Order of Chivalry?

[Louis IX]

Hi all,

I was offered to be part of a traditionalist catholic Order of Chivalry. I won't say the name for the sake of privacy , but apparently there are plenty , and to add to the context it is a French one.
I do not have much experience about this - and I admit that I didn't even know that these things still exist.
My first impression was that this is some sort of cult , full of heresies and which will lead to various weird rituals - but it seems that it is part of the catholic doctrine.

It looks like this is not a religious order but a traditional institution of the Church having the duty to defend the Church.

Clergymen have a duty , and besides that , the Order of Chivalry is focused on what a layman should do in order to serve the Catholic Church and defend the institution.

As far as I understood , these are not secret societies , and as long as you do not reveal too many rules and behave relatively discreet about other fellow members, you can talk about the main topics of the order regarding the Catholic civilization freely around you.

I received some sort of "Formation" with many doctrinal points and political questions linked to the Church - and I am yet to read it. There are also other internal documents about the rules and the purpose of the Order. The whole thing seems particularly based and is very appealing to me.


However , this is not linked to any sort of personal prestige and I don't want to be hostage of my own pride. - I feel very honored that a person I know thought about me and put his trust in me to join an Order. I feel that it is even more my duty now to try to live as catholic as possible and belonging to such Order adds to my purpose of life.

Before to consider myself up to the level of the task and read all the documents- I would like to ask if anyone has knowledge about what an Order of Chivalry is and its purposes - and possibly have a concrete experience about it.

Thanks in advance and sorry if my message is not well structured grammatically or confusing , I did the best I could considering my level of fatigue .

 

[Pantheon]

Very interesting. I am of the belief that chivalric orders can perform a legitimate function of the Church. Hypothetically, a standing militia could provide young men an opportunity to dedicate their life to practicing martial arts and chivalry.

Monks and warrior ascetics bring an unsurmountable value to society. If there are monks of Christ there could equally as well be soldiers for Christ. Such a militia would naturally be forbidden to fight wars but provide an ascetic path for men. Similar to Buddhist warrior monks who have supernatural powers but never hurt anyone and practice martial arts for spiritual, ascetic purposes.

Such knights would be the vanguard of the Church, and in rare cases could be deployed as self defense. After all, Christians are the most persecuted group in the world. Becoming a martyr for such soldiers would be an honor, but modern society does not understand martial virtues so the topic remains controversial.

 

[infowarrior1]

While I am not Catholic. I have to warn you guys about Courtly Love and how it has infected Chivalry and twisted it into something quite perverse:

Chivalry is the word that expresses that ideal.

One of the frequent criticisms I’ve received with my writing on chivalry is that I’m using the term incorrectly. The argument is that chivalry is merely a code of martial honor, and tha…

dalrock.wordpress.com

The same qualities that made a manful fighter then, make one now: to speak the truth, to perform a promise to the utmost, to reverence all women, to be constant in love, to despise luxury, to be simple and modest and gentle in heart, to help the weak and take no unfair advantage of an inferior. This was the ideal of the age, and chivalry is the word that expresses that ideal.

Confusing history with literature.

One of Vox Day’s readers argued: As Dalrock has explained, all that cultural bomb-throwers have to do is to borrow from the Satanic inversion that is chivalry, that puts women in the place of…

dalrock.wordpress.com

Originally Courtly Love glorified Romantic Love only in the context of Adultery and not Marriage:

XVII. A Knight was in love with a lady who was already in love with another; he received some hope to be loved in the following manner — that if she was ever deprived of the love of her present lover, then certainly this knight would have her love. After a brief time the lady married her lover. The aforesaid knight then demanded that she grant him the fruit of the hope granted to him, but she refused, saying that she had not lost the love of her lover. In this case the queen answered thus: “We do not dare oppose the decision of the Countess of Champagne, who in her decision decreed that love can exercise no power over husband and wife. Therefore we recommend that the aforesaid women grant the love that she has promised.”

The chivalric rules of love.

French poets, in the eleventh century, discovered or invented, or were the first to express, that romantic species of passion which English poets were still writing about in the nineteenth. They ef…

dalrock.wordpress.com

Even though Marriage is meant to be the place for Romantic Love(Song of Solomon).

