75 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

Gervaise wrote...

Because there is nothing in the Chant of Light that talks about Divine Right but it does say that all are equally the Maker's children be they slave or noble and therefore should be treated in the way the Maker has set out in the Chant. Orlesian Divine Right allows a noble to beat a peasant to death or rape a merchant girl and there to be no come back againt them under the law. In fact if the girl's brother should defend his sister from the assault, he would be condemned to death for defying the noble's rights. The Chantry should have condemned this thinking from day one because dontradicts everything that the Chant of Light stands for. However, since the Chantry was first established by an Emperor of Orlais, I think it is fairly obvious why they have not done so.

Not quite, it is the universal rule of nobles being able to exploit the poor. See Vaughn for further confirmation.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 10 novembre 2011 - 09:44 .

[esper]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Gervaise wrote...

Because there is nothing in the Chant of Light that talks about Divine Right but it does say that all are equally the Maker's children be they slave or noble and therefore should be treated in the way the Maker has set out in the Chant. Orlesian Divine Right allows a noble to beat a peasant to death or rape a merchant girl and there to be no come back againt them under the law. In fact if the girl's brother should defend his sister from the assault, he would be condemned to death for defying the noble's rights. The Chantry should have condemned this thinking from day one because dontradicts everything that the Chant of Light stands for. However, since the Chantry was first established by an Emperor of Orlais, I think it is fairly obvious why they have not done so.

Not quite, it is the universal rule of nobles being able to exploit the poor. See Vaughn for further confirmation.

Sadly there is a difference between elves and human.... As in poor elves worth even less rights than poor humans.

[Gervaise]

And the Chantry priestess should have condemned his actions more forcefully as well. But the Orlesian girl in the market place definitely made it sound like what is considered acceptable in Orlais is different from Ferelden. Vaughan was a bad egg, as were his buddies, but other nobles didn't come across as being like them as a generality, although I have questioned whether matters of sexual abuse are regarded in somewhat different light in Thedas.

My point is that in Orlais a Chevalier is permitted to do these things not just because they are a noble but because their status was granted to them by the Maker. Thus to oppose their will is to oppose the will of the Maker. In any case, the parallels between the way the nobles treat the poor/elves and the way the Templars treat mages under their care in Kirkwall, would seem to indicate that both groups are working to a belief that they are divinely sanctioned to act as they see fit, even though outsiders would feel that this was an abuse of power.

I do wonder if there has ever been an instance in the history of the Chantry where a Divine has made the Emperor/Emperess crawl on hands and knees, wear sackcloth and sit among the paupers in the Chantry to beg forgiveness for an act that was contrary to the Chant of Light (such as one of the earlier Popes made an Emperor do after he ordered the massacre of a group of people).

[esper]

Gervaise wrote...

And the Chantry priestess should have condemned his actions more forcefully as well. But the Orlesian girl in the market place definitely made it sound like what is considered acceptable in Orlais is different from Ferelden. Vaughan was a bad egg, as were his buddies, but other nobles didn't come across as being like them as a generality, although I have questioned whether matters of sexual abuse are regarded in somewhat different light in Thedas.

My point is that in Orlais a Chevalier is permitted to do these things not just because they are a noble but because their status was granted to them by the Maker. Thus to oppose their will is to oppose the will of the Maker. In any case, the parallels between the way the nobles treat the poor/elves and the way the Templars treat mages under their care in Kirkwall, would seem to indicate that both groups are working to a belief that they are divinely sanctioned to act as they see fit, even though outsiders would feel that this was an abuse of power.

I do wonder if there has ever been an instance in the history of the Chantry where a Divine has made the Emperor/Emperess crawl on hands and knees, wear sackcloth and sit among the paupers in the Chantry to beg forgiveness for an act that was contrary to the Chant of Light (such as one of the earlier Popes made an Emperor do after he ordered the massacre of a group of people).

I doubt it. The chantry and the throne of Orlais seems too thightly intervowen (I am too tied to spell right now).
I really think that the Orlais Chantry and thereby the main seat of the chantry is corrupt to the core. 

[Herr Uhl]

Gervaise wrote...

