176 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Rifneno wrote...
Basically "I think Ser Rapist was onto something.  But these whiners just put up the biggest fight about having their souls stolen."  I can't believe people actually think this waste of life is an example of a good templar.  I'm still depressed there's no way to murderknife him.

That's quite a twist of words.

Cullen is saying that a mage who really wants to deal with demons poses an enormous threat, and that an argument can be made for taking more extreme measures to eliminate that risk.  Coming from a man who was tortured for days/weeks by that same kind of mage, that's not an unreasonable position to take.  Not that he took Alrik's side to begin with.

I mean, I could bring up all the good things Cullen does, sparing mages who surrender and all, but this isn't about presenting him in a fair or balanced light; this is about comparing him to a rapist to try and make him look as evil as possible to justify your extreme "I wanna kill him" view.

If I was trying to twist his words, I wouldn't have done it right after giving a letter-for-letter transcript of what he actually says.  And if you think that conversation doesn't HEAVILY imply he took Alrik's side, I have a bridge to sell you.  What do you think "they want no controls on them at all" means?

And epic lol's at you thinking "not killing people who are surrendering" qualifies as good.  Hey, I passed a dog on the sidewalk today without kicking it in the spine as hard as I could, where's my medal of awesome?

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Rifneno wrote...
If I was trying to twist his words, I wouldn't have done it right after giving a letter-for-letter transcript of what he actually says.  And if you think that conversation doesn't HEAVILY imply he took Alrik's side, I have a bridge to sell you.  What do you think "they want no controls on them at all" means?

And epic lol's at you thinking "not killing people who are surrendering" qualifies as good.  Hey, I passed a dog on the sidewalk today without kicking it in the spine as hard as I could, where's my medal of awesome?

But that's exactly what you did.  You posted a transcript of what is actually said and then you twisted it with your "Basically, he supports rapists and wants to make all mages tranquil too".  And that's not what Cullen says.

He didn't take Alrik's side; the rest of the game pretty much shows that without a doubt.

And you can exaggerate things all you want, but it doesn't change the core principles here.  Not kicking a dog is a good thing.  Sparing the lives of a group of surrendered mages after your superior tells you to kill them is a good thing.  Nobody is talking about getting medals and being paragons of virtue here.  Just calling it like is is sufficient for me.

[CaimDark]

Imagine of someone was born with a sword / gun / bomb biologically grafted to their arm.

You better believe people would take safety measures to protect society.  And that's the role of the Templars: to protect society.  Magic exists, period, and it's up to the individual to decide how to use their power.  However, it is up to society to protect the innocent from those mages who choose to use their power irresponsibly.

The system is far from perfect, but the Templars are not merely evil slavers who love killing mages.  Yeah, some Templars are complete douche bags, but so are some mages.

You end up killing upstanding Templars who are merely doing their duty and following orders in siding with the mages.  You end up killing upstanding and innocent mages in siding with the Templars.  If you make the decision from a purely moral standpoint you'll probably end up with the mages.  If you think about the situation practically you should be able to see that containing the mage situation is most likely a better solution than starting a holy war and promoting mage anarchy.  You're only going to bring more Templars down on your heads.  At least in siding with the Templars you can try to control the situation and prevent further chaos.

If you are born with a sword grafted to your arm, it is still your choice wether or not to kill someone with it. The problem is not the the system is not perfect, it's that is is completely broken. It is one thing to regulate and oversee the use of magic, quite another to give one group the power of life and death over another. I shudder to think of the plight of the cute mage girls who have the misfortune of running into the ser Alriks of world.

The way Bioware set it up, there is nothing morally gray about the final decision. Side with the templars and murder innocents, or side with the mages and defend the innocents. And in this case the "upstanding" templars cease to exist, since murdering because someone told you to does not make it any less murder. We can't even say that the circle has been irreparably compromised or somesuch, since the offender was not even in the circle! By the way, I played my entire game much like a D&D Paladin, helping, forgiving and being nice to everyone, but man, Anders pissed me off so much I killed him without an ounce of regret!:happy:

Anyways... if the circle had been blown up by say, Orsino, the just thing to do would still be to just punish the offender, but in this case there might be an argument to be made that if the First Enchanter has fallen so far the threat the circle poses is just too great. I am still not sure I would support such a solution, but I can see the gray area here. As it was, it was murder pure and simple, a perception that was only reinforced when we learn Meredith was not just naturally crazy, she was magically-warped-crazy.