More on the corruption of Chivalry by Courtly Love which seems intertwined with it in the beginning:

The love which is to be the source of all that is beautiful in life and manners must be the reward freely given by the lady, and only our superiors can reward. But a wife is not a superior.81 As the wife of another, above all as the wife of a great lord, she may be queen of beauty and of love, the distributor of favours, the inspiration of all knightly virtues, and the bridle of ‘villany’;82 but as your own wife, for whom you have bargained with her father, she sinks at once from lady into mere woman. How can a woman, whose duty is to obey you, be the midons whose grace is the goal of all striving and whose displeasure is the restraining influence upon all uncourtly vices?

This grovelling is a satanic inversion of the proper relationship between Wife and Husband and also is a glorification of adultery. Also the passion between man and wife in contradiction to the Scriptures was considered abhorrent and falsely accused of being the same as adultery.

…the impropriety (from the courtly point of view) of loving his own wife. Such a man is in propria uxore adulter. His sin is heavier than that of the unmarried lover, for he has abused the sacrament of marriage.

Courtly Love: The origins of cuckchivalry.

I’ve been reading The Allegory of Love by C.S. Lewis, about the medieval idea of “courtly love”. Lewis sums up the concept as (emphasis mine): The sentiment, of course, is love, …

dalrock.wordpress.com

Courtly Love is pure evil. And wicked.

 

[Pantheon]

While I am not Catholic. I have to warn you guys about Courtly Love and how it has infected Chivalry and twisted it into something quite perverse:

This grovelling is a satanic inversion of the proper relationship between Wife and Husband and also is a glorification of adultery. Also the passion between man and wife in contradiction to the Scriptures was considered abhorrent and falsely accused of being the same as adultery.

Courtly Love is pure evil. And wicked.

Here comes the Lutheran nit-picker.. Courtly love in the higher sense is an aristocratic code of conduct between man and woman that plays out an archetypic theme. It is not meant to subvert or supplant scripture. I understand that you, as a Protestant formalist, have a grudge against it since your Judaistic equality doctrine is allergic to any deviation from legalistic constraints. This effectively blocks you from seeing any virtue in the playful side of love or chivalric romanticism.

 

[infowarrior1]

Here comes the Lutheran nit-picker.. Courtly love in the higher sense is an aristocratic code of conduct between man and woman that plays out an archetypic theme. It is not meant to subvert or supplant scripture. I understand that you, as a Protestant formalist, have a grudge against it since your Judaistic equality doctrine is allergic to any deviation from legalistic constraints. This effectively blocks you from seeing any virtue in the playful side of love or chivalric romanticism.

The glorification of adultery and cuckoldry hardly qualifies as virtue. Neither has this failed to result in the problems we have nowadays in the conservatives fatal weakness to the feminist movement when they because of this same chivalry give way again and again to those same wicked forces.

Romance isn't inherently sanctified by its existence but by its presence in holy wedlock.

Because Romance is inherently sexual and doesn't belong outside wedlock:

Romance is sexual.

Boxer astutely notes (emphasis mine): Some of you guys are assuming something salacious in these inappropriate father-daughter relationships, but it’s not necessary for the father and daughter to h…

dalrock.wordpress.com

There are many years of posts on this topic:

Chivalry – Page 29 – Dalrock

Posts about Chivalry written by Dalrock

dalrock.wordpress.com

Dalrock is a key Christian figure of the manosphere so I recommend you read all those posts.

As a result my thoughts are the way they are now.

 

[Penn Senator]

And they say chivalry is dead!

 

[belchmech]

Chivalry be damned, it is the first step on the road to woman's lib. It is what white knight cucks are made out of, burn and burn it good!

 

[Steiner]

The glorification of adultery and cuckoldry hardly qualifies as virtue. Neither has this failed to result in the problems we have nowadays in the conservatives fatal weakness to the feminist movement when they because of this same chivalry give way again and again to those same wicked forces.

Romance isn't inherently sanctified by its existence but by its presence in holy wedlock.

Because Romance is inherently sexual and doesn't belong outside wedlock:

Romance is sexual.

Boxer astutely notes (emphasis mine): Some of you guys are assuming something salacious in these inappropriate father-daughter relationships, but it’s not necessary for the father and daughter to h…

dalrock.wordpress.com

There are many years of posts on this topic:

Chivalry – Page 29 – Dalrock

Posts about Chivalry written by Dalrock

dalrock.wordpress.com

Dalrock is a key Christian figure of the manosphere so I recommend you read all those posts.