My point is that in Orlais a Chevalier is permitted to do these things not just because they are a noble but because their status was granted to them by the Maker. Thus to oppose their will is to oppose the will of the Maker. In any case, the parallels between the way the nobles treat the poor/elves and the way the Templars treat mages under their care in Kirkwall, would seem to indicate that both groups are working to a belief that they are divinely sanctioned to act as they see fit, even though outsiders would feel that this was an abuse of power.

I do wonder if there has ever been an instance in the history of the Chantry where a Divine has made the Emperor/Emperess crawl on hands and knees, wear sackcloth and sit among the paupers in the Chantry to beg forgiveness for an act that was contrary to the Chant of Light (such as one of the earlier Popes made an Emperor do after he ordered the massacre of a group of people).

Where did you get this from?

[dragonflight288]

Where did you get this from?

Most likely a combination of lore, what the woman in Denerim says about Chevalier being allowed privileges over unwilling women, Leliana's story about being arrested by the Orlesians, and the Orlesian's funny accent.

[Herr Uhl]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Where did you get this from?

Most likely a combination of lore, what the woman in Denerim says about Chevalier being allowed privileges over unwilling women, Leliana's story about being arrested by the Orlesians, and the Orlesian's funny accent.

The "maker" part. I haven't heard of them getting any divine privelige.

[AlexXIV]

Herr Uhl wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Where did you get this from?

Most likely a combination of lore, what the woman in Denerim says about Chevalier being allowed privileges over unwilling women, Leliana's story about being arrested by the Orlesians, and the Orlesian's funny accent.

The "maker" part. I haven't heard of them getting any divine privelige.

A religion as the Chantry of Andrastae does not have much choice. They can support nobility claiming it is the Maker's will that they rule His world and His children or they oppose nobility because they have no right to rule His world and His children. There's really no middleground if you believe that this god exists and everything that exists is His.

[Herr Uhl]

I don't remember that they needed to do that in real life. They did it for kings, but every damn knight? I seriously doubt that they're all blessed by the chantry as the makers chosen.

Or should they just dispand all nobility, or they support all of it? Shouldn't that mean that Loghain has divine right? In which case I really don't see why their giving it to chevaliers is such a big deal.

[dragonflight288]

A religion as the Chantry of Andrastae does not have much choice. They can support nobility claiming it is the Maker's will that they rule His world and His children or they oppose nobility because they have no right to rule His world and His children. There's really no middleground if you believe that this god exists and everything that exists is His.

Only the Maker abandoned his children so they need to earn his forgiveness just to look at them again. A person must earn his favor, because the Maker cannot possibly have love for all (discussions with Leliana, her views vs the Chantry)

What you described was the Catholic Church. The Chantry is different, with a different deity entirely.

The "maker" part. I haven't heard of them getting any divine privelige.

I'm aware, but I couldn't think of anything either so I was being sarcastic. Ah well. Intonation is very difficult to convey in keyboard speech.

[TEWR]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Where did you get this from?

Most likely a combination of lore, what the woman in Denerim says about Chevalier being allowed privileges over unwilling women, Leliana's story about being arrested by the Orlesians, and the Orlesian's funny accent.

There's a codex on the Chevaliers and how some abuse their power, with the writer acknowledging that these are heinous crimes, that any true Orlesian knows them to be false knights, and one day they shall answer to the Maker.

Whether they actually take any action against them I don't know, but my guess is that they don't. It seems like the priests over there have an Elthina complex.

[dragonflight288]

Of course they would. They are in the homeland of the Chantry, in the heart of the supposedly most cultured and mightiest Empire in Thedas. How could they be anything but blessed by the Maker?

[Conway044]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Cullen helps Hawke after annuling the circle, slaughtering who knows how many people for a crime he knew they didn´t commit, including children (I guess there are mage children in KW even if we don´t see them). After that I don´t care for excuses, if I get the chance to kill him he better pray he´s very important to the plot at that moment.

Cullen also supports Hawke if you choose to spare the mages that surrender during the RoA. 

Just an FYI incase you haven't played that side of the battle.

[DreamerM]

Conway044 wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Cullen helps Hawke after annuling the circle, slaughtering who knows how many people for a crime he knew they didn´t commit, including children (I guess there are mage children in KW even if we don´t see them). After that I don´t care for excuses, if I get the chance to kill him he better pray he´s very important to the plot at that moment.

Cullen also supports Hawke if you choose to spare the mages that surrender during the RoA. 

Just an FYI incase you haven't played that side of the battle.

