Re: Should Churches bring back some sort of "Knighthood"?

ecthelion of the fountain · by ecthelion of the fountain on Sat Dec 20, 2008 3:33 am

Actually, Knighthood has very little to do with war and fighting. It is all about honor and Christian principles. That is what I think my benefit contemporary Christians.

srsly ash what naive old man though you your history? Knighthood was all about politics... which back then often resulted in war

Ash · by Ash on Sat Dec 20, 2008 3:37 am

ecthelion of the fountain wrote:

Actually, Knighthood has very little to do with war and fighting. It is all about honor and Christian principles. That is what I think my benefit contemporary Christians.

Knighthood was all about politics... which back then often resulted in war

No, it wasn't.

Politics did happen and did corrupt at times, but it was not "all" about politics.. at all.

Many of the early Christian hymns were written by retired Templar knights who became monks and priests.. for example.

ecthelion of the fountain · by ecthelion of the fountain on Sat Dec 20, 2008 3:42 am

templars are a whole other story, they often where monks in the first place and you could never leave the order. if you wanted to stop fighting all you could do was switch to non military branch.
do you think the church and crown would grant a group such privileges without reason? knighthood and lordship was nothing more then a very fancy bribe

Ash · by Ash on Sat Dec 20, 2008 3:47 am

ecthelion of the fountain wrote:templars are a whole other story, they often where monks in the first place and you could never leave the order. if you wanted to stop fighting all you could do was switch to non military branch.
do you think the church and crown would grant a group such privileges without reason? knighthood and lordship was nothing more then a very fancy bribe

You using the example of some of the few bad apples to paint the whole Organization and Philosophy/Theology as corrupt.

It's abit more complicated than that, but ok

Oddly · by Oddly on Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:11 am

The overall point is that knights weren't all good folk, they were dudes doing their jobs...like firefighters ~ good, meaningful and helpful job, it doesn't mean all firemen are good people.

Ash · by Ash on Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:54 am

Oddly wrote:The overall point is that knights weren't all good folk, they were dudes doing their jobs...like firefighters ~ good, meaningful and helpful job, it doesn't mean all firemen are good people.

Of course, according to Christianity no one is good. Some of us , at best, are just less bad than others. queen

ecthelion of the fountain · by ecthelion of the fountain on Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:16 am

Ash wrote:
ecthelion of the fountain wrote:templars are a whole other story, they often where monks in the first place and you could never leave the order. if you wanted to stop fighting all you could do was switch to non military branch.
do you think the church and crown would grant a group such privileges without reason? knighthood and lordship was nothing more then a very fancy bribe

You using the example of some of the few bad apples to paint the whole Organization and Philosophy/Theology as corrupt.

It's abit more complicated than that, but ok

corrupt?no not corrupt, it was nothing but politics. the peace loving knight with his white hoarse and knights code wasmade up later and is nothing but fairytale!
knights where nobles that supported a mighty ruler in return for privileges. nothing else.