husbands, "lovers"). Moreover, the analogy involves deceptively circular reasoning, making it doubly appropriate in this doublethink context. For here, a biological event—the presence of the fetus in the uterus—is imaged as "like," that is, imitative of, a technological event—the presence of an astronaut in a spaceship. This elicits an obvious question: Is the astronaut in the spaceship an attempt to imitate the situation of the fetus in the uterus? Elsewhere I have shown that there is (unacknowledged) evidence in ethical writings on abortion of a widespread male tendency to identify with fetuses. This merits further analysis.

There are clues about the source of this fetal identification syndrome (which is frequently fatal for women unable to obtain needed abortions) in Frankfort's description of Byrn as "a childless man who seeks to guard unwanted fetal tissue." Males do indeed deeply identify with "unwanted fetal tissue," for they sense as their own condition the role of controller, possessor, inhabitor of women. Draining female energy, they feel "fetal." Since this perpetual fetal state is fatal to the Self of the eternal mother (Hostess), males fear women's recognition of this real condition, which would render them infinitely "unwanted." For this attraction/need of males for female energy, seen for what it is, is necrophilia—not in the sense of love for actual corpses, but of love for those victimized into a state of living death.

Frankfort's description of Byrn as "childless" also merits scrutiny. For it is the condition of all males to be childless, and there is evidence that this condition is experienced as disturbing to those who are obsessed with reproduction of the male self (which should not be confused with any genuine desire to care for and energize another being). Indeed there are male authors who are very willing (perhaps too willing) to attest to the anxiety of males over their childless state. Philip Slater, for example, writes of "this vulnerability of the male in the sphere of worldly immortality which gives rise to the concept of the 'external soul,' so prominent in magic and mythology." According to his view, a woman need not guess whether something of herself continues on in a new organism, for she can see the child emerge from her own body:

Thus if one translates "soul" in these stories as "that part of me which will live on after I die," the woman initially holds her "soul" within herself. It is only the man whose "soul" always resides outside of himself.

Thus "as men have been lamenting for centuries, his immortality is out of his own control."

According to this view, then, males identify the "immortal" soul with biological offspring, and women should feel fortunate in their role as incubators, shells, hotels, youth hostels, homes, hatcheries for human souls. I have already suggested that it is dangerous for women to accept reductionist theories about the male propensity for "womb envy." Thus it should arouse suspicion that Karen Horney's "womb envy" theory (with which she countered Freud's proposition of "penis envy") has been eagerly adopted by some liberal males (for example, Philip Slater). The problem with such a theory is that the implied criticism stops short of being a genuine feminist analysis. Hags must learn to double-double unthink (Andrea Dworkin's phrase)—that is, to go past the obvious level of male-made reversals and find the underlying Lie. Thus it is a pitfall simply to reverse "penis envy" into "womb envy," for such theories trick women into fixating upon womb, female genitalia, and breasts as our ultimately most valuable endowments. Not only disparagement, but also glorification of women's procreative organs are expressions of male fixation and fetishism. These disproportionate attitudes are also demonically deceptive, inviting women to re-act with mere derivative fetishism, instead of deriding these fixations and focusing upon the real "object" of male envy, which is female creative energy in all of its dimensions. Male hatred of women expressed in such fetishized forms hides the deeper dimensions of envy, which remain unacknowledged. Thus we hear one male say of another's "project" or invention, "That's his baby." We also hear men describe the books, papers, articles of other men as "pregnant" with meaning. Such deceptive expressions provide clues to the deeper levels of deception. They suggest that the procreative power which is really envied does in fact belong primarily to the realm of mind/spirit/ creativity. Yet this envy is not necessarily a desire to be creative, but rather to draw—like fetuses— upon another's (the mother's) energy as a source. Thus men who identify as mothers (that is, supermothers controlling biological mothers) are really protecting their fetal selves. They wish to be the fetuses/ astronauts and the supermothers/ ground commanders, but not the biological vessels/ spaceships which they relegate to the role of controlled containers, and later discard as trash.

-Mary Daly, Gyn/Ecology

[hieromonkcharbel]

From a sermon by Saint Peter Damian, bishop

Invincibly defended by the banner of the Cross

Dear brothers, our joy in today’s feast is heightened by our joy in the glory of Easter, just as the splendour of a precious jewel enhances the beauty of its gold setting.

Saint George was a man who abandoned one army for another: he gave up the rank of tribune to enlist as a soldier for Christ. Eager to encounter the enemy, he first stripped away his worldly wealth by giving all he had to the poor. Then, free and unencumbered, bearing the shield of faith, he plunged into the thick of the battle, an ardent soldier for Christ.