[CaimDark]

Guys, we are having an interesting conversation about the game's plot. Please don't ruin it by making it personal. After that, degenerating into insult hurling is just a step away. Oh wait, I have the solution: let's ban them preemptively to make sure they don't break the forum's rules and don't offend anyone!!!:lol:

[Icy Magebane]

Rifneno wrote...

Take the Tranquil Solution papers to Cullen sometime.  In fact, don't bother.  I'll save you the time with a transcript.

Hawke: Your Ser Alrik was working on a plan to turn all mages tranquil.
Cullen: I will not ask how you came by the personal effects of a man recently murdered within our own walls. It's true there has been some discussion of the idea. But as you can see, it has gone no further than that.
Anders: You expect us to believe that?
Cullen: Believe what you like, mage. (Note: LOL's at Cullen acknowledging plot armor) The Harrowing has served us well enough for centuries. It will be up to mages themselves whether they push us to more stringent measures.
Dialogue option: "Do you approve of the plan?"
Hawke: It sounds like you support this.
Cullen: The Tranquil ritual was created as a mercy so that mages need not be killed out of hand for a threat they might pose. There is an argument to be made for applying it more widely.
Anders: Are you going to listen to this? He's no better than Ser Alrik.
Cullen: Do you think it's easy to contain a mage who truly wants to deal with demons? We have done our best. But many mages have made it clear they view the ritual as no better than death. They want no controls on them at all.

Basically "I think Ser Rapist was onto something.  But these whiners just put up the biggest fight about having their souls stolen."  I can't believe people actually think this waste of life is an example of a good templar.  I'm still depressed there's no way to murderknife him.

I'm not seeing a problem here.  And pointing out Alrik's depravity doesn't help your argument, it merely shows your uncompromising bias.  That was a corrupt man who found a job where he could satisfy his perversions.  Cullen's acknowledgement of the Tranquil Solution doesn't seem to mention that it's okay to abuse anybody.   He doesn't even endorse the plan, but simply states why they make mages Tranquil in the first place. 

Mages can't be allowed complete freedom because their minds are succeptible to demonic influence and as abominations, they are more than a match for a squad of simple town guards.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

CaimDark wrote...
If you are born with a sword grafted to your arm, it is still your choice wether or not to kill someone with it. The problem is not the the system is not perfect, it's that is is completely broken. It is one thing to regulate and oversee the use of magic, quite another to give one group the power of life and death over another. I shudder to think of the plight of the cute mage girls who have the misfortune of running into the ser Alriks of world.

The way Bioware set it up, there is nothing morally gray about the final decision. Side with the templars and murder innocents, or side with the mages and defend the innocents. And in this case the "upstanding" templars cease to exist, since murdering because someone told you to does not make it any less murder. We can't even say that the circle has been irreparably compromised or somesuch, since the offender was not even in the circle! By the way, I played my entire game much like a D&D Paladin, helping, forgiving and being nice to everyone, but man, Anders pissed me off so much I killed him without an ounce of regret!:happy:

Anyways... if the circle had been blown up by say, Orsino, the just thing to do would still be to just punish the offender, but in this case there might be an argument to be made that if the First Enchanter has fallen so far the threat the circle poses is just too great. I am still not sure I would support such a solution, but I can see the gray area here. As it was, it was murder pure and simple, a perception that was only reinforced when we learn Meredith was not just naturally crazy, she was magically-warped-crazy.

It goes beyond merely choosing not to kill someone with your born-on weapon.  It's also about control.  If a person is born with a bomb grafted to their arm, and it was widely known that there is some force out there (comparable to demons) that could take control of that bomb away from the person then the threat increases and more safety measures are implemented.
Mages have just as much control over the lives of others as Templars do.  I shudder to think of the plight of all those innocent civilians taken victim by maleficarum and evil mages who summon demons all over the city.

The chantry / templar system should be changed, imo, as holding mages on that tight a leash will only inspire rebellion.  But the principles are still good and they are still necessary.  Even if you killed all the Templars, got rid of the chantry, and made mages free it would only be a matter of time before one douchebag mage went out and committed an atrocity, causing the public to demand more control over mages.  Maybe the new system will be better than the current one, maybe it'll be the same, maybe it'll be worse.  I daresay it is more likely to make a better system from the inside of the current one, weeding out the lunatics like Meredith and Alrik rather than committing your own mage-inspired "Rite of Annullment" on the entire Templar order.

