Interesting article. This, plus the article on the Cudgel in Dragon #358 has got me interested in the guy, where as before I just viewed him as a rather boring stick in the mud.
One thing I noticed was that this article states that St. Cuthbert was rivals with Hieroneous and Rao. But I've read elseware that they were friends (not strict allies anyway). I'm just wondering about that difference.
Also, it appears that the paragraph about the faithful of Cuthbert appears to have been repeated a few times. Just an F.Y.I.
Also, it appears that the paragraph about the faithful of Cuthbert appears to have been repeated a few times. Just an F.Y.I.
Fixed and with a better, more spread, lay-out. Idk what was going on, but the software has been goofy lately. Everytime I would delete repeated text, it would just add it to the end of the article, usually. _________________ Kneel before me, or you shall be KNELT!
Interesting article. This, plus the article on the Cudgel in Dragon #358 has got me interested in the guy, where as before I just viewed him as a rather boring stick in the mud.
One thing I noticed was that this article states that St. Cuthbert was rivals with Hieroneous and Rao. But I've read elseware that they were friends (not strict allies anyway). I'm just wondering about that difference.
Also, it appears that the paragraph about the faithful of Cuthbert appears to have been repeated a few times. Just an F.Y.I.
That bit about Cuthbert being enemies with Hieroneous and Rao is something I made up, mostly to add more shades of grey to the setting via making some of the gods of good enemies with one another. It doesn't exist in canon, so feel free to ignore it if you wish.
Well I always have treated canon as a guildline rather than an involatable law, but I do tend to find more useful things in these articles that useless.
Oh, and the article is much more readable now. Thanks everyone!
That bit about Cuthbert being enemies with Hieroneous and Rao is something I made up, mostly to add more shades of grey to the setting via making some of the gods of good enemies with one another. It doesn't exist in canon, so feel free to ignore it if you wish.
I enjoyed the article, especially the light you shed on the motivations and perspectives of the different orders within the faith.
Certainly Cutherbertines and Hieroneouns would be political rivals, regardless of the feelings of the gods themselves, and this conflict plays a major part IMC in Furyondy.
However, the relationship with Rao is, IMO, more complex than you got at, and I would have liked two have seen a paragraph or two more on this. I assume that Cuthbert was himself a worshipper of Rao, and the two churches should have a complex blend of rivalry and cooperation. In many ways, Cuthbert is a new church for a new, more dangerous age. It respects its "parent" church of Rao but is independent. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
I was not too keen on the article. The main portion I did not care for was turning the Orders into Sects, which is an important distinction.
Sects have doctrinal differences from the main body of the church, while Orders do not and serve a specific role within the church, which is succinctly laid out in the original descriptions of the Orders.
The Chapeaux are itinerant preachers, spreading the message of St. Cuthbert far and wide. Their role is to seek new converts.
The Billets are your run-of-the-mill priests. Their role is to preach to the established flock and offer them protection and care as needed.
The Stars are inquisitors. Their role is to keep an eye on the preachers and the priests, and the flock as well, with special attention being paid to maintaining doctrinal impurity and eradicating corruption.
Each of the Orders has a specific task within the grand scheme of things, but they all subscribe to the same basic doctrine. Any that did not would be expunged by the Stars, as that is their specific job within the church. As described in the article, each of these groups preaches St. Cuthbert’s message in a variant way, which is a rather contrary view of the actuality of things. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
I was not too keen on the article. The main portion I did not care for was turning the Orders into Sects, which is an important distinction.
Sects have doctrinal differences from the main body of the church, while Orders do not and serve a specific role within the church, which is succinctly laid out in the original descriptions of the Orders.
The Chapeaux are itinerant preachers, spreading the message of St. Cuthbert far and wide. Their role is to seek new converts.
The Billets are your run-of-the-mill priests. Their role is to preach to the established flock and offer them protection and care as needed.
The Stars are inquisitors. Their role is to keep an eye on the preachers and the priests, and the flock as well, with special attention being paid to maintaining doctrinal impurity and eradicating corruption.
Each of the Orders has a specific task within the grand scheme of things, but they all subscribe to the same basic doctrine. Any that did not would be expunged by the Stars, as that is their specific job within the church. As described in the article, each of these groups preaches St. Cuthbert’s message in a variant way, which is a rather contrary view of the actuality of things.
I disagree here. Real-life religions that place strong emphasis on doctrine and in many sects stress conformity, such as Christianity and Islam, nonetheless have strong variants and intellectual debates and disagreements among their adherents. Christianity has its Catholics and Protestants, Islam has its Sunni and Shi'ites, and great theologians like St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas made tremendous intellectual advancements.
