Would the Knights have gone after the Denarians in the beginning of SmF if...

[Mira]

No one other than you can save your soul.

   Basically, that is what the point.   If I remember correctly that Harry argues that Michael or Sanya should kill Cassius after he surrendered and gave up his coin because Cassius is a killer and worse..  Michael says and Sanya agrees that it isn't for them to judge Cassius and that he was free now for the rest of his life to redeem himself or not....

[nadia.skylark]

No one other than you can save your soul.

I agree that you have to be the one to make the choice to do the right thing; what I mean by saying that the Knights' job is saving souls is the whole thing in "The Warrior," where Harry basically goes around doing things that end up helping people to do the right thing and improve their lives, even though he doesn't realize it until Uriel points it out. I figure the Knights probably have more awareness of what they're doing, but otherwise...Uriel explicitly describes people doing this as being "warriors for the light" or something--it seems like exactly what the Knights' job is, only they're more focussed on Denarians rather than innocent kids (probably because there are lots of people who would help innocent kids, and not many who would help Denarians and such).

[Mira]

I agree that you have to be the one to make the choice to do the right thing; what I mean by saying that the Knights' job is saving souls is the whole thing in "The Warrior," where Harry basically goes around doing things that end up helping people to do the right thing and improve their lives, even though he doesn't realize it until Uriel points it out. I figure the Knights probably have more awareness of what they're doing, but otherwise...Uriel explicitly describes people doing this as being "warriors for the light" or something--it seems like exactly what the Knights' job is, only they're more focussed on Denarians rather than innocent kids (probably because there are lots of people who would help innocent kids, and not many who would help Denarians and such).

Harry unknowingly helped others to make the "right" choice..  His actions created the climate where the right thing could be done...  Though he did prevent Michael from beating to death the guy who would harm his son, that was more direct action..   Knights are a little different,  when confronted with an evil action they'd try to stop it like any good person would, but they do not judge the person who did it, nor do they feel it is their place to punish that person... That is why except for that one night Murphy realized she couldn't be a Knight..  All her life she had been a cop and she used her own judgement to stop bad guys and she saw them or judged them as being bad.. When she judged Nic with a "Damn you,"  after he had surrendered and tried to execute him, she broke the rules and the Sword.    Like Murphy, Harry has no problem in punishing those he judges as bad or criminal, he also often repeats that he is no Knight.  After the foolishness with Lea has never tried to use a Holy Sword again. Though one wonders if he would have if pushed on the island in Small Favor.

[nadia.skylark]

Harry unknowingly helped others to make the "right" choice..  His actions created the climate where the right thing could be done...  Though he did prevent Michael from beating to death the guy who would harm his son, that was more direct action.. Knights are a little different,  when confronted with an evil action they'd try to stop it like any good person would, but they do not judge the person who did it, nor do they feel it is their place to punish that person... That is why except for that one night Murphy realized she couldn't be a Knight..  All her life she had been a cop and she used her own judgement to stop bad guys and she saw them or judged them as being bad.. When she judged Nic with a "Damn you,"  after he had surrendered and tried to execute him, she broke the rules and the Sword.    Like Murphy, Harry has no problem in punishing those he judges as bad or criminal, he also often repeats that he is no Knight.  After the foolishness with Lea has never tried to use a Holy Sword again. Though one wonders if he would have if pushed on the island in Small Favor.

"Acting in such a way as to create a climate which encourages/allows people to do the right thing" seems to be a good summary of the Knights' job. Whether they judge people or not seems immaterial to that.

And to relate this back to what I was originally saying: rescuing Marcone would certainly be acting in such a way as to help people do the right thing/reduce the chances of them doing the wrong thing. It would prevent Marcone from being tortured into taking up a coin, would prevent the Denarians from torturing Marcone, would give the Knights a chance to attempt to convince the Denarians they encountered to give up their coins, would prevent the stability Marcone imposed on the Chicago criminal underworld from falling apart (it's been pointed out that it is far easier for Hell to collect souls when there's mass chaos and destruction), and would prevent Harry lying to Luccio to get the White Council's help (as has been pointed out to me on another thread, Michael quite sincerely believes lying to be Wrong).

