All Sanctified know this story: we speak to a non-Sanctified Kindred who, at first, appears interested in our teachings. Naturally, we step up to the task and begin our sacred duty to proselytize. Soon, however, we find a poorly-hidden pattern in their line of questioning: they do not ask questions to learn. They wish to trap us with linguistic sophistry, to render us speechless, to make us flustered and angry. A skilled debater who knows the Testament well is familiar with these tactics and easily able to answer each question fully and truthfully, without a false step, but this does not sway the interlocutor’s view. Indeed, he or she enters the debate with mind set and fortified against influence. Rarely is a debate entered, between anyone, that changes the mind of either debater; this is doubly true when discussing religion, and worse still when those in the discussion are Damned who have not changed in decades or centuries.
The Rule of Golgotha 8:12 tells us not to give up:
No request for prayer or guidance shall be denied, even though you know it to be false, for by showing your magnanimity and piety you shall affect not only the petitioner but also all who hear of your good graces.
But these games of “tease-the-Sanctified” too often backfire on those that begin them, and lead to the anger of and bilious rejection of our guidance by the very one who requested it. While this surely does no harm to us, it also does not help the Damned to whom we speak. They enter the discussion planning to disagree with everything we say, and when our words are irrefutable, they become distressed. But this does not usually lead to conversion; on the contrary, the interlocutor’s opinion of our Covenant is lowered for having made him look bad in a debate.
Recently, I was engaged in such a discussion. As a faithful servant of God, I did my best to teach the Kindred to whom I spoke. Though dead and surely Damned, she believed that the salvation of Christ still belonged to her. The fact of her Embrace saddened me, for one with faith so strong may have been saved once. She began by calling the Covenant a “cult of lies” propagated by an “old fuck up on a mountain.” I knew instantly that this would be one of those discussions that would lead nowhere, but another Kindred present had asked several questions prior to this and I hoped that I might still be able to bring the word at least to him. So I doggedly continued.
I elucidated the precise points of our theology, which she had gravely misunderstood. I explained the fact of our Damnation, that salvation is denied to us and yet we still serve the will of God. At that point, we came to the true root of her issue with the Sanctified. She asked me, “what’s in it for you?”
I was, I must admit, at a loss for words for a moment. Because she had spoken at some length about the forgiveness of Christ, I had assumed, foolishly, that she might be familiar with the concept of doing one’s duty in the name of God. Instead, it appeared that her idea of faith is as a transaction: virtue in exchange for salvation. Without the salvation as an incentive, she saw no reason to obey the will of God.
I did offer an answer to her question. Eschaton 4:13 tells us that, on Judgment day, those Damned who are faithful shall be freed from their chains and go into Hell as its kings to punish the damned. Also, I told her that I feel a sense of satisfaction in knowing that my efforts may save the souls of others. She then asked me, “So, you follow the Lance so that you can torture people in hell?” There was no way she could not look upon it as a trade, though I told her it is not. We do the will of God because it is our duty, and for no other reason. We seek no reward for our actions. Because our own souls are forfeit, we are able to freely act in our efforts to save the souls of others.
There is a fundamental difference between someone who thinks like this young Kindred does, and the way a Sanctified thinks. Certainly, we could examine the psychology of it all and find, perhaps, a reason why many Kindred cannot see a reason to perform an action save that they gain from it. But this does not solve the problem. How do we explain the concept of duty to someone who has, apparently, never heard of it?