I personally find it more believable that St. Cuthbert has more variance than one might otherwise suspect. Many depictions of religion in modern fiction, whether on TV, in books or stage plays, or the movies, seem to me to depict religion in a very negative, and worse, reductionist and overly simple light, something that personally disgusts me.
That's what I'm trying to do with my writeups of the various religions. Show the various schisms and debates within the churches, and show that they are not as uniform and bland as one might think. In fact, one might reasonably state that St. Cuthbert's faith is one of the most intellectually fertile and progressive in the whole Flanaess, given the universality of the major topics its doctrine touches on and the sheer number of its adherents and followers.
THe bigger a social movement gets, including a religion, the better the chances that rifts and disagreements will develop. That's not necessarily a bad thing, mind-the debate that can result can strengthen the faith and ensure its continued survival.
Otherwise, if the Cuthbertines are all as rigid and uniform as canon seems to assume, how can they simultaneously operate in an upright and noble kingdom like Furyondy and a corrupt pit of thieves like Greyhawk? Cuthbert's faith is fairly popular, and yet if its priests were as rigid and doctrinaire as they are popularly depicted, chances are they'd be marginalized, since most citizens wouldn't adhere to their views if they insisted on preaching and acting the same way they did in Furyondy.
Besides, that still doesn't mean there isn't some common ground-priests in Furyondy likely use the same scriptural quotes to explain why the Furyonds scored another smashing military victory, or why the Keoish continue to add to their very long and very rich tradition of military incompetence and cowardice.
Given that Keoish military defeats are as predictable as the phases of the moon, one would think that the Cuthbertines would make a note of it. _________________ <div align="left">Going to war without Keoland is like going to war without a pipe organ. They both make a lot of noise and they're both a lot of dead weight, so what's the point in taking them along? </div>
The whole point is that Orders are not sects- they are organizations within a single church. They have no variant beliefs or cross purposes, just a specific purpose. The Cuthbertine Orders are the Cuthbertine equivalent of the Catholic Orders- the Jesuits, Franciscans, etc. All of these groups have a focus/purpose, but they are not contrary to the mother church- they are a part of it and sanctioned by it. That is what the Cuthbertine Orders are. They are not sects. Using the Orders to define such sects is therefore a bit odd.
Any Cuthbertine sect would likely have its own version of the Orders, but at the base of things the sect would have a different interpretation of at least some standard Cuthbertine doctrine. That is what differentiates a sect from the parent church- a difference in doctrinal interpretation. Of course there can be Cuthbertine sects, but they would be rare due to the lawful and zealous nature of the church, let alone it having an Order within it dedicated to rooting out and destroying such "heresies".
I appreciate your goal of broadening the interpretation of the faiths, but you've gone about it the wrong way here by dividing the church dependent upon the services its branches are responsible for, rather than by having a variant sect(based on differing doctrinal interpretation) with its own Orders who are proponents of the "new message", as the Orders of the parent church are proponents of the "true message". _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Last edited by Cebrion on Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:44 am; edited 1 time in total
The whole point is that Orders are not sects- they are organizations within a single church. They have no variant beliefs or cross purposes, just a specific purpose. The Cuthbertine Orders are the Cuthbertine equivalent of the Catholic Orders- the Jesuits, Franciscans, etc. All of these groups have a focus/purpose, but they are not contrary the mother church- they are a part of it and sanctioned by it. That is what the Cuthbertine Orders are. They are not sects. Using the Orders to define such sects is therefore a bit odd.
Any Cuthbertine sect would likely have its own version of the Orders, but at the base of things the sect would have a different interpretation of at least some standard Cuthbertine doctrine. That is what differentiates a sect from the parent church- a difference in doctrinal interpretation. Of course there can be Cuthbertine sects, but they would be rare due to the lawful and zealous nature of the church, let alone it having an Order within it dedicated to rooting out and destroying such "heresies".
I appreciate your goal of broadening the interpretation of the faiths, but you've gone about it the wrong way here by dividing the church dependent upon the services its branches are responsible for, rather than by having a variant sect(based on differing doctrinal interpretation) with its own Orders who are proponents of the "new message" as the Orders of the parent church are proponents of the "true message".
Ah, I misunderstood the exact meaning of these terms. I'm sure a DM who goes your route could, however, extrapolate their own composition of the church based on what I wrote-I fully expect that anyone who uses my work cherry-picks what they like and ignores the rest. ;)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
