What about all the other crusades?

[dronald]

For declaring an indulgence? Why in the world would we do that?

Well, let’s say hypothetically a Pope wanted to take back Jerusalem today and said the following:

“If anyone who sets out should lose his life either on the way, by land or by sea, or in battle against the infidels, his sins shall be pardoned from that moment. This I grant by right of the gift of God’s power to me.”

What would most people think?

 

[PRmerger]

Well, let’s say hypothetically a Pope wanted to take back Jerusalem today and said the following:

“If anyone who sets out should lose his life either on the way, by land or by sea, or in battle against the infidels, his sins shall be pardoned from that moment. This I grant by right of the gift of God’s power to me.”

What would most people think?

I would think that the Pope is not speaking in the area of faith and morals, as far as mandating that we join the military and fight. That is outside his purview.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

How losing ones life in the battle against infidels can give remission to ones sins. And if Popes can still make such a declaration. That’s been troubling me from the beginning.

I already answered this for you yesterday (July 3) 8:20 pm, 8:43, and 9:05.

Also, if a Pope did declare such a thing now, would it be reasonable to separate ones self from such a Pope?

Different time. Different place. Different set of social assumptions.

The Crusading movement started about 1,000 years ago. The make up of European society and the role of the papacy was completely different than it is today there and here. It’s anachronistic and, in a way imperialistic, to look back 1000 years and expect to find in the Middle Ages the relationship between church and state that we just worked out 200 yrs ago and chide them for not being just like us. Those advances took time.

No Pope today has the authority or power to call and mobilize an army for war to liberate Christian lands and people from an invader as was Islam then. By 1050 AD fully 2/3 of Christian lands were invaded, conquered, and subjected to Muslim rule.

 

[FireFromHeaven]

Hi,
Yes. the video link I sent earlier,
youtube.com/watch?v=RLVXRrzm0kc
Did make the connection that to hold Jerusalem, one would have to control the Muslims - who took Jerusalem and their other holdings by force of arms and persecuted Christians there - armed forces in Egypt. Jump ahead 11 minutes to get to the facts.

One a tangent, here is an interesting article on the effects of the Crusades.
crisismagazine.com/2013/the-real-significance-of-the-crusades

http://www.crisismagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Crusader-Routes-620x320.jpg

John

I haven’t had time to watch the video yet, but I had one quick question. If the crusades against Egypt were justified to protect Jerusalem, wouldn’t that mean that the existence of the kingdom of Jerusalem be justified? From what I know, the crusaders swore an oath to return reconquered Byzantine land to them. Wouldn’t that mean that Jerusalem’s existence was unjustified?

 

[FireFromHeaven]

Well, let’s say hypothetically a Pope wanted to take back Jerusalem today and said the following:

“If anyone who sets out should lose his life either on the way, by land or by sea, or in battle against the infidels, his sins shall be pardoned from that moment. This I grant by right of the gift of God’s power to me.”

What would most people think?

Well at least in the context I doubt it would affect me. The Speech at Clermont was in reply to the Byzantine request for help. The pope is merely saying that those who go to aid the Byzantines would recieve a full indulgence. In modern times, I think such an action by the pope would only happen if catholic soldiers were fighting in a particularly just war. However I doubt this would occur, due to the pope no longer being leader of Christendom and I don’t see too many particularly just wars around.

 

[FireFromHeaven]

Were the Albigenesian and Hussite crusades justified? What about the crusades against Pagans in Eastern Europe?