If the Alliance accepted the Forsaken

[Verdugo]

Vereesa entered the picture only in WotLK, and she wasn't really a relevant Alliance character. I doubt the time they would've spent together in WotLK would've changed Sylvanas' mentality in any meaningful way.

I'm sure Vereesa would also approve of Sylvanas committing suicide... she'd understand that her sister finds no joy in her existence, and would comprehend her frustration and desire to put an end to her agony once her thirst for vengeance is sated.

Because what we need is portraying suicide as positive. We already have Beyond: Two Souls, how many fuckups of that calibre we need.

[Martymark]

The World of Acceptance-craft would be less violent, but a less fun place.

[Nerovar]

Depends on Sylvanas' ultimate agenda and/or if she had a grudge against the Alliance for producing Arthas (the Human who killed her and nearly destroyed her entire nation), using the capital she garnered from their strong rejection to sell for better terms with the Horde shortly afterward. As for the PvP quests you refer to, there's a Horde analog asking for "Human Bone Chips," as well - so I'm not sure I would put a great deal of stock in that, either. Archbishop Benedictus was also outed as a servant of the Twilight's Hammer, so taking his spiritual views as "Stormwind's actual holy doctrine" might also be something of a stretch.

Keep in mind that Benedictus was still revered by members of the church even after his fall to madness and subsequent betrayal and death to
a point where Bishop Farthing doesn't even believe you if you tell him about Benedictus' fall. But I don't exactly understand the argument here. Are you implying that advocating for the destruction of the Undead was somehow an unpopular position among humans? I mean, back in Classic even when we were told to kill the Scarlet leaders it wasn't because of their "wacky religious beliefs" but merely because of their persecution of people who weren't undead. Raleigh even outright tells us that he thinks ridding Azeroth of the Undead is a noble cause.

[Magical Mudcrab]

Pretty sure Sylvanas is the one responsible for killing the Desolate Council, not Calia. Calia was an excuse used to justify the murder of all of them, not just the defectors. Calia was a good excuse, but Sylvanas would have dismantled it regardless based on her internal narrative earlier in the book. I do agree that it would be nice to have citizenry challenge their leaders' positions more and get responses from those leaders, be it Calia, Baine, Gazlowe, Anduin, Turalyon, or Jaina. They could even add little NPC vignettes into the capitol cities and change up the dialogue based on recent events to give more insight into how localized events are affecting the rest of the world.

Sylvanas is the one who gave the order to have its members killed, but it was Calia's stupid actions which enabled Sylvanas. Without Calia, Sylvanas would not have had justification to have all its members executed. It's easy to have people killed with evidence of treachery, but without it she couldn't act against it without suspicion from the Forsaken (i.e.: imagine a constitutional monarchy where the monarch, without reason, disbands the parliament that had been chosen by the people).

But the reason why I think there should be Forsaken outspoken about Calia goes beyond just faction members challenging their leaders, it comes down to Calia representing a shift to the old monarchy which damned each and every member of the Forsaken. She abandoned her family, her kingdom, and only now has decided to return after the Forsaken are a - relatively - stable people. Moreover, she's not actually a Forsaken, she's something different and something which I think even they would regard with suspicion, especially as she has not endured any of the trials that regular Forsaken have had to go through, such as the trauma of a violent death at the hands of the undead hordes, or the memories of their actions as a near-mindless undead possibly killing friends and family; she's not a Forsaken by creation or by experience. She is, by any metric, an outsider; the last member of a fallen monarchy that has come to retake her throne amongst a people that should not want her.

[Thage]

I often think how the world of Warcraft would have been had only the Alliance accepted the Forsaken as victims as opposed to monsters after their freedom. Would Sylvanas have being so bitter? Would the Blight have happened? Would Gilneas have fallen?

