Think about it. During the Great Crusade, the Emperor sought to stamp out beliefs in gods, and led the Imperium into a golden age. Then, another man (Horus) led by gods, tore it asunder, and plunged the Imperium into a dark age, where everyone worships some god or another.
Is it all a metaphor for religion today?

I would say more it's representative of early Christianity's conflict with various polytheistic religions. The Imperium are a monotheistic empire (their believe in the God Emperor is as good as any religion I've ever heard of) and Chaos represent the scattered belief systems of various other Gods that early Christianity faced.

I think it's supposed to be another moral conundrum. You have the imperium, who, for the most part, are religious extremists; and yet you have actual demons, meaning religions weren't all wrong. So, is the imperium really that crazy because of its relgion, or does choas really represent pure evil with demons, validating religion to an extent.

Because 40k has so many writers in the franchise, there is no one correct answer, but overall I think the answer is... kinda but not quite. Some of the recent Horus Heresy stuff and the Emperor's behavior during the Great Crusade straddles the line a lot. Graham McNeil's short story "The Last Church" can lead to an impression of "What if God was real, and loved humanity, but decided Hitchens was on to something and we're really better off without churches?" This sort of embracing faith but mistrustful of churches seems to be the most consistent view of religion in 40k authors. Saint Sabbat is real and guides the Imperium to victory in the Saint Sabbat arc of the Gaunt's Ghosts books. Screaming prayers at them can at least make daemons uncomfortable. But the church itself is full of fallible people like VanDire's reign of blood, or the corrupt cardinal from "Flesh and Iron".

I don't think its based on a religion since the Emperor actually exists in their world

:ducks:

vleermie wrote:I don't think its based on a religion since the Emperor actually exists in their world

:ducks:

I chortled

The emperor before the Heresy said he did not want to be worshipped as a God. At the time most people in the imperium were made uncomfortable around those that did so, to the point where the city Monarchia was destoyed by order of the Emperor because of it's Worship of the Emperor.

The Emperor only became worshipped as a God by the whole IoM after the Lectitio Divinitatus came to power

As has been said though it's hard to say 40K is a dig at religon as so many people have contributed to it differently.

A quote from the horus heresy novels

"Humanity will only be pure when the last brick of the last church falls on the last priest"

Having not read all of the fluff I can only give my general opinion, but as a person of faith I see the 40k universe as more anti-institution than religion. Seeing all of the negatives of the bureaucracy of the IoM as well as the excesses of the Ecclesiarchy while at times in the fluff reading about people who are pretty devout it seems to be a critique of the inhumanity of institutions. Oh sure atheism is definitely a part of that but you can read into the fluff whatever you want. That is my two cents anyway

The Emperor decreed that all Religions be banned and stated that all the suffering and wars of the past were because of religion as stated in the book "The Last Church". The Emperor burned the last church and offered the priest a place at his side, but the priest chose his fate and turned away from the Emperor and walked into the burning church and embraced God. Moral of the 40k story is that man has killed and murdered more people in the name of religion than any other acts of man. So mankind no longer needed religion to lead them into the future.

The Emperor was right really the whole Heresy was caused because Lorgar couldnt let go of his need to believe in a god and worship something he was convinced that humanity needed faith to survive and unite it and im not saying he was wrong in that but he made the mistake of mixing faith with religion. kinda justifying the Emperors whole "religion is bad" stance

I think it's not the background that's an indictment of institutionalized religion, but the 'current' time era that shows it worst. Humanity rising, and accomplishing things while the secular emperor is at the head, and as soon as he is taken out of the picture and the theocracy of the Imperium is established, humanity begins to decline and wane.

Yes parts of it are meant to be satirical.

Well in mechanicum the emporer slays a dragon, suspiciously like s.t george, which would mean the emporer is st george, in the 40k universe at least

moonshine wrote:Well in mechanicum the emporer slays a dragon, suspiciously like s.t george, which would mean the emporer is st george, in the 40k universe at least

S.t George also came from the Middle East (I think, can't quite remember) and the Emperor was born in a region just a touch off centre from the Middle East.

most if not all GW has made is stolen (blatantly in many cases)

If you try hard enough everything is a dig at religion.

Or everything is supportive of religion.

The Emperor obvious fell because he was a man of science and didn't believe in a god.

Xandu most things are stolen nowadays, but thats not the subject.

oh and purplefood, if i recall correctly, it was libya, the same place in mechanicum

Simple answer:

No it isn't. It's just some typical fantasy thing since most fantasy setting have a lot to do with gods and such.

moonshine wrote:Xandu most things are stolen nowadays, but thats not the subject.

oh and purplefood, if i recall correctly, it was libya, the same place in mechanicum

true

I'd say Fantasy is more of a dig at christianity then 40k is

I think it has more to do with people's impulse of clinging to religion when things are hard, and their need to make an understanding if one can't be found.

vleermie wrote:I don't think its based on a religion since the Emperor actually exists in their world

:ducks:

Considering that true, pure faith is actually a very powerful force in 40k? No, I don't think it's a dig at religion.

Well, maybe organized religion. But not religion as a concept.

Melissia wrote:Considering that true, pure faith is actually a very powerful force in 40k? No, I don't think it's a dig at religion.

Well, maybe organized religion. But not religion as a concept.

I consider one of the defining differences between religion and faith is that religion is a public, organized set of beliefs to be adhered to...while faith is simply a very confident belief in something/someone/something.

That said, I think 40k's focus is more on the negative consequences of dogma, not so much specifically religion. Dogmatic following of Imperial law for example is often shown to have rather negative effects as well, stifling technology and creative thought. Religion just inherently happens to have a hell of a lot of dogma...so naturally it pops up. Now, sure there are Dark Age/Enlightenment references found with the Emperor's coming....but their writers are all over the place...so *shrug*.

Actually, oddly enough the Ecclesiarchy is one of the few erasons that the art world thrives in 40k. Sure, most serious art is religious art but at least it's there instead of brutally oppressed and ignored.

Hisotrically, religous groups have always nurtured art, as it was used to express certain stories. This is best seen in the dark ages and the renaissance.

Melissia wrote:Actually, oddly enough the Ecclesiarchy is one of the few erasons that the art world thrives in 40k. Sure, most serious art is religious art but at least it's there instead of brutally oppressed and ignored.

There's an argument for the ages; Would Beethoven have been Beethoven without his faith.....would Michelangelo have given us the Sistine Chapel without religion... . I've watched Hitchens debate that subject many times and he always says "Well, if your an artist...you go where the money is or starve...and the church tends to have a bit of money thanks to fleecing the sheep..."

Anyways, not a subject for here I suppose (and I have no definitive thought on it one way or another) .

I think it is a dig at The Church as the ecclesiarchy is often portrayed as a shadey, sometimes crazy, often politically motivated bureaucracy that encourages absolute faith. Toss in a bit of 'under pain of death' medieval style brutality, because everyone knows christians are all good people nowadays...

This is not a dig at any specific religion, or faith in general, but maybe at the way it may be practiced. I think that Horus as Satan and the Emprah as God and Sanguinous as Michael or something similar you could I guess say it is a pretty skewey stretch of a parallel, but there's a lot of non-christian based motifs thrown in too (Thorjac and Loki the trickster? Orks believing something so therefore it must be true?) showing that maybe all religious traditions can be turned into some kind of sci-fi fantasy mockery. I dont think it is meant as a bash against it, it just uses it, along with all sorts of other cultural mishmash, to create a 'universe' with some similarity to the themes we see in our real world beliefs (or disbeliefs).

Religion and science, they do not coexist. 40K is science-fiction, which makes it besed loosely on science, which doesn't coincide with religion. So yes, it's a dig on religion.