[Icy Magebane]

Kirkwall's Circle is an extreme case. As I've said, Ferelden's Circle was fine. You know who wanted to change things there? Uldred, a guy whose primary goal was to use blood magic and become an abomination. Only the troublemakers seem to have a problem with the Circle.

Edit:  Non-troublemakers would include people like Wynne and Irving.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 07 avril 2011 - 03:12 .

[Rifneno]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

But that's exactly what you did.  You posted a transcript of what is actually said and then you twisted it with your "Basically, he supports rapists and wants to make all mages tranquil too".  And that's not what Cullen says.

No, he dodges the question and resorts to sad attempts at justification because he doesn't have the balls to tell the truth that even he knows deep down is plain evil.  If he didn't support it he would've no.  He didn't even say "I don't agree with his notion, but playing devil's advocate..."  No, he just goes straight away to the justification.  Arguing he didn't support Alrik's plan is like arguing Alrik himself meant that Ella would do his taxes when she's tranquil.

He didn't take Alrik's side; the rest of the game pretty much shows that without a doubt.

Right, like when he says "mages aren't people like you and me!"  He's a real darling.

And you can exaggerate things all you want, but it doesn't change the core principles here.  Not kicking a dog is a good thing.  Sparing the lives of a group of surrendered mages after your superior tells you to kill them is a good thing.  Nobody is talking about getting medals and being paragons of virtue here.  Just calling it like is is sufficient for me.

Oh, so then your stance is if a person had any redeeming qualities whatsoever, then they're not bad.  Okay then.  Ever heard of a man named Pablo Escobar?  He paid for everything from new roads to clean water systems.  He built schools, churches, sports arenas, built houses and literally gave them to people living on garbage.  Know how he got all the money to do that great stuff?  He was one of the biggest druglords in the world.  He killed an estimated 600 cops and their families.  Paid random kids a fortune to murder cops, he was even the first guy to order the assassination of a Colombian government official.  The moral of the story?  Just because somebody did something cool doesn't mean they do no wrong.

[CaimDark]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

It goes beyond merely choosing not to kill someone with your born-on weapon.  It's also about control.  If a person is born with a bomb grafted to their arm, and it was widely known that there is some force out there (comparable to demons) that could take control of that bomb away from the person then the threat increases and more safety measures are implemented.
Mages have just as much control over the lives of others as Templars do.  I shudder to think of the plight of all those innocent civilians taken victim by maleficarum and evil mages who summon demons all over the city.

The chantry / templar system should be changed, imo, as holding mages on that tight a leash will only inspire rebellion.  But the principles are still good and they are still necessary.  Even if you killed all the Templars, got rid of the chantry, and made mages free it would only be a matter of time before one douchebag mage went out and committed an atrocity, causing the public to demand more control over mages.  Maybe the new system will be better than the current one, maybe it'll be the same, maybe it'll be worse.  I daresay it is more likely to make a better system from the inside of the current one, weeding out the lunatics like Meredith and Alrik rather than committing your own mage-inspired "Rite of Annullment" on the entire Templar order.

The plight of the innocent civilians taken victim by maleficarum is no different than the plight of innocent civilians victimized by marauders, bandits and rapists in the lowtowns and darktowns of the world. There is no justice in sacrificing one innocent to save another. And this is even more appaling when we consider that in DA2's story nearly every roving mad, bloodthirsty blood mage that victimizes innocent civilians started as a nice upstanding citizen and was driven to such extremes by the very templars that claim to protect them. How is society protected like that?

Still, it seems we agree on more than I thought at first. I never said I'd support the total dissolution of the Templar order and complete freedom to mages, nor do I recall any pro-mage poster on this thread supporting such a thing (although I did not read the whole thread, so  might be wrong). Were mages allowed complete freedom I have no doubt Fenris would be proven right and eventually they would form a new Imperium. What I'd support is a system that recognizes that mages are people like everyone else and as such preserving their rights is as important as protecting society from the potential harm they might bring. Thus, mages would be allowed to live relatively normal lives, under constant supervision, rather than slaves to be put down at the slightest provocation.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Rifneno wrote...
No, he dodges the question and resorts to sad attempts at justification because he doesn't have the balls to tell the truth that even he knows deep down is plain evil.  If he didn't support it he would've no.  He didn't even say "I don't agree with his notion, but playing devil's advocate..."  No, he just goes straight away to the justification.  Arguing he didn't support Alrik's plan is like arguing Alrik himself meant that Ella would do his taxes when she's tranquil.

