No. Nor were any of the thoughts that you have on my mind at the time. Frankly, I tangle with a lot of people over a lot of topics - some by design and some by accident. I apologize if I've tangled with you in the past and offended you, but I honestly have no memory of what we might have tangled over. So be assured that I'm not bearing you any particular ill will.
No, you did not offend me back then, it was more of a misunderstanding, ...anyway, I'm glad we've got that out of the way!
As for what I'm taking a jab at, I taking a jab at the notion that a priest of a particular diety has a relationship with his diety that is comparable to that of the relationship assumed of between a Christian and his diety. I'm saying that this simplification grossly misunderstands the full range of complex ways that different religious groups have seen how they stand in relationship to the divine. Many existing religious groups and most ancient ones had entirely different outlooks on the relationship between mortals and gods, than the way the Christians percieve the relationship with their God.
I assure you, as far as the game mechanics and fluff go, I'm not making any parallels between a D&D cleric and a Christian one. I'm only talking about how a cleric in the D&D "works". No matter the fluff, no matter the idiosyncrasies of any given deity, no matter the fictional setting/nation/religion, no matter the actual way the cleric interacts with his god, there is always a strong "connection" between the mortal and deity, that results in the deity granting powers to the mortal.
For example, other religious groups might percieve the deity in any one of the following often mutually exclusive ways: blind, uncaring, distant, hateful, essentially mindless, mechanical, suffering the same failings as mortals only to greater degrees, ignorant, unknowable, and so forth. Thus the idea of relating to that diety as a servant to a benevolent subject, or even as a subject of at all does not always make sense under such conceptions.
There is no way that a D&D cleric, views his deity as "blind, uncaring, distant, hateful, essentially mindless, mechanical", in respect to himself and in respect to their mutual goals. The deity might be uncaring to a certain race. The clerics believes so as well. The deity might hate "something", the cleric hates that too. If the deity is mechanical, the cleric either does not know, or if he knows he behaves accordingly to satisfy their mutual goals.
If the deity hates all elves and wants to see all elves slaughtered, the cleric abides to that and acts in favor of the deity's portfolio, NOT because he believes otherwise, and NOT because he actually loves elves and wants to brick that deity down. This is not possible, because if a cleric is indifferent/against the beliefs of his deity, he simply ceases to be a cleric of that deity.
Without disrespect, if things worked the way you describe them, any given scenario/story, would be a bad scenario/story, one full of "holes" that do not make cense.
Example:
Let's take that god who hates elves I mentioned above.
Now imagine your version of the cleric, who either doesn't really care about elves, or even likes/loves elves. The cleric finds the deity hateful and uncaring towards elves. The same cleric wakes up in the morning, and prays to deity, while actually "thinking" that he dislikes elves so that the deity does not see through his lies...? Then, after getting his spells he behaves however he wants, while taking care of not to offend the deity openly...?
Again, without disrespect, not only is this approach invalid with the D&D system, it also makes for bad storytelling.
Whenever a cleric prays to his deity, his feelings, guilts, thoughts... his very soul is transparent to that god. The actual reason the deity grants him powers is because, the clerics BELIEVES in whatever the deity believes in. Moreover his faith to the cause is so strong, that he actually is the one to get the powers, because there might be other believers of the same deity as well (commoners or whatever have you) who do not get any powers from the god. The cleric's faith and resolve is the strongest in respect to the portfolio, that's why he is granted powers.
It should be noted for example that in 1e, the clerics prayers of up to 3rd level were assumed to be answered BY THE CLERIC HIMSELF. Only 7th level spells required the direct dispensation of the diety. Now aspects of this conception have been lost over time as the cleric gets refined into a more and more standardized version of the Christian priest, but fundamentally even under the 3e rules there is nothing that requires this.
I don't know how first edition deals with clerics, although I'm fairly certain that things did not really change in later editions.
from the 2nd edition PHB:
The cleric receives his spell as insight directly from his deity (the deity does not need to make a personal appearance to grant the spells the cleric prays for), as a sign and reward for his faith, so he must take care not to abuse his power lest it be taken away as punishment.
The nature of the mythos helps define the strictures the priest must follow.
PHB 3.5:
A cleric uses the power of his god to make the god's will manifest. ...
Like they gods they serve, clerics can be of any alignment. ...
