The only true fons honorum for Cesidians

[Answer to a friend who inquired whether someone was truly royal]

The House of Habsburg-Lorraine is definitely royal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Habsburg-Lorraine

The Imperial and Royal House of Bradley-Fornbacher-Habsburg-Lorraine...

https://houseofstewartstuartobrolchain.org

...could very well be a branch of Habsburg-Lorraine, and at least superficially it seems that its fons honorum (Latin for "fountain of honours") was formally recognised by the "Supreme Court of Noble Justice of the International Noble Arbitral Tribunal of Bari" (Italy), with a judgement made back in May 1930.

However, as I was able to verify elsewhere on the internet, self-styled imperial or royal orders are legion, and some are imitations of extinct orders of knighthood, or even of existing ones, created by self-appointed "princes" or "grand masters".

What the leaders of these self-styled orders lack is the legal right to a fons honorum.

Some organisations have provided a false fons honorum to satisfy the need, and the one mentioned above may be one of them.

In these cases, the founder, patron, or even matron of the "order", has essentially assumed a false title of nobility, in addition to assuming some sort of sovereignty, whether current, or formerly exercised.

It is also important to understand that a monarch, whether currently reigning, or deposed, cannot create a law for other countries or entities outside of his/her territorial authority. A valid monarch is restricted to his or her own jurisdiction, and does not have authority outside of those boundaries.

Unless he or she is ectopolitan, or literally outside, even circumscribing all other political boundaries.

So even if the Imperial and Royal House of Bradley-Fornbacher-Habsburg-Lorraine is truly legitimate and verifiable, it still has no authority in the state of Pennsylvania, USA, or elsewhere.

Even Prince Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia (Prince of Venice), "Savoy" in French or English, in fact, or the grandson of King Umberto II of Italy, or the last king of Italy, may have some influence in Italy and elsewhere, and may even enjoy a great deal of respect simply because of his family's pretty obvious royal history, but he has no political power within current Italy, which is no longer a monarchy, but a republic.

Moreover, there are those of the genuine Savoy royal branches (cousins) who would even dispute whether Emanuele Filiberto's eldest (Princess Vittoria) and youngest (Princess Luisa) daughters have any right of "royal succession", since in the former Kingdom of Italy [Regno d'Italia] (1861 – 1946), which no longer even exists, only male descendants enjoyed any "royal succession" privileges.

However, it is also true that Emanuele Filiberto's father — Prince Vittorio Emanuele, Prince of Naples — can, and has changed that, being the authority of that specific fons honorum, which is recognised by other monarchs in Europe and elsewhere, and by the Almanach de Gotha's two volumes — a directory of Europe's royalty and higher nobility (Volume I), but also of non-sovereign princely and ducal houses of Europe (Volume II).

And things get more complicated than that.

Non-existent, abandoned, or deposed royal houses, or once famous ancient orders of chivalry, cannot be restored to the full dignity and power of a de jure (Iegal) sovereignty, and therefore cannot legitimately create knighthoods, etc.

The houses and orders that are extinct, no longer have any sovereignty. They no longer exist, because all their rights have been extinguished forever by international law. They simply cannot be re-established, restored, or renewed. Those rights are lost for all eternity.

That is the law, even international law. You simply can't restore something you do not own, and have no legal or lawful right to. The once great power to do so is simply null and void, after these powers are forfeited by the law of nations, and the law of nature.

Following the War of the Spanish Succession, the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht brought a new rule within public international law.

Specifically, a prince or princess who enjoyed rights of royal succession in his or her home country, had to renounce these rights when marrying into a foreign royal family.

The purpose of this international law was to prevent the union of crowns through dynastic marriages.

History is full of cases of royal marital unions that eventually led to war and strife over dynastic rights.

So customary public international law requires the renunciation of succession rights whenever a prince or princess marries into another sovereign house, but this rule can even be somewhat extended, when the (non-sovereign) royal simply marries a foreigner, and possibly at least remotely representing some ancient foreign kingdom of the past, as Prince Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia has done by marrying the French actress, now Princess, Clotilde Courau (Princess of Venice). The Kingdom of France [Royaume de France] (last incarnation: 1815 – 1848), has also existed in the past, even though today France is also a republic.