It would depend greatly on three things:

1) How well does the Alliance smooth over the Forsaken's first exposure being Garithos?
Sure, Sylvanas never intended to keep her word, but with the man antagonizing her at every turn and displaying suicidal levels of confidence in his victory with or without her and Varimathras's forces, it's easy to see why the general populace among the Forsaken wouldn't have had too much issue with her betraying him. It's hard to feel sorry for an asshole seeing comeuppance for his behavior. If the Alliance wanted to seriously court the Forsaken back before the Horde picked them up instead, there would have been some legwork involved to demonstrate Garithos was an exception, not the rule, and his rank one of circumstance (when you're the highest-ranking guy left alive, who is there to tell you you can't be Grand Marshal?) rather than born from talent and achievement.

2) How long and how significantly has Sylvanas been broken to the point of omnicidal nihilism?
From what we've seen, both in Classic and the modern timeline, Sylvanas has been merrily planning to kill anyone who so much as looks at her cross-eyed, commissioning a plague capable of killing the living and dead in equal measure. None of the apothecaries working on the plague in the Classic timeline make any secret that they plan to use it aplenty, and not just on the mad zealots in the Scarlet Crusade or the mindless Scourge and their intelligent masters. Any alliance with Sylvanas was always a ticking time bomb at best. And unlike with most of the Horde being located across the ocean meaning very little oversight until circumstances compelled the Horde to liberate the Undercity and be made privy to the extent of her behavior behind closed doors, the Alliance's seat of power prior to Varian's return was, by all accounts, Ironforge--and Ironforge was quite close to the Undercity, being only a few territories away. It would have been significantly harder for Sylvanas to operate in secrecy with regular visits from the Alliance to keep tabs on her, knowing as they would her questionable ethics given how she treated her alliance with Garithos.

3) How would the living refugees and the new undead populace of Lordaeron coexist?
As seen in Classic, once the Forsaken got things up and running, their territories were largely inhospitable to human life, thanks to the love and tender care the Scourge took in maintaining the lands it swept over prior to the undead breaking free and reclaiming their free will. Given that the still-living Lordaeron refugees in Stormwind and Theramore may want to return home at some point (which had been one of the driving conflicts between the Alliance and the Forsaken prior to Sylvanas's aggressive expansionism after the Shattering), what efforts would the Forsaken make in restoring the land to support a living population, if any?

Nothing we've seen so far suggests that the Apothecaries would have stopped working on the Blight regardless of who they allied with. The civilians and other Forsaken just living their lives might have had no issue integrating into the Alliance, but the actions of Forsaken leadership would almost immediately put a strain on matters. Sylvanas was bitter because Arthas ripped her soul out of her body, forced her to be complicit in the genocide of her own people, and, until the blood elves sent word out that they were looking for allies, apparently had no idea her people had gotten back on their feet and reestablished their society and government.

Gilneas probably would have fallen to a coastal Horde invasion, because the Horde still needed a port in the northern Eastern Kingdoms in order to advance Horde interests in the area, lest Hammerfall become their only noteworthy presence north of the Thandol Span, never mind having to deal with both the Horde and worgen outbreaks/invasions.

[NorthernDragon]

The World of Acceptance-craft would be less violent, but a less fun place.

I mean you can have conflict beyond race wars. Even if Forsaken were accepted you're still going to have the conflict in TBC, WotLK, Cataclysm, etc

[bagina]

Vereesa entered the picture only in WotLK, and she wasn't really a relevant Alliance character. I doubt the time they would've spent together in WotLK would've changed Sylvanas' mentality in any meaningful way.

I'm sure Vereesa would also approve of Sylvanas committing suicide... she'd understand that her sister finds no joy in her existence, and would comprehend her frustration and desire to put an end to her agony once her thirst for vengeance is sated.

