"It wasn't the reward that mattered or the recognition you might harvest. It was your depth of commitment, your quality of service, the product of your devotion -- these were the things that counted in a life. When you gave purely, the honor came in the giving, and that was honor enough."
                -- Scott O'Grady

Author Topic: Religion and Chivalry  (Read 32205 times)

Christian Tobler

  • New Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #15 on: 2008-07-23, 19:13:54 »
This is a very interesting topic.

First, the equation of Christ with pure pacifism has some challenges. Jesus violently overthrows the money changes' tables, scatters their coins, and drives away livestock with a whip in the incident in the temple. He also instructs his followers to arm themselves in the garden of Gethsemane.

The knight's role as an agent of violence can also be excused in Scripture because of their service: "Render unto Caesar..."

Regarding the broader scope of the topic, the medieval knight in the image handed down to our time is the product of diverse forces, and these were layered into the concept across a span of centuries. The earliest knights, or miles, were elite soldiers. The Peace and Truce of God movements connected this elite with the concept of defense of church and keeper of God's peace. Still later, the courtly love movement and chansons de geste gave him his romantic aspect as champion of ladies.

It is the Church that 'civilizes' knighthood, taking a warrior elite and giving them an even more sacred charge. Without the Church, knighthood would doubtless have been a very differnent institution.

All the best,

Christian

Sword Chick

  • Founder/Lead Instructor Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
  • Forum Follower
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
    • Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #16 on: 2008-07-24, 12:48:07 »
Hi Sir Ed,

As to your remarks about who is the more noble, the chivalrous Christian or the chivalrous atheist, from my own admittedly faith based point of view, I would argue that just because the atheist doesn't believe in a higher power, doesn't mean he isn't being guided by it, though unknowingly.

This comes from someone who has felt the beatings of a guardian angel's wings on more than one occasion.

Buzz.  :)
"Where have all the good men gone and where are all the gods?
Where's the street wise Hercules to fight the rising odds?"
~Steinman/Pitchford

Sir Edward

  • Forum Admin
  • Commander of the Order
  • Forum Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,340
  • Verum et Honorem.
    • ed.toton.org
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #17 on: 2008-07-24, 14:55:59 »

That's a good point, but allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. The atheist could make the same argument in reverse, that the devout Christian is really just (unknowingly) following a set of philosophical ideals that aren't actually driven by an external force. :)

Just covering all the angles. :)

This reminds me of a bumper-sticker I once saw, which read "Militant Agnostic: I don't know, and neither do you!"

But getting back to the religious acceptance of the violent nature of a knight's duties, one of the points that was also brought up on the Armour Archive was that there are forms of acceptable killing (particularly in the medieval mindset), not the least of which is self-defense or saving the life of an innocent. Perhaps war can thus be justified as an extension of these.

That also brings up an interesting point. There are many who feel that killing is never justified. Many others would accept killing in self-defense as justified. Personally, I think defending oneself steps into the realm of being your duty. To allow yourself to be killed, when you had the means to prevent it, is allowing evil to prevail. Thoughts?


Sir Ed T. Toton III
Knight Commander, Order of the Marshal

( Personal Site | My Facebook )

Sword Chick

  • Founder/Lead Instructor Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
  • Forum Follower
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
    • Academy of Chivalric Martial Arts
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #18 on: 2008-07-26, 02:40:32 »
This reminds me of a bumper-sticker I once saw, which read "Militant Agnostic: I don't know, and neither do you!"

How about the dyslexic agnostic who wonders if there is a dog?
Quote
To allow yourself to be killed, when you had the means to prevent it, is allowing evil to prevail. Thoughts?

