The Great Commission. image - Christians of Moddb

We conquered the entire Roman Empire without raising a sword, and then took over Europe in the face of pagan faith, after pagan faith, then spreading to the New World, the East, islands of the sea, and you expect us not to succeed?

Son, the Church always wins.

The question is, if you wish to participate in that victory. Through all manner of calamity and wonder, the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church.

Fact.

...

I sound pretty dogmatic don't I?

Europe did not go on crusades of violence to spread the word, it was an act of defense against Islamic expansionism that had pillaged western nations from Rome to Paris both through raiders and conquesting armies. If we wanted to spread the word we'd bombard them with missionaries and zealots.

It was an act of defense that eventually escalated into all out war between the two powers of that time see sawing back and forth between Europe and the Middle East. Don't even bother giving atheists a modicum of indulgence by peddling that line that Christianity is responsible for all that death and destruction. One way or another, leaders of that time would've unified with or without the Church's blessing.

In addition, the Byzantines and Ottomans fought their war before that under the guise of religious dogma but really were imperial governments each seeking to either preserve or expand their sphere of influence. It was common for empires to act in such a manner during that time, it's only to be expected given their system of government and expectations of absolute autocracy. Yet somehow you blame the Churches for this? Look into the economic, political, and social expectations of that time for leadership. The Byzantines had a Emperor, what do you expect of an Emperor if not to maintain his domain? And as for Jerusalem, given the dominant culture of their Empire there were expectations to retake and defend that part of their domain, which had been violently seized by Islamic expansionism. When Rome got involved people needed a rallying cry to go beyond just securing Europe's defense. Jerusalem became that cry partly because the Ottoman Empire was now perceived as a genuine threat to European Sovereignty given what they just did to the Byzantines and were doing the same now to Rome with their raiding parties as an advance force. To take and keep Jerusalem, was to cripple the Ottomans if not result in their outright destruction with the morale boost that came after.

Religion was used as a guise, but the political motivations are clear as day if one looks between the lines. Something few people care for these days.

I apologize if my rebuke was taken personally but I had to say something as I get rather tired of us being blamed for things under such contemptible lies.

And also, the malcontents who say "well religion caused those wars one way or another!" I'll tell you this, men use whatever excuse they so desire to justify their conquests and acts of violence. The true Holy war, for the believer, is against the vice of man and vice of society. Seeking to be right with their creator and deny themselves. That's Holy war, one we know everyday.

So please, spare me the guilt trips. I will not tolerate them in my presence if I can speak, type, or even shout against them. That goes for everyone here, be they believers with a misplaced sense of guilt over things they never saw nor participated in or edgy atheists who haven't a clue what they're talking about because all they wanna do is get back at the "strict parents" of their Catholic upbringing.

God's people are destroyed by lack of knowledge, so for the love of all that is true in this universe, please educate yourselves especially in our faith.

We don't give up on the lost we keep fighting for them until they convert and if they don't then we keep trying that is all we can do.

I applaud that.

Don't forget though, it's dreamers who made the Church get as far as it has to begin with. Without the push to overcome obstacle after obstacle, wall of Jericho after wall of Jericho, we'd have never gotten this far. That's why we do our duty till the very ends of the world itself. The ability to see an impossible mountain and yet traverse it anyway, it requires a childlike faith. One to endure, one to love the Father. All I ask is be careful about realism becoming pessimism.

Yes, that is true about plenary indulgence.
As for Christian violence, I'd say lords and kingdoms are to blame for that.

However, keep in mind even before the very first crusade Islamic expansionism had made it's way to Rome itself. Southern Italy was invaded in 600 A.D. and by 900 A.D. Sicily had been fully occupied. Islands surrounding were raided and Rome itself was sieged during 846 A.D. The only thing that stopped them was the walls surrounding the city since the Muslims apparently weren't equipped with siege equipment.

Thousands were killed on the outskirts of the city regardless of age and the basilicas of St. Peter and St. Paul, which were outside the city walls, were raided and desecrated. These were some of the most prominent holy sites of Christianity at the time. Now looted and surrounded by the blood of not just men, but the old, women, and children.

By 849 A.D. a coalition of maritime cities that had been raided before joined in Rome's defense to ward off a second Islamic attack on the city. By 1091 the last Arab strongholds in Southern Italy were counter attacked and driven from the shores of Italia. Which was four years before the declaration of the very first Crusade.

Italia had been abused, beaten, and raped of their dignity by Islamic slave traders, pirates, and expansionists. With that in mind, is it any surprise the cities joined into an alliance and looked to the papacy for leadership?

Consider, in the early 10th century the Muslim Emperor ordered the forced conversion of Christians in his new Empire. Ultimately resulting in the destruction of the Church in Jerusalem and a tax called Jizya. Which was for non Muslims and crushed most into bankruptcy by todays standards.

There was also additional laws that colonial Islam enforced on their "new" subjects.

- Christians and Jews could not bear arms -- Muslims could
- Christians and Jews could not ride horses -- Muslims could
- Christians and Jews had to get permission to build -- Muslims did not
- Christians could not proselytize -- Muslims could
- Christians and Jews had to bow to their Muslim masters when they paid their taxes
- Christians and Jews had to live under the law set forth in the Koran, not under either their own religious or secular law.

How do you think Europeans felt when they heard this is what would happen to them if Islam took over their shores?

In addition, between the 7th and 15th century, Islamic pirates dominated the slave trade especially with their captured "cargo" from raids up in Italia. The estimated death toll of that trade between Italia and later Africa for the 14 century period it existed is at 112 million. They also plagued Spain, England, even France whos trade routes suffered and ships were lost by the thousands during those days of piracy. So there was most certainly a economic impact.

This is why I say religion wasn't the driving factor, but merely the guise. You think Crusades would've been declared had the Muslims simply lived peacefully with their neighbors in their territories? Rather then invading them, forcibly converting them, or just enslaving them?

The Ottomans/Muslims made themselves a problem not just for the Byzantines but for Europe itself. With that in mind, is it any surprise Rome was all too eager to answer the request of the Byzantine Emperor who'd been beleaguered by such conquests as they'd experienced the last several centuries on their own Italia?

Do also consider, I don't think the local governments nor Church was enthusiastic about trade and cultural relations with a dominantly Muslim neighbor, who was now the new owners of the former Byzantine Empire. Violent, expansionist, and morally bankrupt neighbors with no concern for their fellow man. Barbaric.

I'll concede that religious zeal against such a evil people can be a factor. But when you get down to it, this wasn't a war just about ideology, it was a war against human cruelty. Next time there's a discussion like this, please remember that.

As for my sources on this.

Board.freedomainradio.com

They really should teach this in schools.

It both saddens and angers me when I see such betrayals in the Church world. Such things, run contrary to the point of being a Christian. The sadder thing is Ive seen those who joke about the sacking of Constantinople especially among younger and edgy. That was one of the greatest moments of shame in the entirety of Church history and betrayed everything the Church is to stand for.

Thank you for the links. I gotta lot of reading to do these days but eventually I will get down to those once I get them.

Dr. Jones? Interesting.

History.ac.uk

We've talked politics so much I hadn't known you study Church History but I'll admit it's a good surprise to have. It'll be a while before I'm an "expert" in anything though. I have come to the conclusion that I shall always be a student as long as there's another book or even insight to read. And there are so many of them, I have only one life. I can only pick those things most relevant to me and hope I have a positive impact on those around me with what I learn.

You have a good day Spudd, and God Bless.

Don't worry, I'll make plenty more conversion posts in the future. :-)