Such a bad take lol. As person with more than 3 siblings this is so wrong and fucked up. Can't imagine coming to that conclusion

[Aucald]

Keep in mind that Benedictus was still revered by members of the church even after his fall to madness and subsequent betrayal and death to
a point where Bishop Farthing doesn't even believe you if you tell him about Benedictus' fall. But I don't exactly understand the argument here. Are you implying that advocating for the destruction of the Undead was somehow an unpopular position among humans? I mean, back in Classic even when we were told to kill the Scarlet leaders it wasn't because of their "wacky religious beliefs" but merely because of their persecution of people who weren't undead. Raleigh even outright tells us that he thinks ridding Azeroth of the Undead is a noble cause.

This is the same Bishop Farthing who later becomes Twilight Deacon Farthing in Legion - I would probably see his word as suspect as I would Benedictus' with benefit of hindsight. As for what I'm implying, I'm saying that the private instructions given to an Alliance partisan and zealot working in an active warzone coupled with Benedictus' faltering faith and growing extremism (culminating in his becoming the Twilight Father and lieutenant to Deathwing) would make what he tells Karl Phillips in Alterac Valley pretty suspect and very likely not representative of mainstream belief in the Light, even in Stormwind. Raleigh himself, at least at that point, doesn't really distinguish between the Scourge and the Forsaken as altogether different people. He's also an ex-member of the Scarlet Crusade himself, which would explain his animus given their beliefs and general views.

[Varodoc]

Such a bad take lol. As person with more than 3 siblings this is so wrong and fucked up. Can't imagine coming to that conclusion

I didn't know you were a zombie whose soul has been imperfectly reattached to their body. I can't imagine how your siblings can stomach living with a rotting zombie then.

[Super Dickmann]

This is the same Bishop Farthing who later becomes Twilight Deacon Farthing in Legion - I would probably see his word as suspect as I would Benedictus' with benefit of hindsight. As for what I'm implying, I'm saying that the private instructions given to an Alliance partisan and zealot working in an active warzone coupled with Benedictus' faltering faith and growing extremism (culminating in his becoming the Twilight Father and lieutenant to Deathwing) would make what he tells Karl Phillips in Alterac Valley pretty suspect and very likely not representative of mainstream belief in the Light, even in Stormwind. Raleigh himself, at least at that point, doesn't really distinguish between the Scourge and the Forsaken as altogether different people. He's also an ex-member of the Scarlet Crusade himself, which would explain his animus given their beliefs and general views.

I don't know why you tie yourself in knots to try and present their views as fringe when we're told point blank by the text that it's the mainstream view in Stormwind and it's the whole gist the book has Anduin overcoming. Philips isn't some private acolyte, he says that Benedictus teaches 'us', i.e the worshipers about this position on undeath. The mainstream view was that the undead were to be killed, the people who had this held the highest offices and were broadly respected and even the non-Stormwind leaders who run said faction that endorses warlocks, Death Knights and void elves tell Anduin that the best thing to do about the undead is to kill them, except Velen. It's not even about protecting the current canon against what it used to be following changes or new information, it quite is the latest information in all available sources.

[Dancaris]

Then Alliance in vanilla was like humans, short humans, small humans and undead humans. With either night elves became Horde, or neutral. And goblins/ogres in the horde. Then in BC blood elves would be in same faction as night elves. draenei wont happen. Cata - another human, furry humans this time, went to blue team, and either goblins or ogres comes to horde ones. Depends what comes in vanilla. What a world it will be.

[Nerovar]

This is the same Bishop Farthing who later becomes Twilight Deacon Farthing in Legion - I would probably see his word as suspect as I would Benedictus' with benefit of hindsight. As for what I'm implying, I'm saying that the private instructions given to an Alliance partisan and zealot working in an active warzone coupled with Benedictus' faltering faith and growing extremism (culminating in his becoming the Twilight Father and lieutenant to Deathwing) would make what he tells Karl Phillips in Alterac Valley pretty suspect and very likely not representative of mainstream belief in the Light, even in Stormwind. Raleigh himself, at least at that point, doesn't really distinguish between the Scourge and the Forsaken as altogether different people. He's also an ex-member of the Scarlet Crusade himself, which would explain his animus given their beliefs and general views.