...Clerics do not acquire their spells from books or scrolls, nor do they prepare them through study. Instead, the meditate or pray for their spells, receiving them through their own strength of faith or as divine inspiration.
Some clerics devote themselves not to a god but to a cause or a source of divine power. ...
While some clerics are tightly bound to their churches' activities on a daily basis, others have more freedom to conduct their lives as they please, as long as they do so in accordance withe god's wishes.
Ex-Clerics
A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god (generally by acting in ways opposed to the god's alignment or purposes) loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description).
So when you say that by 1e:
"the cleric's prayers of up to 3rd level were assumed to be answered BY THE CLERIC HIMSELF.", I assume that the " by himself" is
treated as "their own strength of faith".
Even when they are not devoted to a specific deity, they still abide to certain divine ideals and beliefs, as abstract as they might be, and they always have a strong faith in those.
Never can he feel that the deity or divine power (spiritual inclinations) are "blind, uncaring, distant, hateful, essentially mindless, mechanical", in respect to him, or to his beliefs.
So when a cleric does not stay true to his deity's will and beliefs, or when he does not stay true to some abstract divine power (abstract in a cense that they are not dictated by a specific divine entity, but by some generic "spiritual/divine" power) the cleric always becomes an Ex-cleric.
No, cleric recieve and cast spells, some times from their deity and sometimes not.
As explained above, the "sometimes not" happens when the cleric does not abide to a specific deity. Even then, he still abides to to a generic divine power in accordance to his spiritual inclinations.
And of course you assume that faith is a vital part of the prayer because you are steeped in the Western Christian tradition, and in that tradition the mystery aspects of the religion are played down or (in the Prostestant traditional) often totally shunned.
No, what I say is totally based on how the D&D cleric "works", no matter the religion.
But faith is not always a strongly emphasized aspect of religious belief. Christianity involves very little magical practice, but in the case of ancient religions its almost all magical practice. In ancient polytheistic religions it doesn't really matter if you believe the God is good and looking out for your interests or not - and in fact you may very much believe otherwise - it only matters that you perform the particular sacred rites which bring about the gods favor. A cleric may see his role not as upholding the 'faith' of the deity, but simply propitiating the diety to perserve the natural order or to forestall his unpredictable wrath.
No, it's only natural to assume that in Christianity - which presumes a benevolent, all-present, living deity that wants to contact those that worship him. Modern imans of the Moslem faith don't presume a spiritual connection to the diety. Ancient priests of various pantheons did not persume a spiritual connection resulting from performing magical rites, though they might have presumed power gained thereby. For example, shortly after Christianity began, a sect of Jews explained the miracles attributed to the founder of the religion to that founder learning the secret name of God and misusing it to work wonders. Now under your modern conception of the relationship of a miracle worker to a deity this is impossible, because a god would not allow his power to be used against his will. But even to certain ancient Jews, whose conceptions of a diety were much closer to modern than say the Romans or the Etruscans, this was apparently a reasonably satisfactory answer.
Now here is where you confuse the game with reality.
First and foremost, "faith" in D&D, does not mean faith in the belief that gods exist. In D&D "faith" means ONLY faith in the gods will, goals and general portfolio, it means being in agreement with what a deity represents. In D&D, there is undeniable evidence of the existence of gods. Whenever a cleric prays to a god and receives powers, he can "instantly" heal the gapping wounds of the peasant and anybody can be a witness of this divine magic. No one can deny the existence of gods in the D&D world. The deity's are actual "personas" of the world. Even if they are unreachable, they prove their existence every day.
In real life there is no undeniable evidence of the god's existence. I 'd even say that there is no evidence whatsoever, by we better not go deeper into this...
In real life there are atheists like myself (there... again I had to say it!
), who deny the existence of any god, and there are also those (perhaps like yourself?) you believe that there is/are a god(s). The PRIMARY faith of those who believe in god(s), is faith in the very existence of god(s). Faith & agreement, in whatever the god(s) represents comes second. As I said above, in the D&D world, there is no need for this PRIMARY faith. In the D&D world there are no atheists. There might as well be those who do not agree with any deity, but even they, know well enough that the gods are real. In D&D there might be those who are willing to perform certain rites so as to bring about a deity's favor, but if those same people only want a certain favor, while they disagree or disdain certain other aspects of the deity, they are definitely not clerics of that same deity. Just because the gods are actual "NPCs" in the D&D world, does not mean that there aren't clandestine clerics and worshippers who are willing to perform false rites in order to attain their goals.