Melissia wrote:Considering that true, pure faith is actually a very powerful force in 40k? No, I don't think it's a dig at religion.

Well, maybe organized religion. But not religion as a concept.

I would not describe the Imperium's religion as a positive force.

ToBeWilly wrote:Religion and science, they do not coexist. 40K is science-fiction, which makes it besed loosely on science, which doesn't coincide with religion. So yes, it's a dig on religion.

40K is what is generally referred to as "Science Fantasy" or "Space Fantasy." It is in no way, shape, or form Sci-Fi. Case in point: mutants with magical space magics, space elfs with magical space magics, magical space daemons, space orcs with magical space magics born of stupidity, the general abundance of magical space magics...

Sci-fi more or less requires at least some token technobabble, or implied technobabble, rather than just "A wizard The Emperor did it."


The fluff heavily implies that beings with a warp presence can alter reality simply by believing something hard enough. Orks's technology runs off this: their minds are too simple for even a shred of doubt, and as a result reality warps to conform to their beliefs. The same thing is observed in the most fanatic servants of the Ecclesiarchy when they work themselves into it: believing that "the Emperor" will guide their bullets, protect them from harm, etc. so hard that for a few moments there's not even a shred of doubt in their minds, and so reality warps to humor them while it lasts. It would appear Daemons are even more susceptible to this, being injured by litanies and holy objects, which makes sense when one considers they are part of the warp, which is highly susceptible to the emotions of beings with a warp presence.

Funnily enough, even the Chaos 'Gods' can be explained away in a (super)scientific manner as extremely powerful parasites dwelling in the Warp. No such explanation is given for the Ork or Eldar gods though.

Xanadu wrote:most if not all GW has made is stolen (blatantly in many cases)

Most modern sci fi isn't original either. So the origins of the 40k universe aren't unique in that respect. So what's your point?

ToBeWilly wrote:Religion and science, they do not coexist. 40K is science-fiction, which makes it besed loosely on science, which doesn't coincide with religion. So yes, it's a dig on religion.

40k is not really science-fiction. That term gets thrown around misleadingly because it takes place in space. Fantasy fiction set in space, fine. But saying it is 'science' fiction is pretty insulting to real science fiction which tries to create, through scientific theorizing, a plausible scenario for the future. Ray guns and bug eyed aliens and dark gods of the warp are not really a plausible future scenario. Read some Asimov or Niven or Arthur Clark as good examples of writers attempting to establish plausible possible futures without falling back on 'magic' (or psykers - same thing) to explain the unexplainable. Just because the enchanted sword excalibur looks high tech and has a different name doesn't make it any more 'science' than a horoscope or a biblical prophecy or a round table legend.

YES. The fluff is based around the idea that, although there are some very powerful beings in the universe, they are not 'gods', did not 'create' the universe, and don't care at all for their followers. The followers merely worship these beings as gods, without really understanding what they are (Eldar Gods, Primarchs, The Emperor, C'Tan, Chaos Gods etc).

The stated intent of the Emperor was to end all religion, and this was to be considered a good thing. The reason that the 41st M IoM is in such a bad way is heavily implied to be the fault of overbearing religion vs scientific enlightenment.

Given the very deliberate dig at the Catholic church present throughout the IoM background, and the fact that this is a game developed in the UK, where the vast majority of the population don't care for religion (of a population of 60 million, only 8% worship regularly), I'd imagine that the dig at religion is VERY intentional on the part of the designers.

And I completely agree with it.

Jesus despised his own jewish religious leadership for its hippocrasy and greed and lashed out against it because it was all just a big greedy sham to keep people in line too. Funny how that works... post-Paul 'christianity' turned the ideal of a Jesus myth into a new sham to keep people in line too. The ecclesiarchy does the same in 40k to the Emprah's origional goal as early roman catholic christianity did to Jesus' teaching.

And then you get people like Sebastian Thor, who was pretty much the Emperor's voice. Which did not result in dismantling the Ecclesiarchy but instead reforming it.

Amaya wrote:I would not describe the Imperium's religion as a positive force.

Then you would be wrong.

The Ecclesiarchy itself might be a corrupt institution with far too much politics going on (much like churches in real life I should note, so this is no surprise to me), but the actual religion itself, distanced from the corrupt bodies that feed off of it? It is indeed a powerful, positive force in the galaxy, protecting people from the devastation caused by the corruption of chaos. The chaos gods don't care about humanity, they just want their ego stroked. The Emperor, however, does care about humanity. He may not like religion, but he certainly is willing to use it for the betterment of mankind now that he is stick upon his throne.

Melissia wrote:

Amaya wrote:I would not describe the Imperium's religion as a positive force.

Then you would be wrong.

The Ecclesiarchy itself might be a corrupt institution with far too much politics going on (much like churches in real life I should note, so this is no surprise to me), but the actual religion itself, distanced from the corrupt bodies that feed off of it? It is indeed a powerful, positive force in the galaxy, protecting people from the devastation caused by the corruption of chaos. The chaos gods don't care about humanity, they just want their ego stroked. The Emperor, however, does care about humanity. He may not like religion, but he certainly is willing to use it for the betterment of mankind now that he is stick upon his throne.

Right, first off. Amaya says he 'would not describe it as a positive force'. The only way he is WRONG is if he is, in fact, lying and WOULD describe it as a positive force. I believe what you meant to say was 'I politely disagree with you'. Right?


I agree that the blind faith that the citizens have DOES have it's positives, as you say.

However, we never really know if the people of the Imperium would do just as well if the Warp and Chaos were explained to them scientifically rather than spiritually, since that never even happened in the time of the Emperor.

Just as, in the real world, religion had LOTS of benefits to communities, since it generally took good community sense (don't sleep with someone else's wife, don't kill someone else) and turned them into 'religious commandments' to make sure everyone followed them. Once people choose to follow these 'commandments' because they're good ideas in and of themselves (rather than because God tells you to) then the need for religion is questioned. However, we never see this side in 40k.

Faith keeps back Chaos, and that's a good thing, but it may well be that study and understanding would keep it back even better....!

Insightful post, OP.

I think (and have said before) that the gothic quality of 40k is inspired by the latent anti-Catholicism of British culture. The same cultural imagination that invented the Black Legend of the Spanish Inquisition is behind the Inquisition of 40k. You can see this same kind of anti-Catholicism in movies like Elizabeth: The Golden Age. I'd go so far as to say that it's no coincidence that Dawkins in British, but I guess it's a bit off-topic.

ArbitorIan wrote:Faith keeps back Chaos, and that's a good thing, but it may well be that study and understanding would keep it back even better....!

Or it could be that understanding it only drives most people insane.

Chaos doesn't follow the laws of science anyway.

Also, McNeill's story "The Last Church" is an unintentional lampoon of the New Atheist rhetoric. IMO, it's utterly preposterous but seems to support OP's idea.

The only reason someone hasn't killed someone else for the name of science is because too many groupings have science. (And because "In the name of science" is a silly battle cry.)

Lol you gyus have to realize that the Emperium (A.K.A.) Emperor and his Lords of Terra are really the Church of Scientology, a real church today. In the 40k story line this group is banned from the American Empire and forced to hide in the Middle East. Here the Chruch of Scientolgy is protected by the Middle Eastern Pact forces defending their vital Oil supplies from others, The Church of Scientology then creates the first Super Soldiers, the Emperor and this starts the great war that is known as ....let me reamber right.....The Great Crusade....it unites most of Terra and its colonies in the Sol system under one leader the Emperor. And the rest of the story you guys know.....

