THE PAPAL BULLs
Declared on November 18, 1302
- The unity and uniqueness of the Church is affirmed, without which there is no salvation; the Church is a mystical body with only one head, Jesus Christ.
- The doctrine of the two swords is affirmed: the spiritual one is used by the Church itself, the temporal one is given to the kingdom.
- The temporal power is subservient to the spiritual, so that the temporal power is judged by the spiritual; likewise, in the Church, the inferior spiritual power is judged by the superior spiritual power (the bishops are judged by the Pope); the pope un nemine iudicatur, that is, he cannot be judged by anyone: only by God.
- It is necessary, for the purposes of salvation, that every creature be subject to the Pope.
Boniface VIII with this bull underlines the uniqueness of the Church through a particular allegory.
“At the time of the flood, in fact, there was only one Noah’s ark, which represented the one Church; it had been built with only one arm, it had only one helmsman and one commander, namely Noah, and we read that out of him everything on earth was destroyed.”
Declared on January 8, 1454.
- By this document the pope recognized the kingdom of Portugal (specifically King Alfonso V, his successors and the infant Enrique):the exclusive ownership of all conquered islands, lands, ports and seas in the regions extending “from the Capes of Boujdour and Nam through the whole of Guinea and beyond to the southern shore”.
- the right to continue their conquests against Muslims and pagans the right to trade with the inhabitants of those territories, conquered and to be conquered, except for the products traditionally forbidden to infidels: iron tools, wood for construction, ropes, ships and armor.
Papal Bull of Niccolò V
The bull Aeterni regis
It was granted by Pope Sixtus IV on June 21, 1481.
it confirms the substance of the Treaty of Alcáçovas that affirms the Castilian possession of the Canary Islands and grants to the kingdom of Portugal all the lands conquered by the Portuguese, and this up to India, with the condition of evangelizing them.
This bull confirms the legal basis for Christopher Columbus’s authority as the Spanish representative in the Americas and is one of a series of bulls promulgated after Romanus pontifex (1455).
This bull confirmed the validity of the following three documents:
Bull Romanus Pontifex of 1455 Nicolas V
Inter caetera Bull of 1456 Callisto III
Article 8 of the Treaty of Alcáçovas (1479), which established the distribution of the Atlantic territories between the kingdoms of Portugal and Castile after the War of Castilian Succession. The original manuscript of the promulgated bull is in the National Archives of Lisbon. Portugal needed the security of Castile in its fulfillment, and for this, the ratification of the agreement by the pope was essential. It seems obvious to us to presume that the request came from Portugal, since the bull Aeternis regis of Pope Sixtus IV of 1481 literally translates the Castilian commitment to respect Portuguese rights in what said agreement stipulated. The fact that the pontiff expresses that he confirms the bilateral agreement on his own initiative (motu proprio), the same
beyond the diplomatic rhetorical formalism
presupposes having been requested […] Later, the intervention of Pope Alexander VI in the problem of the Indies was not spontaneous but provoked by the Catholic Monarchs. It is the legal basis for Christopher Columbus to act as the bireignal agent of the Spanish crown in America, because it was the papacy that granted permission for the “discovery” of America, that is to say
the Venetian nobility. This papal bull created the crown of Aragon, later to be known as the crown of Spain (the passage from Beres to Paios). That he lost it in 1604, when Pope Paul V granted it to James I of England, due to the rupture that occurred between the
Paolo Sarpi’s “Giovanni” and the “Vecchi” allies of the papal bloodlines and Venetian black nobility.
This bull makes that a child when he is born, counts his birth certificate, as a bond or value to the private central bank of the nation. Taking ownership of the flesh from him, and condemning him to perpetual servitude as a ROMAN PERSON or slave. In fact, Sixtus IV considers what was stated by Boniface VIII so that human beings are considered lost at sea, since they could never claim rights or property, since they would never know.
CESTUI QUE VIE ACT 1666
Cestui que vie as a legal concept dates back to medieval times, specifically from England. During this time, owners of farms and other property could be absent for extended periods while traveling, either for business or religious reasons. It became important to ensure that family members, business associates, or tenants could use the property without fear of expropriation by feudal lords. While the individual was away, a trust took care of the land but did not retain legal ownership of the property. The trust was often based on a good faith agreement between the parties.
