Arcadia Discussion Zone

I have a very good friend named "Carmain", a motorcycle mechanic, and a good motocross racer, but I don't think I ever heard him say he was a prince or anything.

Mr. Butz, let me thank you for publicly acknowledging the fact that I have never tried to deceive anyone regarding the name I was born with - the name that appears on my birth certificate, Social Security card, California Driver's License, bank accounts, credit cards, and federal and state tax returns. I've been quite forthcoming in the past regarding the fact that, had it not been for Coppens' and Douzet's hatchet job on my integrity nine years ago, I never would have thought of taking the necessary steps to register the historic Périllos blason in my name with the Cronista de Armas of Spain, the accredited agent of the Spanish Ministry of Justice in the country where the arms were first granted. A process which, I might point out, requires the applicant to furnish solid genealogical particulars documenting one's descent from the original grantee. Now, while you may be unclear on the methods used to illustrate ancestral claims, your ignorance of the mechanics of same has no bearing on outcomes. Competent and qualified genealogical and heraldic authorities can and do accept previously verified and published compilations, requiring the applicant to provide only the documentation necessary to prove descent from their last documented ancestor in that lineage. Given that state-issued birth certificates are a fairly recent innovation, a myriad of documentary records are accepted as valid, including baptismal records, marriage records, wills, census records, land titles - even published genealogical and heraldic compendiums from competent and qualified sources. That may not sit well with you, but professional genealogists have no qualms about using any and all resources available to compile evidence of lineage stretching back beyond the existence of state-issued birth certificates. And qualified civil authorities whose job it is to verify and certify the results are in no way beholden to your deficient understanding of that process.

As to the matter of my moral character, you, as a clergyman, are free to cast as many aspersions as your scapegoating, condemning belief system allows - and sleep soundly knowing your heavenly reward is secure.

TCP

Well, probably because he's not, Dr. Einstein! Nor am I. I have an honorific title, not contingent at all on heredity as none of my ancestors ever held it. It was created for me and will likely die with me.

TCP

Surely not ALL pigs?

VAM

Pigs can't sing, Roger, they can only grunt. Or, in some cases, parrot the grunts of other pigs.

TCP

I read that

Pope Clement called "true evidence", meaning evidence extorted by torture. The pope wrote to King Edward II demanding that the Templars be arrested and tortured. Otherwise, Edward and his court would be excommunicated as impeders of the Inquisition. As a bribe, Edward was offered a Plenary Indulgence for all his past sins. Finally he permitted papal judges to torture the Templars, changing the English Law "out of reverence for the Holy See". The indispensable utility of torture was thus established, and "the success of the extermination of the Templars set the patterns for the subsequent persecution of witches


this was pawn Clement was giving Plenary Indulgence to Edward and demanding Torture

the Inquisition only brought "true evidence" through torture

through charges of Heresy one could take over the land

In the initiation of the Templar wasn't a white robe with a red cross placed over him at the end of the ceremony? I read that somewhere too.

Well, Tim, I think that about wraps things up as to your credibility. And again your own words do you in. You admit this is an honorific title created for you. In other words, a Mickey Mouse title.

And more damning, you say it is "not contingent at all on heredity".

Yet, earlier you said that you had to go through, "A process which, I might point out, requires the applicant to furnish solid genealogical particulars documenting one's descent from the original grantee."

So which is it?? If it is a one-off title not granted through hereditary criteria, then there was absolutely no need to verify your claims at all in the first place!

And, even nore damning, you say, "none of my ancestors ever held it" .

If none of your ancestors ever held this title, then how could there be an "original grantee" that you had to document descent from?!?!

There can be no further doubt that you are yarn-spinning, and yarn-spinning badly.

The ARMS REGISTRATION (i.e. the "HERALDRY") is contingent on heredity. One must prove descent from the original grantee (by means of genealogical documents) in order to receive certification for the ARMS, which I have accomplished. Do you not understand what the difference is between a COAT OF ARMS and a TITLE? I have been discussing the process of securing the former, not the latter. Do I need to post definitions for you?



The "original grantee" for the family COAT OF ARMS, Jeff. I am the original grantee for the TITLE. Is this becoming any clearer to you?

The TITLE of "Marqués de Périllos" has never been held by anyone before me, my ancestors were styled "Vizconde de Périllos" and I did not inherit that title. An ancestor of the current holder bought it out of abeyance from the Spanish government in 1907, the last Périllos descendant who held it having died in the 1850s without heirs; thus there was no possibility for me to claim it by inheritance 97 years after the fact. The current head of the Portuguese royal house, HRH Dom Duarte, Duque de Bragança, very kindly assisted me by according me the honorific title of "Marqués" by concession in 2004 along with the rank of Fidalgo Cavaleiro da Casa Real Portuguesa and Cavaleiro Grã Cruz da Ordem de São Miguel da Ala. On the recommendation of Dr. Pier Felice degli Uberti, Chairman of the International Commission for Orders of Chivalry (ICOC) and a very dear friend of mine, the Spanish Cronista, the Marqués de La Floresta, very kindly included my title on my admission certification (dated 4 March 2007) to the Noble Compañía de Ballesteros Hijosdalgo de San Felipe y Santiago, a Spanish nobiliary corporation which the Marqués serves as Alcaide-Presidente - which affords me the rank of Hidalgo in Spain (which, too, is honorific, as I am not a Spanish citizen). All of which I've been completely forthcoming about, right here on this very forum in fact; and I've posted scans of both the Portuguese and Spanish concessions here as well. I'm certain you wouldn't know what to do with them even if you find them, but happy hunting.