LordWynne wrote:Lol you gyus have to realize that the Emperium (A.K.A.) Emperor and his Lords of Terra are really the Church of Scientology, a real church today. In the 40k story line this group is banned from the American Empire and forced to hide in the Middle East. Here the Chruch of Scientolgy is protected by the Middle Eastern Pact forces defending their vital Oil supplies from others, The Church of Scientology then creates the first Super Soldiers, the Emperor and this starts the great war that is known as ....let me reamber right.....The Great Crusade....it unites most of Terra and its colonies in the Sol system under one leader the Emperor. And the rest of the story you guys know.....

.....no more drugs...for that man.

Just kidding .

Manchu wrote:Insightful post, OP.

I think (and have said before) that the gothic quality of 40k is inspired by the latent anti-Catholicism of British culture. The same cultural imagination that invented the Black Legend of the Spanish Inquisition is behind the Inquisition of 40k. You can see this same kind of anti-Catholicism in movies like Elizabeth: The Golden Age. I'd go so far as to say that it's no coincidence that Dawkins in British, but I guess it's a bit off-topic.

Well i think alot more anti-catholic feeling in the film came from the fact that they were invading in the name of the pope. The film isn't anti-catholic because it was made in Britain, but because it is an accurate depiction of history.

Anyway back to the point, clear links can be seen between between the Jesus and the Emperor, and the Roman Catholic Church with the IoM. Jesus and the Emperor were both free thinkers and brought new ideas to the masses. The Roman Catholic Church and the IoM were both not created by their respective gods, but used to control the masses and justify the present leadership, both are layered with dogma that has replaced the free thinking that their gods wanted. the Roman Catholic Church and the IoM both have had inquisitors, witchhunts, holy wars, crusades etc.

Back when it was first creayed the satire/link was much more obvious to the point that some church-goers actually did complain, but as GW is now an international company and not a garage set up, i think the intentional poking has been replaced by new writers just working within the established framework without an anti-religious agenda.

I think that the setting of the 40k universe is heavily based on Medieval Europe. The fact that the Europeans had lost large amounts of technology with the fall of the roman empire and went through the dark age (represented in the 40k fluff) the rise of christianity hindered european scientific development as it kept it back and acussed scientists of hersey and persicuted them (the same as in the 40k fluff) untill the renaissance in europe. Even the space marines represent the many different knightly orders in Europe all sworn to Christianity (the emporer in 40k case). So I believe that its more a fact that its based on all the crazy beleifs and supersition of the medieval period rather than a dig at god.

But having said that black library authors all have their own belifs and standards so they may well project an anti religion tone more strongly in their novels than others.

Just my take on things

Big G

BluntmanDC wrote:Well i think alot more anti-catholic feeling in the film came from the fact that they were invading in the name of the pope. The film isn't anti-catholic because it was made in Britain, but because it is an accurate depiction of history.

It takes more than mere dates and names to accurately depict history. In terms of it's script, that movie conforms to an interpretation of history (not coincidentally, an interpretation popular in Britain since the times of Elizabeth I -- it's propaganda after all) that is explicitly anti-Catholic. In terms of it's visual content, the movie is overtly anti-Catholic.

BluntmanDC wrote:Anyway back to the point, clear links can be seen between between the Jesus and the Emperor, and the Roman Catholic Church with the IoM. Jesus and the Emperor were both free thinkers and brought new ideas to the masses. The Roman Catholic Church and the IoM were both not created by their respective gods, but used to control the masses and justify the present leadership, both are layered with dogma that has replaced the free thinking that their gods wanted. the Roman Catholic Church and the IoM both have had inquisitors, witchhunts, holy wars, crusades etc.

That's certainly one perspective on the Catholic Church: a naive, uninformed, insulting and ultimately ludicrous perspective but a perspective nonetheless. Even so, I am inclined to agree that this is the perspective that GW fluff authors have adopted in satirizing Catholicism through the Ecclesiarchy in the finest British tradition of anti-Catholicism.

BluntmanDC wrote:Back when it was first creayed the satire/link was much more obvious to the point that some church-goers actually did complain, but as GW is now an international company and not a garage set up, i think the intentional poking has been replaced by new writers just working within the established framework without an anti-religious agenda.

I agree that GW authors don't really have an agenda, per se. Like every one else, however, they can't help but be influenced by their own personal beliefs and the ideas that are current to their times. I would reiterate that McNeill's Last Church is a fine example of the same muddled thinking that one can find in The God Delusion.

Manchu wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:Well i think alot more anti-catholic feeling in the film came from the fact that they were invading in the name of the pope. The film isn't anti-catholic because it was made in Britain, but because it is an accurate depiction of history.

It takes more than mere dates and names to accurately depict history. In terms of it's script, that movie conforms to an interpretation of history (not coincidentally, an interpretation popular in Britain since the times of Elizabeth I -- it's propaganda after all) that is explicitly anti-Catholic. In terms of it's visual content, the movie is overtly anti-Catholic.

I haven't actually seen that film - I saw a few minutes of it on a plane, I thought it looked awful! But I will weigh in on this anyway: at the time of Elizabeth's reign, the Spanish Armada etc there was a great deal of anti-catholic sentiment in Britain, and elsewhere through Europe - just as there was intense anti-Protestant sentiment in the countries still following the Catholic church. Even after the colossally bloody and protracted religious wars ended, this sort of prejudice did linger for a long time.
BUT I don't think that means the movie was anti-Catholic, nor do I think there is much anti-Catholic sentiment in Britain today. You'd have to go seek out some real right-wing nationalist nutjobs for that. As I understand it the film was made portraying Elizabeth resisting potential invasion by a Catholic country (and Spain did see invading England at least partly as a religious venture) so it seems natural, as with most films, that the protagonists were made more heroic and the antagonists more villainous. I can't see that this reflects anti-Catholic feeling on behalf of the films' producers.

Edit: point I forgot to make: as ArbitorIan pointed out, very few people in the UK partake of organised religion regularly. That does argue against any strong religious feelings or prejudices.

I thought people were a bit more critical of propaganda these days but . . .

I'm not going to take it upon myself to teach anyone here about historiography. In lieu of that, here's a link:

http://www.decentfilms.com/reviews/elizabeth2.html

@Manchu: how is denying someone who says "this is GOD and you have to believe or you are damned, trust us we know best" naive? Whether its Catholics or Jews or Subgenius members or Allah or Buddha or Bob the nutty guy down the street, denying religion, which is by nature an affront to free thinking, in whatever form is hardly naive. If anything, believing what you are told because someone said so is naive.

Well if you look most of 40k is based on some form of culture e.g
Thousand sons = egyptians and Space wolves= vikings

Yeah read the god delusion, it all makes sense haha.

Back on topic, I think its just Medieval Europe in the far future with orks and space elves thrown in to make it more fun to play and not really a dig at religion.

As for there being no widespread anti-Catholic sentiment in the UK today, ask yourself why Tony Blair only converted to Catholicism after resigning as PM and leader of the Labour Party. (And this despite the fact that both his children and wife were already Catholic and there being widespread rumors of his own religious convictions, including publicly attending mass.) Your country's prejudices are a lot more complicated -- and more current -- than perhaps you realize.

In my view, only the British could have dreamt up 40k. And British anti-Catholicism is a big part of that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gadge wrote:Yeah read the god delusion, it all makes sense haha.

A book written by someone who has no understanding of the topic he is writing about is bound to make sense to a reader who is similarly uninformed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yeenoghu wrote:@Manchu: how is denying someone who says "this is GOD and you have to believe or you are damned, trust us we know best" naive? Whether its Catholics or Jews or Subgenius members or Allah or Buddha or Bob the nutty guy down the street, denying religion, which is by nature an affront to free thinking, in whatever form is hardly naive. If anything, believing what you are told because someone said so is naive.

