Europe had seen a fair share of troubles since the height of the Roman Empire. Having just emerged from being harassed by barbarians from the north, a new menace threatened their borders, and “in the period of three centuries the creed of Mahomet, preached on the sword's edge by his hardy followers, extended its sway over a large portion of the earth."1 It had been, from early after Christ's death, a “pious custom in Europe to make pilgrimages to the Holy Land.”2 Up until this time, Christians and “foundations of wealthy pilgrims were allowed to received the multitudes that flocked to the sacred city in order to kiss the tomb of the Saviour and pray in the placed where he had walked”3, but the influx of the followers of Mohammed would change all of that in the Middle East. The pilgrims would set up travel routes, hospitals for sick travelers, trade shops, and other stops along the route to the Holy Land to help in the journey. After the conquest by the Muslims, when pilgrims again made their voyages, “they found their hospitals desolated and plundered, their sacred placed profaned, their religion insulted, and were only to happy to escape outrage and death."4 These attacks were seen as atrocities in the European mind, and would begin to stir something in the hearts of Christians in the West. Two sides would erupt in the conflict, while the “one deemed themselves secure of salvation while combating for the Cross, and sought an entrance to heaven through the breach of Jerusalem; the other, strong in the belief of fatalism, advanced fearless to the conflict, and strove for the houris of Paradise amidst the lances of the Christians."5 The war for the Holy Land, with “short interruptions this terrible combat of Europe and Asia lasted for nearly two hundred years."6
To understand war, an understanding of the heart and motivation of the warriors involved must be taken up. Since the question raised is whether the cause of Christ, was advanced, then a look only at the Crusaders would be appropriate. When the Europeans learned of the troubles that were facing the pilgrims, and so strong was “"the profound indignation excited in Europe by the narratives of the sufferings of the Christians who had made pilgrimages to the Holy Sepulcher"7, that this became a rallying point where commoners, clergy, and royalty could all gather behind. With the rallying cry of “my soul belongs to God”8, they set off to take back the ground where their religion was born, and to protect those innocents who made the long and hard journey from some of the perils that had arisen. Their hearts were in the right place, so much so that only “one passion warmed every bosom, one only desire felt in every heart. To rescue the Holy Sepulcher from the hands of the infidels-to restore the heritage of Christ to his followers- to plant the Cross again on Mount Calvary was the sole object of their desires. For this they lived, for this they died."9
The desire to rescue the Holy Land, however, does not necessarily mean that their actions were justified by the religious leaders of the day. A new philosophy on warfare had to be discussed, on whether or not God opposed to the taking up of arms for a cause, regardless of how just or unjust the people thought it might be. This discussion was called the “Just War” theory, and was originally thought of by Augustine of Hippo. This was the concept of “the idea and practice of penitential warfare in the service of the Church”10, and would be put forward by several popes, included Pope Gregory VII (1073 – 1085) and Pope Urban II (1088-1099). According to some Christian theologians, such as Victoria, there are two essential conditions to be met for a war to be considered just: "first, legitimate authority, the primary subjective and formal condition; secondly, a just cause, the primary objective and material condition."11
The Popes viewed these two conditions as having been met, and starting encouraging the people to support the concept of the Crusades by employing various propaganda methods. By “focusing on the motivation of the individual participants and the underlying cause of wars fought in defense of the Church and faith”12 and fostering the “idea of becoming a soldier of Christ (Latin miles Christi) and fighting a military campaign to restore God's honour where it mattered most, i.e. the Holy Land where Christ had lived and saved humankind, was a powerful propaganda concept to which people responded enthusiastically.”13 Pope Urban II would even define participation in the Crusade as an obligation to the service of God and offer penance for those who took part. This definition put forth by the papacy, combined with the burning desire in the hearts of the people to defend the Holy Land and those wishing to journey to it, would garnish the support need for an active military campaign. The people's hearts were in the right place, having seen the spread of Islam as an obstacle to the spread of Christianity, and they wished that Christianity would spread as well back into the region from which it was born. Ultimately, they came to the conclusion that the “only legitimate reason for waging war is the defense or restoration of the peace and order of society against serious injury. When it is waged for this cause, it is not contrary to the divine precepts or counsels."14
While the Popes moved to justify warfare against those who wished to conquer the Holy Land and interrupt the people who wished to travel there, that does not mean that there were not times when the concept of a “just war” was abused. Now that it had been deemed that the papacy may call forth military strength to settle what it viewed as attacks against the institution of Christianity, it was only a matter of time before abuses of that power would take place. Those who came to be viewed as heretics or political opponents of Rome could now face the threat of Crusades being conducted against them. The conflicts against “political enemies of the papacy grew out of a long tradition of armed conflicts between the papacy and its political opponents in Italy in the eleventh century”15, and later the Third Lateran Council of 1179 “provided limited military support for bishops fighting heretics in their dioceses.”16 The support that the papacy had received for the Crusades in the Middle East gave the Popes a sense of security, and that their actions against Europeans would go unobstructed as well. They argued that since military force was justified against heretics, local and foreign, by “arguing that heretics disregarded doctrine and disobeyed the ecclesiastical.”17 Those whose viewpoints were openly heretical were not only crusaded against, but crusades “against schismatics were proclaimed against exponents of the Greek and Russian Orthodox Church as well as against opponent Catholic factions during the Great Schism of the fourteenth century.”18 These, and other, abuses of power by the leadership in the church would tarnish the crusades, and give rise to the question as to whether the cause of Christ was advanced at all.