Pretty funny considering Farthing's successor Bishop Arthur has the exact same dialogue. Both Farthing and Benedictus were corrupted later on. That doesn't mean everything they did before their fall from grace was therefor tainted by their later madness. There's simply nothing that would indicate this. There's also no source for your claim that Benedictus' views were "growing extreme" back in classic when this quest was made - you simply derive this conjecture from your premade conclusion that his views reflected in The Archbishop's Mercy are extreme. Also why would his views become more extreme/fantatical as his actual faith in the Light wavers and even if this was the case, why would Karl Philips view him as overly merciful and kind (maybe the average Alliance commander is indeed holier than the pope)?
Raleigh also doesn't distinguish between the Scourge and the Forsaken because to the living there's very little practical difference between the two. Both are abominations and their mortal enemies who are "living" reminders of the fall of one of the great human kingdoms and the cradle of human civilisation. That's the entire point.

[Aucald]

I don't know why you tie yourself in knots to try and present their views as fringe when we're told point blank by the text that it's the mainstream view in Stormwind and it's the whole gist the book has Anduin overcoming. Philips isn't some private acolyte, he says that Benedictus teaches 'us', i.e the worshipers about this position on undeath. The mainstream view was that the undead were to be killed, the people who had this held the highest offices and were broadly respected and even the non-Stormwind leaders who run said faction that endorses warlocks, Death Knights and void elves tell Anduin that the best thing to do about the undead is to kill them, except Velen. It's not even about protecting the current canon against what it used to be following changes or new information, it quite is the latest information in all available sources.

Not really tying myself in knots by any means, as you put it; but I do think there views are very likely fringe and not representative of mainstreams views in the Church of the Light. Philips refers to Benedictus as teaching "us" in the same most religious sorts refer to their religious authorities, that's not really conclusive of anything inasmuch as it's a common turn of phrase and doesn't at all require that what is taught is necessarily what is learned. I wouldn't even argue that there was significant animus toward the undead in general as a result of the Third War, merely that it wasn't necessarily to the point of unthinking hatred - if it *had* been, you'd think the armies of Stormwind would've led an exalted march on Lordaeron/Undercity long long ago. Also of note is that the term "undead" was basically synonymous with Scourge, and that the Stormwindians of that era often didn't underscore a different between the Forsaken and the Scourge (except those in the know). By the time of Before the Storm this had changed, and it was common knowledge that the Forsaken were not the Scourge, but they were still Horde, and so there was still hostility (now stemming from the Wrathgate incident as well as the war in Gilneas). I think you're conflating the two eras unnecessarily and making an argument that is entirely too broad and lacks nuance.

[Super Dickmann]

Not really tying myself in knots by any means, as you put it; but I do think there views are very likely fringe and not representative of mainstreams views in the Church of the Light. Philips refers to Benedictus as teaching "us" in the same most religious sorts refer to their religious authorities, that's not really conclusive of anything inasmuch as it's a common turn of phrase and doesn't at all require that what is taught is necessarily what is learned. I wouldn't even argue that there was significant animus toward the undead in general as a result of the Third War, merely that it wasn't necessarily to the point of unthinking hatred - if it *had* been, you'd think the armies of Stormwind would've led an exalted march on Lordaeron/Undercity long long ago. Also of note is that the term "undead" was basically synonymous with Scourge, and that the Stormwindians of that era often didn't underscore a different between the Forsaken and the Scourge (except those in the know). By the time of Before the Storm this had changed, and it was common knowledge that the Forsaken were not the Scourge, but they were still Horde, and so there was still hostility (now stemming from the Wrathgate incident as well as the war in Gilneas). I think you're conflating the two eras unnecessarily and making an argument that is entirely too broad and lacks nuance.

