Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
   Mobile App






Forum Rules Enter at own risk!

The Philosophy, Science & Religion forum has been created as an unmoderated forum. The issues discussed here can and will get very intense. Please show respect and appreciation to alternative views posted here. We appreciate your consideration.

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Crusades And Catholicism, Moved from Euros vs Americans
Bookmark and Share
andylucy 
Posted: 08-Feb-2004, 06:15 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





I moved my reply to a new thread so as not to confuse the old one.

OK, Take 2. wink.gif

QUOTE (Kiwi Gael @ Feb 4 2004, 08:04 PM)
The Vatican set out to exterminate anyone it deemed heathen, whether they be Muslim, Jews, non-Catholic Christians... etc etc.., 


Negative. They only set out to free the Holy Land from those who refused to allow Christian pilgrims to visit. By the way, at the time of the Crusades, there were no non-Catholic Christians. There were only heretics and apostates to fill that category. It was the apostate Christians, who professed belief in Islam to avoid martyrdom at the hands of the invading Moslems, who were counted among the enemies.

QUOTE
I envision Him being sick to His stomach, as He witnessed all that barbaric carnage (which involved cannibalism!!!!!!!!!!!)


Show me the primary document which relates the actual eating of human flesh. All I have ever seen is reference to the boiling of prisoners in pots, which was a common form of torture at the time. The Romans placed some of the Holy Martyrs on grills, to be roasted. Did they eat them? Never seen evidence of it. Same here. Horrible? Yes, torture is a terrible thing. Cannibalism? No evidence presented. As far as the barbarous sacking of Jerusalem, it was indeed barbaric. However, the soldiers breaching the city were the same as the soldiers who breached the walls of Badajoz in 1812. Wellington wrote of the grievous carnage resulting after the walls were breached. They beat and raped and killed; not necessarily in that order. Soldiers were soldiers. Sieges led to massacres. There are too many examples to enumerate. Does this make it right? No. However, when viewed in the historical context, one may see that the actions were typical of armies following a siege.

QUOTE
And what about the big one "Thou shalt not kill"? Urban was proclaiming war as a penance!!??eek.gif The Word of God teaches fasting and prayer, regarding penance.


I would have thought that a Bible scholar such as yourself would have stated it as "Thou shalt not murder," which is closer to the original Hebrew. biggrin.gif And, Urban II did not proclaim the Crusade as "penance," but attached an "indulgence" to particiaption. There is a difference. An indulgence is an act made for partial or total remission of the temporal judgement due to our sins. Indulgences are often given for making pilgrimages, etc. Indulgences are voluntary, supplementary acts. Penances are prescribed acts of fasting and prayer for the actual remission of sin. Two totally different things.

QUOTE
Christ is Head of His Church (Eph 5:23)(Col 1:18), not the pope, or any other religious leader.


Absolutely no argument from me, nor from any Catholic. biggrin.gif

QUOTE
The pope claims to speak for Christ


Actually, the Holy Father speaks for the Church, through the miracle of Apostolic Succession, as the successor of St. Peter to whom the keys to the gates of Heaven were given. (I foresee an exhumation of the old "Petras" vs "Petra" argument coming up wink.gif )

QUOTE
So, if the papacy is the one and only Church of God - well, history and the Scriptures tell a very different story
.

Actually, the Scriptures say little about it, and what they do say supports the institution of the Catholic Church. History supports it as well, at least until the 16th century and the Protestant Reformation.

QUOTE
Unabiased historical records and the Scriptures reveal the Vatican teaching hate, fear, and condemnation. Christ came to set His people free with God's Law of Liberty, but the Vatican enslaves its followers with anti-Scriptural rules, regulations and rituals.


Show me the "unbiased" historical records that show this (hint: as a degreed historian, I know that there ain't no such thing as an unbiased record wink.gif ). As far as enslavement, well, no one is forced to stay, are they? They can go and try to make it on their own. It is just silly to me to try that when there is a Church founded by Christ Himself there to assist you in reaching Heaven. To each his own. As far as anit-scriptural, well, let's not get into the whole sola scriptura debate here. Plenty of time for that debate in its entirety in the future.


QUOTE
If the Vatican epitomises true Christianity, then we are in real trouble!


Indeed, for my Protestant brothers, this is true. If the Roman Catholic Church is the true Church started by Christ, there is trouble. Show me a historically provable Christian Church prior to the religio-political upheaval that heralded the Protestant Reformation. There isn't one. It is not extant. All that existed were heretical sects which died out after a time. The Church triumphed over all attempts to bring her down. What was that verse about the gates of Hell not prevailing... or something? laugh.gif

QUOTE
The Crusades were nothing more than an excuse for the papacy to expand its power and clout.