Religion is in no sense an affront to freethinking. Believing something solely because someone told you to does not qualify as religious faith, at least not in the Christian (Catholic) sense.

I would say religious intolerance is not just confined to the UK im afraid, but there is still a devide between catholics and protestants in the UK, but its more to do with football rivalries (rangers and celtic for example) and its often due to kids being brought up with their parents views and hatred to people, not really anything to do with religion, think they have forgot about why the hate each other, the religious wars in Europe have been over for a few hundred years.

Anyway best to stay on topic i think,

Big G



Automatically Appended Next Post:

A book written by someone who has no idea about what he is writing about is bound to make sense to a reader who is similarly uninformed.

I was brought up catholic, in Scotland. Then I got older and say the truth haha, right think its best to not get into a theological debate and get back to talking about toy soldiers

Big G

No, it's not confined to the UK, but the rift between Catholicism and Protestantism is historically very strong there.

Well, we are on topic.

Religious intolerance is not limited to the UK, of course. But anti-Catholicism is particularly potent in the UK (and, not least of all because of its origins as part of the British Empire, the US).

The background of Warhammer 40k is a mosaic of pop culture images and references, some of which are far older than their most immediately recognizable iteration. The long-standing British hatred and suspicion regarding Catholicism seems like a pretty obvious example.

I was brought up catholic

Honestly, this fact alone does not make you any more likely to know anything more about Catholicism than any one else.

Manchu wrote:Well, we are on topic.

Religious intolerance is not limited to the UK, of course. But anti-Catholicism is particularly potent in the UK (and, not least of all because of its origins as part of the British Empire, the US).

The background of Warhammer 40k is a mosaic of pop culture images and references, some of which are far older than their most immediately recognizable iteration. The long-standing British hatred and suspicion regarding Catholicism seems like a pretty obvious example.

I was brought up catholic

Honestly, this fact alone does not make you any more likely to know anything about Catholicism than any one else.

In my limited experience Catholics tend to be less informed about their regilion. The Catholic Church doesn't exactly encourage study of the Bible.

Manchu wrote:A book written by someone who has no idea about what he is writing about is bound to make sense to a reader who is similarly uninformed.

Well, that was rather rude.

Is this where the others that disagree with you post 'NUH UH, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT'

@Amaya: I agree with your point but it has nothing to do with studying or not studying the Bible.

@AgeofEgos: I don't see how. I've read the book. Dawkins has no understanding of religion. The thing he is attacking is not religion. The thing he attacks is something that Westerners, regardless of their knowledge about any subject, would dislike. As such, the only people who could find his argument compelling are people who similarly have no understanding of religion. I know very little about Islam. If I wrote a book denouncing it, the only people who'd find it convincing are other people who know little or nothing about Islam.

A cursory search will show you that Dawkins abuses the 'straw man' fallacy in The God Delusion.

Manchu wrote:
@AgeofEgos: I don't see how. I've read the book. Dawkins has no understanding of religion. The thing he is attacking is not religion. The thing he attacks is something that Westerner, regardless of their knowledge about any subject, would dislike. As such, the only people who could find his argument compelling are people who similarly have no understanding of religion. I know very little about Islam. If I wrote a book denouncing it, the only people who'd find it convincing are other people who know little or nothing about Islam.

Well...I think arguing Dawkins points is a much better angle than openly stating in a thread....anyone that agrees with him has no idea what they're talking about. Plus, this probably isn't a good thread to discuss real life politics/religion...

Ok its not what you gus are talking about but are word beares meant to represent catholics , their homeworld is called catholis coincedence ?

AgeOfEgos wrote:Plus, this probably isn't a good thread to discuss real life politics/religion...

That's the topic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

moonshine wrote:Ok its not what you gus are talking about but are ord beares meant to represent catholics , their homeworl is called catholis coincedence ?

The Word Bearers were from Colchis.

Manchu wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:Plus, this probably isn't a good thread to discuss real life politics/religion...

That's the topic.

The topic is if 40k has religious tie ins in order to demean it....not if religion is false/true or if people that agree with atheistic books are idiots.

First, idiot is a term you've introduced to this discussion.

Second, we're only talking about Dawkins because I brought up British anti-Catholicism and also mentioned that it's no coincidence that Dawkins is British. These are on-topic comments. From there, people began to claim things about history and religion that are false. In pointing out that these claims are false, the idea that Richard Dawkins could be a good source to learn about religion came up. I rejected it. We're still on topic here, Ageof Egos. If you don't want to discuss this topic, that's okay.

Manchu wrote:First, idiot is a term you've introduced to this discussion.

Second, we're only talking about Dawkins because I brought up British anti-Catholicism and also mentioned that it's no coincidence that Dawkins is British. These are on-topic comments. From there, people began to claim things about history and religion that are false. In pointing out that these claims are false, the idea that Richard Dawkins could be a good source to learn about religion came up. I rejected it. We're still on topic here, Ageof Egos. If you don't want to discuss this topic, that's okay.

....you stated that Dawkins was someone who has no understanding of the topic he is writing about is bound to make sense to a reader who is similarly uninformed....in a 40k background thread....about toy soldiers....

. . . in a thread about whether the 40k Background is an insult to/parody of religion.

Manchu wrote:. . . in a thread about whether the 40k Background is an insult to/parody of religion.

..which is my point...

*shrug* The topic seems legitimate to me. If you are the type of person that doesn't want to analyze the 40k Background as product of the real world, coming out of the minds of people with real prejudices, then that's okay. There's a lot more Dakka for you outside of this thread.

Manchu wrote:*shrug* The topic seems legitimate to me. If you are the type of person that doesn't want to analyze the 40k Background as product of the real world, coming out of the minds of people with real prejudices, then that's okay. There's a lot more Dakka for you outside of this thread.

*Shrug*, I injected no prejudices on the thoughts of religion in this thread. I simply pointed out when others did.

AgeOfEgos wrote:I injected no prejudices on the thoughts of religion in this thread.

I'm certainly not accusing you of doing otherwise.

40k is grimdark, and a very grimdark topic is religious extremists. this and the escued worship of a man make for a less than lovely human culture of the future.

Let me clarify something:

I am not talking about whether or not atheism or theism has any merit. That is truly off-topic.

I am talking about the common points of these sources:

- 40k fluff

- the Black Legend

- Elizabeth: the Golden Age

- The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

As I see it, there are at least three commonalities here:

(1) They all disparage religion, particularly Catholicism.

(2) This disparagement is in each case based on inadequate understanding/purposeful misunderstanding of religion.

(3) They're all bloody well British!

Is the 40k Background a dig at religion?

YES. It is especially a dig at Catholicism, which comes as no surprise considering that it's authors are British.

There's no denying that the upper echelons of the Catholic Church are corrupt. It's not as bad as it was 500+ years ago, but there are still a lot of problems.

40k draws its inspiration from the darkest corners of the Inquisition and the medieval RMC that manipulated its followers for personal and political gains in the name of God.

@Amaya: No, 40k draws its inspiration from the darkest corners of the British imagination regarding Catholicism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:There's no denying that the upper echelons of the Catholic Church are corrupt. It's not as bad as it was 500+ years ago, but there are still a lot of problems.

What's the point of saying this? And why hasn't Ageof Egos noticed?

I disagree with the notion that attitudes towards religion in 40k writing are particularly anti-Catholic in sentiment. The themes can apply to any Church that has become strongly tied to a governing body-politic. What seems especially Catholic, as opposed to Protestant or Muslim, about the Ecclesiarchy?