As @Nerovar already covered, what I don't see evidence of is any reason to believe that Benedictus' views were fringe. We know that multiple people, among them Philips were taught the same, we know he hosted the Scarlet Crusade and in something I forgot but the other poster brought up, even the anti-crusade guy isn't against their treatment of the undead but the rest of their program. You correctly note in your post that at the time there wasn't much difference between Forsaken and Scourge in the eyes of the general populace. All this points in the same direction - that at the time of Vanilla, Stormwind's policy was destroying the undead and the popular opinion was the same. The reason I bring up the BTS-era status quo is that even many years later, even after more contact with the undead by neutral organisations, the prevailing opinion among both the regular people in Stormwind and the Alliance's head honchos, except Anduin and Velen, were overwhelmingly anti-Forsaken and considered killing them to be a mercy. This contradicts the idea that Benedictus was in any way fringe. You could make a case his position was wrong or that he was influenced by his own disillusionment, but not only is the backing for that slim it doesn't matter since he was still a very respected figure and his views and those of the Alliance at the start of BTS were extremely close despite tons more contact with undead and the Alliance becoming extremely accepting of just about everyone.

[Magical Mudcrab]

This is the same Bishop Farthing who later becomes Twilight Deacon Farthing in Legion - I would probably see his word as suspect as I would Benedictus' with benefit of hindsight.

A little off-topic, but it's sort of ironic how the Church of the Holy Light, which was a root cause in having people like Kel'thuzad expelled from the Kirin Tor for practicing Necromancy due to fear of the magic itself, has been churning out high-level Twilight Hammer members pretty consistently.

[Aucald]

Pretty funny considering Farthing's successor Bishop Arthur has the exact same dialogue. Both Farthing and Benedictus were corrupted later on. That doesn't mean everything they did before their fall from grace was therefor tainted by their later madness. There's simply nothing that would indicate this. There's also no source for your claim that Benedictus' views were "growing extreme" back in classic when this quest was made - you simply derive this conjecture from your premade conclusion that his views reflected in The Archbishop's Mercy are extreme. Also why would his views become more extreme/fantatical as his actual faith in the Light wavers and even if this was the case, why would Karl Philips view him as overly merciful and kind (maybe the average Alliance commander is indeed holier than the pope)?

Raleigh also doesn't distinguish between the Scourge and the Forsaken because to the living there's very little practical difference between the two. Both are abominations and their mortal enemies who are "living" reminders of the fall of one of the great human kingdoms and the cradle of human civilisation. That's the entire point.

As @Nerovar already covered, what I don't see evidence of is any reason to believe that Benedictus' views were fringe. We know that multiple people, among them Philips were taught the same, we know he hosted the Scarlet Crusade and in something I forgot but the other poster brought up, even the anti-crusade guy isn't against their treatment of the undead but the rest of their program. You correctly note in your post that at the time there wasn't much difference between Forsaken and Scourge in the eyes of the general populace. All this points in the same direction - that at the time of Vanilla, Stormwind's policy was destroying the undead and the popular opinion was the same. The reason I bring up the BTS-era status quo is that even many years later, even after more contact with the undead by neutral organisations, the prevailing opinion among both the regular people in Stormwind and the Alliance's head honchos, except Anduin and Velen, were overwhelmingly anti-Forsaken and considered killing them to be a mercy. This contradicts the idea that Benedictus was in any way fringe. You could make a case his position was wrong or that he was influenced by his own disillusionment, but not only is the backing for that slim it doesn't matter since he was still a very respected figure and his views and those of the Alliance at the start of BTS were extremely close despite tons more contact with undead and the Alliance becoming extremely accepting of just about everyone.