I agree there absolutely.
"Where have all the good men gone and where are all the gods?
Where's the street wise Hercules to fight the rising odds?"
~Steinman/Pitchford

Sir Matthew

  • Squire of the Order
  • Forum Acolyte
  • ***
  • Posts: 603
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #19 on: 2008-09-03, 22:31:30 »
In an attempt to revive this most interesting discussion I shall add my two cents.  I do not think that it is necessary to have a christian or even a traditional organized religious base for the broader use of Chivalry.  In the historical context, then I believe that an organized religious base must be applied for the term to apply.  I do believe that chivalry requires some belief in an external power, God, for lack of a better term.  It is my experience that there are very few people who are actually atheists.  Most are more like myself in that they may not believe in the traditional organized religions but do embrace the idea of a God.  I refer to this as spirituality.  I follow a Judao-christian God and idealology without belonging to any particular faith.  I would argue that the Warrior Code or Bushido, while similiar to Chivalry is different because it lacks that intermingling of religion.  Both were developed by the powers that be to control the warrior classes and ensure their loyalty.  In the wrong hands, both have also been used for ill as well as good.  Ok, well I guess now I will sit back and see if I have stirred up any hornets.

Dragonlover

  • Guest
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #20 on: 2008-09-04, 16:19:23 »
Very well said Sir Brian.
i would concur most definitely. :)

Todd Sullivan

  • New Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #21 on: 2008-10-13, 19:18:00 »
Better late than never (slap his visor down and hides behind his horse).

I believe the Subject is: Religion and Chivalry and not: Christianity and Chivalry  :-*

For myself; although the medieval knight has it's history tied to the church, I myself am 50/50 about religion and chivalry tied to each other.  To me chivalry is many things; gallantry to ladies, doing the right thing, obeying the law to ones best ability, being a benefit to society and not a menace, a shoulder to cry on, an open ear, community involvment, protection of children, unjudgemental eyes, and standing up for those who can't stand up for themselves.

In doing the above mentioned things, religion has no part for me, however, I am a pagan, and when I kneel before a bout, say at a Selohaar Gathering or at my home, than religion does play a part.

If someone is to say "For me, as a modern knight, holding true and reviving chivalric value, YES my religion has much to do with it"  than I say "well done and I understand" and support that person's view.  When it comes to religion and strong beliefs a man/women can and will take a strong stance for thier belief, up and too the point of strapping a bomb to thier chest, while I would not go to that extreme I will step into harms way to defend a women who gets slapped across the face by a drunk boyfriend and religion will have no part.

Hope I'm not confusing?

Cheers,

Todd
Lake Ontario Fechtschule

Sir Griff

  • New Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #22 on: 2008-10-13, 19:56:48 »
I think chivalry was also very much about having an excuse to just up and challenge someone to fight to the death in the name of chivalry, for any perceived insult. Back in the Middle Ages, conflicts could ignite from something like a mild insult or perceived slight, and each side would feel justified to pursue conflict in order to be "chivalrous" and maintain their honour.

Chivalry also had some pretty warped ideals that are pretty hard for me to understand. For example, if a knight caught two lovers eloping without the consent of their parents, he would let them go but not without taking all their money first (supposedly so they wouldn't have any outside help on their escape and prove that their love was strong) then going to the pub and buying his friends drinks.

That seems very odd to me.

Justin

  • Knight at heart
  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 74
  • On the quest to knighthood
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #23 on: 2015-06-29, 21:24:38 »
I personally don't think that religion is a necessity for chivalry. To be chivalrous is a choice. A person should have a desire to be chivalrous of their own accord, not solely because they are bound by a higher power. Thats just my opinion though.
« Last Edit: 2015-06-29, 21:25:11 by Justin Alvira »
Some say that the age of chivalry is past, that the spirit of romance is dead. The age of chivalry is never past, so long as there is a wrong left unredressed on earth.

Joshua Santana

  • Yeoman of the Order
  • Forum Acolyte
  • **
  • Posts: 1,002
  • Honorare scutum meum, veritas mea gladio
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #24 on: 2016-04-24, 15:50:13 »
I agree this is an interesting thread.  Allow me to take a different spin on this subject.