[Mira]

[quote
And to relate this back to what I was originally saying: rescuing Marcone would certainly be acting in such a way as to help people do the right thing/reduce the chances of them doing the Wrong thing. It would prevent Marcone from being tortured into taking up a coin, would prevent the Denarians from torturing Marcone, would give the Knights a chance to attempt to convince the Denarians they encountered to give up their coins, would prevent the stability Marcone imposed on the Chicago criminal underworld from falling apart (it's been pointed out that it is far easier for Hell to collect souls when there's mass chaos and destruction), and would prevent Harry lying to Luccio to get the White Council's help (as has been pointed out to me on another thread, Michael quite sincerely believes lying to be Wrong).
[/quote]

Except Marcone isn't trying to redeem himself in any way, at least not so far..  In my opinion making the trains run on time for the criminal world is hardly doing a service for good...

Yup, Harry lied, which is a sin, he is human..  Michael would also point out that he did it to save a child's life.

"Acting in such a way as to create a climate which encourages/allows people to do the right thing" seems to be a good summary of the Knights' job. Whether they judge people or not seems immaterial to that.

But it isn't...  They will let a murder go in the case of Cassius, free to murder  again or not, to go unpunished, because it isn't their place to judge him, not their job to try and stop him..  Murphy was unwilling to follow that rule, if she believes someone is guilty, she will judge them so, and either punish them herself or take them somewhere where they can be punished..  Nic knew that that is why he elaborately arranged the fiasco in front of Michael's house in Skin Game then go through the motions of surrender to Murphy, who in turn, judge, tried to punish, and broke a Holy Sword... 

But back to Cassius, in his heart he is a bad guy, he had no intention of changing who he is, he gave up his coin only because he didn't want to be executed by either Michael or Sanya... He didn't stop doing bad things, he wanted another coin so he could do them even better, that is why he attacked Harry and tortured him,  he thought that Harry had taken up Lasciel's coin and he wanted it for himself..  So how did that work out for him and the world around him? 

The original point, the Knight's job is to gather up the coins of the Fallen, to free the souls they enthrall..  Once free, those souls can either go about the business of redeeming themselves, or continue the same corrupt life they lived before minus the aid of the coin, it's pot luck really... Most
of the souls who chose to take up a coin were bad in the first place, that is why they were tempted to do it..  Surrendering a coin to save their own life, doesn't change their hearts...  On the other hand  Sanya did give up his coin because he became disgusted with what he was doing what the coin was helping him to do, he rejected it... That is so rare that Heaven granted him a Holy Sword..

[nadia.skylark]

Except Marcone isn't trying to redeem himself in any way, at least not so far..

What's that got to do with anything? Nicodemus wasn't trying to redeem himself either, and that didn't stop Michael from trying to redeem him. And also, you know, the Knights are fairly focussed on Denarians as their main priority, so I figure stopping Marcone from picking up a coin would be considered kind of important to that.

In my opinion making the trains run on time for the criminal world is hardly doing a service for good...

And I agree with you, but things would be far worse if he up and died/turned Denarian, and the criminal underworld started fighting over who got to be his successor.

Yup, Harry lied, which is a sin, he is human..  Michael would also point out that he did it to save a child's life.

But wouldn't it have been better if Harry could have saved that child's life without lying?

But it isn't...  They will let a murder go in the case of Cassius, free to murder  again or not, to go unpunished, because it isn't their place to judge him, not their job to try and stop him..  Murphy was unwilling to follow that rule, if she believes someone is guilty, she will judge them so, and either punish them herself or take them somewhere where they can be punished..  Nic knew that that is why he elaborately arranged the fiasco in front of Michael's house in Skin Game then go through the motions of surrender to Murphy, who in turn, judge, tried to punish, and broke a Holy Sword... 

But back to Cassius, in his heart he is a bad guy, he had no intention of changing who he is, he gave up his coin only because he didn't want to be executed by either Michael or Sanya... He didn't stop doing bad things, he wanted another coin so he could do them even better, that is why he attacked Harry and tortured him,  he thought that Harry had taken up Lasciel's coin and he wanted it for himself..  So how did that work out for him and the world around him? 

