I need to walk through the scenario before I can ask the question, so here goes. Suppose a Paladin of Sarenrae is sent by his church to capture a tiefling who was reportedly causing all sorts of trouble. The paladin captures the tiefling and brings him back to his church. The local cleric wants to execute the tiefling, partly because of what he's been told, and partly because, well, the guy is a tiefling, evil in the blood and all that.
The paladin refuses to go along with that, saying that he has seen for himself evidence that the tiefling is not beyond redemption. He goes on to say that he will personally vouch for the tiefling, and that anyone that wants to carry out the sentance can go through him. He finally says that if he is wrong, may Sarenrae strike him dead where he stands.
Obviously the cleric goes along with it, in the sense that he doesn't pick a swordfight with someone who just dared their god to kill him if he was wrong, but what happens in the political and ecuminical sense? Could a cleric fall if they lost sight of Sarenrae's Redemption portfolio? How would it affect the paladin from a political standpoint to butt heads with the local head of his church, especially if he won?
In case it was important to the story, the tiefling was capable of redemption, and in fact most of the accusations against him were hearsay and rumor. Also, I'm not bringing an arguement to the boards, this is a part of the character's backstory.
I don't think either party is really at risk of 'falling' per se.
The Cleric has made their call based on one aspect of the Deities portfolio, and also considered the societal expectations (I assume the Cleric isn't breaking the law or serving their own interest above the common good). The Paladin is simply looking at a different page of the same text and bringing forth their interpretation.
The Paladin (of he won) is entitled to his victory, and all things being equal there should be little fallout if he fought his case and won legitimately.
If (for some reason) the Church itself (or rather its representatives locally) had actually gone down a dark and evil path, then the Paladin might consider a schizm and start his own congregation etc.
They do cover this sort of thing in the 2nd Ed Complete Paladins Handbook.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would agree with the general consensus; the cleric is in no danger of losing access to his abilities, so long as he is being true to and truly worships the Dawnflower. She is a goddess of forgiveness, sure, but she also does not pull her punches. She can be extremely militaristic, and cutting down evil quickly and without remorse is a valid approach to her worship. Depending on the circumstances I might have the cleric's dreams be a bit troubled if he wrongfully executed the tiefling, but that would be the most of it. It should also be expressed to the cleric that he or she should view this as a learning experience, that his goddess does not support condemning anyone on the basis of their heritage alone.
The paladin did as a paladin should; the paladin is supposed to be a righteous agent of his deity, and following the more forgiving aspects of the Dawnflower's portfolio is extremely fitting. He stood up to what he saw was a fault against his goddess' teachings and prevented a great wrong.
Now, the fallout from this incident is dependent on many factors. Does the cleric feel humiliated, or is he humbled? How much pull does the cleric have in the church within the region? The paladin should not be faced with any retribution from Sarenrae, but churches are political organizations as much as they are religious institutions. If the cleric has enough clout and decides to seek retribution against the paladin, the paladin could be excommunicated by the local church. The Dawnflower may still support his actions, and his charge to carry out her will would remain unchanged, but others in the region might view and treat him differently than they otherwise would.
|
Sarenrae is complicated. Qadira and most of Kelesh often pointedly ignore Sarenrae's peace and redemption portfolios outright, yet they continue to gain spells and power from her. Neither party is wrong, neither party has violated Sarenrae's teachings, per se, mainly due to the little clause that states that a creature without a chance for redemption ought to be struck down. Since this is subjective, the cleric wasn't entirely wrong to veer on the side of caution (not a full demon, true, but fiends tend to be difficult to "redeem"). But neither was the paladin wrong, for, having seen a chance for redemption present, he did his best to act in such a manner as to lead by example, and help the man purify his soul and learn the ways of good. In other words, both acted as their religion tells them to act.
As for what would happen? Well, that's difficult to say, since PF deities are very active. "Qadira: Gateway to the East" touched upon the fact that there is some tension between the sects of Sarenrae who act as militants and those that embrace her Redemption aspect. I think it would basically boil down to a religious conflict, but I'm finding it very difficult to imagine a cleric and paladin of Sarenrae going at each other. Since neither has lost their powers, both stand in Sarenrae's good graces. To attack one another would violate the tenets of their faith. They might disagree, but I highly doubt there will be any repercussions beyond a few grumbled words and the two of them staying on the opposite sides of the room during sermons. It's hard to imagine a goddess of forgiveness breed feuds among her worshippers...