The crusades are sometimes referred to as Holy Wars. These words do not do them justice, because they do not adequately describe the reality of the crusade or of the society that produced them. Like so many generalizations, they certainly ring true for some crusades, but even then we must recognize that these crusades reflected only a portion of the society and limited periods."19 Lumping all crusades under one title is one of the reasons why there is so much confusion over the whole subject. Not all crusades were just, nor were all of the actions of the crusaders righteous. As we have seen, however, that the people believed they were doing the will of God, and the papacy was all to keen to seek justification for military power. Ultimately, the crusades would keep military pressure on invading forces from the East, so the argument could be made that these actions helped keeping Arabic forces at bay during this period. It also sparked a revival in the hears of the people, dedicating themselves to what they believed was the advancement of the Kingdom of God. The crusades were “justified by faith conducted against real or imagined enemies defined by religious and political elites as perceived threats to the Christian faithful"20, but even the most just cause will eventually wear thin on the hearts of the people. Crusade after crusade would cause them to ponder what it was exactly they were fighting for, and eventually the power granted the the papacy would come with consequences for Europeans as well. It is not a simple question to answer whether the cause of Christ was advanced by the crusades, because the answer is yes and no. In the beginning they did certainly, as it has been shown in the hearts of the people and their willingness to die for the cause of Christ. Their actions were found justifiable before God, and their motives were indeed pure. In later periods it did not advance the cause, as concentrated power caused corruption. It was these actions, and the actions of a few crusaders who did not obey the commandments that God has given in Scripture, that has tarnished the name of Crusade for history’s sake.
Bibliography
Britton, J.J, The Crusades, The Critic, 23 Issue 599 (1861): 650
Kossel, Clifford G.,The just war theory, Religious Education, 59 no. 3 (1964): 220-226.
Maier, C., Crusades, New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale (2003): 405-415.
McElrone, Hugh P., The Crusades, Catholic World, 36, Issue 211 (1883): 112 – 125
Powell, James M., Church and Crusade: Frederick II and Louis IX, The Catholic Historical Review, 93 Issue 2 (2007): 250 - 264
The Crusades, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, 959 Issue 366 (1846): 475-492
1 Hugh P. McElrone, The Crusades, Catholic World, 36, Issue 211 (1883) 112.
2 Ibid., 114.
3 Ibid., 114.
4 Hugh P. McElrone, The Crusades, Catholic World, 36, Issue 211 (1883) 114.
5 "THE CRUSADES." Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 59, no. 366 (Apr 01, 1846): 475.
6 J.J. Briton, The Crusades, The Critic, 23 Issue 599 (1861) 650.
7 "THE CRUSADES." Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 59, no. 366 (Apr 01, 1846): 477.
8 J.J. Briton, The Crusades, The Critic, 23 Issue 599 (1861) 650.
9 "THE CRUSADES." Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 59, no. 366 (Apr 01, 1846): 475.
10C. Maier, Crusades, New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale (2003) 406.
11Clifford G Kossel, "The just war theory." Religious Education 59, no. 3 (1964) 223.
12C. Maier, Crusades, New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale (2003) 406.
13Ibid., 407.
14Clifford G Kossel, "The just war theory." Religious Education 59, no. 3 (1964) 221.
15C. Maier, Crusades, New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale (2003) 413.
16Ibid., 412.
17Ibid., 412.
18Ibid., 413.
19James M. Powell, Church and Crusade: Frederick II and Louis IX, The Catholic Historical Review 93, Vol 2 (2007) 263.
20James M. Powell, Church and Crusade: Frederick II and Louis IX, The Catholic Historical Review 93, Vol 2 (2007) 252.
No comments:
Post a Comment