Catholicism in a Campaign

[Estlor]

I'm not a Jew or a scholar of Judiasm, which means my comments are not meant to reflect the actual truth of the Jewish faith, but a perception of it as it was portrayed in the gospels. If I step on the toes of anyone who is a Jew, forgive me, it's not intentional and my D&D "Jewish" faith is not meant to be compared to the real Jewish faith no more than my D&D "Catholic" faith is meant to be compared to Catholicism.

That said, here's my thoughts.

The Jewish religion shown in the gospel is a very lawful-oriented one. At the time Moses led the Jews out of Eygpt, the commandments were set down in order to prevent God's chosen people from straying into pagan faiths. The Hebrew Scriptures makes no attempt to deny the existance of pagan faiths or that pagan priests drew power from that faith, it just shows that the followers of God were stronger because God was stronger.

Fast-forward to the time of Christ. Israel is occupied by the Romans and the religious order of the region has become VERY lawful in an attempt to fend off the pagan Roman faith. From the perspective of the early Christians (and, as seen in the gospels, Christ himself), the Jews had lost sight of the meaning behind the rules, making the rules more important than God. In a sense, law became a "god" itself. Jesus's mission was meant to shock the people into realizing they had lost sight of the truth. Some got it, others didn't.

From a D&D perspective, God to the Hebrew people would be more of a strong Lawful Neutral being. A strict judge and king. His priests would revere law above all else to the point where the original edicts that included goodness would be lost along the way.

The "Catholic" in your campaign would come from a religious sect of the LN group that believes NG is more in spirit with the truth of their shared god. This revelation would have come from their original religious leader, a man they believe to be an avatar of their god sent to the mortal realm to preach the truth, be persecuted by the LN sect, then put to death until they rose again, proving their connection with the god and their belief in the truth faith. They long for a day (that they feel will come soon) in which their fallen leader will return from the divine realm to stand judgement over the apocalypse with an army of angels at his side.

That's close enough in spirit to the foundation of Catholicism and the gospel-era Jewish faith but still "fantasy" enough that it shouldn't be true Catholicism or true Judaism.

 

[Dogbrain]

Though Christianity was distinct from regular Jewish belief before Jamnia, it was only afterwards that it became totally separate. It was not until the second century that the Marcionites would come along, claiming that the God of the Old Testament was evil and that the New Testament was about a new God.

Note that Marcionism was denounced as a gross heresy by the Church.

 

[Three_Haligonians]

Do not do it unless you know a great deal more about Christianity and its history than you let on here. Otherwise, what you will end up with will be a shallow parody, nothing better.

Just to reassure you, Dogbrain, I myself am Catholic and so is my sister, who is playing the Catholic priest in question. She's even better at this stuff than me, having taught Catechism in the past. The only other player in question is my boyfriend, so we're not concerned about igniting any flame wars in game. Even so, we've all been doing a lot of research in order to understand what was going on in the faith back in the early days. I've been drawing extensively from "A Brief History of the Catholic Church" which is proving invaluble for understanding various sects, doctrines, and debates within the church. The posts here are really helping as well, there is a lot of information here I haven't yet come across or considered, so please, keep it coming!

In regards to your concerns, I think that you've made a very good point, and I'm glad you brought it up. Hopefully, with the combined knowlege of my group and the HUGELY helpfull posts here, I'll be able to fold this character into my game in a respectful manor.

T from Three Haligonians

 

[Three_Haligonians]

"This revelation would have come from their original religious leader, a man they believe to be an avatar of their god sent to the mortal realm to preach the truth, be persecuted by the LN sect, then put to death until they rose again, proving their connection with the god and their belief in the truth faith."

Here is another point that I'm having trouble with: the resurection. In real-world Catholicism this was percieved as miraculous, however, would it have the same effect in a D&D setting, where there a fair amount of people who can resurect. My sister, who is playing the Catholic priest, holds that it would still have a huge impact as Christ's followers would hardly be expected to be able to afford to have him resurected. I thought about having him resurected in a kind of "anti-resurection zone" to put it in a really dumb way. But maybe my best choice would be to have him resurected without a spell.

I know I'm getting a bit off topic here, but you guys have really got my brain going with these posts. So, please keep it up, your thoughts are, as always, appreciated.

T from Three Haligonians

PS: from those of you who have given me books to read, I'm trying to get my hands on all of them!

 

[Torm]

It might help if you knew the (apocryphal) story of the PURPOSE for the death and resurrection. I mean, everyone always says, "He died for your sins," but you never really hear anybody talk about the mechanics of HOW His death saved anyone's soul.

There is a story that says that while Lucifer lost the war in Heaven and was exiled, he won one last victory of sorts - right before he betrayed G-d, he had secreted away the Key of Souls, also known as the Faerie Key (for reasons never made clear to me), and in exile, while working to spoil Man's relationship with G-d, he was also working on ways of using the Key to disrupt the connection between Man and G-d, and to divert the souls of people who died, particularly those with sin. This situation had, for one reason or another, become more urgent when Jesus was sent and given His mission - He had to live as a mortal and die with sin on Himself (thus the treatment of the moneychangers at the Temple), so that He could go to Hell to retrieve the Key. He did, and returned on the third day to let Man know that things would be better now, and then ascended on to return to His Divinity.

The Resurrection wasn't the important thing - it was what He was doing while He was gone.

