Religious power rankings

[Norrel]

'True faith' was for the peasantry. Nobles were too savvy and too cynical to care that much, and if they were true believers they generally weren't very good rulers. Being a successful monarch required more than a little ruthlessness and pragmatism.

Bull!@#$. King Alfred the Great, much? The nobility and the peasantry were similarly pious. Saying that the vast majority of European nobility were even in the slightest bit intellectual is a bit of a longshot, much less a bunch of cynics and free-thinkers. Especially when you consider the fact that "scholarly" men were most often those the most involved with the church.

Edit: since we're modelling all of EU nobility here, not just royalty, how about the knights hospitaller or other such holy order that was largely composed of the highborn?

[Geronus]

Bull!@#$. King Alfred the Great, much? The nobility and the peasantry were similarly pious. Saying that the vast majority of European nobility were even in the slightest bit intellectual is a bit of a longshot, much less a bunch of cynics and free-thinkers. Especially when you consider the fact that "scholarly" men were most often those the most involved with the church.

Edit: since we're modelling all of EU nobility here, not just royalty, how about the knights hospitaller or other such holy order that was largely composed of the highborn?

Fair enough, I made my statement too sweeping. The point is, religion and politics were never that far apart. Cynical manipulation of religion for political purposes is not a modern phenomenon, and is historically quite common. Look at the history of another knightly order: The Knights Templar. Or the Fourth Crusade that destroyed Constantinople. I'm not saying that true faith didn't exist, but to say that BM players treat religion too cynically? Well, I'm not sure I agree.

[Norrel]

Fair enough, I made my statement too sweeping. The point is, religion and politics were never that far apart. Cynical manipulation of religion for political purposes is not a modern phenomenon, and is historically quite common. Look at the history of another knightly order: The Knights Templar. Or the Fourth Crusade that destroyed Constantinople. I'm not saying that true faith didn't exist, but to say that BM players treat religion too cynically? Well, I'm not sure I agree.

People exploited religion, sure. But that was only possible because people actually believed it. And exactly, religion and politics weren't too far apart; I would go as far as to say that they're indistinct. When everyone doesn't give two !@#$s about their faith, they're totally separated (as you can see ingame whenever some pseudo-atheist tells everyone to separate their religious and political beliefs). It's far too easy to be machiavellian and distant about your faith when it's a video game. What's more, nobody would ever openly say that they didn't believe in a faith and that they were only in it to exploit their compatriots. Machiavelli doesn't count because he's not medieval and The Prince was a satire.

[Antonine]

What we have to bear in mind is that things were and are never clear cut. Lots of medieval nobles genuinely believed that if they didn't cancel out their sins they would burn for all eternity. Of course, since sinning was so popular the church created a loophole whereby nobles could buy salvation through donations to the church as long as they at least kept their sinning private. But even most of those who did commit adultery and murder people still believed in the religious doctrine and generally went out of their way to appear pious - not to mention condemning anyone who publicly flouted religious customs.

However, that didn't me that nobles didn't see the power of religion and didn't use it. After all, many of the great events in european history were motivated by a combination of piety and pragmatism. Such as the crusades, for example. Go on one this and you have the opportunity to get rich by taking other people's lands - but at the same time it's the pious thing to do and it will redeem your soul.

And, to be honest, I think that's how most medieval nobles would have behaved. They would have been believers but they'd also have balanced the pragmatic considerations of any situation as well.

So I don't really see anything wrong with characters using religion for political ends - but just bluntly using it as a tool without any figleafs or having a meaningless religion (like the Path of Chivalry in Oritolon) is the kind of thing which I do think should be seriously frowned upon.

[Antonine]

Machiavelli doesn't count because he's not medieval and The Prince was a satire.

It never ceases to disappoint me how many people just don't seem to get this.

[Bedwyr]

You both make it seem like religion was just a tool, which it wasn't.

Where did I ever say that?  My post specifically said that I wanted more people to use politics as a tool to support religion, not the other way around.

[Bedwyr]

It never ceases to disappoint me how many people just don't seem to get this.

Machiavelli was not medieval.  Machiavelli wrote about many medieval Rulers, however, as well as various general principals applicable from the earliest days of the Romans to the current day in addition to early modern Rulers and the like.

There is also no conclusive evidence that the Prince was a satire.  I think it's more instructive to look at when in life he wrote the Prince as opposed to, say, the Discourses on Livy.  He wrote the former later in life, and he was always a partisan of a united Italy.  It's not terribly hard to envision a man who felt that a united Italian Republic was not practical after decades of experience in politics, and thought that a united Italy was more important than his republican principles.

Besides, even if it were a satire, it's very, very good advice for would be and current Rulers, as various Holy Roman Emperors and the Founding Fathers of the United States found (though, of course, the latter were more interested in the Discourses on Livy).

And I would like to finish with this: Just because you believe in something, doesn't mean you can't use it as a tool for other ends.

[Arundel]

And I would like to finish with this: Just because you believe in something, doesn't mean you can't use it as a tool for other ends.