Let's just take one tiny example. The "Rosarius" is clearly a play on the concept of rosary beads, Can you think of any similar plays on either Protestant or Muslim religious terms in 40k?

Now let's take another, wider example: religious orders. The SM and Sisters are both modeled on Roman Catholic religious orders. Should we be more specific? How about Black Templars and the Order of Our Martyred Lady? You can also see in the way the Ecclesiarchy venerates saints a rough parody of the Roman Catholic Cult of the Saints (if not the Communion of the Saints).

Finally, we can talk about the language: "High Gothic" is basically some kind of parody of Latin -- a language that is heavily associated with Roman Catholicism and NOT any flavor of Protestantism or Islam. In fact, it is a language that most Protestants protested against from the beginning and Muslims would find simply profane (given that it's not Arabic).

Manchu wrote:Let's just take one tiny example. The "Rosarius" is clearly a play on the concept of rosary beads, Can you think of any similar plays on either Protestant or Muslim religious terms in 40k?

The Rosarius may have a simillar word, but wearing necklaces with religious icons on them is hardly distinctly Catholic. A commonly mentioned mark of religious devotion is making a pilgrimage following a saint's trail for spiritual fulfillment, which is reminiscent of the pilgrimage to Mecca that all Muslims are expected to make once in their lives.

Now let's take another, wider example: religious orders. The SM and Sisters are both modeled on Roman Catholic religious orders. Should we be more specific? How about Black Templars and the Order of Our Martyred Lady? You can also see in the way the Ecclesiarchy venerates saints a rough parody of the Roman Catholic Cult of the Saints (if not the Communion of the Saints).

The Templars are not part of the Ecclesiarchy. Space Marine chapters can be and are modeled on just about every other Warrior-brother-ethos that human history has put forth, so if anything a lack of a reference to crusading knights would be more glaring than its inclusion. Veneration of "Saintly" figures is pretty universal to religions and a couple things that aren't (see the Founding Father fetish at work here in America). Buddhism has a lot of this sort of thing as well.

Finally, we can talk about the language: "High Gothic" is basically some kind of parody of Latin -- a language that is heavily associated with Roman Catholicism and NOT any flavor of Protestantism or Islam.

Latin is also the original language that English is based on. What other short-hand could be used for an older language the current tongue is based on that an English-speaking reader would grasp as instinctively? The idea of an older, more educated language for older, more enlightened times ties with a lot of the themes of decay and deterioration in 40k.

- Wearing a string of beads that have religious significance and are called a Rosarius is an overt reference to the rosary. It's not at all like the concept of a pilgrimage. It's much, much, much more specific.

- It doesn't matter whether SM are part of the Ecclesiarchy or not; they are an organization of (de facto) celibate monks who live together in monasteries, venerating relics of saints, organizing their day-to-day lives in accordance with a holy book, &etc. Other religions may have similar organizations. Only the Catholic faith has organizations like this that are called things like "Templars." Furthermore, the concept of saint is one thing but here we are talking about the word saint (rather than a Hindu or Muslim or Buddhist term) coupled with a more specific understanding of saints that is Catholic rather than Buddhist or Muslim or Hindu or anything else.

- Ancient English is Germanic and not Romantic. Since 1066, English has been half French so, yes, we are familiar with Latin roots. Moreover, Latin's reputation as being a language of education is inextricably tied to its use by the Roman Catholic Church.

You can try to generalize the examples that I've given but you can't seem to deal with how specific they actually are. Yes, there is definitely inspiration outside of anti-Catholicism for the spirituality of 40k. But it is all packaged in very overt anti-Catholic terms and images.

Manchu wrote:- Wearing a string of beads that have religious significance and are called a Rosarius is an overt reference to the rosary. It's not at all like the concept of a pilgrimage. It's much, much, much more specific.

The Rosarius is not portrayed as a string of beads last I saw, but a chain link "Chain of Duty" around the chaplain's neck, with one Icon that contains the force field emitter. 0 beads. There's obviously a simillarity in names, but everything else about them is different. In fact, it' been a long time since Sunday school, but I distinctly remember that wearing a rosary is considered disrespectful, quite the opposite of how a Rosarius is used.

- It doesn't matter whether SM are part of the Ecclesiarchy or not; they are an organization of (de facto) celibate monks who live together in monasteries, venerating relics of saints, organizing their day-to-day lives in accordance with a holy book. Other religions may have similar organizations. Only the Catholic faith has organizations like this that are called things like "Templars." Furthermore, the concept of saint is one thing but here we are talking about the word saint (rather than a Hindu or Muslim or Buddhist term) coupled with a more specific understanding of saints that is Catholic rather than Buddhist or Muslim or Hindu or anything else.

Since the Warhammer background is written in English, they could hardly use any other word. Once again, the Ecclesiarchy has 0 organizations of enhances super warriors with names like "Templar". Beyond that, not all Astartes chapters have the word "Templars" in their name. In fact, none of the first founding legions are Templars. This isn't 3rd edition right after the release of Codex Armageddon anymore. All the home-brew chapters are Something-Wolves, not Something-Templars these days.

- Ancient English is Germanic and not Romantic. Since 1066, English has been half French so, yes, we are familiar with Latin roots. Moreover, Latin's reputation as being a language of education is inextricably tied to its use by the Roman Catholic Church.

That's fascinating, but doesn't counter my point that there are other reasons to pick Latin as the basis for High Gothic than ZOMG GW HATES CATHOLICS.

You can try to generalize the examples that I've given but you can't seem to deal with how specific they actually are. Yes, there is definitely inspiration outside of anti-Catholicism for the spirituality of 40k. But it is all packaged in very overt anti-Catholic terms and images.

Only if you approach the idea of Spiritual authorities having secular power as unique to Catholicism. Joe Guardsman's and Battle-Brother Steve's faith is always shown as a source of strength and perseverance. The veneration of saints, even, is validated by the fact that 40k saints are actually somewhat divine and kick some butt. It's only the high ranking muckity mucks who really get a negative portrayal, and the fanatics that they use as weapons.

Honestly, man, you're missing the forest for the trees.

It's a ROSARIUS. If you weren't supposed to think rosary it would be called ANYTHING else. There is no other reason to call it a Roasrius except to evoke the rosary.

I don't know why you are so keen to point out that the Ecclesiarchy doesn't field units called Templars. It doesn't matter in the slightest to this conversation. The point of this thread is not just that the Ecclesiarchy is a stand-in for the Catholic Church. And if you are so stuck on the Ecclesiarchy then why no comment about Out Martyred Lady? No other religion except Catholicism uses "Our Lady" as a title of veneration, except where people using Catholic analogies have done the translating. Moreover, take a look at the Templars' chapter symbol -- it's a cross. Not a wheel, or the word om, or a guy with a trumpet, or some Arabic script but a CROSS. Specifically, it is a Maltese cross. Aside from evoking the Catholic militant religious orders, there is no other ostensible reason that any SM chapter would use a cross in its heraldry. These are just a few out of many, many specific examples. We haven't even talked about the Inquisition yet -- an institution which is right off the pages of Enlightenment era English texts deriding Catholic Spain.

All the reasons that GW would pick Latin to represent High Gothic are tied back to the Catholic Church's use of Latin throughout medieval Europe. That's the sum of it, my friend.

Finally, Joe Guardsman's faith is one that allows him to cooperate in the galaxy-wide domination of humanity through endless war, genocide, and every form of destruction. Warhammer 40k EXPLICITLY links a religion modeled after Catholicism to the perpetuation of prejudice, violence, and universal misery. If that's not anti-Catholic, then I don't know what is.