I think Cullen was a character like Orsino who's part was mostly left on the cutting room floor. Hawke can have several conversations with him, and regardless of where Hawke stands on the mage/Templar debate, he or she will, unprompted, call Cullen "friend." Now I know killing Templarbinations together might qualify as a bonding experience, but I can't help but think there was supposed to be a lot more to the relationship between Cullen and Hawke that never actually made to the game.

[Gervaise]

"The aristocracy is different from Ferelden in other ways, as well. The Orlesians' right to rule stems directly from the Maker. There exists neither the concept of rule by merit nor the slightest notion of rebellion. If one is not noble, one aspires to be--or at the least aspires to be in the good graces of a noble, and is ever watching for a way to enter the patronage of those better placed in the Grand Game. "

This was taken from a Codex on Orlais written by a Bann of Ferelden.   I think that says it all.   By the Maker, the mage rebellion must have really put the wind up them!   But you see what true Andrastrians are up against.
 

[xScarecrowX]

Holy Hypocrites, Andrastians!

Look, I dislike the templars. I love mages! But, the original Chant of Light, to me, doesn't seem hypocritical. What they did after it was, but the Chant seems very straight to it, in a way.

It also kind of reads like the American constitution, not that I'm comparing the content. The Chant sort of sounds like it was meant to be vague, to see what mankind did with it.

My Hawkes are never really that religious, though.

Modifié par xScarecrowX, 11 novembre 2011 - 09:42 .

[DKJaigen]

Herr Uhl wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Where did you get this from?

Most likely a combination of lore, what the woman in Denerim says about Chevalier being allowed privileges over unwilling women, Leliana's story about being arrested by the Orlesians, and the Orlesian's funny accent.

The "maker" part. I haven't heard of them getting any divine privelige.

But i have. i believe its one of the codexes.

[DKJaigen]

xScarecrowX wrote...

Holy Hypocrites, Andrastians!

Look, I dislike the templars. I love mages! But, the original Chant of Light, to me, doesn't seem hypocritical. What they did after it was, but the Chant seems very straight to it, in a way.

It also kind of reads like the American constitution, not that I'm comparing the content. The Chant sort of sounds like it was meant to be vague, to see what mankind did with it.

My Hawkes are never really that religious, though.

The problem with the chant thats its not hypocritical but that it can be interpreted in several ways.

[Arthur Cousland]

DreamerM wrote...

Conway044 wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Cullen helps Hawke after annuling the circle, slaughtering who knows how many people for a crime he knew they didn´t commit, including children (I guess there are mage children in KW even if we don´t see them). After that I don´t care for excuses, if I get the chance to kill him he better pray he´s very important to the plot at that moment.

Cullen also supports Hawke if you choose to spare the mages that surrender during the RoA. 

Just an FYI incase you haven't played that side of the battle.

I think Cullen was a character like Orsino who's part was mostly left on the cutting room floor. Hawke can have several conversations with him, and regardless of where Hawke stands on the mage/Templar debate, he or she will, unprompted, call Cullen "friend." Now I know killing Templarbinations together might qualify as a bonding experience, but I can't help but think there was supposed to be a lot more to the relationship between Cullen and Hawke that never actually made to the game.

Yes, it's always odd when my mage Hawke calls Cullen "friend" and will ask how he can assist the templars.  I guess that's also similar how Cullen tells mage Hawke how "mages aren't people like you and me".

[jamesp81]

Gervaise wrote...

Because there is nothing in the Chant of Light that talks about Divine Right but it does say that all are equally the Maker's children be they slave or noble and therefore should be treated in the way the Maker has set out in the Chant. Orlesian Divine Right allows a noble to beat a peasant to death or rape a merchant girl and there to be no come back againt them under the law. In fact if the girl's brother should defend his sister from the assault, he would be condemned to death for defying the noble's rights. The Chantry should have condemned this thinking from day one because dontradicts everything that the Chant of Light stands for. However, since the Chantry was first established by an Emperor of Orlais, I think it is fairly obvious why they have not done so.

It is kind of obvious, to anyone paying attention, that the upper levels of the Chantry have been polluted by Orlesian jurispredence (if you could call it that).

This is probably why village Chantries seem to be the best ones.  They're separated enough from the upper echelon political dog**** that it doesn't impact their daily lives much.  Another thing to remember is that all the village chantries we've seen are in Ferelden, which seems to be on the verge of going 'Church of England' at any moment.