And to use it as a tool, others have to believe in it too. We have finished the loop .
Forgive me for assuming that you said such; I tied your argument in support to Bardic's, and went from there. Sorry.

[Arundel]

There are a hundred non-mechanical ways to apply religion to politics. On Dwilight, for example, my characters have historically been able to wield enormous power through their religion, and virtually none of that power came from the gross mechanical effects of what a priest can do in the game, nor did they seek to use it for exclusively religious ends. Neither have they been particularly zealous, though obviously they're not stupid enough to appear openly faithless (not that they are).

I stated the game was lacking in religious authority and influence, not that it was absent. You've played in Astrum and Kabrinskia on Dwilight, leading me to believe you're part of Sanguis Astroism. Evidently, I wasn't making reference to Sanguis Astroism - the religion you historically wielded enormous power through - considering its the prime example of what I want to see more of - or close to it - in this game. Its an ensemble of theocracies that enforce the law of their religion. Aetheris Pyrism is beginning to make some steps in the right direction, but so far, it keeps itself out of politics, which I disagree with.

But since this is an FEI thread, I'm speaking about religions like MAE, or the countless prominent nobles who've stated that everyone should toss religion aside. MAE because it exerts NO religious authority and its followers are essentially atheists. If anything, its a forgotten lifestyle. Then there are the preachers of atheism, who believe that anything relating to a god should be tossed aside for the good of the realm or its stability. The amount of pragmatism these people have doubles that of Machiavelli, and considering there are a lot of them, its simply ridiculous.

Edited some grammar

[Bedwyr]

But since this is an FEI thread, I'm speaking about religions like MAE, or the countless prominent nobles who've stated that everyone should toss religion aside. MAE because it exerts NO religious authority and its followers are essentially atheists. If anything, its a forgotten lifestyle. Then there are the preachers of atheism, who believe that anything relating to a god should be tossed aside for the good of the realm or its stability. The amount of pragmatism these people have doubles that of Machiavelli, and considering there are a lot of them, its simply ridiculous.

I've attempted a few times to change that trend in MAE, and Arella and Jenred were actually working on another big attempt which I hope to take up again.  Jenred would happily help you burn atheists as well.

Also, anyone who openly professes that they are using religion solely as a tool didn't read their Machiavelli very carefully.

[Draco Tanos]

Unfortunately, Bedwyr, there are plenty who do outright.  Or try to claim IC that religion has no place/influence on politics.  It's just not a very medieval mindset which drives a few of us absolutely batty.

People have long claimed the same about the CoH from EC that Arundel has indicated, but I've been slowly trying to turn that around since I took the reins of it two or so years ago, including slowly tweaking it from purely philosophy to a monotheistic faith.  When we spread to FEI as planned, it'll continue that course.  There are people, of course, who try to claim religion is meant to be a tool (the Margrave of Bescanon's character on EC springs to mind) or that politics trump faith (which from an IC standpoint where people still think God would smite them makes little sense!), so that kind of establishes itself as a roadblock.

I understand, EC/BT aren't SMA or official RP continents, but there should still be some sense enforced.

[Antonine]

When we spread to FEI as planned

Not if my missionaries spread the Church of Sartan to the EC first :p

[Indirik]

When we spread to FEI as planned, it'll continue that course.

Please don't.

[Geronus]

But since this is an FEI thread, I'm speaking about religions like MAE, or the countless prominent nobles who've stated that everyone should toss religion aside. MAE because it exerts NO religious authority and its followers are essentially atheists. If anything, its a forgotten lifestyle. Then there are the preachers of atheism, who believe that anything relating to a god should be tossed aside for the good of the realm or its stability. The amount of pragmatism these people have doubles that of Machiavelli, and considering there are a lot of them, its simply ridiculous.

Edited some grammar

Pragmatism (or cynicism) and secularism are not the same thing, and what you're talking about sounds more like secularism. It sounds like players are carrying their personal beliefs and inclinations over into their characters. I agree that secularism as a principle has no place in a medieval simulation.

I've heard these complaints before, in fact I think there are some threads in the General Discussion forum along these lines. Nothing will change though without people going out of their way to create the social pressures that existed during medieval times IC. If someone talks smack about religion, religious characters in the realm should shun or even openly persecute him. If an entire realm embraces atheism as a guiding principle, one or more religions should stir up a crusade to crush the apostate kingdom before their blasphemous principles can spread and seduce others of the faithful away from the Truth.

[Draco Tanos]

Not if my missionaries spread the Church of Sartan to the EC first :p

Before or after it's seen as an attempt to revive the CoI and is wiped out?  Seriously, it has little chance for that very reason.  Where are they going to find refuge?  The two break-away Ibby Kingdoms?  Would they truly risk Perdan and Caligus marching against them?

Please don't.

Tough?  Only a matter of time until we spread to Dwilight and Colonies as well.  Though Colonies is a little more difficult as we can't seem to find people willing to actually play on that continent OOC yet alone deal with it IC...  The one turn a day thing is a turnoff for many people, it seems!