Dwilight University/Theology/Followers of Religion

The contents of this page are not readily available to everyone, either because it is sensitive or because it is rare or otherwise little known knowledge. It is here for the purpose of archiving or making it more accessible to a certain audience, and this should be kept in mind while reading the contents of this page and all it's subpages. In short, the contents of this page are to be considered OOC knowledge, except for characters who are full members of Dwilight University.

Letter from Greg Tarr

Message sent to Full Members of Dwilight University

Dean Sejieda, As I am new to the realm and to the religion matters, I would like to learn more about what you think about the theoracy of Morek and how would you describe the term "religion"? I am also really interested in the military and I wanted to ask about the military formations. What military formation should a commander use on a specific occasion, like infantry vs monsters, or cavalry vs archers. What is the advantage of the skirmish and the wedge formations? What would be the best thing to do when you assault a fortress and you are outnumbered? I have other questions but those are the ones that I find the most interesting. Regards,

Greg Tarr (Student)

Letter from Sejieda Vita

Message sent to Full Members of Dwilight University

Greg, I have recalled I promised some words on Morek's theocracy and religion. However, I was distracted with other matters until now. I apologize if this is briefer than you expected. Simply put, I have no strong feelings for or against Morek. My loyalty lies with my liege, and by extension, the duchy. As the duchy is within Morek, I support Morek. However, this means that my support for my region come before the duchy and the duchy before the realm. Regarding the theocracy, it is the governing force of Morek as begun by Donghaiwei. However, it must be acknowledged that those who followed their oaths never agreed to live in a theocracy. We abide by it out of our honor to our oaths. Some of us support the idea of theocracy. Some of it disagree with it. Some of us don't care either way. As far as the term religion, it is the organized structure behind many nobles' beliefs. It is for each noble to live by their own beliefs. It is not to be used to force nobles to believe. Even commoners have more say in their religion than this by the fact that priests attempt to convince followers, not force them to follow. If a commoner has the ability to decide their religion, then surely a noble has that and more

Sejieda Vita (Dean of Military Studies)

Letter from Greg Tarr

Message sent to Full Members of Dwilight University

Dean Sejieda, Members of the Dwilight University, I do understand that followers of a certain religion does not have the right to oblige others to believe in a specific faith. Even if they try they will simply fail. Those "submitted" to the religion will pretend to be followers, but in their heart they will always be faithful to their own beliefs. Thus I pretend that even in a theocracy, one could not oblige (even by law) another to believe in something in particular. Furthermore, I do think that there is another problem. Let's take the example : a Knight serves a Lord, who serves a Duke, who serves another high ranking official. If the high ranking official does believe in a religion, I do think that the Duke is of some kind obliged to join that religion ; Not because of an oath or because of a law that the high ranking official could pass. It should be a personal choice, a choice that will show the high ranking official that the Duke is his loyal, his "follower". If you do follow my logic, you will eventually see that it should be the same as for the Lord and the Knight. This is just how I see this religious "problem". I am open to all critics. Regards,

Greg Tarr (Student)

Letter from Branthorpe Silverbear

Message sent to Full Members of Dwilight University

Student Tarr, Dean Vita, Members of the Dwilight University, I do understand that followers of a certain religion does not have the right to oblige others to believe in a specific faith. Even if they try they will simply fail. Those "submitted" to the religion will pretend to be followers, but in their heart they will always be faithful to their own beliefs. Thus I pretend that even in a theocracy, one could not oblige (even by law) another to believe in something in particular It may surprise members of the University, but I completely agree with the above statement by Student Tarr. False followers are terrible, the lowest of the low. I aim to be careful to avoid obliging belief of the Bloodstars within Laws of Morek. Dean Vita, Any thoughts on my letter about studying the arts ?

Branthorpe Silverbear (Student)