Saint vs. Saint in WWI

  • Thread starter Thread starter Defend_the_Keys
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Defend_the_Keys

Guest
As we are currently marking the 100th anniversary of WWI, I thought it would be interesting to point out that the leaders of two of the belligerent nations who fought each other have both been declared saints in their respective Christian faiths.

The king of Austria-Hungary from 1916-1918, the blessed Carl I, has been declared “blessed” by the Catholic Church and from what I understand may have the second miracle required for full sainthood. Blessed Carl would have been the king for most Greek Catholics in Europe during WWI as Slovakia, Galicia, and Trans-Carpathia were all within the boarders of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Ruthenian Catholics of America almost exclusively trace their heritage to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

On the other side of the war, Czar Nicholas, the emperor of Russia, has been declared a martyr/saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. He and his family were murdered by Bolshevik revolutionaries in 1917.

Thus, for a period of several years we had two leaders, both declared saints by their respective faiths, who literarily led their nations in battle against one another. I guess this illustrates the craziness of war. Blessed Carl is thought to have considered WWI a huge incident of fratricide and attempted to sue for peace upon ascending the Austrian throne in 1916, but his German Allies were not interested. On the other hand, WWI essentially started when Czar Nicholas mobilized his Army in “defense” of Serbia, which in turn caused Germany to mobilize its Army. I’ve heard it said that Nicholas was rather inept and did not realize that his decision to mobilize would cause a full scale war, but none the less it most certainly it did.

Without turning this into a my saint is better than your saint, does anyone have any thoughts here? How could two saints have led their nations in armed struggle against one another? This is not a case of foot soldiers simply doing their jobs, in which case it would be easy to see how two saints could have ended fighting each other. Rather, this is a case of absolute monarchs leading their subject nations in war against one another, so it seems to be a much more complicated situation from a theological point of view. Am I wrong here?
 
Blessed Karl was not emperor when the war broke out. He did try to make peace, but was prevented by the Germans.
 
Being a saint in no way makes someone’s actions infallible, unless they were Pope, and even then that would be limited to teaching of faith and morals.

A ruler has certain obligations that do not “scale” to the average sinners’ seats. Among those would be honoring treaty and alliance obligations (Nicholas) or leading one’s nation in an already progressing war (Karl). But they are not infallible.

No doubt, had Nicholas foreseen his country’s defeat, Revolution, and the formation of the atheistic CCCP (apart from the cost to his own skin and royal family) he would have chosen another course of action.

ICXC NIKA
 
Blessed Karl did a number of things to try and stop the war. He opposed unrestricted submarine warfare, would not let the Germans send Lenin through Austrian lands into Russia to try and incite revolution which he correctly predicted would engulf all of Russia and also the German and Austrian empires as well, and he secretly tried to broker a peace with the French through his wife the empress Zita’s relations without the knowledge of the Germans. These peace negotiations were scuttled by the Italians who had an undercover deal with the allies to gain Austrian territories if the allies were victories.

A good book about Blessed Charles of Austria is A heart for Europe by James and Joanna Bogle. I have personally prayed for Blessed Karl to intercede for me on some important matters and I have a special interest and devotion to this man who I hope one day will be recognized as a saint by the Church.

I did not know that Czar Nicholas had been declared a martyr/saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. It is definitely another layer to the tragedy of those times.
 
Defend_the_Keys said:
How could two saints have led their nations in armed struggle against one another? This is not a case of foot soldiers simply doing their jobs, in which case it would be easy to see how two saints could have ended fighting each other. Rather, this is a case of absolute monarchs leading their subject nations in war against one another, so it seems to be a much more complicated situation from a theological point of view. Am I wrong here?
Click to expand...
Blessed Karl was certainly not an absolute monarch. He did not become Emperor until the very end of 1916 when the war was already stalemated. He immediately began peace negotiations but was opposed by his own government. He regarded the Catholic Habsburg empire as something sacred but the anti-Catholic Woodrow Wilson, backed by all of the other powers, was determined to see the empire destroyed.
 
The Archduke Charles (Karl) became heir-presumptive after the assassination of his uncle, the Archduke Franz (Francis) Ferdinand.
The Emperor Franz Josef I took steps to initiate Charles to his crown in affairs of state.
However the old Emperor passed away.
 
hamandcheese said:
Blessed Karl did a number of things to try and stop the war. He opposed unrestricted submarine warfare, would not let the Germans send Lenin through Austrian lands into Russia to try and incite revolution which he correctly predicted would engulf all of Russia and also the German and Austrian empires as well, and he secretly tried to broker a peace with the French through his wife the empress Zita’s relations without the knowledge of the Germans. These peace negotiations were scuttled by the Italians who had an undercover deal with the allies to gain Austrian territories if the allies were victories.

A good book about Blessed Charles of Austria is A heart for Europe by James and Joanna Bogle. I have personally prayed for Blessed Karl to intercede for me on some important matters and I have a special interest and devotion to this man who I hope one day will be recognized as a saint by the Church.

I did not know that Czar Nicholas had been declared a martyr/saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. It is definitely another layer to the tragedy of those times.
Click to expand...
Tsar Nicholas and his family were not declared martyrs in the Russian church. They were proclaimed Passion Bearers which is different from a martyr. Just don’t ask me, since I don’t personally know the difference.
 
Typically, the distinction between martyr and passion-bearer is made because it is often felt that a martyr should be killed specifically for his faith, whereas the title passion-bearer is then given to one who endures some sort of unjust circumstances surrounding his death in an exemplary Christian manner.
 
hamandcheese said:
A good book about Blessed Charles of Austria is A heart for Europe by James and Joanna Bogle. I have personally prayed for Blessed Karl to intercede for me on some important matters and I have a special interest and devotion to this man who I hope one day will be recognized as a saint by the Church.
.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the lead, I ordered the book!
 