There might as well be worshippers who want a deity's favor without being fake in their beliefs. Perhaps they want a god's favor and only that, and perhaps they are not willing to follow the entire code of this deity. And perhaps this deity will answer to them if the act of doing so benefits it's purposes. Still these people are not clerics of that deity.
A deity will never grand powers to those who "partly" believe in it's cause. Those who get the powers are the trusted followers, who might as well acknowledge certain faults of that deity, but they always see a means to an end, and they always have the uttermost belief and respect in their god's plans. No matter what, their faith in the cause of their deity is unchallenged. When second thoughts come knocking in the night (which is only natural, and also makes for great storytelling), this is when the "ex cleric" rule comes slowly in. IMHO there is no need to use this rule once at some big misstep by removing all powers at once. A DM can always "reduce" the powers granted to a cleric so as to portray the cleric's denial/objection in respect to the deity's ideals and beliefs... that's how I play it anyway, and it offers for great storytelling opportunities.
Your making the assumption here that a) the deity is going to mind being decieved rather than being impressed by the mortals resourcefulness
Of course a deity is going to mind being deceived, because she cannot afford/allow its own flock to go against it's plans! No deity is so stupid. Even if the mortal's "betrayal" is ineffectual to it's plans, the deity will still take away the powers. There might be a case where the deity will not take away a betrayer's powers, but only if the deity has some machiavellian plan of coming out of this scenario with benefits.
There is no way that a deity will grand powers to half-believers, traitors, or people who only want to benefit themselves and their personal agenda with the deity's powers. If any deity was so "soft", the D&D world would have been full of clerics... and by full i mean full!! ...just as if the arcane language was somewhat "simple" the D&D world would have been full of wizards!
I think the Ex-Cleric rule clarifies exactly how a deity treats with treason and lies from the part of it's clerics.
and b) that the deity is a mindful being with a will and not a mechanical and impersonal force. Again, you are defaulting to the Christian conception of religion.
All deities are mindful beings. D&D has always treated them as such.
In the case where a cleric does not choose a deity, but chooses to serve a cause or some generic divine power instead, he still has to stay true to that cause. In this case: deception, lies and treason come in the form of NOT "living for the cause", of NOT abiding to the code of this generic divine power.
EVERY divine power, from the most specific (deity) to the most generic and abstract one, has rules that can be followed or broken.
Again, you are making the assumption that what the diety cares about is sincere and honest devotion,
I'm not assuming anything. The game's books say so.
and that's not the usual assumption of ancient religions. In the greek religion for example, the idea that you would love and be devoted to a deity would seem rather strange and perhaps an act of hubris.
This is wrong. Devotion to a god was not hubris. While during the common rituals clerics were actually the heads of every family, without any distinct religious titles or clothing or gear, there were still devoted clerics to each god. Those devoted clerics were excepted to carry out the most important of rituals and feasts, they were expected to handle the temples' resources, and were practicing clergy as a profession. No matter if they were elected for the post, there were clerics for a year, and even lifetime clerics devoted to a certain god and to a certain temple (those were the high ranking ones). There were cases were the female clerics were expected to be virgins... Sometimes male clerics were expected to never marry... they all had distinct clothing and gear (even staffs!). Love and devotion to a god was not hubris. It might have been some sort of "profession" (even then, one to be taken very very seriously), but it was still carried out with love and respect to the god and it's beliefs.
What the deity really cared about was simply that you offered them the resources they desired through acts of sacrifice which they got some satisfaction from. In other words, what the deity really cared about was that you paid your taxes, and whether you did so of a cheerful heart or not wasn't that important. It's only in the Judeo-Christian tradition that you see a conception of the divine that could care less if you paid your taxes if you did so uncheerfully and without loving the deity.
In D&D, you can treat worship, however you want, and you can use whatever references might suit your style of play. EVERY religion on the planet has a different way of being worshipped by the people. In D&D you can use all those types of worship.
Still EVERY religion on the planet has it's clerics it's monks it's bishops it's "teachers"... and they are all expected to live in a certain way so as to make the example for everybody else. Call it faith, call it way of living, call it meditation, call it player, call it however you want, this is what differentiates the true men of faith from the laity in D&D. The clerics in D&D have to live up to what is expected from the deity, not to what is expected from the population.