In practice, it was often a way of avoiding paying taxes by giving land and property to the Church, which was exempt from taxes, while allowing descendants to reside and enjoy the property. Henry VIII, under his advisers Thomas Cromwell and Thomas More, attempted to invalidate the cestui que vie trust, a process that continued under the English Reformation.
Cestui que vie is French for “he who lives”. It is a legal term for an individual who is the beneficiary of a trust or an insurance policy, with rights to the property, income and profits provided by the property. A cestui trust which is the person entitled to an equitable, rather than legal, trust in the assets of the estate.
The concept is also used in modern life and health insurance policies, where cestui que vie is an individual whose life measures the duration of the insurance contract. In these contracts, the cestui que vie is known as the policyholder, insured or holder of the policy. Thus, while the term refers to the beneficiary of a trust or estate, it often refers to the insured and not the beneficiary of an insurance policy.
The Cestui Que Vie Trust is a fictitious concept. It is a Temporary Testamentary Trust (or Bond), first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, in which a State could be affected for the Benefit of a Person presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed to be “dead” after seven years.
Additional presumptions by which a Trust could be formed were added in later statutes to include: bankruptcies, secondary, disabled, mortgages and private companies.
The original purpose of a Cestui Que Vie Trust was to form a temporary Estate for the benefit of another due to some event, state of affairs, or condition that prevented them from claiming their status as alive, competent, and present, before a competent authority.
Accordingly, any claim, history, statutes or arguments that deviate in terms of the origin and function of a Cestui Que Vie Trust, as pronounced by those canons, is false and automatically null and void.
A beneficiary under the Estate could be either a Beneficiary or a Cestui Que Vie Trust. When a Beneficiary loses the direct benefit of any higher State Property held in a Cestui Que Vie Trust in his name, he does not “own” the Cestui Que Vie Trust, but rather he is solely the beneficiary of what those Trustees of the Cestui Que Vie Trust Which Fri choose to stipulate.
As all Cestui Que Vie Trusts are created on a presumption, based on original purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if it can be proven that those presumptions do not exist.
The Executors or Administrators of the superior State voluntarily and deliberately:
1. They transfer the beneficial titles of the child, as Beneficiary, within the First Trust Cestui Que Vie, in the form of a Registration Number when registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person (Juridical Personality) and denying the child any right to real property.
2. They claim the baby as property (personal property) for the State.
The slave baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either putting a foot print on the live birth record or a drop of its blood, as well as tricking the parents into signing by delivering the baby through misleading legal meanings on live birth registration, which is a promissory note converted into a SLAVE BOND, sold to the state’s private banking reserve and then transferred to a second and separate Trust Cestui Que Vie, per child, owned by The bench.
When the promissory notes reach maturity and the bank is unable to “garnish” the child slave, a maritime lien is legally issued to “rescue” the lost property and is monetized as money issued serially against the Cestui Que Vie Trust.
3. They claim the child’s soul through the Baptismal Certificate.
Since 1540 and the creation of the first Cestui Que Vie Trust Act, deriving its power from the Papal Bull of the Roman Cult leader, Pope Paul III, when a child is baptized and a Certificate of Baptism is issued, the parents have gifted, bestowed and transferred the baby’s soul to a “THIRD” Cestui Que Vie Trust owned by the Roman Cult, which has kept its valuable property in its vaults ever since.
It represents one of the three Crowns, representing the three ownership claims of the Roman Cult:
1. The Real Property (possessions on the Land of the slave)
2. Personal Property (the body of the slave)
3. Ecclesiastical Property (the soul of the slave)
Each corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to BAR Courts:
1. Business enterprise law (where the judge is the “landowner”)
2. The canon of maritime law (where the judge is the banker) and
3. Talmudic law (where the judge is the priest).
FROM THE CESTUI QUE VIE ACT TO THE LEGAL FICTION
Given what has been revealed on the basis of Roman Law, what is the true hidden power of a judge when we face a tribunal? Is your superior knowledge of process and procedure or magic? Or is it something simpler and far more obvious?
It is unfortunately so much hype about Estates and Executors that they have deliberately not revealed that an Estate, by definition, has to belong to a Trust, to be specific, a Probate Trust or Cestui Que Vie Trust.
When we receive a legal document or have to appear in court, it is these same Cestui Que Vie Trust that have our rights converted to the property contained within them.
Instead of being the Trust or the Executor or the Administrator, we are merely the Beneficiary of each Cestui Que Vie Trust, granted only the beneficial and equal use of certain property, never the legal title.