Thank you for the lead, I ordered the book!
Click to expand...
Another good book that looks at not just Blessed Karl but the first world war from a Catholic perspective is 1917: Red Banners, White Mantle by Warren H. Carroll.
 
Emperor Charles (Karl) I favored a constitutional monarchy and some sort of federal solution to the Empire’s problems, and he realized that peace was essential and time was short.
 
hamandcheese said:
Another good book that looks at not just Blessed Karl but the first world war from a Catholic perspective is 1917: Red Banners, White Mantle by Warren H. Carroll.
Click to expand...
Thank you! I also found a speech by Warren H. Carroll on itunes about blessed Carl that is free to download which is very good.
 
CyrilSebastian said:
Emperor Charles (Karl) I favored a constitutional monarchy and some sort of federal solution to the Empire’s problems, and he realized that peace was essential and time was short.
Click to expand...
Indeed, he did. He was following, in many ways, in the footsteps of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand whose assissination was the catalyst which started the war. The Archduke and his wife were also extremely devout and treated Bl. Karl and his wife like their own children.

An interesting book on the subject is here:

amazon.com/The-Assassination-Archduke-Sarajevo-Romance/dp/1250000165/ref=cm_cr-mr-title

I also like this comment from Sir Winston Churchill:

"If the Allies at the peace table at Versailles had allowed a Hohenzollern, a Wittelsbach and a Habsburg to return to their thrones, there would have been no Hitler. A democratic basis of society might have been preserved by a crowned Weimar in contact with the victorious Allies.”
 
I’m sure I am not the only student of WW1 who wonders over and over…oh what might have been…
 
Serbian senior military officers and members of the Serbian Army sought to create Greater Serbia through groups like the Black Hand; the Black Hand trained and sent Gavrilo Princip and his fellow assassins into Bosnia to assassinate the Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

Austro-Hungary would have viewed these groups as terrorist organizations.

The assassination of the Archduke seems like a legitimate reason to go to war for Austro-Hungary. Perhaps these groups like the Black Hand and Young Bosnia would have tried to assassinate more of the Hapsburg Family.

Some WWI Historians speculate that if the Archduke had not been assassinated, WWI would not have occurred.
One of the speakers, Richard Ned Lebow, professor of war studies at Kings College London, says counterfactual history is an “essential tool in figuring out how the world works”, a way of considering the possibility of alternative outcomes.
Click to expand...
He believes that World War One could have been prevented, if Archduke Franz Ferdinand had survived the assassin’s bullet.
Click to expand...
“Franz Ferdinand was the strongest spokesman for peace in Austria-Hungary. He believed that a war with Russia would lead to the downfall of both empires.”
Click to expand...
bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-29991018
Just prior to World War I, under the orders of the Chief of Serbian Military Intelligence, Serbian Military Officers and remnants of the by then moribund Black Hand organized and facilitated the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria on occasion of his visit to Sarajevo, Bosnia. The Austro-Hungarian investigation of the assassination rounded up all but one of the assassins and also much of the underground railroad that had been used to transport the assassins and their weapons from Serbia to Sarajevo. Within two days following the assassination, Austria-Hungary and Germany advised Serbia that they should open an investigation, but Serbian Foreign Minister Gruic, speaking for Serbia replied, “Nothing had been done so far, and the matter did not concern the Serbian Government,” after which “high words” were spoken on both sides. Entreaties by Germany asking Russia to intercede with Serbia were ignored. On 23 July Austria-Hungary delivered a toughly worded letter to Serbia with ten enumerated demands and additional demands in the preamble aimed at the destruction of the anti-Austrian terrorist and propaganda network in Serbia. Austria called attention to Serbia’s March 1909 declaration committing to the Great Powers to respect Austria-Hungary’s sovereignty over Bosnia-Herzegovina and committing Serbia to maintain good neighborly relations with Austria-Hungary. If the ten enumerated demands and demands in the preamble were not agreed to within 48 hours, Austria-Hungary would recall its ambassador from Serbia. The letter became known as the July Ultimatum. Serbia accepted all but one of the demands, to let the Austrian officers conduct an investigation on Serbian soil, which would have compromised its sovereignty. In response, Austria-Hungary recalled its ambassador.
Click to expand...
Austria-Hungary authorized the mobilization and the declaration of war against Serbia on 28 July 1914. The Secret Treaty of 1892 required both Russia and France to mobilize immediately followed by a commencement of action against the Triple Alliance (i.e., Germany, Austria–Hungary and Italy), if any member of the Triplice (*sic *Triple Alliance) mobilized, and so, soon all the Great Powers of Europe were at war except Italy. Italy cited a clause in the Triple Alliance treaty which only bound it to enter in case of aggression against one of the treaty members, and so remained neutral – for the time being.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hand_%28Serbia%29

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Bosnia
 
On November 21, 1916, the bells of the Austrian-Hungarian monarchy tolled, announcing the demise of Emperor Francis Joseph I.
His successor Charles knelt before the statue of the Blessed Mother and prayed the Rosary.
It was thus that Emperor Charles I began his reign on the Feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, as a sign that his entire future life was to become a single great sacrifice.
Charles’s coronation as apostolic king of Hungary took place on a Saturday, which in a special way is dedicated to Our Lady.
 
Charles knelt before the statue of the Blessed Mother and prayed the Rosary.
It was thus that Emperor Charles I began his reign on the Feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, as a sign that his entire future life was to become a single great sacrifice.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top