Look, I'm not saying that there are no elements that tie back to catholic imagery. Given the big role of the Catholic church in Western civilization, it would be harder to do classical references that don't tie to Catholicism somehow than find a Hollywood movie with people who have never heard of Kevin Bacon. I would like to focus on the point most relevant to the original question imo, because there's something that interests me here.

Finally, Joe Guardsman's faith is one that allows him to cooperate in the galaxy-wide domination of humanity through endless war, genocide, and every form of destruction. Warhammer 40k EXPLICITLY links a religion modeled after Catholicism to the perpetuation of prejudice, violence, and universal misery. If that's not anti-Catholic, then I don't know what is.

We have a fundamental point of view difference here that I find intriguing. When I read 40k, the theme I pick up on most frequently is that the Imperium, as brutal as it is, is necessary for mankind to not go extinct. That without the Inqusiitions and the Crusades and the mistrust of Aliens, humanity would have been Waaghed by the Orks or eaten by Bugs or whatever'd to death millenniums ago. The Tau only really started to fit in to 40k when we started getting hints that the "greater good" was really just a propaganda line and you can't trust the Blue Skins any more than you can trust the Eldar. EVERYTHING is out to kill humanity, and the Joe Guardsmen are what keep the species alive. Thus, if I were to completely give in on the Ecclesiarchy being far more Catholic than Unitarian or Baptist or whatever, we would still have the interesting paradox that you could also say "Warhammer 40k EXPLICITLY links a religion modeled after Catholicism to the survival of humanity in the face of a galaxy full of horror and nightmare. If that's not pro-Catholic, then I don't know what is."

The question is, could mankind survive the 41st millenium without being as brutal and grim-dark as it is? If you think the answer is yes, then yeah everything about the Imperium comes off as excessively horrible, and anything referenced from history is an insult. If not, then before proclaiming the writers to be anti-Catholic you have to consider what is seen positively, negatively, or set dressing and which parts of that are or are not Catholic.

40k is hardly a dig at religion, the entire Imperium turned in on itself and ended up worshiping the one man who abolished it in the first place.

And I really don't think it's anti-Catholic. I mean, most of the fluff has solid basis on western culture, it'd be nearly impossible to not include a Catholic-like church or organization.

The reason the Black Templars have all the similar names are BECAUSE they're based on the Templars of the crusades. Which other chapters use religious iconography? Besides maybe the Word Bearers, all of the founding Legions hardly have any sort of reference to the Catholic Church, bar maybe the use of Angel, but I really wouldn't count that...

Honestly, you're missing the forest for the trees Manchu. Sure, there are TONS of references to the Catholic church in 40k, and some of the grimdark tuning isn't too far from what the Catholic church has done, we have to remember that it's been fit into the 40k universe, it's supposed to be full of prejudice and violence, it's not meant to be tuned as some sort of dig against Catholicism. If it was, then why the hell give it any positive aspects? Unshakable belief in the Emperor is said to be anathema to Daemons, which if I'm not mistaken are universally considered "Bad" and "Evil". While unshakable belief in Catholicism doesn't do nearly as much, if this is a parody/dig on Catholicism then it really depicts it in a positive light, no?

Honestly, I think it's as much an aesthetic matter as anything. A brutal, monolithic church has some wonderful aesthetics, but they're rather tainted when what they preach (daemons and witches conspiring to WHARGLBARGL) is quite blatantly false. Remove the "they're wrong" aspect, and suddenly they become really sort of cool.

The same applies with the rest of the Imperium, and their Fascistic aesthetics and worldview: in a world where what they preach is incoherent gibberish, all their wonderful aesthetics get tainted. So again, remove the "they're wrong and unacceptable" aspect, and you get some wonderful aesthetics to play around with.

Manchu wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:Anyway back to the point, clear links can be seen between between the Jesus and the Emperor, and the Roman Catholic Church with the IoM. Jesus and the Emperor were both free thinkers and brought new ideas to the masses. The Roman Catholic Church and the IoM were both not created by their respective gods, but used to control the masses and justify the present leadership, both are layered with dogma that has replaced the free thinking that their gods wanted. the Roman Catholic Church and the IoM both have had inquisitors, witchhunts, holy wars, crusades etc.

That's certainly one perspective on the Catholic Church: a naive, uninformed, insulting and ultimately ludicrous perspective but a perspective nonetheless. Even so, I am inclined to agree that this is the perspective that GW fluff authors have adopted in satirizing Catholicism through the Ecclesiarchy in the finest British tradition of anti-Catholicism.

It's a completely valid perspective as an outsider. And it could just as easily be applied to any other branch of Christianity, or many other religions.

Insulting religion is always ok. Religion should not be allowed a special 'uninsultable' status above any other belief system (such as Marxism, Veganism or believing in Fairies). All are ways in which people choose to live their life and all are equally open to criticism. It's one area where Dawkins makes a very GOOD point.

Anyway.

I'd suggest that, in modern Britain, there is currently a fine tradition of anti-religiosity, rather than specifically anti-Catholicism. Believe me, the vast majority of the younger generation (by which i mean under 50ish) in Britain are equally critical of all religion. I imagine the reason that the Ecclesiarchy in 40k is seen as more a 'Catholic' analogue than a 'Generic Christian' or 'Generic Religious' one is that the pomp, ceremony and grandness of the Catholic church today provides a much richer source of visual imagery for the artists than the Protestant churches, which are largely devoid of the grand, colourful, devotional celebration. The IoM also references a period of western history (dark ages/medaeval Europe) where the biggest church by far was the Catholic one.

Manchu wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:Well i think alot more anti-catholic feeling in the film came from the fact that they were invading in the name of the pope. The film isn't anti-catholic because it was made in Britain, but because it is an accurate depiction of history.

It takes more than mere dates and names to accurately depict history. In terms of it's script, that movie conforms to an interpretation of history (not coincidentally, an interpretation popular in Britain since the times of Elizabeth I -- it's propaganda after all) that is explicitly anti-Catholic. In terms of it's visual content, the movie is overtly anti-Catholic.

BluntmanDC wrote:Anyway back to the point, clear links can be seen between between the Jesus and the Emperor, and the Roman Catholic Church with the IoM. Jesus and the Emperor were both free thinkers and brought new ideas to the masses. The Roman Catholic Church and the IoM were both not created by their respective gods, but used to control the masses and justify the present leadership, both are layered with dogma that has replaced the free thinking that their gods wanted. the Roman Catholic Church and the IoM both have had inquisitors, witchhunts, holy wars, crusades etc.

That's certainly one perspective on the Catholic Church: a naive, uninformed, insulting and ultimately ludicrous perspective but a perspective nonetheless. Even so, I am inclined to agree that this is the perspective that GW fluff authors have adopted in satirizing Catholicism through the Ecclesiarchy in the finest British tradition of anti-Catholicism.

BluntmanDC wrote:Back when it was first creayed the satire/link was much more obvious to the point that some church-goers actually did complain, but as GW is now an international company and not a garage set up, i think the intentional poking has been replaced by new writers just working within the established framework without an anti-religious agenda.

I agree that GW authors don't really have an agenda, per se. Like every one else, however, they can't help but be influenced by their own personal beliefs and the ideas that are current to their times. I would reiterate that McNeill's Last Church is a fine example of the same muddled thinking that one can find in The God Delusion.

I'm niave? History is taught in Britain from a very neutral standpoint (often showing the failings of our country) unlike the revisionist (and very inaccurate) history lessons in US schools.

So you want all English characters in Elizabethen England to go 'oh well the pope may have ordered this invasion, but on thinking about it he really is a nice guy.' Grow up, just because you don't like the history of your religion doesn't mean it didn't happen.