[Big I]

LadyJaneGrey wrote...
*Goes Codex Diving*  I don't see how these basic principles are hypocritical.  Sure, any organization will have it's hypocrites and bad interpretations, but these seem like pretty good rules to live by:

These truths the Maker has revealed to me:
As there is but one world,
One life, one death, there is
But one god, and He is our Maker.
They are sinners, who have given their love
To false gods.


Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him.
Foul and corrupt are they
Who have taken His gift
And turned it against His children.
They shall be named Maleficar, accursed ones.
They shall find no rest in this world
Or beyond.


All men are the Work of our Maker's Hands,
From the lowest slaves
To the highest kings.
Those who bring harm
Without provocation to the least of His children
Are hated and accursed by the Maker.


Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
There is but one Truth.
All things are known to our Maker
And He shall judge their lies.


All things in this world are finite.
What one man gains, another has lost.
Those who steal from their brothers and sisters
Do harm to their livelihood and to their peace of mind.
Our Maker sees this with a heavy heart.


--Transfigurations 1:1-5

We can argue all day whether the Maker exists and whether he's worth obeying, but I have a hard time seeing  these as bad, hypocritical principles.  "Use your gifts to serve others, do not attack/harm others (regardless of whether you could get away with it),  don't lie, and don't steal."

The Chant isn't all it's cracked up to be. For instance:

1)"As there is but one world..." - the Chant establishes that there are two worlds, the Fade and the waking world, with the Fade being the Maker's first creation. Threnodies 5:1-5:8

2)Maleficar - the Chant establishes demons and spirit as the Maker's first children. Thus, any mage who uses magic against spirits and demons is by the above definition a maleficar. Erudition 2:1

3)"Without provocation..." - the Chant legitimises the use of violence if you are provoked. Not surprising given Andraste was a conqueror, but that allows people to rationalise violence against anyone they have a problem with.

4) Dissonant Verses - parts of the chant being declared dissonant for political convenience (e.g. the Canticles of Shartan and Hessarian)

[General User]

I disagree on point 1. The Fade and the material world of Thedas are obviously intimately connected. So much so that calling them separate worlds may not be accurate at all.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

The Chant isn't all it's cracked up to be. For instance:

1)"As there is but one world..." - the Chant establishes that there are two worlds, the Fade and the waking world, with the Fade being the Maker's first creation. Threnodies 5:1-5:8

2)Maleficar - the Chant establishes demons and spirit as the Maker's first children. Thus, any mage who uses magic against spirits and demons is by the above definition a maleficar. Erudition 2:1

3)"Without provocation..." - the Chant legitimises the use of violence if you are provoked. Not surprising given Andraste was a conqueror, but that allows people to rationalise violence against anyone they have a problem with.

I think you're taking point 1 and 2 too literally.  And the third point would only be a problem if you beleive there is no possible provokation for any violence whatsoever.

Real life has a lot of different contexts. Even something relatively straightfowrd would have to be interpreted to fit one situation or another.

"Blessed are those who stand before the corrupt and the wicked and do not falter."

That's perfectly fine sentiement. Essentially the Chant says to stop stop evil. But anyone who does would still have to decide what that is.

[Gervaise]

You have to be seriously trying to find objections for the sake of it to condemn the Chant of Light on the basis given above. The only woolley phase is the "without provocation", which naturally does lend itself to interpretation but, for example, locking mages up for something that they might conceivably do in the future is clearly wrong unless they have already provoked such a reaction by deliberately causing harm with their magic. Leading a rebellion against Magisters who regularly indulge in blood sacrifices, subjugate large swathes of humanity and had already caused the creation of the darkspawn, would seem to be justified.

What I have yet to find is any reference in the Chant of Light which backs the "Divine Right" of the Templars to lock up and control all mages as they see fit, even though the mage has done nothing wrong, and to tell them they are cursed for simply being a mage, or the "Divine Right" of Orlesian nobles to maintain their status in life without challenge or penalty, regardless of how they treat others. To my mind, both of these "Rights" are actually contradicted by the Chant.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I'm pretty sure the Chant's only word on that is that "Magic must serve man and never rule over him." Some templars interpret this as having a divine right to rule over mages' lives.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 13 novembre 2011 - 06:52 .