Farthing and Benedictus were revealed as corrupted later on, but I highly doubt their descent was at all sudden much less instantaneous. I think a faltering faith in their beliefs, which would be the cornerstone for any pillar of an organized religion, would definitely have a pronounced effect on all they said and did even prior to being outed as apocalyptic cultists. The idea that the only recourse for an free-willed being is to baptize their heart in flame would be, in my view, a definitively extreme belief. This is buttressed by the fact that we know Benedictus himself, supposed an Archbishop of the Church of the Light whose central tenets are respect, tenacity, and compassion, would later become a leader of an apocalyptic cult whose central goal was ushering in the end of all life. I would also imagine Karl is a bit more extreme in his views serving as a soldier in an active warzone, which tends to have something of a pronounced effect on one's views in that capacity. Though Karl's zealotry is likely born out of patriotism more than religion, at least in regard to what's going on in Alterac.

As for Raleigh, he's a former Scarlet so he would have a dim view of the Forsaken regardless - that's not really adjacent with anything else we're discussing here. The Scarlet Crusade's position on the undead is a more extreme one on its face, especially in point of fact that we know they're wrong about *all* undead beings being one and the same. Unnatural != evil in the Warcraft universe.

- - - Updated - - -

A little off-topic, but it's sort of ironic how the Church of the Holy Light, which was a root cause in having people like Kel'thuzad expelled from the Kirin Tor for practicing Necromancy due to fear of the magic itself, has been churning out high-level Twilight Hammer members pretty consistently.

I always thought that was particularly odd as well - I'd wager that the Church of the Light is also probably less than free of its corruption even now, as well.

[Nerovar]

The idea that the only recourse for an free-willed being is to baptize their heart in flame would be, in my view, a definitively extreme belief.

This is the important part.

There's nothing in the lore that that supports this view. On the contrary, all of the things that were mentioned here point towards the fact that this is a very common thing. I mean, let's be real here. Mages were viewed with suspicion because they were thought to attract the twisting nether/demons, Warlocks were barely tolerated in Classic, had to hide in basements and some parts of the Stormwind nobles actively worked towards destroying them altogether - do you honestly think that this paints a picture of humanity that would have any form of leniency towards the Undead who are not only intrinsically tainted by dark magic that prevents their souls from passing on into the next life (which makes their very existence anathema to the Church of the Holy Light) but are also responsible for the fall of Lordaeron, just because they possess free will? To me, it seems like you're hardcore injecting your own beliefs into the Warcraft setting and then force together conflicting parts of the lore from different time periods to fit that belief.

In regards to Benedictus: Again, the corruption of Benedictus is stated to start with the events of TBC and culminates with Cata and therefor cannot really be considered an influence on his views in Classic. We later learn, that his faith wavers after the Third War - but how likely is it that an Archbishop who experiences a crisis of faith would turn to even more fanatical methods (which are still somehow seen as merciful and kind by the only worldly perspective we have on the matter)?
And once again: the current Bishop Arthur in the Cathedral of Stormwind still holds Benedictus in such a good light that he considers the message about his betrayal to be based on rumours and conjecture.
There is simply not a single mention within the lore that implies Benedictus being this fringe extremist you make him out to be - no matter how atrocious we may consider him by our real life morals.

[Super Dickmann]

@Aucald

Nerovar already basically covered all I was going to say on this topic, but the most of what I'll say is that I've had trouble phrasing a response to this post because the argument being made is that Farthing or Benedictus's position is objectionable or that they had a predisposition to going too far. Which is fair enough, and the rationality of the attitude towards the undead can debated, but it has no real bearing on the topic. I'd say it's not really altogether out of place given the information at the time or the then canon on undeath, but my position or yours on the moral quality of it doesn't affect the point. That being how widespread that position was or its societal acceptance, which was high both at the time and ages afterwards in BTS.

[Mehrunes]

Pretty sure Sylvanas is the one responsible for killing the Desolate Council, not Calia. Calia was an excuse used to justify the murder of all of them, not just the defectors. Calia was a good excuse, but Sylvanas would have dismantled it regardless based on her internal narrative earlier in the book. I do agree that it would be nice to have citizenry challenge their leaders' positions more and get responses from those leaders, be it Calia, Baine, Gazlowe, Anduin, Turalyon, or Jaina. They could even add little NPC vignettes into the capitol cities and change up the dialogue based on recent events to give more insight into how localized events are affecting the rest of the world.

