FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: A New Crusade
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Thought I would offer my POV on the mass persecution of Christians in Iraq. I believe that we need a new Crusade. A modern one. I will say this, If Pope Francis would declare the need for a crusade to save our Christian Brethren (obviously this will never happen) I would be the first one on a boat headed for Iraq. To heck with waiting on some government somewhere or the "United Nations". At what point do Christians and especially Catholics stand up and defend themselves and each other?
[size=10pt]The impetuses of the original Crusade were the desire to save pilgrims from abuse and to save holy places from desecration. In my own opinion, from my own POV, I am not so sure that the use of "holy violence" is in accord with the Gospel...

I always think of this one with regards to Crusades:

Luke 9:51-56 Wrote:And it came to pass, when the days of his assumption were accomplishing, that he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers before his face; and going, they entered into a city of the Samaritans, to prepare for him. And they received him not, because his face was of one going to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John had seen this, they said: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he rebuked them, saying: You know not of what spirit you are. The Son of man came not to destroy souls, but to save. And they went into another town.

Of whose Spirit are we?

1 Peter 3:4 says our inner man must have a heart clothed in the imperishable, incorruptible jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God's sight.

When we trust Christ and His Providence, we are gentle and quiet and patient, praying even for the greatest evil-doers. What will violence avail us? Did the Martyrs call for Crusades against Pagan Rome, or did they lay down like lambs for the slaughter and so plant the seeds of the glory of the Church? We must preach "no salvation outside the Church", and we must live the Gospel. This will stop the march of evil. This will break down the Gates of Hell.

I'd rather be calm than brandish a sword. Which is the sharper sword: Islamic zeal or Christian charity? Allah's demonic wrath, or the justice of the Holy Trinity?
This has always been a difficult topic for me and I have been back and forth with it a lot. Does the principle self defense not exist with God? Does the good shepherd allow the wolf to slaughter the sheep in the name of martyrdom? That is not what the scripture teaches. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. How does he do this? When the wolf comes he must battle him until one of three things take place. 1. The wolf retreats. 2. The wolf is killed, or 3. The shepherd dies. The only good options are 1 and 2. option number three means certain death for the sheep does it not?
(07-28-2014, 11:19 AM)Copeland Wrote: [ -> ]Thought I would offer my POV on the mass persecution of Christians in Iraq. I believe that we need a new Crusade. A modern one. I will say this, If Pope Francis would declare the need for a crusade to save our Christian Brethren (obviously this will never happen) I would be the first one on a boat headed for Iraq. To heck with waiting on some government somewhere or the "United Nations". At what point do Christians and especially Catholics stand up and defend themselves and each other?

I'm curious---what do you think a modern crusade would actually look like?
(07-28-2014, 12:13 PM)Copeland Wrote: [ -> ]This has always been a difficult topic for me and I have been back and forth with it a lot. Does the principle self defense not exist with God? Does the good shepherd allow the wolf to slaughter the sheep in the name of martyrdom? That is not what the scripture teaches. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. How does he do this? When the wolf comes he must battle him until one of three things take place. 1. The wolf retreats. 2. The wolf is killed, or 3. The shepherd dies. The only good options are 1 and 2. option number three means certain death for the sheep does it not?

I often wonder about this as well. I did not mean to condemn you with my post, by the way, but only to put alternative thoughts out there.

A Christian should not regard his own earthly life so highly that he defends himself with violence whenever he's threatened. I think pacifism is a good principle for the individual. When it comes to others being attacked, however - and other Christians especially - we enter another moral world. It's no longer self-defense, but a Just War waged on behalf of another person or persons. This is difficult.

With regards to the Crusading mentality: how did God act toward us when we were at enmity with Him? By the "Crusades Logic", He ought to have cast down physical fire on us and destroyed us sinners. By the logic of Heaven, He became incarnate and died for us on the Cross, raising our human nature in His holy resurrection three days later. That's very different from our Crusades...

Our Good Shepherd sent the wolf into an everlasting retreat from the field of battle. How? By dying. Strange, isn't it? The mind of the Holy Gospel stands head and shoulders over the mind of this World.
If the Holy Father were to call for Crusaders, it would undoubtedly be a Just War to save the Christians of Iraq and the greater Middle East. I hope I would have the fortitude to join.
(07-28-2014, 11:47 AM)Heorot Wrote: [ -> ][size=10pt]The impetuses of the original Crusade were the desire to save pilgrims from abuse and to save holy places from desecration. In my own opinion, from my own POV, I am not so sure that the use of "holy violence" is in accord with the Gospel...

I always think of this one with regards to Crusades:

Luke 9:51-56 Wrote:And it came to pass, when the days of his assumption were accomplishing, that he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers before his face; and going, they entered into a city of the Samaritans, to prepare for him. And they received him not, because his face was of one going to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John had seen this, they said: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he rebuked them, saying: You know not of what spirit you are. The Son of man came not to destroy souls, but to save. And they went into another town.

Of whose Spirit are we?

1 Peter 3:4 says our inner man must have a heart clothed in the imperishable, incorruptible jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God's sight.

When we trust Christ and His Providence, we are gentle and quiet and patient, praying even for the greatest evil-doers. What will violence avail us? Did the Martyrs call for Crusades against Pagan Rome, or did they lay down like lambs for the slaughter and so plant the seeds of the glory of the Church? We must preach "no salvation outside the Church", and we must live the Gospel. This will stop the march of evil. This will break down the Gates of Hell.

I'd rather be calm than brandish a sword. Which is the sharper sword: Islamic zeal or Christian charity? Allah's demonic wrath, or the justice of the Holy Trinity?

There wasn't a means to take up arms against pagan Rome.  And it wasn't practical.  This is very different.  There is a means, and doing nothing is very impractical.

And, in case you've forgotten, Saints would appear on the field of battle.  Christ would show up in the dreams of even non-Catholics like Constantine, who wasn't baptized until he was on his deathbed.  Also, the Spaniards would be aided against highly improbable odds by divine intervention during the wars to expel the Islamic invaders.

Even when they came to the Americas, the Spanish would get saved from some of the more hostile tribes in the American southwest by divine intervention.

So:

The solution is "all of the above".  Which may indeed include a crusade.  If there are Christian militias forming in Iraq right now, for their own defense, are you going to tell them they're in the wrong?  THAT would be unreasonable.
We should have a right to self defense. Its suicidal to believe otherwise. Unjust aggression is evil but self defense should be a no brainer. I wouldn't bat an eyelash at taking the lives of muslims who were breaking into home and trying to kill me and drive me out. Seriously Christian pacificism should have limits.
(07-28-2014, 01:54 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]We should have a right to self defense. Its suicidal to believe otherwise. Unjust aggression is evil but self defense should be a no brainer. I wouldn't bat an eyelash at taking the lives of muslims who were breaking into home and trying to kill me and drive me out. Seriously Christian pacificism should have limits.

I think we DO have a right to self defense and to defend the innocent and helpless.

I also think pacifism is a choice to be made solely on an individual basis, not a dogma imposed upon all Christians.
As a father of two little girls and a husband to a beautiful wife is it not my duty as the shepherd of my home to protect them with my life. What would happen if I chose to be a pacifist and they murdered my wife and I and raised my daughters to be heathens like themselves? Would I be commended for my pacifism or condemned by it?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5