A fresh look at the crusades

  • Thread starter Thread starter ontheway1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing new about this view. Christendom had been fighting a defensive battle against the Muslims for well of 300 years. They had been attacking via the Iberian peninsula, Scily/Italy and though Asia Minor. The goal was no less than the destruction of Christendom. The Crusades, at least the first, was a just attempt (albeit belated) at adopting an offensive strategy. Now, not all of the actions during the Crusades were just. But the idea, in and of itself, was very noble. And although the First Crusade is considered to have ultimately failed with the fail of the Kingdom of Jerusalem in the late 13th century, for 200 years it largely took the battle front out of Christendom and moved it to Muslim lands. Considering, the war between Christendom and the Islamic world really lasted really over 1000 years (an ending could be said to be the victory over the Ottomans at the Seige of Vienna in 1683), that 200 years break was critical to the flowering of Christendom. So I think the failure is overstated.
 
Tafan2. You are right in saying that this is not new. But, in view of all the lies and distortions about this, truth needs to be repeated from time to time.
 
I certainly agree. Treating the Crusades as this great evil always has boggled the mind.
 
It is part of the self-loathing which seems to have taken over the western intellectuals.
 
Well I think they had good intentions, but maybe not the best way, and definitely many “Christians” did harm. Also the fourth Crusade was not great when the Western Christians decided to sack Constantinople, the capital of the Greek/Eastern Christians. Just furthering the divide between the East and the West
 
That history is too tangled to be summed up in one sentence. Relations between the Byzantines and the Muslims was complex, even without the western Christians entering the picture. The whole thing is too easily dismissed and classified as harm done by the “Christians”.
 
Last edited:
Well the crusaders were promised money to get that emperor on the throne and out of greed they abandoned their mission to fight the Muslims to help the emperor to be. It’s no wonder they didn’t get the money after he died so suddenly. Maybe if they had been focused on fulfilling their mission it would have been avoided
 
Yes I understand. One side is not necessarily bad or good. It is complicated, and both sides had problems and did bad things. I have just found that sometimes Catholics try to hard to defend the Crusades and make it seem like the Christians were the good guys instead of seeing it from different angles and also recognizing the evil done sometimes by the Christians. I know this is not always the case, but it sometimes felt this way at my Catholic school. I know secular society often does the opposite and condemns the Crusades so I understand the need to defend the Christians a little.
 
Last edited:
Of course the sack of Constantinople was unjust. But going to the Levant to fight the Muslims? Was certainly justified.

BTW, if you want to read a good book, Belloc’s book on the Crusades (focuses on the first) is excellent.
 
Got it. I don’t disagree. Sometimes I prefer Belloc’s style to Chesterton’s.
 
Last edited:
I would start with the Everlasting man, it’s a better book than Orthodoxy. Or you could try his books on StThomas Aquinas or St Francis.
Any Fr Brown story is worth your time.

Have you read Belloc’s essays and poems on sailing?
 
I almost never do. Though I’ve collected both of them for around 55 years.
 
Belloc is a master storyteller. I have just gone through the first two chapters of The Crusades. He paints a vivid picture indeed.
 
I think it is On Sailing the Sea where he describes his different thoughts between the working man, the middle class, and the rich. Two or three paragraphs that will make you stop and think about your life. Could be Cruise if the Nona though, my memory is just getting worse and worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top