Right, like when he says "mages aren't people like you and me!"  He's a real darling.

Oh, so then your stance is if a person had any redeeming qualities whatsoever, then they're not bad.  Okay then.  Ever heard of a man named Pablo Escobar?  He paid for everything from new roads to clean water systems.  He built schools, churches, sports arenas, built houses and literally gave them to people living on garbage.  Know how he got all the money to do that great stuff?  He was one of the biggest druglords in the world.  He killed an estimated 600 cops and their families.  Paid random kids a fortune to murder cops, he was even the first guy to order the assassination of a Colombian government official.  The moral of the story?  Just because somebody did something cool doesn't mean they do no wrong.

A) It's nice to know that you can read Cullen's mind.

I don't remember him saying mages aren't people, especially in the context you're implying.

C) The main, and painfully obvious, difference between Cullen and Pablo Escobar is that Cullen never did any of those things.  Can you give me an example of something Cullen did that was completely evil?  Or are you just going to continue to make claims that are irrelevant and illogical?

Better yet, you can simply point to where I said that performing good deeds is equivalent to absolution.

[Rifneno]

Icy Magebane wrote...

I'm not seeing a problem here.  And pointing out Alrik's depravity doesn't help your argument, it merely shows your uncompromising bias.

Says the one comparing any mages who want the right to do things like marry and have a family with a pride abomination that nearly wiped out a Circle and its accomanying Templar Order.

"As I've said, Ferelden's Circle was fine. You know who wanted to change things there? Uldred, a guy whose primary goal was to use blood magic and become an abomination. Only the troublemakers seem to have a problem with the Circle."

That was a corrupt man who found a job where he could satisfy his perversions.  Cullen's acknowledgement of the Tranquil Solution doesn't seem to mention that it's okay to abuse anybody.   He doesn't even endorse the plan, but simply states why they make mages Tranquil in the first place.

I've yet to hear anyone explain how "They want no controls on them at all" could possibly mean except an irritated response to not being able to soul-steal every mage in the country.

Mages can't be allowed complete freedom because their minds are succeptible to demonic influence and as abominations, they are more than a match for a squad of simple town guards.

You have no idea how dangerous properly taught mages would be, none of us do.  Because the Chantry makes it impossible for such a thing to occur.  If the templars didn't demand that mage children be removed from their families and never be seen again, thus allowing Connor better education than a guy who can barely tie his shoes (Jowan), would he have known better than to climb into that desire demon's rusty van with the "FREE CANDY!" sign on it?  We'll never know.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

CaimDark wrote...
The plight of the innocent civilians taken victim by maleficarum is no different than the plight of innocent civilians victimized by marauders, bandits and rapists in the lowtowns and darktowns of the world. There is no justice in sacrificing one innocent to save another. And this is even more appaling when we consider that in DA2's story nearly every roving mad, bloodthirsty blood mage that victimizes innocent civilians started as a nice upstanding citizen and was driven to such extremes by the very templars that claim to protect them. How is society protected like that?

I don't think it's fair to say all those blood mages were "driven to it by the Templars".  Some of them may have been, but it's supposition.  There certainly are plenty of mages under the Templars who don't resort to such measures, and I don't recall Bethany writing me any letters about how horrible it is in the Circle for everyone.

And there is a distinct difference between evil mages and evil bandits / common thugs.  That difference is magic.  You're dealing with a different beast altogether when your opponent can mind control people and summon demons as compared to simply knifing them.  It calls for a different measure of control and protection, hence the Templars' lyrium abilities.
You can't send in a common patrol cop to disarm a bomb, you need an explosives expert.

[IanPolaris]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

I don't remember him saying mages aren't people, especially in the context you're implying.

Sorry but he says EXACTLY that.  When you rescue Ser Keran and challenge Cullen, he will respond, and I quote, "Mages are weapons.  They aren't people like you and me."  Even Ser Keran's sister (a TEMPLAR"s sister) says that's too harsh.