So if the Roman Legal System assumes that we are merely the beneficiary of the Cestui Que Vie Trust, when we go to court who represents the Trust and Executor’s Office?
We all know that all cases are based on the judge’s discretion which often defies procedures, statutes and maxims of the law.
The judge is the unreal and legal Name. The judge is the Trust itself. We are a mirror image for them, a ghost, a dead person.
Under King Henry VIII and his Venetian/Magyar (Hungarian) advisers, the first Poor Laws were enacted around 1535 coinciding with the first official mandate requiring uniform record keeping by every Church of England parish of births, deaths and marriages. .
The poor were considered the responsibility of the "Church" including making sure they had abundant work and that they did not starve, while being considered by default the property of the church.
Under Queen Elizabeth I of England, a set of measures were introduced that had the effect of accelerating the alienation of land from peasants to landless beggars.
Under the Erection of the Barracks Act of 1588, peasants required permission from the parish to erect dwellings wherever such construction was, by a peasant land on his master's land, the land was considered a "right". As a result, the hierarchies of the landless poor or “beggars” increased.
Under Queen Elizabeth I of England, the laws concerning the administration and care of the "poor" were refined through the Poor Law (1601) which introduced a basic set of "rights" for the poor as well as the introduction of two “Supervisors of the Poor” (Guardian) in each Parish, elected at Holy Week and financed through the first lien (tax) through local rates (now called “municipal taxes”) on property in possession of payers' fees.
Under Charles II of England, the concept of "liquidations" as Church of England controlled poor labor plantations was further refined through the Liquidations Act (1662) and the Poor Relief Act (1662), including for the first time the issuance of “Settlement Certificates” equivalent to a “birth certificate, passport and social security” listed in the document.
A child's place of birth was her settlement place, unless her mother had a settlement certificate from some other parish stating that the unborn child was included in the certificate.
However, from the age of 7 onwards the child could have been an apprentice and earned a settlement for himself through a so-called apprenticeship contract deed or 'voluntary slavery'. Also, the child could have obtained a settlement for himself through service around the age of 16.
Under the “reforms” of the Liquidation Act (1662) and the Poor Relief Act (1662), no one was allowed to move from city to city without the proper “Certificate of Liquidation”.
If a person entered a parish where he or she had no official liquidation and it seemed likely that the new parish would be charged, then an inspection would be made by the judges (or parish supervisors).
From this inspection under oath, the judges would determine if that person had the means to support himself. The results of the inspection were documented in an Inspection Document.
As a result of the inspection the trespasser would either be allowed to stay or be removed by means of what became known as an Order of Removal, the origin of the modern equivalent of a “Notice of Eviction and Removal” when a sheriff removes people from their home.
According to the various settlement acts from the 17th century onwards until the introduction of Birth Certificates, the issuance of a Certificate of Settlement was considered a privilege, not a right.
If a peasant wished to move, the parish from which he lived would choose to issue a Certificate of Settlement which then effectively became indemnity insurance for the new parish, if the beggar was unable to earn a living.
A settlement certificate was only valid if it was pierced with the seals of the supervisors of both parishes and that of the local judges, and was not transferable. This is the same model of modern passports used today for citizens listed as “P” (Pawns or Poor or Destitute).
Due to the increase in the number of “poor”, in 1723 a new law was passed called the Poor Asylum Trial Act (1723) in which those who wished to claim benefits and relief as poor now had to enter an “asylum”. for the poor”, being essentially a prison for men, women and children to perform some established work.
To ensure that all the poor were considered and could be identified, new laws were also introduced to force the Poor to wear a letter “P” on their right shoulder as a mark of their status.
This is the origin of both the “P” still placed as a mark on modern passports and other “official” documents, and the “P” worn by 20th century prisoners.
Beginning in 1773 with the Enclosure Act of 1773, followed by the Enclosure Consolidation Act of 1801, the English Parliament effectively “privatized” massive amounts of common land for the benefit of a few, causing huge numbers of landed peasants to arrive. to be “landless poor” and therefore in need of assistance from the parish. The Fencing Acts are the basis of the Land Title as it is known today.
Due to the deliberate “legal” theft of land under Parliamentary Enclosure laws of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the number of poor people increased dramatically.
This led to the introduction of the most horrible and cruel laws to deliver to an elite few, the slave labor necessary for the industrial revolution through the Poor Law Amendment Act (1834), which effectively established that the The poor could not receive any benefits unless they were constantly “employed” in a poorhouse-prison.