Sorry, but they were a defensive measure to regain access to the Holy Land sites which were forcibly taken by Moslem invaders, particularly Jerusalem in 638AD. Offensive measures were taken within the strategic context of a defensive war. Show me proof to the contrary.

QUOTE
Regarding that article andi referred to, well, sorry, it's no more than a pro-Vatican feeble excuse for the atrocities of the past.


Yes, it is pro-Church, and I am not ashamed of it being so. Pope John Paul II has made formal apologies for many of the atrocities committed by the Church. I have yet to hear any apology for the thousands of Catholics murdered by Cromwell and Elizabeth I. That was a Protestant Christian gig, wasn't it?

QUOTE
If we seek to learn the accurate telling of these events, then let's learn them from unabiased sources - numerous sources in numerous languages - that tells it as it is with none of this whitewashing.


How many languages do you read? Personally, I read English, German, and French. But these are only the modern equivalents of what was spoken centuries ago. So, we must rely on translations. wink.gif (I also read Old Norse, Old and Middle English and Latin, but not very well. I love studying languages! biggrin.gif ). What you are wanting doesn't exist: the perfect, unbiased historical document. Each author imparts his/her bias into their work. Translators confuse the matter further. Best you can do is read everything and try to sort out who really believed what and how did it influence their writing. (I cannot believe that I distilled Introduction to Historiography into one paragraph. Geez. To think I wasted two terms in that class laugh.gif .)

QUOTE
That journal Aon mentioned is a good example.


Actually, the Journal of Anna Comnena is a very good example of Byzantine historiography. Just keep in mind that she felt contempt for "Latins" and that her primary area of interest was in preserving the history of her father, Emperor Alexius. Also keep in mind that her chronology does not jive with other accounts from the same period. That does not mean that it is wrong, just that it differs from other accounts. She also doesn't delve deeply into economic or military matters. But it is a very good read, and enlightening as to the views of a Byzantine princess at the time of the Crusades. I read it about 20 years ago, but I still have a copy somewhere. I have never heard of Fulk the Chronicler. Can you elaborate on that one, Mirri? Could be interesting.

QUOTE
The Vatican has to face its demons of the past. Re-writing history will not change it.


As I stated, John Paul II has issued apologies to many of the people the Church has hurt in its inadvertant zeal over the centuries. Again, have there been any apologies for the murder of thousands and thousands of Catholics over the centuries? None forthcoming. Of course, the people who ordered those acts are dead, so apologies are a bit late, me thinks.

Whew, just my orthodox papist ranting reply to KG's ranting heretical post. biggrin.gif


Just my tuppence.

Andy


--------------------
Just my tuppence.

Andy


Never drink to excess; you might shoot at a tax collector and miss. - Robert A. Heinlein

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.

TANSTAAFL

If a person doesn't believe in something, he'll soon believe in anything. - G. K. Chesterton

9-1-1: state sponsored Dial-A-Prayer
PMEmail Poster               
Top
andylucy 
Posted: 08-Feb-2004, 06:29 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





It worked!! It worked!! It went through despite all of KG's petitions and prayers!! laugh.gif

Andy lol.gif
PMEmail Poster               
Top
kidclaymore 
Posted: 08-Feb-2004, 11:40 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



THE BLACK KNIGHT
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 658
Joined: 05-Jul-2002
ZodiacAsh

Realm: North East Texas

male





clap.gif clap.gif


--------------------
Slainte
Cho Sona ri radan ann am muileann and Gus an coinnich sinn a rithisd
Clan Lamont
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aon_Daonna 
Posted: 09-Feb-2004, 02:30 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



The Wolf Lady
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 2,966
Joined: 06-Apr-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Fife, Scotland

female





woohoo wink.gif

Anna Comnena was the name I was looking for ... I hate my brain sometimes *sighs*
btw, if you read sources and believe everything it's your own fault (you as a generic term). Because most original texts will be biased in some way or another.

Btw, andy ever read the diary of Victor Klemperer? You might like it. (he was a Jew in Nazi Germany who witnessed the Dresden Bombings. He was protected by his wife's family (a rich traditional one) )


--------------------
Moderator: The Playground (RPG)

Carpe Jugulum
Carved with a twisted smile
An epitaph for sorrow
Sethian - Epitaph

If anybody wants a costum signature, pm me!
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aon_Daonna 
Posted: 09-Feb-2004, 02:34 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



The Wolf Lady
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 2,966
Joined: 06-Apr-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Fife, Scotland

female





ooh forgot to add... catholicism isn't quite right in the title. the Catholic Church of that time did think of themselves as the only rightful church, protestantism wasn't even invented at that time wink.gif

I will always have a problem with the concept of one man (ie pope) saying the absolute as was stated in a dogma (if I remember right a fairly recent one). I don't like that concept, another point of my criticism of the catholic church.. (which doesn't mean I don't criticise others as well wink.gif I just have more experience with catholicism)
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Kiwi Gael 
Posted: 13-Feb-2004, 08:56 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Honored Clan Member
****

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 94
Joined: 30-Jan-2004
ZodiacAsh

Realm: Tokoroa, New Zealand.

male





Accounts of cannibalism during the Crusades were made by Radulph of Caen and Albert of Aix in 'The Crusades Through Arab Eyes' by Amin Maalouf (translated by Jon Rothschild).