As a result my thoughts are the way they are now.

First of all, coming into a discussion about a Catholic Order of Chivalry, stating you are not a Catholic and then linking various articles to another protestant, is hardly a scrupulous argument. Then going ahead and railroading that discussion by throwing meat hooks onto the word "Chivalry" and dragging it through the mud is hardly productive. Do you even know the Catholic interpretation of the word, from the inception of the orders and beyond? You're looking at it from an extremely modern point of view, and only referencing a Men's Right Activist.... one of the weakest self proclaimed titles I could ever imagine...

Back to the OP: The historic Catholic Orders of Chivalry all included vows of chastity, renounced worldly possessions and were basically warrior-monks, spreading the word of Christ (by force at times) and aiming to help people. Of course some Crusading was involved.

Modern day Orders aim to serve others and defend the Church. While they are no longer military wings of the Faith, they defend in other ways. Think of it as a charitable organization, I can confirm to you they are not following the code of Chivalry such as referenced above.

My opinion is that you should do it! It is a great way to deepen your connection with others in the faith, it is part of Church doctrine and it is an honor. I think that it will aid in deepening your dedication to the faith, having an order depending upon you and keeping you in line. If you feel it strays from what you believe, you can always leave.

God bless!

 

[ilostabet]

Here comes the Lutheran nit-picker.. Courtly love in the higher sense is an aristocratic code of conduct between man and woman that plays out an archetypic theme. It is not meant to subvert or supplant scripture. I understand that you, as a Protestant formalist, have a grudge against it since your Judaistic equality doctrine is allergic to any deviation from legalistic constraints. This effectively blocks you from seeing any virtue in the playful side of love or chivalric romanticism.

There is yet another dimension to courtly love (which is also found in Song of Solomon and in other, non-Christian traditions too), which is that the several ladies are merely a poetic vehicle and substitute for Divine Wisdom, and that under the guise of 'love songs' they are instead speaking of something much deeper. But this sort of consideration with multiple meanings is wholly lost to modern minds.

To the OP, I say that organizations such as those are probably the vehicle through which the Church will overcome modernity (since it was through their destruction, at least in part, that modernity came to be). As long as this participation is taken in humbleness, as you indicated, it is of tremendous spiritual import.

 

[Augustus_Principe]

The glorification of adultery and cuckoldry hardly qualifies as virtue. Neither has this failed to result in the problems we have nowadays in the conservatives fatal weakness to the feminist movement when they because of this same chivalry give way again and again to those same wicked forces.

Romance isn't inherently sanctified by its existence but by its presence in holy wedlock.

Because Romance is inherently sexual and doesn't belong outside wedlock:

Romance is sexual.

Boxer astutely notes (emphasis mine): Some of you guys are assuming something salacious in these inappropriate father-daughter relationships, but it’s not necessary for the father and daughter to h…

dalrock.wordpress.com

There are many years of posts on this topic:

Chivalry – Page 29 – Dalrock

Posts about Chivalry written by Dalrock

dalrock.wordpress.com

Dalrock is a key Christian figure of the manosphere so I recommend you read all those posts.

As a result my thoughts are the way they are now.

Didnt "GBFGM"(guy who would write gibberish) from the chateau heartiste have an issue with Dalrock? Man, that was so long ago. Wish I could go back and check those post now that I am Catholic.

 

[infowarrior1]

Didnt "GBFGM"(guy who would write gibberish) from the chateau heartiste have an issue with Dalrock? Man, that was so long ago. Wish I could go back and check those post now that I am Catholic.

GBFM is hilarious. What a legend.

 

[infowarrior1]

First of all, coming into a discussion about a Catholic Order of Chivalry, stating you are not a Catholic and then linking various articles to another protestant, is hardly a scrupulous argument. Then going ahead and railroading that discussion by throwing meat hooks onto the word "Chivalry" and dragging it through the mud is hardly productive. Do you even know the Catholic interpretation of the word, from the inception of the orders and beyond? You're looking at it from an extremely modern point of view, and only referencing a Men's Right Activist.... one of the weakest self proclaimed titles I could ever imagine...