Except by the time Sylvanas learned about Calia she already realized that the members of the Desolate Council still on the field were defecting. She still didn't order their deaths at that point and instead decided to give them a test of loyalty by sounding the horn (i.e. the signal for withdrawal that the Desolate Council was told twice about). And there's been no mention of the Desolate Council members that survived being punished, killed or even dismantled.

[Aucald]

This is the important part.

There's nothing in the lore that that supports this view. On the contrary, all of the things that were mentioned here point towards the fact that this is a very common thing. I mean, let's be real here. Mages were viewed with suspicion because they were thought to attract the twisting nether/demons, Warlocks were barely tolerated in Classic, had to hide in basements and some parts of the Stormwind nobles actively worked towards destroying them altogether - do you honestly think that this paints a picture of humanity that would have any form of leniency towards the Undead who are not only intrinsically tainted by dark magic that prevents their souls from passing on into the next life (which makes their very existence anathema to the Church of the Holy Light) but are also responsible for the fall of Lordaeron, just because they possess free will? To me, it seems like you're hardcore injecting your own beliefs into the Warcraft setting and then force together conflicting parts of the lore from different time periods to fit that belief.

I'm not injecting any of my own beliefs (which wouldn't have anything to do with non-existent undead beings in the first place), I'm merely referring to the actual tenets of the Chuch of the Light out of their own dogma within the game (e.g. the doctrines of respect, tenacity, and most important compassion) and the issue of outright killing free-willed undead beings because they are "unnatural" in a world filled with magic and other fantastical beings. Initially there was some confusion as concerns the Scourge - who are not free-willed and enslaved by the Lich King to be implacable killing machines, and the Forsaken who while still undead have had their wills returned to them and albeit darkened by their experience are still fundamentally human (in the general sense of the term). The Church has over time learned of this distinction, and I would imagine Archbishop Benedictus as a leader within the Alliance was likely among the first to learn this as well. There's also the continued issue of conflating a single PvP quest with the *entirety* of the Church of the Light and thinking a single interaction between two NPC's can somehow stand in proxy for that of an entire congregation of vary beliefs.

In regards to Benedictus: Again, the corruption of Benedictus is stated to start with the events of TBC and culminates with Cata and therefor cannot really be considered an influence on his views in Classic. We later learn, that his faith wavers after the Third War - but how likely is it that an Archbishop who experiences a crisis of faith would turn to even more fanatical methods (which are still somehow seen as merciful and kind by the only worldly perspective we have on the matter)?

And once again: the current Bishop Arthur in the Cathedral of Stormwind still holds Benedictus in such a good light that he considers the message about his betrayal to be based on rumours and conjecture.

There is simply not a single mention within the lore that implies Benedictus being this fringe extremist you make him out to be - no matter how atrocious we may consider him by our real life morals.

I don't agree with your take on Benedictus here - and furthermore it outright states that the Twilight's Hammer "learned of Benedictus' uncertainty" meaning he was *already* uncertain when they found him in TBC. Benedictus was already ripe to be converted. The Third War, which caused his aforementioned wavering, was also before Classic takes place. As for your question about how a crisis of faith can make one turn to more fanatical methods, this is a pretty common refrain in both fantasy and real life - as one's intrinsic or internalized faith wavers, one often bolsters this by outward actions or affectations, such as zealotry or fanaticism. A perceived weakness or failing can often provoke overcompensation in people.

Arthur's take on Benedictus is immaterial, as we both know the truth of Benedictus' fate and ultimate allegiance. That being said, I don't think Benedictus was necessarily himself an extremist (at least not at that time), only that he was willing to foster or support such in others in the name of his faith - or failing that, use his faith as a political means to attain a nonetheless secular or military result in Alterac. Benedictus' faith was itself compromised, and that can often make it easier for people to commoditize their faith if their belief isn't earnest.