Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Goobermunch" data-source="post: 1568242" data-attributes="member: 10516">So is your post.  I'm sorry to jump in here, but this is a great springboard.Having spent a substantial portion of the past few months studying the Star Chamber, I can tell you right now you're dead wrong.  The Star Chamber was not permitted to impose the death penalty.In fact, in its early period, the Star Chamber was a Court of Equity--a place where a peasant could bring a petition for the King's Justice.  As such, it's primary purpose was to mitigate the unjust results of the Law Courts.Further, it wasn't the chivalric code that permitted the crusaders to kill the Infidel, it was a papal indulgence given to each.  Prior to the granting of the indulgence, the Church couldn't find enough soldiers to engage in the Crusades because of the concerns that murder was a mortal sin.He had an absolute duty to act with honor.  An honorable combatant does not fight an unarmed foe.  An honorable combatant does not strike from behind.  An honorable combatant doesn't strike with surprise (this doesn't mean you can't attack first, it just means you can't do it when your foe is completely unable to react).  His acts were patently dishonorable.Sure, he had the right reason for his act.  But the ends do not justify the means.Even in medieval England, knights were not judges, juries, and executioners.  They had more important things to do.  There were, however, judges and juries.  Judges were appointed by the king and travelled the country dealing with criminal and civil suits.  Juries were generally members of the peerage in cases involving nobles (thus a jury of your peers, a thing Americans are not entitled to).  Executions were done by members of the military.  There were also canon courts, which handled matters involving canon law.The point here is that there was a legal system outside the knighthood.  I'll gladly spot you that his actions were in the defense of an innocent and helped someone in need.  But the Code of Conduct doesn't say that a paladin should act with honor, or help those in need, or punish those who harm the innocent.  It requires that the paladin act with honor and help those in need and punish the evildoers.  All at the same time.That's why this is a gross violation of the code.  And that's why this paladin loses his status.  Of course, it's not the end of the paladin's career, because the paladin can simply attone for his wrong doing and get on with his life.--G</blockquote>

Verification