Therefore, despite the international treaties against slavery, a worse slavery was born being a “paid slavery” or “legal slavery” through which men, women and children lived in terrible conditions and were worked “until death” .
Beginning in 1834, a number of historical changes were introduced in the registration of births, deaths, and marriages, the issuance of documents, and the administration of the “poor”:
1) In 1834 the British Parliament introduced the Poor Law Amendment Act (1834), which reorganized Church of England parishes into unions that would be responsible for the poor in their area and administered by a Board of Guardians of the Poor Law, also known as the Board of Guardians. Clerks of the Magistrates’ Courts still held the power of a Clerk of the Board of Guardians; Y
2) In 1835, the Municipal Corporations Act (1835) was introduced, which effectively standardized the corporate model for towns and municipalities, including making the municipality responsible to elected officials for data collection and administration service.
3) In 1836 the Births and Deaths Registration Act was introduced, which for the first time created the General Registration Office and the requirement of uniform registration of births, deaths and marriages throughout the Empire, by Municipal Councils and Unions of parishes. Thus, on July 1, 1837, the Birth Certificate was formed as the successor to the Settlement Certificate for all the “poor” dispossessed of their land by birthright, for being considered “voluntary” legal slaves. with benefits provided by the parish/region, funded by the Society of Lloyds (financial services group provider of banking and financial services in the UK and overseas) as it is to this day.
Beginning in 1871, historic changes in the administration of “vital statistics” such as birth certificates and death certificates were encouraged with the introduction of health districts or “sanitary districts.”
The Local Government Act of 1871, the Public Health Act of 1872 and the Public Health Act of 1875, created a system of “districts” -called “Sanitary Districts”- governed by a Sanitary Authority responsible for various matters of public health , including mental health, legally known as “sanity”. Two types of Sanitary Districts were created, these being Urban and Rural.
While the health districts were “abolished” in 1894 with the Local Government Act of 1894, the administration of the “poor” is still maintained in part under the concept of boards of health district Guardians, including magistrates and other “Judges of Health”. Peace”.
Since 1990, under the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO) Convention on the Rights of the Child, the system of issuing birth certificates as proof of a man or woman being a permanent member of the marginal class, has become an international system.
Ordinary / regular passports
An ordinary or regular passport is issued to citizens for occasional travel, such as vacations and business trips. An ordinary passport is issued by any country, territory or organization and is used by the passport holder to cross an international border. It is classified as a type “P” passport and the “P” stands for “personal”.
A diplomatic passport is issued only to people who work as representatives of a government. Ambassadors, for example, may hold diplomatic passports as proof that they are actually government officials they represent. The appearance of the diplomatic passport is usually the same as that of an ordinary passport. It is classified as a “type D” passport with “D” for “diplomat”. A person with a diplomatic passport has different requirements to cross borders. Diplomatic passport holders can benefit from immunity and preferential tax exemptions in some cases.
If you work at a consulate or embassy, you most likely have a diplomatic passport. A diplomatic passport can be issued to citizens who are senior government officials, diplomats, and representatives and delegates of a government.
An official passport is issued to a person traveling abroad on official public business. These may include all local administrative officials and military officers traveling in an official capacity. It usually has a different color than a normal passport. In the United States, for example, official passports are red, while diplomatic passports are black. In many cases, people traveling on government business use ordinary passports. Please note that the holder of an official passport is not necessarily a citizen of that country. An official passport generally gives the holder greater recognition, but no other special immunity. It is classified as a type ‘S’ passport with the ‘S’ for ‘security’.
SUMMARY OF THE CESTUI QUE VIE ACT
- It is established that people are babies, incompetent and unable to manage their own lives so they are basically lost. In the law they define more specifically that people are lost beyond the sea.
- In this way, the human being with legal personality is incorporated into Civil Law and in turn within the Admiralty Law. The interesting thing is that people are not clearly informed about this legislation.
- It is established that the State will ‘temporarily’ take over the land rented by these people as a Trust until news of them is heard (they declare that they are mature, capable of not being lost at sea).
- If after 7 years the person does not prove to be alive, the lands automatically return to the state.
- In short, the estate (of London) has taken custody of all and the property in a Trust. The state has become the administrator administering all titles to people and things, until a “living” man returns to claim those titles. (UCC 1 reporting methodology – Admiralty Law)