P.S. to all - I'm not ascerting any of the above as TRUE, but I have read it in a source recognized by some (few) as authentic, and more importantly, I thought it might help for the purposes of the question about the importance of the Resurrection in a world where that's somewhat common.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Actually, I think the big problem in playing a pseudo-Catholic priest in a setting that doesn't have Judaism is not so much the difficulty of the Resurrection (the idea of bringing someone back from the dead was not unknown in the ancient world--Jesus is said to have raised other people from the dead (Lazarus, the Widow's son, the Synagogue leader's daughter, et al) and IIRC, one of the Roman Emperors was reported to have raised someone from the dead. Rather the significance of the Resurrection was that Jesus was raised from the dead without the intervention of anyone else and in accordance with a host of prophecies and predictions that gave his resurrection eschatological and evidiential significance). Instead, the difficulty would, I think lie in the historical-religious context and significance of the resurrection. If you wanted to have the resurrection of the game's pseudo-Jesus have similar significance to what is assigned to it IRL, it would need to stand at the end of a long line of prophecies and to represent the culmination of God's relationship with humankind. It would also have to be in some way, a universal sin-offering or atonement (I know there are various theologies on this point but the distinctions are more subtle than is relevant here). Without all of that, your pseudo-catholicism wouldn't make sense.

In the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Aslan dies on the stone table and is resurrected in the morning and goes on to defeat the White Witch. Yet Narnia did not develop anything resembling the Catholic church because the different prophecies in Narnia (the deeper magic from before the dawn of time simply said that when an innocent who had committed no treachery was slain in a traitor's stead, the table would crack and death itself would begin working backwards; while similar to the prophecies of Jesus, it's not the same) did not have the same significance. Similarly, Aslan's death in Narnia was never interpreted in a universal manner. Aslan died for Edmund, not for Mr. Tumnus or anyone else. As such, the core of the Catholic faith would not be present for any kind of Narnian pseudo-catholicism.

If you want to have a real, robust pseudo-Catholicism in your game, I think that you would need to incorporate a lot of the real thing--including history, prophecy, context, and theology as well as ritual and organization in order for it to make sense. At that point, you might as well go whole hog and set the campaign in a mythic version of the real world.

 

[Dogbrain]

There is a series of fantasy novels wherein a specific type of dagger kills without the possiblity of resurrection. Perhaps a similar means of execution is used by the authorities. Can't have convicted rabble-rousers getting their bodies stolen and subject to a resurrection spell, after all.

 

[Wrath of the Swarm]

I can think of one very obvious problem: Catholocism as it is understood today did not exist several hundred years AD. Until the Great Schism of 1054, when the Church formally broke into Western and Eastern branches (which became the Catholic and Orthodox churches, respectively), the Christian faith was unified, at least in theory. In practice, different geographic regions had developed different liturgical and in some cases doctrinal traditions - this is eventually what lead to the split.

Around 500 AD, the first period of the Byzantine Empire was taking place. Christianity had been the state religion for the past few centuries - instead of Christians being a persecuted minority, it was politically and socially expedient to follow the faith. Some have argued that this actually weakened Christianity, as instead of attracting only a few people who were so devoted to their beliefs that they would risk horrible death for them it attracted people interested in the increased power and influence within the "secular" system Christianity could bring them. Society was heavily influenced by the Roman Empire, which had collapsed only about three hundred years before. Constantiople, which vied with Alexandria as the center of the spiritual empire and was the capital of the secular empire (to the degree to which the two were distinct entities at the time) was sometimes called "the New Rome", in fact.

It's a fascinating period of history, both in the secular and religious senses, but I suspect it's not what you're looking for.

 

[Henry]

Here is another point that I'm having trouble with: the resurrection... I thought about having him resurected in a kind of "anti-resurection zone" to put it in a really dumb way. But maybe my best choice would be to have him resurected without a spell.

This is one of the stickier points I was hoping to avoid by the removal of the old/new covenant part of the equation. If there was no split, or if the "fall" happened in a different way, then that could be avoided.

But look at it this way: All you really need is an event that splits the One church from the "good" church, right? How about a harbinger comes, no need for him to be royalty, just a messenger who says, "the rules have changed." But put in in an atmosphere of slight uncertainty; maybe he was believed to be an adversary, or maybe this harbinger performed the miracles as was foretold, but NOT THE miracles that were foretold. Then you have the "good" church saying, "No, he isn't", you have the One Church saying, "yes, he is," and voila! Friendly split between the religions. Then you can have extremists coming in to say the teachings are harmful, and introduce the occasional persecutor that way.

For a REAL role reversal, have the One Church being the one denying the harbinger, and the "good" church among the ones breaking off. SO you have "in the beginning was the One Church, keeper of the One's word" and then the churches of Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil break off, because the One's harbinger said, "the rules have changed - there must be struggle in order for my will to be completed, and the perfection of all things to come"; then, BANG you have the old church being the one trying to hold things together, and the G/E/C/L churches trying to "progress" and finish the message. You change the paradigm from Jewish Faith / Pre-Catholic Church to Catholic Church / Protestants.

Just some thoughts.

 

[Dogbrain]

Around 500 AD, the first period of the Byzantine Empire was taking place. Christianity had been the state religion for the past few centuries - instead of Christians being a persecuted minority, it was politically and socially expedient to follow the faith. Some have argued that this actually weakened Christianity, as instead of attracting only a few people who were so devoted to their beliefs that they would risk horrible death for them it attracted people interested in the increased power and influence within the "secular" system Christianity could bring them. Society was heavily influenced by the Roman Empire, which had collapsed only about three hundred years before.

COLLAPSED? What are you smoking, son? The Vasileon Rhomaiosini lived on quite nicely, as did its people, the Romaioi. If there was any "collapse" of the Empire, it would be after Manzikert.