Historically, Chivalry has been associated with the Christian Church and its values pertaining to the elite warrior (best book on the subject in my opinion is Richard Kreuper's Holy Warriors).

From the viewpoint of Jewish Chivalry, religion plays the part of the balance between the Two Services (Avodat Hashem Service to the Eternal and Avodat Ben Adam Service to one's fellow.  Religion touches both and Jewish Chivalry is focused on both of them in ideal and application. 

In addition, Jewish Chivalry never sees a separation between the ideal and the faith (Judaism in this case).  An example of this can be found in Pirkei Avot or Ethics of the Fathers with statements such as "Be not like servants who serve their master for the sake of a reward; instead be like servants who serve their master not for the sake of a reward." "Who is wise?  He who learns from every person."  "Who is strong?  He who subdues his personal inclination."  "Who is honored?  He who honors others."  (Translation:  Selflessness go along way.  Wisdom and learning doesn't end with a university diploma.  Inner Moral Strength counts.  Honoring others forms a basis for personal Honor).

In a way, religion helps to form the moral standard which is the influence for one's Chivalric conduct.  While the argument of no need for religion to be chivalrous can be seen as valid from a etiquette or conduct based perspective.  I see the picture as both sides of the discussion as two sides of one coin. 

Knight of The Lion Blade

Honora gladium meum, veritas mea, et Spirítui Sancto.  כדי לכבד המגן שלי, האמת שלי חרבי

Honor My Sword, Truth My Shield.

Sir Rodney

  • Knight of the Order
  • Forum Acolyte
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,118
  • Inquit Corvus
    • The Mercenary Company Nevermore
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #25 on: 2016-04-25, 05:20:55 »
I command thee to rise!   ;)


Interesting perspective on this topic Joshua.  I’m completely un-versed in ancient Jewish chivalry.  Can you recommend any reading for me?
"Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say Ni at will to old ladies. There is a pestilence upon this land, nothing is sacred. Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress in this period in history." - Roger the Shrubber

Joshua Santana

  • Yeoman of the Order
  • Forum Acolyte
  • **
  • Posts: 1,002
  • Honorare scutum meum, veritas mea gladio
Knight of The Lion Blade

Honora gladium meum, veritas mea, et Spirítui Sancto.  כדי לכבד המגן שלי, האמת שלי חרבי

Honor My Sword, Truth My Shield.

Jon Blair

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #27 on: 2016-04-26, 18:13:13 »
I believe that chivalry is inextricably linked to Christianity because the Church was such a part of the formative process of chivalry that it would not have been chivalry without it.

After the collapse of the Carolingian Empire in 888, France, Germany, and Italy fragmented into a feudal mess. Local lords and knights struggled to maintain their demesnes while vying for power over their peers. Internecine feuding resulted in raids on each other, with the peasantry and the clergy feeling the brunt of these attacks. As a result, in 989 the Synod of Charroux issued the Pax Dei or Peace of God, under the authority of Archbishop Gombald of Bordeaux and Gascony, with agreement from the bishops of Poitiers, Limoges, Perigueux, Saintes, and Angouleme. It declared the nobility, including the knights, were to refrain from robbery of the poor and defenseless (the peasantry) of their provender and livestock, robbing or assaulting the godly (the Clergy) who were not bearing arms, and the plundering of Church property, upon pain of Excommunication. To this were added assaulting or robbing women (especially virgins and widows) and children, burning houses, beating the peasantry, and robbing merchants. The Pax Dei spread into all of Western France, including Aquitaine, Burgundy, and Languedoc by the early eleventh Century, and was strongly supported by King Robert II of France.

While the effectiveness of the Pax Dei was limited at its inception, it led to the Church issuing various decrees, including the Treuga Dei (Truce of God), which prohibited fighting by knights and nobility on Sundays, Holy (Feast) Days, all of Advent, Lent, certain other days of the week (Thursday, in memory of the Ascension; Friday, in memory of the Passion; and Saturday, in memory of the Resurrection), and the days between April 25 to Ascension Thursday, and the eight days leading up to and including Pentecost. Also, that all church personnel and property, pilgrims, women, merchants and their servants, and peasants working in the fields and their livestock were under permanent peace.