One's purpose and the rules one has to follow are different things. Cassius exploited a loophole in the rules. Think of it in terms of a police officer: their purpose is to protect and serve, but they also have rules about reading suspects their rights, and not beating them up to get a confession and stuff--and sometimes those rules let guilty people get away, but that doesn't change their purpose.

The original point, the Knight's job is to gather up the coins of the Fallen, to free the souls they enthrall..  Once free, those souls can either go about the business of redeeming themselves, or continue the same corrupt life they lived before minus the aid of the coin, it's pot luck really... Most
of the souls who chose to take up a coin were bad in the first place, that is why they were tempted to do it..  Surrendering a coin to save their own life, doesn't change their hearts...  On the other hand  Sanya did give up his coin because he became disgusted with what he was doing what the coin was helping him to do, he rejected it... That is so rare that Heaven granted him a Holy Sword..

I think Michael said in Death Masks that the point of the Knights "is to save those poor souls corrupted by the Fallen." I think I've got the wording right, but I don't have my book at the moment but I'm not sure. However, I am sure that he said something to this effect.

[Kindler]

And yet they killed Rasputin (Rasmussen? The guy who held Ursiel's Coin) when Shiro and Sanya showed up. They've killed Denarians before, and Michael went all out against Nicodemus in Skin Game once he was certain Nic wouldn't turn away from his path.

The point is that there is a big difference between a preemptive action and a reactive one. Harry, I think, describes it at one point as, "The Denarians do something, the Knights respond." What Harry wanted to do was hunt down the Denarians and assault or kill them. In fact, Harry deliberately sets up the bargain on Demonreach because he knew that Nicodemus would break his word, which would give Michael the reason he needed (kinda the permission, actually) to go weapons-free. Harry created a situation where Michael could act without jeopardizing the Swords.

On the other hand, if Michael and Sanya participated in a sneak attack without warning and tried to cut of Nic's head while he was asleep, for example, I'm pretty sure the Swords would've been vulnerable. So the difference between the two isn't just the stakes, it's the absence of anything remotely like treachery by the Knights. Though I should point out that Michael was crippled for life as a result of going to the Island, so maybe the paper-thin excuse that Dresden manipulated wasn't good enough.

[morriswalters]

And also, you know, the Knights are fairly focussed on Denarians as their main priority, so I figure stopping Marcone from picking up a coin would be considered kind of important to that.

Why would you think that?  The Knight's aren't responsible for anyone's choices.  This is repeated over and over again.  Harry himself is the obvious example.

[Mira]

Why would you think that?  The Knight's aren't responsible for anyone's choices.  This is repeated over and over again.  Harry himself is the obvious example.

Exactly,  they are there essentially to put a check on the Fallen and restore if they can the free choice of the one who held the coin..  They cannot or are not supposed to go beyond that.. That doesn't mean in a fight they cannot kill a coin holder who won't surrender, or that they cannot fight evil or aid in that fight..  But if the coin holder surrenders his or her coin, their hands are tied, they can neither save nor condemn the the soul of former holder of the coin...  As so elegantly put, the only one from that point on who can save his or her soul is the former holder of the coin...

[nadia.skylark]

The point is that there is a big difference between a preemptive action and a reactive one. Harry, I think, describes it at one point as, "The Denarians do something, the Knights respond." What Harry wanted to do was hunt down the Denarians and assault or kill them. In fact, Harry deliberately sets up the bargain on Demonreach because he knew that Nicodemus would break his word, which would give Michael the reason he needed (kinda the permission, actually) to go weapons-free. Harry created a situation where Michael could act without jeopardizing the Swords.

I agree with you about the preemptive vs reactive action thing. What I'm saying is that, while hunting down the Denarians for the purposes of killing them is definitely a preemptive action, hunting down the Denarians for the purposes of rescuing Marcone is a reactive action--they are reacting to the Denarians' action of kidnapping him. And they did, in fact, hunt down the Denarians for the purpose of rescuing Ivy, so they can definitely do that.