My credibility is in no way effected by your inability to distinguish between a coat-of-arms registration and an honorific title concession, or your unfamiliarity with the procedural steps for obtaining either, or for what purpose an heraldic authority exists. Not that I would expect you to be up on such things, but the wise man educates himself before casting aspersions on others without knowing or understanding what the hell he's talking about. Very bad form for a clergyman; worse for one who would have people believe him to be a scholar.

TCP

Even his own friend admits he is nothing but a con-man just out to piss people off.

The guy is frickin' James Bond! It's good to know he's out there infiltrating and battling all these nefarious Catholic pseudo-orders, making the world a safer place for us all.

You re4ally didn't need to prove to us your reading comprehension is nothing?

Well, even worse is that they cannot make sense of it, even if you do take the time to try to explain it to them in detail. I think TV reality shows are easier for the average American to follow. The Real Housewives of New York has a divorced American countess in the cast, I'm sure if one did a survey of American viewers, 99.9% of them would call her "royalty"...



Oh, now go easy on Jim. He just dives in willy-nilly whenever an opportunity arises to bash me, we shouldn't expect him to familiarize himself with backstory when it's my "lifestyle" that irritates him. In fact, I'm not sure what else Jim actually does here on Arcadia. The only time I ever hear from him is when I cross swords with someone else, and like clockwork, he jumps in to lob stinkbombs at me. Otherwise I never hear a peep out of him. Does that qualify as stalking, I wonder?

TCP

Sadly, you are correct. Exhibit A:

http://www.facebook.com/marques.deperillos

I see you're avoiding the actual "issues" you saw fit to raise after I've thrown some light on your comprehension deficits.

TCP

OMG! TCP has a FACEBOOK PAGE...?

TCP

It's only because everytime I check in, I find the dynamic duo is still here trying their best to smell up the forum with their "never wrong reality" to the point where it's almost impossible to enjoy the diverse and varying opinions others have to share. Other then for your insistance that your take on everything is right and everybody elses is wrong, I could care less about your lifestyle and insistent need to disguise yourself and infiltrate these forums.

Tim, give it up. You admit to joining these Catholic orders under false-pretenses and by unethical means. In other words, lying. Then you expect us to accept that your title is legitimate, going only on your word? Your word obviously means nothing.

Please spare me any further lectures on ethics.

Well, you know Jim, I believe there is an "ignore" feature on this forum that you might consider availing yourself of, that way you won't be bothered. Since your contributions to this forum aside from slurs directed at me are few and far between, you probably won't even be noticed!

TCP

That's hilarious, thanks Roger.

You should take your own advice, your Highness.

Of course it's not Roger, because you know ALL the facts. Why should there even be a forum, Roger could just write a book of everything he knows and nobody would ever have to question anything ever again.

I've admitted to no such thing, Mr. Butz; in fact, given the wealth of detail about my personal life over the past decade readily accessible with just a few keystrokes (as you are finding out yourself, apparently), it would be nigh well impossible for me to misrepresent myself without being called out for it. Which is why I make it a matter of policy to be as candid and consistent as I can be whenever people like you (and there have been many) believe they've "exposed" me. Perhaps your own assumptions about "qualifiers" and "disqualifiers" aren't quite accurate. Perhaps you're simply throwing anything and everything you can "dig up" at me without regard to how it all fits together.

And I don't expect anyone to simply take my word for anything, which is why I posted scans of the relevant documentation from Portugal and Spain here on Arcadia the last time "someone" saw fit to play cat-and-mouse with me. Not my problem if you can't or won't acknowledge that, just so long as others who might be reading this thread can see your bias.

So now that you've crossed the line from dismissive comments to libelous accusations (i.e. "false-pretenses", "lying") kindly furnish us with evidence you've collected detailing my perfidy.

TCP

Oh no, I prefer knowing what's being said about me in public!

TCP

Apparently "diverse and varying opinions" constitute only 90° of the 180° of the Arc, while the other 90° is all that shitty factual stuff that stinks up their perfumed garden and upsets the unicorns.

TCP

We're all glad you know many facts Roger, and that you've certified that the things you know are indeed facts and not just your opinion or the opinion of somebody else whom you happen to agree with.