Great Bull of 1811: Difference between revisions

m
(Finished page (I think))
 
Line 14: Line 14:
===Second Statement===
===Second Statement===
{{Quote|THAT peaceable assembly of the subjects of the Kingdom is permitted by an authority higher than Our own and shall not be abrogated except to defend against heresy;}}
{{Quote|THAT peaceable assembly of the subjects of the Kingdom is permitted by an authority higher than Our own and shall not be abrogated except to defend against heresy;}}
The Second Statement establishes the {{wp|right of assembly}} in [[Urcea]]. A relatively new concept, the Great Bull fully created legal protection for assembly under the law for the first time in Urcea. The statement includes an exception to protected assembly in the form of allowed prohibitions on assembly "to defend against heresy". Scholars are greatly dividied on this clause, with some believing that this phrase was intended to deal with {{wp|insurrection}} by Protestants rather than to abridge the ability of Protestants to gather and worship openly. The majority consensus of historians, however, believes the ability to break up an assembly "to defend against heresy" was explicitly intended to give the authorities the ability to break up these proceedings as needed. However, nearly all historians agree this phrase was not a mandate to do so, only an option for public authorities to protect public morality. Thus, the courts have upheld the ability of the authorities to dispel religious assemblies in Urcea; after around [[1830]], every case relating to this part of the Statement referred to groups recognized as {{wp|cults}}.
The Second Statement establishes the {{wp|right of assembly}} in [[Urcea]]. A relatively new concept, the Great Bull fully created legal protection for assembly under the law for the first time in Urcea. The statement includes an exception to protected assembly in the form of allowed prohibitions on assembly "to defend against heresy". Scholars are greatly divided on this clause, with some believing that this phrase was intended to deal with {{wp|insurrection}} by Protestants rather than to abridge the ability of Protestants to gather and worship openly. The majority consensus of historians, however, believes the ability to break up an assembly "to defend against heresy" was explicitly intended to give the authorities the ability to break up these proceedings as needed. However, nearly all historians agree this phrase was not a mandate to do so, only an option for public authorities to protect public morality. Thus, the courts have upheld the ability of the authorities to dispel religious assemblies in Urcea; after around [[1830]], every case relating to this part of the Statement referred to groups recognized as {{wp|cults}}.
 
===Third Statement===
===Third Statement===
{{Quote|THAT the subjects of the Apostolic Kingdom shall have no obligation to quarter the armies of [[Emperor of the Levantines|His Imperial Majesty]] and that We and Our descendants shall take every measure to prevent such occurrence, and that no soldier in Our service shall be quartered in the home of a subject of the Apostolic Kingdom except in times of domestic war;}}
{{Quote|THAT the subjects of the Apostolic Kingdom shall have no obligation to quarter the armies of [[Emperor of the Levantines|His Imperial Majesty]] and that We and Our descendants shall take every measure to prevent such occurrence, and that no soldier in Our service shall be quartered in the home of a subject of the Apostolic Kingdom except in times of domestic war;}}