Clearly what he did serves to teach us a valuable lesson: if we are afraid to strip ourselves of our worldly possessions, then we are unfit to make a strong defence of the faith.

As for Saint George, he was consumed with the fire of the Holy Spirit. Armed with the invincible standard of the cross, he did battle with an evil king and acquitted himself so well that, in vanquishing the king, he overcame the prince of all wicked spirits, and encouraged other soldiers of Christ to perform brave deeds in his cause.

Of course, the supreme invisible arbiter was there, who sometimes permits evil men to prevail so that his will may be accomplished. And although he surrendered the body of his martyr into the hands of murderers, yet he continued to take care of his soul, which was supported by the unshakeable defence of its faith.

Dear brothers, let us not only admire the courage of this fighter in heaven’s army but follow his example. Let us be inspired to strive for the reward of heavenly glory, keeping in mind his example, so that we will not be swayed from our path, though the world seduce us with its smiles or try to terrify us with naked threats of its trials and tribulations.

We must now cleanse ourselves, as Saint Paul tells us, from all defilement of body and spirit, so that one day we too may deserve to enter that temple of blessedness to which we now aspire.

Anyone who wishes to offer himself to God in the tent of Christ, which is the Church, must first bathe in the spring of holy baptism; then he must put on the various garments of the virtues. As it says in the Scriptures: Let your priests be clothed in justice. He who is reborn in baptism is a new man. He may no longer wear the things that signify mortality. He has discarded the old self and must put on the new. He must live continually renewed in his commitment to a holy sojourn in this world.

Truly we must be cleansed of the stains of our past sins and be resplendent in the virtue of our new way of life. Then we can be confident of celebrating Easter worthily and of truly following the example of the blessed martyrs.

[thepastisalreadywritten]

SAINT OF THE DAY (October 6)

On October 6, the Catholic Church commemorates Saint Bruno of Cologne, founder of the Carthusian order of monks who remain notable for their strictly traditional and austere rule of contemplative life.

Born in 1030, Bruno is said to have belonged to a prominent family in the city of Cologne.

Little is known of his early years, except that he studied theology in the present-day French city of Reims before returning to his native land, where he was most likely ordained a priest in approximately 1055.

Returning to Reims the following year, he soon became head of the school he had attended there, after its director Heriman left to enter consecrated religious life in 1057.

Bruno led and taught at the school for nearly two decades, acquiring an excellent reputation as a philosopher and theologian, until he was named chancellor of the local diocese in 1075.

Bruno's time as chancellor coincided with an uproar in Reims over the behavior of its new bishop Manasses de Gournai.

Suspended by the decision of a local council, the bishop appealed to Rome while attacking and robbing the houses of his opponents.

Bruno left the diocese during this period, though he was considered as a possible successor to Manasses after the bishop's final deposition in 1080.

The chancellor, however, was not interested in leading the Church of Reims.

Bruno and two of his friends had resolved to renounce their worldly goods and positions and enter religious life.

Inspired by a dream to seek guidance from the bishop later canonized as Saint Hugh of Grenoble, Bruno settled in the Chartreuse Mountains in 1084, joined by a small group of scholars looking to become monks.

In 1088, one of Bruno's former students was elected as Pope Urban II.

Six years into his life as an alpine monk, Bruno was called to leave his remote monastery to assist the Pope in his struggle against a rival papal claimant as well as the hostile Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV.

Bruno served as a close adviser to the Pope during a critical period of reform.

Around this time, he also rejected another chance to become a bishop, this time in the Italian region of Calabria.

While he obtained the Pope's permission to return to monastic life, Bruno was required to remain in Italy to help the Pope periodically, rather than returning to his monastery in France.

During the 1090s, Bruno befriended Count Roger of Sicily and Calabria, who granted land to his group of monks and enabled the founding of a major monastery in 1095.

The monks were known, then as now, for their strict practice of asceticism, poverty, and prayer; and for their unique organizational form, combining the solitary life of hermits with the collective life of more conventional monks.

St. Bruno died on 6 October 1101, after making a notable profession of faith which was preserved for posterity.

In this final testimony, he gave particular emphasis to the doctrine of Christ's Eucharistic presence, which had already begun to be questioned in parts of the Western Church.

“I believe,” he attested, “in the sacraments that the Church believes and holds in reverence, and especially that what has been consecrated on the altar is the true Flesh and the true Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which we receive for the forgiveness of our sins and in the hope of eternal salvation.”

Veneration of St. Bruno was given formal approval in 1514 and extended throughout the Latin Rite in 1623.

More recently, his Carthusian Order was the subject of the 2006 documentary film “Into Great Silence,” chronicling the life of monks in the Grand Chartreuse monastery.