Apologetic for Crusades

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Leslie

Puritan Board Junior
Some years ago I heard rumors that there was a book out defending the idea of the crusades. I've searched in Amazon and can find nothing. Can anyone tell me if such exists and where to find a copy?
 
I'll get you links later....yes, several books.

From a civil-government stand-point, a defensive war against Islam could be just. And from that perspective, the Crusades (some of them) were just.

From a religious stand-point, however, there is no Christian equivalent to Jihad and the Pope had no authority to announce indulgences for those who took up the oath, though as a secular leader he was not wrong to call for aid to beleaguered brothers in his realm who were being killed and harassed by the Muslims.

Also, some evil acts were perpetrated by both sides during the wars. But, evil acts within a just conflict do not make a just cause unjust - though the just carrying out of a war would be expected for the most part from a just party fighting a just war.
 
Even though it was quite shady from a religious perspective, it was a legitimate defensive war. Had we not thoroughly savaged Islam's armies and weakened them, it is quite likely they could have broken through Vienna centuries later.
 
I have read God's Battalion's The case for the Crusades by Rodney Stark.
I enjoyed the book, it was recommended by my Minister Kevin Ridley, it was a fun read :)

The book makes a strong case against the unregenerate historians who have misrepresented the role of Christianity in the history of the world against all rational reason to do otherwise.
Much like Darwin's Evolution Mythology, created more as an attack on God rather than any scientific investigation, these historians choose darkness over light because they are children of their father, and their interest is not in the truth but in ridiculing Christianity.
 
Here is a papist defense of the Crusades.

One point that should be brought up is that the Crusades were instigated by the Roman Catholic Church (which is not Christian). The church of Rome is both a political and religious entity, much like Islam. In both systems (medieval Romanism and Islam) dissent was not tolerated and those who held dissident views were punished. Both have a history of suppressing other religions. It's important to look at the political nature of the papacy and the Romish church when talking about the Crusades.
 
MichaelNZ said:
One point that should be brought up is that the Crusades were instigated by the Roman Catholic Church (which is not Christian).
Click to expand...

By that standard, there were no Christians at the time, given that all were either Eastern (Orthodox, Caesaropapist) or Western Catholic (Roman). By this standard we condemn all of the theology of Anselm (incarnation and substitution) and Thomas Aquinas (election and Predestination), and leave ourselves far poorer.
 
Philip said:
MichaelNZ said:
One point that should be brought up is that the Crusades were instigated by the Roman Catholic Church (which is not Christian).
Click to expand...

By that standard, there were no Christians at the time, given that all were either Eastern (Orthodox, Caesaropapist) or Western Catholic (Roman). By this standard we condemn all of the theology of Anselm (incarnation and substitution) and Thomas Aquinas (election and Predestination), and leave ourselves far poorer.
Click to expand...

And to make it even worse, St Bernard of Clairvaux was instrumental in religiously getting these Crusades off the ground, and Calvin loved St Bernard.
 
ReformedReidian said:
Philip said:
ReformedReidian said:
And to make it even worse, St Bernard of Clairvaux was instrumental in religiously getting these Crusades off the ground, and Calvin loved St Bernard.
Click to expand...

As I recall, he wrote the rule of life for the Knights Templar and preached the Second Crusade.
Click to expand...

I used to dislike Bernard until this moment. Now I am officially in.
Click to expand...

Bernard's impact on the spirituality of the reformed churches cannot be understated. Though it seems that by the 17th century, a lot of the attention in Puritan and reformed circles had turned toward the Eastern Fathers as well.

And before anyone brings it up, it should be noted that the Templar order was suppressed by Papal decree in 1312 despite being found innocent. Archival evidence reveals what historians of the period suspected: that the suppression had more to do with politics (and Philip IV of France's debts) than with any actual wrongdoing. Further, any and all claims of underground continuation of the order are spurious at best.
 
How can one NOT love Bernard after reading the hymns he wrote? Sure, he got some things wrong, but who is above error?
 
Philip said:
ReformedReidian said:
Philip said:
ReformedReidian said:
And to make it even worse, St Bernard of Clairvaux was instrumental in religiously getting these Crusades off the ground, and Calvin loved St Bernard.
Click to expand...

As I recall, he wrote the rule of life for the Knights Templar and preached the Second Crusade.
Click to expand...

I used to dislike Bernard until this moment. Now I am officially in.
Click to expand...

Bernard's impact on the spirituality of the reformed churches cannot be understated. Though it seems that by the 17th century, a lot of the attention in Puritan and reformed circles had turned toward the Eastern Fathers as well.

And before anyone brings it up, it should be noted that the Templar order was suppressed by Papal decree in 1312 despite being found innocent. Archival evidence reveals what historians of the period suspected: that the suppression had more to do with politics (and Philip IV of France's debts) than with any actual wrongdoing. Further, any and all claims of underground continuation of the order are spurious at best.
Click to expand...

So, do you accept the conspiracy theory that the Templars went underground and rose again as the Freemasons? ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top