But no, neither would fall in this case. They WOULD if they chose to go through with said swordfight, or rather, the cleric would, if he started it, because he's going directly against an active decision of his goddess (and against the evidence of a paladin that would lose powers if he were wrong). The Paladin, so long as he acted as shield, and not blade (i.e., he acted in self-defense and didn't goad the cleric into a fight) would just be doing his job. Otherwise he too risks drawing Sarenrae's ire, attacking a fellow priest out of a basic difference in tenet interpretation...
|
A while ago i posted a thread: Sarenrae and Slavery how can they co exist? ( i was refering to Qadira)
Here was James Jacob's thoughtful response April 16,2011
Sarenrae herself, and her church, does not tolerate slavery, but nor do they preach "Kill the slavers!" They would certainly look for non-violent ways to seek a slave's freedom—purchasing the slave and setting the slave free is probably the preferred method.
Now that said, there's a wide range of individual variations among the specific worshipers of Sarenrae—as with ANY religion. There are some worshipers of Sarenrae who would, perhaps, seek to simply comfort slaves if possible, espcially if they see the alternative (living on your own with no support structure in a dangerous city) is more painfula nd dangerous than slavery itself. There's ABSOLUTELY some worshipers of Sarenrae who crusade against slavery and slavers themselves and DO use violence against the slavers.
Now, as for Qadira? It's important to keep two things in mind about Sarenrae's faith being the most widespread faith in Qadira:
1) It's not in charge. The government of Qadira is richer and more powerful than the church of Sarenrae in Qadira, and as a result, the government is the one that gets to say if slaves are legal or not. The church has to either go along with that or rebel, and in Qadira's case, the church has opted to go along with it.
2) The church of Sarenrae in Qadira is NOT the most faithful of all of Sarenrae's churches. In fact, it's one of the most corrupt of her churches, because they've more or less lost sight of the "redeem your enemies" and "peace is better than war." Over the course of many generations, the church of Sarenrae in Qadira has become militarized, basically, and they're a lot more pro-war than they should be—but not SO pro-war that the chruch is in immediate danger of losing all their clerical powers. This church's tolerance of slaves in Qadira is but one of many examples of how the church is straying from Sarenrae's path. It's also why there's a schism building among the church, as a growing number of worshipers are coming to realize that things have somehow gone sour in the faith here. But an outright rebellion would tear the church apart, cause massive unrest in the faith AND in the nation, and could even start a Qadiran civil war—which is exactly the type of thing the true worshiper of Sarenrae DOESN'T want. So the actual honest worshipers of Sarenrae in Qadira are sort of caught in a terrible spot—either stand up for the actual teachings of their goddess and risk tearing their church apart, or stay quiet and risk letting the church stray that one final bit that finally forces Sarenrae to take action against the church.
All of this is set up to give a really interesting political angle to the church, honestly—it'd be super easy to just paint Sarenrae's church as a "can do no wrong" set of do-gooders, but this is, in my opinion, a far more interesting and realistic portrayal of the corruption of power. And it's got built into it the seeds of a really interesting-sounding campaign!"
While not directly answering your question It would seem that faith's are not monolithic, and there seems to be plenty of room for people of the same faith to disagree...well about all sorts of things.
I hope this helps,
Elyas
Suppose a Paladin of Sarenrae is sent by his church to capture a tiefling who was reportedly causing all sorts of trouble. The paladin captures the tiefling and brings him back to his church. The local cleric wants to execute the tiefling, partly because of what he's been told, and partly because, well, the guy is a tiefling, evil in the blood and all that.
I'm no expert on Sarenrae, but since it's obviously about a good faith I have to say that I can't comment without more information.
1. What's "all sorts of trouble"? Thievery? Public indecency with a goat? Painting graffiti on the local guardhouse? Or murder, rape and sacrificing to dark gods?
2. What is "reportedly" did he do it or not? Lord Shojo "reportedly" allied with a lich and his goblin army to bring down his own city. Well, reported by a crazy paladin who fell because of executing him on those false accusations.
3. If he did anything bad, what were the tiefling's motives.
All I can tell so far is that the cleric wouldn't have fallen because he didn't actually do anything.
Wow, this is very interesting. Thanks all for your insight.
Anway, the rumors the cleric heard were basically the standard 'wicked withc in the woods' stories that had been repeated for years as a way to keep people away from from where the tiefling lived. To be honest, I probably overplayed the cleric's bloodlust, the task was more 'bring the tiefling back to be judged' rather than execution.