The Roman Catholic Church at that time was corrupt, can you explain away the Pope that put his dead predicessor on trial, or the pope who had whores act like pigs eating chestnuts on his floor, or the brothels owned by the church, the vast wealth owned by the church (going against the very teachings of Jesus) etc etc

Take your head out of the sand and grow up, you may not like Catholic history, but it did happen.

Manchu wrote:which comes as no surprise considering that it's authors are British.

I see, its not ok for people to question your religions history, but you can be totally prejudiced against a country's people.

moonshine wrote:Ok its not what you gus are talking about but are word beares meant to represent catholics , their homeworld is called catholis coincedence ?

Their homeworld is called Colchis.

Wikipedia wrote:According to the Greek mythology, Colchis was a fabulously wealthy land situated on the mysterious periphery of the heroic world. Here in the sacred grove of the war god Ares, King Aeëtes hung the Golden Fleece until it was seized by Jason and the Argonauts. Colchis was also the land where the mythological Prometheus was punished by being chained to a mountain while an eagle ate at his liver for revealing to humanity the secret of fire.

Medea was from Colchis - a woman who was betrayed by her husband and wanted revenge, which could tie with the Word Bearer's view of being 'betrayed' in their love for the Emperor.

Circe, the witch from the Odessey, was also from Colchis, though since the Word Bearers are hardly the most sorcerous of Legions, this probably isn't the analogy we're looking for!

Manchu wrote:What's the point of saying this? And why hasn't Ageof Egos noticed?

*Shrug*, I had moved on and accepted the fact we disagreed..which is not an uncommon phenomenon in the online world.

But what's more important than what I did do, is what I didn't. For example, making a passive aggressive troll post in hopes to elicit an emotional response.

inquisitorfaust wrote:Given the big role of the Catholic church in Western civilization, it would be harder to do classical references that don't tie to Catholicism somehow than find a Hollywood movie with people who have never heard of Kevin Bacon.

What? Who cares whether it would be hard to avoid references to the Catholic Church when you want to create a "Gothic" setting? It doesn't matter whether or not you "have to" use such references -- what is important is that these references are in themselves degrading to Catholicism. Since you're having trouble seeing that, let's look at something that was said since our last posts:

ArbitorIan wrote:Religion should not be allowed a special 'uninsultable' status above any other belief system (such as Marxism, Veganism or believing in Fairies). All are ways in which people choose to live their life and all are equally open to criticism. It's one area where Dawkins makes a very GOOD point.

So Christian faith is the equivalent of believing in fairies? I don't know if I've ever seen better evidence of the near-total lack of understanding of religion that is so common today -- and, look, it is even specifically sourced to Dawkins in this case.

Richard Dawkins is popular because he has tapped into this overwhelming ignorance. Unlike other atheists (like Daniel Dennett), he has written books that do not require intelligence to read and understand. As I have said, this is because he -- just like his target audience -- does not understand anything at all about religion. It's hard to explain to people how deeply insulting this is. I would never write a book purporting to explain the genetic mechanisms of evolution because I am not at all qualified to do so. And yet Dawkins believes he can write such a book about religion -- with no qualifications at all. This alone should tell you a lot about the extreme hostility (what he disguises as scientific objectivity and neutrality) with which he approaches the topic. This is a(nother) sure sign that his writing on the matter is untrustworthy.

In the United States, we have been exposed to the idea of "political correctness" for quite some time. A lot of people hate this kind of thing -- they feel that it makes a mockery of common sense. But what I have found is that this enforced "political correctness" has helped to open people's eyes (specifically, white males' eyes) about prejudices against women and non-white races that they would have never recognized before because their "common sense" is itself inherently misogynistic and racist.

Similarly, the kind of language being used in this thread to gloss over the many specific references to Catholicism in 40k and the obvious link between those references and a fictional organization that purposefully spreads terror, violence, hatred, and misery demonstrates that the "common sense" among the many in the 40k target audience is itself inherently anti-Catholic specifically and anti-religious more generally.

Now, to return to inquisitorfaust's point:

inquisitorfaust wrote:The question is, could mankind survive the 41st millenium without being as brutal and grim-dark as it is? If you think the answer is yes, then yeah everything about the Imperium comes off as excessively horrible, and anything referenced from history is an insult. If not, then before proclaiming the writers to be anti-Catholic you have to consider what is seen positively, negatively, or set dressing and which parts of that are or are not Catholic.

Look, we can all agree that fascism is bad, right? But in the GrimDark, fascism is necessary for human survival. Does it become less wrong for being necessary? Nope -- that's part of the horror of the 40k setting: we are repulsed by the idea that things that are absolutely wrong in the real world are "necessary" in 40k. Similarly, the presentation of religion as mass ignorance, violence, oppression, &&etc is unequivocally insulting to real world religion and the fact that such a religion is "necessary" within the fictional world itself does not mitigate that insult.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AgeOfEgos wrote:For example, making a passive aggressive troll post in hopes to elicit an emotional response.

Whoops -- looks like you just did what you were claiming to not do! Anyway, my point was that you were quick to jump on me for ostensibly insulting atheism (I did not) but let an utterly inane and off-topic insult like Amaya's regarding the Catholic Church sail right by.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anyway, I refuse to assume the responsibility of unburdening the lot of you from your prejudices. If you won't take the word of a Catholic on these matters, consider that someone who seems pretty a-religious can clearly see what's going on with the 40k background as well:

ArbitorIan wrote:Given the very deliberate dig at the Catholic church present throughout the IoM background, and the fact that this is a game developed in the UK, where the vast majority of the population don't care for religion (of a population of 60 million, only 8% worship regularly), I'd imagine that the dig at religion is VERY intentional on the part of the designers.

Argue with him instead.

You'll find that at lest 70% of the people living in England are sceptical about all faiths, lets face it, we over here have had two civil wars over it (the last one was quite bad, you may have heard about it, it started over a book translated into english and ended with us cutting a kings head off).

We tend not to let religion try and take over our politcical policys, sure its there but its more out of tradition not due to faith (of any kind). Religion and Politcis do not make good bed fellows.

As for the anit-chatholic bit...really? Your basing your argument on one hundred years of 2000 years of history. There was more going on at that time which the Church had a hand in than what probably your history books denote, the mass killing and calling them witch hunts, the sale of places in heaven for killing, attonments on death beds if you give all you worldly goods to the chuch...the Protestants (irionicly it was the Gremans that started it, dam those Lutherans) had had enough of the popery and ideologue , the cheating and swindeling that the church used to blind the simple folk of the land. Why the hell would we have to bend to the will of Rome at that time?

As for the topic subject: Is the background of 40K a dig at religion? It is and its not at the same time, a paradox if you will.

Manchu wrote:

AgeOfEgos wrote:For example, making a passive aggressive troll post in hopes to elicit an emotional response.

Whoops -- looks like you just did what you were claiming to not do! Anyway, my point was that you were quick to jump on me for ostensibly insulting atheism (I did not) but let an utterly inane and off-topic insult like Amaya's regarding the Catholic Church sail right by.

Anyway, I refuse to assume the responsibility of unburdening the lot of you from your prejudices. If you won't take the word of a Catholic on these matters, consider that someone who seems pretty a-religious can clearly see what's going on with the 40k background as well:

ArbitorIan wrote:Given the very deliberate dig at the Catholic church present throughout the IoM background, and the fact that this is a game developed in the UK, where the vast majority of the population don't care for religion (of a population of 60 million, only 8% worship regularly), I'd imagine that the dig at religion is VERY intentional on the part of the designers.

Argue with him instead.

