Author Topic: The Dogma of the Temple of Haelyn  (Read 3193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline X-Osoerde (Alan)

  • The Dragon
  • Former players
  • Sovereign
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.394
  • Regency: 21
  • Gender: Male
The Dogma of the Temple of Haelyn
« on: September 29, 2008, 05:36:07 AM »
OOC: Bjorn wrote this a long time ago.

“There are currently two main movements within the Temple of Haelyn. The Orthodox movement is headed by the Orthodox Temple in Diemed. The primary followers of the orthodox tradition are the Haelyn’s Aegis, the Western Imperial Temple and the Militant Order of Curiaécen. The Reform movement was originally led by the Northern Imperial Temple in Boeruine, through the teachings of the Prophet Fitzalan. While the NIT is still true to the teachings of Fitzalan in a certain sense, it has ceased to evolve. Instead it has become set in its own, variant, orthodoxy. Currently, the moral leadership of this movement has been inherited by the Impregnable Heart of Haelyn. Principal adherents to the Reform movement include; Haelyn’s Bastion of Thruth and the Hidden Temple of Curiaécen.”

“The most obvious difference between the two movements is their willingness to interpret the Book of Laws. The Orthodox movement claims that the divine nature of the Laws requires that one interpret what it says literally. If parts of the laws are currently ill understood or seem illogical or even unreasonable, that is because we, as mortals, fail to grasp the divineness of the Laws.”

“The Reform movement, however, claim that the Laws can only be understood by relating them to the world of today. The Anuire that Haelyn knew when he created the Law is not the Anuire of today. Therefore we must look at the intentions behind the Laws, not the exact wording. Only then can we truly understand Haelyn’s message, and use his wise words to guide us during our mortal lives.”

“One noteworthy example is the Pillars of Haelyn, from which the knightly virtues are derived. The Orthodox calls them Honor, Duty and Valor. The Reform claims them to be Honor, Justice and Courage. Wherein lays the difference? Honor is equally present with both and means roughly the same; the knight must be true to his word, chivalrous to women and so on. Duty implies that the knight’s foremost concern is loyalty and obedience to his superiors, perhaps even at the expense of justice. The Reformators turn it the other way around, serving justice is the knight’s foremost goal, then comes loyalty to one’s lord. The same goes with Valor and Courage. Valor implies that the knight must act in a certain way or be perceived as weak or unworthy – Orthodox knights are often quick to anger and appear haughty to those of lower station. Reformatory knights, on the other hand, know that courage is a personal thing – a feeling that one cause is just and that one is serving a higher power.”

- High Prefect Hubaere Armiendin, High Mass in Caercas 1516HC.
Yes, wyrmling, the meat is made all the more tender by armor...