Accept your mortal descent from the immortal Goð.
The rest is commentary.
In theology, sincere commentary on dogma is its "exegesis".
At any time (including the present), feel free to stop reading this mortal's commentary and let the dogma, itself, speak to you. That is this mortal's primary comment on the dogma.
I mean that sincerely.
You live and you are a mortal Goð.
A Goð 's expression is Creation.
Being a Goð means Acting to Create that which you find Good. This is the essential unity between that which is Goð and that which is Good.
Recognizing descent from the immortal Goð, reflect on your mortal limitations in appreciation of the Creation of which you are a part and in which you participate. This primary relationship of the Individual to Creation precedes society.
From this primary relationship proceeds all morality.
One more thing precedes society:
The parent-child relationship.
Children are creations of the mortal Goðs called "parents". It bears repeating that this relationship also precedes society.
Human Society is the relationship between mortal Goðs.
When the Creative expressions of mortal Goðs come into conflict, their primary relationship with the immortal Goð's Creative expression provides the only fair adjudication.
The Fair Church℠ exists to facilitate that adjudication through mortal Goðs voluntarily assorting into societies, called Ecclesia, conducive to their individual Creative expressions.
A church is a kind of society. The Fair Church℠ recognizes that the individual's descent from the immortal Goð precedes society. Likewise, The Fair Church℠ recognizes that the child's descent from parents also precedes society. These relationships therefore precede The Fair Church℠ itself.
Toward this end, The Fair Church℠'s motto, "May the best win!" means a fair contest between Ecclesia to resolve conflicts between mortal Goðs, respecting these primary relationships.
The Fair Church℠ subjects Fair Ecclesia, to only these constraints, so-as to protect the relationship between parents and their children, as well as the relationship between mortal Goðs and the immortal Goð:
1This constraint is derived from the book "Man's Relation to Government", section "The One Alternative To Bloody Revolution" by Melvin Gorham, ISBN 0-914752-16-2, Sovereign Press, 326 Harris Road, Rochester, WA 98579. An exemplar for this kind of ecclesiastical law is given below, under "Natural Ecclesia: Language For Ecclesiastical Natural Law".
2Excommunication is strictly relative to the excommunicating Fair Ecclesia. The Fair Church℠ does not excommunicate. The Fair Church℠ is, in this sense, ultimately inclusive. However, those excommunicated from all other Fair Ecclesia are restricted to Natural Ecclesia.
3This allots each adult with territory necessary for replacement reproduction, hence mitigates the biological imperative for war. It does not exclude semi-enclaves.
4The intent is similar to that set forth by The Half-Earth Project.
5This further expands the territory of Natural Ecclesia as more of humanity is subject to individual selection.
6This is the necessary and sufficient condition to implement the originally-limited intent of the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, as well as facilitate emigration. This naturally excludes pene-enclaves consistent with the intent of §3
7This is the obligation to serve in Holy War for Individual Integrity.
LANGUAGE FOR ECCLESIASTICAL NATURAL LAW1
Instead of using the words “adult” and “minor,” or “female” and “male,” or “authority” and “layman,” or any of the many other pairs now used to designate and confuse social roles, this Law uses only two words “sovereign” and “shielded.” A significant carry over from current word usage is that “sovereign” implies decision backed by force. Full definition is given to the word “sovereign” and “shielded” by pointing out their social function.
This Law recognizes that force is an element of every social structure. At the same time it recognizes that a quality of being that inspires protection is the essential balancing element to force.
The force that perpetuates the social organization set forth here is that of sovereign individuals.
Those who inspire and receive the protection of an individual sovereign are designated as “shielded.” The shielded have some protection by all sovereigns and some behavior is enforced on them by all sovereigns. When old enough, children of either sex who have been shielded, may choose forceful sovereignty. As an alternative, they may choose to continue non-participation in the use of force by not declaring their sovereignty.
This Law gives formal social approval to the use of force in certain circumstances by sovereign individuals. This Law severely limits the use of group force. The group can use only as much sovereignty as individuals — by this Law — have delegated to the group and no more.