And also, you know, the Knights are fairly focussed on Denarians as their main priority, so I figure stopping Marcone from picking up a coin would be considered kind of important to that.

Why would you think that?  The Knight's aren't responsible for anyone's choices.  This is repeated over and over again.  Harry himself is the obvious example.

To me, it feels like common sense. Look at it this way: If Nicodemus was torturing some random dude outside Michael's house, telling him that he would only stop torturing him if he would pick up a coin, do you think Michael would interfere? I think he would. Nicodemus may have made the choice to torture the guy, but A) he's a freaking Denarian; and B) torturing people is bad and Michael is not going to just going to ignore some guy getting tortured.

Exactly,  they are there essentially to put a check on the Fallen and restore if they can the free choice of the one who held the coin..  They cannot or are not supposed to go beyond that..

Not true. They definitely fight other enemies. And also irrelevant, since "rescuing some guy the Denarians kidnapped" certainly seems like putting a check on the Fallen.

That doesn't mean in a fight they cannot kill a coin holder who won't surrender, or that they cannot fight evil or aid in that fight..  But if the coin holder surrenders his or her coin, their hands are tied, they can neither save nor condemn the the soul of former holder of the coin...  As so elegantly put, the only one from that point on who can save his or her soul is the former holder of the coin...

What's that got to do with anything? It's not like any of the Denarians who kidnapped Marcone gave up their coins.

[morriswalters]

To me, it feels like common sense. Look at it this way: If Nicodemus was torturing some random dude outside Michael's house, telling him that he would only stop torturing him if he would pick up a coin, do you think Michael would interfere? I think he would. Nicodemus may have made the choice to torture the guy, but A) he's a freaking Denarian; and B) torturing people is bad and Michael is not going to just going to ignore some guy getting tortured.

Wouldn't you help a guy who was on your front sidewalk, torturing someone, no matter what the reason? 

I wasn't talking about Nic's choices.  I was talking about Marcone's.  He's where he's at in the book because of a choice he made.  Two choices actually.  He chose to save Harry in the alley behind Bock's Books.  And he chose to be a free holding Lord.  The first drew the animus of Titania, the second made him fair game in the supernatural world.

[Mira]

Wouldn't you help a guy who was on your front sidewalk, torturing someone, no matter what the reason? 

I wasn't talking about Nic's choices.  I was talking about Marcone's.  He's where he's at in the book because of a choice he made.  Two choices actually.  He chose to save Harry in the alley behind Bock's Books.  And he chose to be a free holding Lord.  The first drew the animus of Titania, the second made him fair game in the supernatural world.

He reasons for saving Harry did not come not from the goodness of his heart either..  He wanted an in to the supernatural world and a body guard...  The man is a crime lord, lots of people suffer because he is who he is...  Being rescued by Holy Knights hasn't changed that.

[g33k]

... Though I should point out that Michael was crippled for life as a result of going to the Island, so maybe the paper-thin excuse that Dresden manipulated wasn't good enough.

No, I think that was actually the very best thing (for Michael) that could have happened.

His injuries, in the final analysis, free him from being a Knight. They let him be home with his family, let him build houses (for which he evidently has a passion).  Yeah... cane.  So what?
 Occasional twinges of pain?  Not like the Knighting lifestyle is exactly pain-free (usually more than "twinges").

He'd pick up the sword again in a heartbeat, if that's what he'd be called to; but he's he's not:  he's being given the reward of the life & family he always wanted.
 

[Mira]

No, I think that was actually the very best thing (for Michael) that could have happened.

His injuries, in the final analysis, free him from being a Knight. They let him be home with his family, let him build houses (for which he evidently has a passion).  Yeah... cane.  So what?
 Occasional twinges of pain?  Not like the Knighting lifestyle is exactly pain-free (usually more than "twinges").

He'd pick up the sword again in a heartbeat, if that's what he'd be called to; but he's he's not:  he's being given the reward of the life & family he always wanted.

I believe Jim said that was Michael's happy ending..

[g33k]

I believe Jim said that was Michael's happy ending.

Exactly.
He IS going to Heaven (possibly via Uriel's afterlife-spooksquad), but for now, he's got a slice of Heaven on Earth.