Also, no micronation, having never been accepted as a subject of international law, or even recognised in some less important fashion, has any real, genuine, or authentic right to bestow titles of nobility, or to bestow knighthoods.

Moreover, a religious organisation cannot "rehabilitate" a secular title. Indeed, a secular organisation, even a royal house cannot "restore" a title over which it had no original control. So one must also be very wary of any religious organisation claiming to be a "church", and which claims authority to grant titles of royalty or nobility.

The same rules apply to private titles and decorations, knighthoods, and condecorations received in a club, fraternity, or other organisation.

And the same rules apply to traditional leaders of indigenous people, or a group of indigenous peoples. These are generally not authorised to exercise any real governmental powers, and traditional leaders are not really subject to international law, which is decidedly anti-tribal since at least the times of Cleisthenes, the father of fake democracy ever since.

According to the Roman Catholic church, and its historical branches within Italy and other countries, even the born again Yeshua HaNotzri [יֵשׁוּעַ הַנָּצְרִי], or Jesus the Nazorean (October 5 BCE – April 30 CE) — there is no scientific evidence that the person who was known as Yeshua HaNotzri in Hebrew is still alive, and 2,025 years old — has conferred on Simon Peter (circa 4 BCE – 29.06.67 CE) chief authority as head of the twelve male apostles, and thus Jesus currently has no religious authority and leadership to speak of, that has been handed down to Him by any, and all of Peter's successors.

If you believe that, you are still a Christian (circa 08.04.30 – 03.02.2021), whether you realise, or not, the full extent of the underlying Christian ideology since at least the First Council of Nicaea, which produced the Nicene church (20.05.325 – 05.05.553), but you are not a Cesidian, who have other beliefs.

Cesidians (03.02.2021 – Ω) believe that the spiritual fons honorum (fountain of honours) did not cease to exist with the death, and/or fake Imperial Roman "resurrection" of the physical Yeshua, and actually even that incarnation in ancient Israel appears to be only a part of a much longer pre-existing spiritual, not physical lineage, the Lineage of the Blessed Hermes (LBH), the Blessed Hermes being another name for Enoch ben Jared (3502 BCE – 3137 BCE):

http://5wcwiki.pbworks.com/w/page/147376713/LBH

So not only Yeshua HaNotzri never really granted all the authority that the Roman Catholic church assumes He has granted to (the born again) Simon Peter, also known as Simon bar Jonah (circa 4 BCE – 29.06.67 CE), but Yeshua HaNotzri may have also been born again, otherwise He could never fulfil any true, non-contradictory prophecy in the Bible and also be 2,025 years old, Aramaic- and Koine Greek-speaking, and currently living off the surface of planet Earth.

The verses of 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4 in the Bible, and others, clearly mention the mass betrayal by Christians, yes, by Christians in the end times of a born again Jesus the Nazorean, because you simply cannot betray someone who is living off the surface of planet Earth.

You see, you would have no fons ignominiae (fountain of disgrace), no jurisdiction whatsoever to exercise such a reproachable thing, if the recipient of the private, or public shame, disgrace, or embarrassment is living, or residing off the surface of planet Earth.

This is Cesidian law, not public international law.

So there is a true fons honorum, but it is societal and spiritual, not political or physical, and it is the fons fontium (fountain of fountains) represented by the "water bearer", or the astrological sign of Aquarius — Bucksfanian astrology sign symbol: δ.

Under this fons honorum, Saint Stephan (circa 5 – 34 CE), and Saint James the Great (circa 1 – 43 CE), are real and living saints, not Christian and dead ones. These saints are as alive as the Homomessianic saint is, but not because the eternal priest, bishop, pope, and saint was "resurrected" by Constantine I, who wanted to resurrect something else, not Jesus the Nazorean, at the time.

MT Kaisiris Tallini