Within this Law a vote is always a deliberated group decision to use group force within the severely limited area herein specified that group force can be used. Because a vote is a basis for the use of force, only sovereigns can vote on matters that are decided by vote.
A provision for formal combat between individual sovereigns is a group enforced protection against demagogues who seek to extend the areas for the use of group force. Because men of honor and integrity usually disdain the twisted use of mob-swaying words (the reason-mutilating weapon of demagogues) formal physical combat on Nature’s terms is every sovereign’s prerogative.
A shielded person cannot vote and cannot be challenged to formal combat.
Small children cannot effectively function as sovereigns, and some adults may not wish to do so. Such persons may be shielded by a sovereign individual.
The shielded are partially protected from action of other sovereigns by the one sovereign under whose shield they live. A shielded person becomes subject to the discipline of all sovereigns if the one sovereign’s shield is removed.
The following statements help define the terms “sovereign” and “shielded”:
A child is born protected by the shield of its mother if she is sovereign or by the shield of her sovereign if she is shielded. Anyone who has reached the age capable of procreation may become sovereign by formal declaration of one’s sovereignty — except for the special condition noted below regarding formal combat.
Except for the special condition noted below regarding formal combat, a sovereign acting alone may remove the shield from one protected by it. Removal is made by a formal declaration of the fact. The shielded person thereby becomes sovereign.
All who are protected by a sovereign’s shield become sovereign if their sovereign dies or disappears.
A sovereign who is shielding no one may cease to be sovereign and become shielded by another sovereign if formal declaration of the relationship is made by both sovereign and shielded.
A sovereign (unshielded) child who is too young to make a valid declaration of its wishes may become shielded by a sovereign who makes a formal declaration of the relationship.
THE SEVEN POINTS OF ECCLESIASTICAL NATURAL LAW
1The language for the Natural Ecclesia is derived from p90-93, “Valoric Fire And a Working Plan for Individual Sovereignty” From the Valorian Society ISBN 0-914752-18-9, except for the underlined additions set forth in §6.3 above. For technical exigesis, see introductory text in Sortocracy's "The State of Nature".
Fair and Natural
Fair Ecclesia may exclude anyone for any reason whatsoever but may not prevent them from leaving. Natural Ecclesia may not exclude anyone but may, within ecclesiastical natural law, restrain them from leaving and even kill them.
The diversity of Fair Ecclesia arising from conflict provides a wide range of options for those excluded from some Fair Ecclesia. These options narrow as a person is excluded from ever-more Fair Ecclesia. Ultimately, Natural Ecclesia may be the only option for some, but this would be after exclusion even by those Fair Ecclesia offering the equivalent of voluntary servitude in harsh environments where their labor is poorly compensated and life is endangered.
In this way The Fair Church℠ replaces the secular morality of "human rights" with a single, well defined, moral right to vote with your feet. This right to vote with your feet necessarily implies three material rights:
#1 is obvious since you can’t put your beliefs into practice without land. #2 is also obvious as people who cannot practically relocate cannot vote with their feet.
#3 should be obvious but, due to the moral zeitgeist, it is not. Incarceration rates, particularly in the US, show us that there are two, fundamentally opposed, kinds of borders: Those that keep people out and those that keep people in. Of the two, the kind that keeps people in is least compatible with the right to vote with your feet. Even the US’s 13th Amendment to the Constitution has provision for involuntary servitude: Slavery for those imprisoned. De facto, legalized, slavery is increasing. We see moral outrage perpetrated as the prison-industrial complex arising at the interface of government and capitalism exploits this gaping loophole in the 13th Amendment. The pseudo-secular moral zeitgeist’s dogma is “inclusion”. What is not admitted is this necessarily entails walls that keep people from leaving who are found to be “criminal” by the "inclusive society".
The moral zeitgeist has to reconcile its moral outrage at imprisonment with its moral outrage at "exclusion". The answer to this, consistent with The Fair Church℠ dogma, is the freedom to escape any Fair Ecclesia, combined with each Fair Ecclesia's freedom to exclude anyone for any reason whatsoever, with Natural Ecclesia as the, possibly fatal, inclusion of last resort.