Yeah, Ser Cullen is a real winner......I wish I could have murderknifed him right there because Cullen reflects the mainstream Templar opinion.  If you view another group of human beings as sub-human tools which Ser Cullen and the rest of the Templars clearly do (for the most part) then any abuse is justifiable or at least permissable.  This is ultimately why Ser Meridith and Ser Cullen both turned a blind eye to Ser Alrik's depravity.  It was depraved indifference (at best) becasue of their sure knowledge in their own divine rectitude that said that mages weren't realy people.

Yes, both are that vile when you strip off all the justifications.

-Polaris

[Andronic0s]

Blood mages where in the streets not in the Circle, why did Meredith not once ordered a sweep of Darktown or the docks? it seems 90% of the blood mage population is concentrated there, from what I saw playing as Hawke, and those are the ones that are the more serious immediate threat to the common man.

Meredith failed in her duty to protect the population from blood magic by fixating in the circle which may or may not have been practicing blood magic, but if they where, they where not affecting the outside world directly.

Modifié par Andronic0s, 07 avril 2011 - 03:41 .

[IanPolaris]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

CaimDark wrote...
The plight of the innocent civilians taken victim by maleficarum is no different than the plight of innocent civilians victimized by marauders, bandits and rapists in the lowtowns and darktowns of the world. There is no justice in sacrificing one innocent to save another. And this is even more appaling when we consider that in DA2's story nearly every roving mad, bloodthirsty blood mage that victimizes innocent civilians started as a nice upstanding citizen and was driven to such extremes by the very templars that claim to protect them. How is society protected like that?

I don't think it's fair to say all those blood mages were "driven to it by the Templars".  Some of them may have been, but it's supposition.  There certainly are plenty of mages under the Templars who don't resort to such measures, and I don't recall Bethany writing me any letters about how horrible it is in the Circle for everyone.

All? No.  You will always have a few bad apples that misuse any power.  However, you are shown from multiple souces and multiple PoVs that yes, when pushed into a corner, mages can (and often do) use blood magic.  Why not?  Blood magic is more powerful and doesn't require chantry controlled lyrium, and has a potentially larger power available.  If you have a nutty Knight Commander that is going to assume all escapees and apostates are ipso facto bloodmages anyway to be slaughtered as sight (and she and her assistant both say pretty much exactly this), then there is no reason not to use it.

This is why the total prohibition by the chantry is so mind-numbingly stupid.  How can you expect to combat bloodmagic if you aren't allowed to learn/research/study it yourself?  (Obviously bloodmagic would have to be tightly controlled...but the chantry puts it's head in the ground and says LA-LA-LA bloodmagic evil......

And there is a distinct difference between evil mages and evil bandits / common thugs.  That difference is magic.  You're dealing with a different beast altogether when your opponent can mind control people and summon demons as compared to simply knifing them.  It calls for a different measure of control and protection, hence the Templars' lyrium abilities.
You can't send in a common patrol cop to disarm a bomb, you need an explosives expert.

Not really.  Both are crimals.  Magic just aggravates the offense is all.  It's the difference between using a gun to rob a bank and saying you have one to rob a bank.  Both are criminal.

-Polaris

[Mystranna Kelteel]

IanPolaris wrote...
Sorry but he says EXACTLY that.  When you rescue Ser Keran and challenge Cullen, he will respond, and I quote, "Mages are weapons.  They aren't people like you and me."  Even Ser Keran's sister (a TEMPLAR"s sister) says that's too harsh.

I don't recall that, nor do I think it defines him regardless.  If he truly believed mages weren't people and were purely weapons then he would not have spared the mages who surrendered.

I don't think Cullen is a saint, by any means, but as far as Templars go he never struck me as evil.  And I expected him to be evilish after coming from DAO.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

IanPolaris wrote...
Not really.  Both are crimals.  Magic just aggravates the offense is all.  It's the difference between using a gun to rob a bank and saying you have one to rob a bank.  Both are criminal.
-Polaris

I didn't say they weren't both criminals.  I said that the measures taken to deal with them have to be different.

[IanPolaris]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Sorry but he says EXACTLY that.  When you rescue Ser Keran and challenge Cullen, he will respond, and I quote, "Mages are weapons.  They aren't people like you and me."  Even Ser Keran's sister (a TEMPLAR"s sister) says that's too harsh.