During the eleventh century, the Church pressured the nobility to accept trappings of piety regarding knights. Building off of St. Augustine of Hippo's City of God, where the idea of a just and godly war to defend God, if no other means of conflict resolution was available, was just and right; Odo of Cluny wrote the Life of St. Gerald of Aurillac, which described the perfect "knight of Christ". Chansons de geste, such as the Song of Roland, showed how noble knights lived their lives not only as fierce warriors but paragons of spiritual virtue. Knights were encouraged to turn over spoils of war to the local church or monastery as offerings in thanks of God's divine protection on the battlefield. The second son of a noble family was often destined for service in the Church, strengthening the bond between the nobility and the clergy. Squires (in the sense of knights in training) were to hold vigil, praying and fasting the night before his accolade, his armor and weapons on the altar to be dedicated in service to God. Homage oaths were sworn with God as witness, as breaking said oaths would invite divine retribution. Sword blades, crosses, and pommels were engraved with Scripture or dedications to various saints. Many knights upheld the Virgin Mary as a paragon of virtue and dedicated themselves to her, which influenced courtly love and honorable treatment of women. God was always watching, providing protection for those who were virtuous and providing retribution against those who were evil.

Even with all this, the nobility were often flirting with disaster for their souls. Finally, Pope Urban II declared a Crusade to the Holy Land, to wrest Jerusalem from "the grasp of the infidel". Tens of thousands took the Cross and made their way to Outremer at the close of the eleventh century. It not only solved Europe's problem with excess bored knights with nothing better to do than to fight each other by sending them to the Holy Land with promises of wealth and righteousness in the eyes of God, it also cemented the Church's influence on the knighthood. With the victory of the Crusade and the establishment of the kingdom of Jerusalem under the Cross of Christ, that influence was now adamant.

As chivalry evolved during the twelfth century, certain people were deemed by medieval Christian authors as exemplars of knightly conduct: Godfrey of Bouillon, Sir William Marshal, Bertrand du Guesclin, even Saladin, who was deemed chivalrous, regardless of his religion. The development of military orders in the Crusades, themselves founded by the Church, influenced chivalry during this time. Arthurian legend changed in the hands of Chretien de Troyes and others to the medieval romance, where the characters of Gawain, Percival, Galahad, and Lancelot as definitions of chivalry became popular. Chivalry eventually came to be accepted as duty to God, King, Liege, fellow Christians, and women.

While one can argue that codes of conduct can be established without religious influence, it would be difficult to prove that what we know of as chivalry would have come about without the efforts of the Church. Compared to other codes of conduct, such as bushido, the code of chivalry maintains an air of virtuousness that still inspires today, even in a society where such ideals are often considered passe.
« Last Edit: 2016-04-26, 18:14:03 by Jon Blair »
"Diligo bonus quod contemno malum"

Azure, a saltire argent charged nine mascles azure

Lord Dane

  • The Hound, Hunter, and Hammer of Justice
  • Knight of the Order
  • Forum Acolyte
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,900
  • Selflessness, Service, Justice.
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #28 on: 2016-04-28, 10:08:20 »
Now that is one hell of a book report. A +!!! Good job, Jon!!!
"Fides, Honos, Prudentia, Sapiencia" (Faith, Honor, Prudence, Wisdom)
"Fiat justitia ruat caelum" (Let justice be done)

Jon Blair

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: Religion and Chivalry
« Reply #29 on: 2016-04-28, 12:42:02 »
Now that is one hell of a book report. A +!!! Good job, Jon!!!
Thank you, Lord Dane, I try to be thorough.  ;D
"Diligo bonus quod contemno malum"

Azure, a saltire argent charged nine mascles azure