FodlanBoard

Manipulative suggests she is just doing it in order to get close to Byleth. I've thought about whether or not all of Edelgards action, from start to finish, could be seen as a matter of her trying to secure Byleth. Except really, because he is so important to every side, the same goes for everyone. Edelgard would just be the most proactive. But I don't think that is the case throughout, because she risks alot to try to be honest with him as time goes on. All of her actions aren't pragmatic in regards to how she treats him.

There is real love and admiration there.

My fan theory was rather wild, It would require more evidence.

The Flame Emperor admits hiring him was a mistake. The idea, of taking out your opponents is intelligent. Especially since we know Edelgard has been planning this war since she was probably six.

I think it is an example of the wrong agent used.

Maybe it would be against Hubert's nature to put her in danger. I just ponder if they knew about Byleth. I suppose Jeralt made a point to hide his existence.

You compared what she is doing to the reformation. Luther is the poster-child of the reformation. It doesn't matter. Zwingli, Calvin, pick one. They represented the same cause.

Disagree, that misunderstands how the Catholic faith works and what actually happened.

1. The Catholic Church had, and has continued to hold, various Councils where Bishops meet and discuss, and end up with needed reforms.

At the most recent, Vatican II, the Catholic Church, spurred on by no one but itself, was ahead of the world in terms of defining its respect, love, and tolerance for people of other religions, and made outreach to secular, modern society. That was its own decision, not forced on itself. The Catholic Church, seventy years ago took the initiative to establish religious tolerance and more than that, interfaith recognition of goodness, at a time when most Christians still thought Muslims were automatically hellbound. The Council of Trent, which responded to Luther, occurred decades after he died. The Catholic Church did not respond because it felt threatened by Luther. A threatened entity responds quickly. Instead, it took its time. It was not Luther who convinced the Bishops, but faithful Catholic reformers. He was invited to participate to speak before the Church in Rome, earlier, while he was still living, but he refused. Martin Luther did not care about the Church at all. His movement was one of destruction, except, unlike El, he lacked any real political power beyond northern Germany. Protestanism is not the result of Luther, all Protestant sects are descendants of the Church of England, they do not exist because of a belief in reform, but because of King Henry VIII's actions. Lutheranism exists in few places except Northern Germany.

Luther's movement was no different really, than previous ones like the Lollardry heresy and others. It was noteworthy, in how quickly it spread between countries through the printing press, and that he successfully distributed his own bible and such. But the notion that Luther reformed the Church misinterprets the actions of the Catholic Church at the time. It is impossible to call something a reform if it cleaves itself off from the institution one is trying to reform. Managing to convert Northern Germany, because the Northern Germany Lords of Saxony and Bradenberg support you is not particularly impressive. Countries followed their leaders religion, because they had to, or they'd suffer as a result.

The fact is the Catholic Church, long before Luther, was moving towards reform. Yes, he created a fire, but the notion he was needed? No. The Church had successful reforms before then, and it was already something most people agreed on. Luther just created chaos.

The Catholic Church, thirty years later, chose to reform itself at the Council of Trent. A Council's decisions require a majority of Bishops agreed. I am supposed to believe the majority of Bishops, including in places Lutheranism never touched inspired their decision? Perhaps German Bishops were convinced in part because of that, but if the majority of Bishops were scared, they didn't act like it.

It was not a 1,000-year-old issue, there wasn't an issue with doctrine, there was an issue with corruption.

That's the thing. The Church ignored most of what he said, specifically, we still grant indulgences, but the Church does not accept monetary donations for indulgences. We kept the Pope, his key objection. Read the 95 theses, then read the Council of Trent. They did not say "Luther was right" they said "He has a point" but then also condemned him as a heretic.

Let's ignore that early Protestantism and Lutheranism were in no way lacking in corruption, violence, and abuses of power. The reformation was historically important for several reasons. It was not religiously important. He was not needed, and contributed nothing to actually reforming the Church. He was just an extremely arrogant loud-mouth.

I think it is much more like the French revolution in scope.

I get that the game never explains exactly why Edelgard did that, and why Kostas attacked her, but I thought it seemed obvious why they had him attack, to take out Claude and Dimitri. What other purpose could there be? The theory I have about Byleth is really just fan-fiction. I can't argue it has real evidence, just that it may fit with Edelgard and Hubert's prerogative. The question is whether they knew why Byleth was before the battle or not