Back to the OP: The historic Catholic Orders of Chivalry all included vows of chastity, renounced worldly possessions and were basically warrior-monks, spreading the word of Christ (by force at times) and aiming to help people. Of course some Crusading was involved.

Modern day Orders aim to serve others and defend the Church. While they are no longer military wings of the Faith, they defend in other ways. Think of it as a charitable organization, I can confirm to you they are not following the code of Chivalry such as referenced above.

My opinion is that you should do it! It is a great way to deepen your connection with others in the faith, it is part of Church doctrine and it is an honor. I think that it will aid in deepening your dedication to the faith, having an order depending upon you and keeping you in line. If you feel it strays from what you believe, you can always leave.

God bless!

Its because all modern discussions in the mainstream about Chivalry always invariably involved Courtly Love. I would have preferred to not have to jump into the discussion.

But I don't want to see us repeat the mistakes of our forefathers that lead to the weaknesses that made us vulnerable to particular ideological attacks.

But inadvertently reinforcing the power of said ideology in breaking down the family, sex roles and sexual morality:

Gynocentrism and its Origins

gynocentrism.com

I do wish that Chivalry is free of Courtly Love. But if it is invariably tied to it. It would have to be jettisoned in favor of Bushido at the very least or some other alternative.

 

[Polyhistor]

As far as I know from reading about the crusades, the “original” chivalry (prior to 1100) was nothing to aim at for a Christian. Not only with regard to sexuality, but also with regard to violence. However, when Pope Urban called for the crusade, he did not ask the knights to abandon their profession or their state, but to improve and sanctify it: “Soldiers of hell, become soldiers of the living God!”
And indeed, over the next 100 years, the barbarous and violent knights became the main pillars of court culture. Unfortunately, this culture was far more civilised but also included extramarital courtly love, as Infowarrior1 correctly observes.
HOWEVER, the Catholic orders of chivalry have little to do with this courtly chivalry. They are rather connected to the orders of the Knights Templar, the Teutonic Order etc., all founded in parallel to the development of courtly chivalry, and partly even in opposition to it. These orders were rather monastic, it’s members being some kind of hybrids between knights and monks, and they even required celibacy! I don’t know if all members lived as celibate as they should have, but I don’t believe that a culture of courtly love had a place in an order of celibate knight-monks.

 

[Louis IX]

Thanks @Pantheon ; @Steiner ; @ilostabet @Polyhistor for your input. Sorry for just answering now .

@infowarrior1 thanks for trying to help - but you are missing the point of what is a catholic order of chivalry. We are not talking about courtly love or about women but about an order which vows to defend the Kingdom of God designated and adapted for laymen.

So I came back with a bit more data. It seems that most of the orders have "cucked" ( pardon my french ) just like the church after Vatican II. Just like the church itself - only a few have operated a transition back towards Traditional Catholicism. Luckily ; the one I have been introduced to seems to follow this path.

At the moment I am yet to finish reading the documentation - which can be considered as both an extensive explanation of the rules and the law within the order and its purpose and wished impact on society plus a doctrinal formation . It slightly differs from catechism ( which i am learning in parallel with traditionalists ) and contains a lot of developments regarding some pope's actions and some teaching of the encyclics as well as some positions regarding specific events between the state and the church. The whole thing is very interesting and is not an impossible task ( such as reading exegesis treaties for a relative beginner like me ) if you re determined and have a decent IQ.

One thing which has struck me is the reaction of a few catholics ( traditionalists!) I know calling this a "bullshit" or an "outdated useless institution ". Such comments probably stem from ignorance but I came through the realisation that it will be impossible to restore the Kingdom of God if you do not restore its institutions .

For France ( I'm not sure if this applies to other catholic countries ; interesting if someone could tell us ) there were traditionally four institutions part of a catholic society :

rebuild Christianity is rebuild its institutions .

-The monarchy , with the sacramental of the Coronation ( validared by a Bishop )giving the King the Divine Graces necessary to save as many souls as possible inside his kingdom (for the common good).

-The orders of chivalry , through Knighthood ceremony , giving the Divine Graces allowing laymen to fight for and/or maintain the expansion of our Lord's Kingdom on earth.

-The Crusades , established specifically to defend Christians and Christanity .

-The military orders , with permanent vows to our Lord.