I don't recall that, nor do I think it defines him regardless.  If he truly believed mages weren't people and were purely weapons then he would not have spared the mages who surrendered.

I don't think Cullen is a saint, by any means, but as far as Templars go he never struck me as evil.  And I expected him to be evilish after coming from DAO.

Do the quest where you rescue Ser Kerran and then say that it's the Templar's fault.  He will tell you that you can't treat a mage like a human being.  That's virtually a direct quote and it seems to be the mainstream templar opinion which is more than a little sickening.

-Polaris

[AlexXIV]

I am not sure if she is insane. Paranoid for sure which shows in the end before the final fight. Having extreme (political) views doesn't necessarily make someone insane. Could be just an ass.

[IanPolaris]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
Not really.  Both are crimals.  Magic just aggravates the offense is all.  It's the difference between using a gun to rob a bank and saying you have one to rob a bank.  Both are criminal.
-Polaris

I didn't say they weren't both criminals.  I said that the measures taken to deal with them have to be different.

Sure.  We deal with an armed robber differently than a burgler, but they are both criminals and locked up for somthing they have DONE.  You don't lock away people (at least not if you want to treat them as humans) for who they are.  Do it for what they've done.

I'd have zero problems with harsh (even teminally harsh) penalties for those that commit crimes with magic, nor with special police (templars) and procedures for the same.  However, punish people for what they do rather than who they are.

-Polaris

[CaimDark]

Cullen is certainly dedicated, but I never saw him as evil either. He makes a few harsh comments, understandable considering what he went through, but he still follows his duty without gratuitously abusing his power. Uldred (is that his name?) made him go through hell and all he did as a result was harden his resolve, we don't see him pursuing a vendetta or murdering mages for payback.  I think that in itself speaks highly of his character. He even lets slip that he is starting to question Meredith. Quite unlike Alrik, which was pretty much the fantasy equivalent of a pedophile who scored a job as a school teacher.

Modifié par CaimDark, 07 avril 2011 - 03:52 .

[Forst1999]

@ AlexXIV
Well, severe paranoia ARE a case of insanity.

[IanPolaris]

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not sure if she is insane. Paranoid for sure which shows in the end before the final fight. Having extreme (political) views doesn't necessarily make someone insane. Could be just an ass.

If you take the pro-templar side in Act 3 and get your marching orders and report to Meridith for boh main quests, she is clearly paranoid beyond any reasonable standard of mental health to the point of likely legal insanity.  She was extreme before the ideal.  After the idol, she is a fruit-loop.

-Polaris

[Beerfish]

Ferretinabun wrote...

Okay, maybe calling the Right of Annulment for the chantry's destruction when the real culprit is standing right beside her is a tad on the whacko side (not to mention, rather funny), but I'd say her paranoia is pretty much justified given that blood mages crop up like cockroaches in DA2.
Plus, she has a damn sexy voice!

She had plenty of reasons to think about annulement before the chantry went boom.  Her assertions were totally backed up by Orsinos little magic act and Anders act.  Anders an apostate and the head of the circle.

[IanPolaris]

CaimDark wrote...

Cullen is certainly dedicated, but I never saw him as evil either. He makes a few harsh comments, understandable considering what he went through, but he still follows his duty without gratuitously abusing his power. Uldred (is that his name?) made him go through hell and all he did as a result was harden his resolve, we don't see him pursuing a vendetta or murdering mages for payback.  I think that in itself speaks highly of his character. He even lets slip that he is starting to question Meredith. Quite unlike Alrik, which was pretty much the fantasy equivalent of a pedophile who scored a job as a school teacher.

Disagree.  Cullen, Meridith and even Elthina aren't as evil and as culpable as Ser Alrik, but they do share in his crime as enablers.  In all three cases, they are far more concerned about Ser Alrik found "murdered" and don't care a white about how his abused his authority.  Even Elthina doesn't care that Chantry law is being flouted.  In fact I blame Elthina most of all.  Meridith had an excuse (the idol and her own twisted perceptions out of a bad childhood experience with her mage-sister).  Cullen...we all know what Cullen endured in Fereldan.  Elthina has no excuse.  She sees Meridith flouting Chantry law...and you give her written proof of the same and she does nothing. 

Grand Cleric Elthina has no excuse and what happened to her was too good for her.

-Polaris