Pointing out troll posts....is not trolling. It's just calling out poor behavior, which you were displaying.

As I stated before, I've moved and accepted the fact we disagree. You can do that too, I have faith so to speak.

Manchu wrote:Anyway, I refuse to assume the responsibility of unburdening the lot of you from your prejudices. If you won't take the word of a Catholic on these matters....

That genuinely made me lol. Keep up the good fight Manchu, don't let the internets get you down.

Pssst.......come here......yes you......let me tell you a little secret about this thread.......come on you know you want to hear it....come closer...yah thats it.....The Church of Scientology created the Emperor in the world of 40K....its true think about it........

AgeofEgos wrote:Pointing out troll posts....is not trolling. It's just calling out poor behavior, which you were displaying.

Now you're the one making me laugh, Mr. RaptorJesus-for-an-avatar.

Manchu wrote:

AgeofEgos wrote:Pointing out troll posts....is not trolling. It's just calling out poor behavior, which you were displaying.

Now you're the one making me laugh, Mr. RaptorJesus-for-an-avatar.

You'll be ok Manchu .

We all will.

I always saw the whole story of The Emperor as sort of analagous to Jesus, I dunno maybe that's just me reading my personal beliefs into it.

Jesus died for your sins = Jesus was killed because stupid donkey-caves killed him because people are stupid donkey-caves and he tried to tell them not to be.


The Emperor was killed by Chaos = because he told everybody not to believe in it and it would go away, but people were stupid and believed that the Emperor would save them from it, rather than just not believing in it, so it killed him. Again because people are stupid donkey-caves.

I think its a pretty good similarity.

Your hero dies because you are an ignorant idiot, so worship him. If only people would have listened.

Manchu wrote:- Wearing a string of beads that have religious significance and are called a Rosarius is an overt reference to the rosary.

Bhuddists do it too.

Melissia wrote:

Manchu wrote:- Wearing a string of beads that have religious significance and are called a Rosarius is an overt reference to the rosary.

Bhuddists do it too.

Not on rosaries.

They're called Juzu, Shu Zhu, etc depending on what languate you speak, but the string of prayer beads is the same concept as rosaries-- to the point where Juzu are frequently referred to as "Bhuddist Rosaries".



In Hindu, they're called Japa Mala.



Frequently they're specifically 108 beads long.

Prayer beads, each bead is a different mantra.

Actually, Melissia, religions are not interchagable. Calling Buddhist prayer beads "rosaries" is an example of ANALOGY. Counting prayers on beads is not all the rosary is about -- it connects to a specific spirituality not shared by Buddhists or Hindus. Calling something a "rosarius" taps into that spirituality as opposed to a Buddhist or Hindu one. There's a reason they're not called jappa or whatever. The authors of the fluff are not commenting on those traditions.

Manchu wrote:Actually, Melissia, religions are not interchagable.

No gak, really? Gee, I wouldn't have known that.

No, I'm fairly certain that the reason they're called Rosaries is because the writers were British Christians.

The concepts for both are still similar, prayer beads which represent some form of spirituality.

Melissia wrote:

Manchu wrote:Actually, Melissia, religions are not interchagable.

No gak, really? Gee, I wouldn't have known that.

No, I'm fairly certain that the reason they're called Rosaries is because the writers were British Christians.

The concepts for both are still similar, prayer beads which represent some form of spirituality.

Did Manchu say that the beads weren't similar in nature? No.

Saying that the Rosarius isn't based on Rosaries is pretty silly.

... didn't I just say it was?

Melissia wrote:

Manchu wrote:- Wearing a string of beads that have religious significance and are called a Rosarius is an overt reference to the rosary.

Bhuddists do it too.

Then why even bring this up?

What I meant, as Amaya points out, was that superficial commanalities between Buddhism (et al.) and Christianity don't enter into this discussion. The IoM is certainly not referencing those traditions. Bringing up Buddhist prayer beads in this conversation ends up being a nonsequitor -- unless someone really doesn't grasp that the similarity is merely superficial or an incident of jingoistic translation -- which Melissia has clarified that she does indeed grasp. So, nonsequitor it is.

Being used as a counter to someone I agree with in not fun, so just to clear up my views on this...

Manchu wrote:Who cares whether it would be hard to avoid references to the Catholic Church when you want to create a "Gothic" setting? It doesn't matter whether or not you "have to" use such references -- what is important is that [b]these references are in themselves degrading to Catholicism.

Yes. I completely agree on your basic point. The authors of 40k wanted to depict a giant, totalitarian middle-ages style religion that rules with an iron fist and executes people who do not agree with them, with the implication that, while they are necessary, they are incredibly distant from their origins. A religion that is an oppressive, but necessary evil.

The authors chose to base this on the Catholic church in the middle ages, this is true. They could have chosen to base it on Wicca, or Hinduism or whatever, but they chose Catholic Christianity in the Middle Ages. However, there are many reasons why, from a non-religious and objective perspective, Catholicism fits the bill perfectly - as previously stated, it's historical significance, it's powermongering and political actions in the period, and it's imagery and iconography from the time.

In 40k, MANY things from real life are exaggerated to the nth dgree - that is one of the primary points of 40k. So, if war is hellish, then in 40k is WORSE. If Russian Commissars were strict, well 40k Commissars are going to be STRICTER. And if the religion of 40k takes it's influence from Catholicism, then you can bet it will be 'turned up as well. So our nuns are ultra-dedicated zealots, our crusaders are permanently on crusade, our Inquisition is completely merciless, and the merest whiff of Heresy will get you shot. Things were not quite like this in the real Middle Ages Catholic Church, but there is a grain of historical truth in all of them.

I should also point out that the religion of the IoM has been shown to take in many creeds. While it's organisation is undoubtedly Catholic, various world worship in ways more similar to other religions - for example, the Fenrisian veneration of the Emperor as a Norse-style 'Allfather'. Or the Ayatanis of the Sabbat Worlds in the Gaunts Ghosts series, who inhabit a world that is much more 'eastern' in religious feel.

While this may be insulting to Catholics, I imagine the authors simply don't care. I happen to agree with them, for the following reason...

Manchu wrote:So Christian faith is the equivalent of believing in fairies? I don't know if I've ever seen better evidence of the near-total lack of understanding of religion that is so common today

YES. From an objective, outsiders point of view, the point of view of someone who doesn't follow any religion or superstition, then the central tenets of the Christian faith sound just as ludicrous as Fairies at the bottom of the garden.

Are you asking me to ascribe more importance or respect to one system of beliefs merely because lots of people believe it? Lots of people thought the world was flat. They were still wrong. If you said you were a Socialist, or a Marxist, or a Confucianist, you would live your life by a system of beliefs, just like a Christian or a Muslim. But I would be allowed to question those beliefs without being considered insulting. Yet, if I call it a religion, suddenly we're not allowed to question it?

Manchu wrote:And yet Dawkins believes he can write such a book about religion -- with no qualifications at all. This alone should tell you a lot about the extreme hostility (what he disguises as scientific objectivity and neutrality) with which he approaches the topic.

Wikipedia wrote:Clinton Richard Dawkins, FRS, FRSL (born 26 March 1941) is a British ethologist and evolutionary biologist. He is an emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford,[1] and was the University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science from 1995 until 2008.[2]

I'm not the biggest fan of Richard Dawkins, and the argument about him probably belongs in the off-topic forum. I tend to agree with his view on religion, but I find that his methods lack subtlety. Either way, as a student of human nature, I'd say he is pretty well qualified. The point above, that religions should not be accorded more 'respect' than other belief systems is one thing I agree with him on.

EDITS to close the correct quote marks!