Without will to rebuild these institutions and being part of them all efforts will be vain.

More on the next episode.

 

[infowarrior1]

Thanks @Pantheon ; @Steiner ; @ilostabet @Polyhistor for your input. Sorry for just answering now .

@infowarrior1 thanks for trying to help - but you are missing the point of what is a catholic order of chivalry. We are not talking about courtly love or about women but about an order which vows to defend the Kingdom of God designated and adapted for laymen.

So I came back with a bit more data. It seems that most of the orders have "cucked" ( pardon my french ) just like the church after Vatican II. Just like the church itself - only a few have operated a transition back towards Traditional Catholicism. Luckily ; the one I have been introduced to seems to follow this path.

At the moment I am yet to finish reading the documentation - which can be considered as both an extensive explanation of the rules and the law within the order and its purpose and wished impact on society plus a doctrinal formation . It slightly differs from catechism ( which i am learning in parallel with traditionalists ) and contains a lot of developments regarding some pope's actions and some teaching of the encyclics as well as some positions regarding specific events between the state and the church. The whole thing is very interesting and is not an impossible task ( such as reading exegesis treaties for a relative beginner like me ) if you re determined and have a decent IQ.

One thing which has struck me is the reaction of a few catholics ( traditionalists!) I know calling this a "bullshit" or an "outdated useless institution ". Such comments probably stem from ignorance but I came through the realisation that it will be impossible to restore the Kingdom of God if you do not restore its institutions .

For France ( I'm not sure if this applies to other catholic countries ; interesting if someone could tell us ) there were traditionally four institutions part of a catholic society :

rebuild Christianity is rebuild its institutions .

-The monarchy , with the sacramental of the Coronation ( validared by a Bishop )giving the King the Divine Graces necessary to save as many souls as possible inside his kingdom (for the common good).

-The orders of chivalry , through Knighthood ceremony , giving the Divine Graces allowing laymen to fight for and/or maintain the expansion of our Lord's Kingdom on earth.

-The Crusades , established specifically to defend Christians and Christanity .

-The military orders , with permanent vows to our Lord.

Without will to rebuild these institutions and being part of them all efforts will be vain.

More on the next episode.

According to gynocentrism.com that documents this phenomenon. This notion of simping for ladies originated from the Muslim world influenced France and spread to the rest of Europe. It reacted with Marian devotion and extended that to all women as her earthly counterparts. And subsequently influenced Chivalry.

If it's just a warrior code without any connection to courtly love. That would be good.

I wouldn't have gone to this length. If it didn't invariably be intertwined with courtly love.

By contrast the Eastern Orthodox was insulated from this cultural infection and was spared the simp culture that resulted. Even as they also had Marian veneration. They were spared having a practice turned into simping for women in general. Like a parasite that steers what would otherwise be a legitimate use of a particular tool towards its own uses.

I'd say the schism may have been necessary between East and West.

Here is more reading if you are interested:

Articles about chivalry

Historical articles about gynocentric-chivalry ▌ Enterprise of the Green Shield with the White Lady (1399) ▌ Chivalry for love – by Thomas Warton (1774) ▌ The spirit of chivalry – by Si…

gynocentrism.com

Starting from writings from 1399.

Historical writings specifically about courtly love the earliest at 1190:

Courtly and romantic love

Historical writings about courtly and romantic love ● The Art of Courtly Love – by Andreas Capellanus (1190) ● Mediaeval Love – by Violet Paget (1895) ● The Troubadours – by H.J. …

gynocentrism.com

 

[911]

Most of the western courtly love tradition is geared towards young love and falls within the framework of marriage and lifelong fidelity. So while it's still suspect to the Protestant's ear, it's actually quite alright and a good part of our western heritage.

There is yet another dimension to courtly love (which is also found in Song of Solomon and in other, non-Christian traditions too), which is that the several ladies are merely a poetic vehicle and substitute for Divine Wisdom, and that under the guise of 'love songs' they are instead speaking of something much deeper. But this sort of consideration with multiple meanings is wholly lost to modern minds.

Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines, the guy wasn't any kind of a role model.

One of the main positive attributes of the Catholic Church is the distance we have from the OT, which is suplanted by the New Testament. Conversely, that is one of the main problem and vulnerabilities of Protestants who lack that distance and discernment.