Once again, this could be nothing more than heretical/infidel propaganda, but when you consider both the overall barbaric savagery of the Crusaders, and the ritual that takes place in the Vatican's Roman Catholic Mass... then cannibalism would not be too far-fetched, one would think.

My question - how many accounts did not get recorded????

Hey, andy... all those 'righteous' popes that did the Lord's work during the Crusades... where are they now? Are they in heaven getting a pat on the back for a job well done? What about all those slaughtered 'heathens' whether they be Muslim, Jew, Christian? Men, women, and children!!!!!!!!!!Where are they? What does the Vatican say on that score???


--------------------
Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom and with all thy getting get understanding (Proverbs 4:7)

user posted image

The Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35)
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aon_Daonna 
Posted: 13-Feb-2004, 10:51 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



The Wolf Lady
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 2,966
Joined: 06-Apr-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Fife, Scotland

female





this might not be the right spot to say so, but I heard something today about Pius XII is going to be made a saint??
PMEmail Poster               
Top
andylucy 
Posted: 24-Feb-2004, 05:56 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





QUOTE (Aon_Daonna @ Feb 13 2004, 09:51 PM)
this might not be the right spot to say so, but I heard something today about Pius XII is going to be made a saint??

His cause has been advanced and the Church has agreed to examine it for viability. Of course, that could take SEVERAL years. wink.gif

Andy
PMEmail Poster               
Top
andylucy 
Posted: 24-Feb-2004, 06:26 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





QUOTE (Kiwi Gael @ Feb 13 2004, 07:56 PM)
Accounts of cannibalism during the Crusades were made by Radulph of Caen and Albert of Aix in 'The Crusades Through Arab Eyes' by Amin Maalouf (translated by Jon Rothschild).


Well, now, let me get ahold of this work, read it, and see if it meets historiographical and linguistic muster.


QUOTE (Kiwi Gael @ Feb 13 2004, 07:56 PM)
Once again, this could be nothing more than heretical/infidel propaganda, but when you consider both the overall barbaric savagery of the Crusaders


Who were no more or less savage than any soldiers of the day. And there WAS propaganda on both sides of the conflict. Any account must be viewed with an eye to the historiography of the period.

QUOTE (Kiwi Gael @ Feb 13 2004, 07:56 PM)
and the ritual that takes place in the Vatican's Roman Catholic Mass... then cannibalism would not be too far-fetched, one would think.


That statement is rather inflammatory, isn't it? It also shows a surprising amount of ignorance about Catholic doctrine and Tradition. Try reading this article, this article, and this article. Educate yourself before casting aspersions.


QUOTE (Kiwi Gael @ Feb 13 2004, 07:56 PM)
Hey, andy... all those 'righteous' popes that did the Lord's work during the Crusades... where are they now? Are they in heaven getting a pat on the back for a job well done? What about all those slaughtered 'heathens' whether they be Muslim, Jew, Christian? Men, women, and children!!!!!!!!!!Where are they? What does the Vatican say on that score???


If they died in a state of Grace, having honestly repented of whatever sins the may have committed, and having received the Sacrament of Reconciliation, then they might just very well be in Heaven. As far as each individual pope, it is not for me to comment on their possible eternal location. By the way, the only "Christian" heathens who would have been killed were the apostates who left the Church because it was expedient to do so, becoming Moslem. The Church doesn't make any statements as to the final eternal disposition of the souls of those killed in the Crusades, leaving that to the tender Mercies of the Father.

Just my tuppence.

Andy
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas 
Posted: 24-Feb-2004, 06:43 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 911
Joined: 18-Nov-2003
ZodiacOak


male





Not all Crusades were in the Middle East. See, for example, Albigenses Crusade, directed at Southern France.
Up until recent times, the Pope at Rome has been responsible for his followers directing a good deal of brutality toward non-Roman Catholic Christians. A good argument can be made that, particularly at the higher levels of hierarchy, the Roman Church was more political than religious.
YMMV,


--------------------
Síochán leat,
Mailagnas
Clan Donald USA
PMEmail Poster               
Top
andylucy 
Posted: 24-Feb-2004, 06:56 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





[QUOTE=Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas,Feb 24 2004, 05:43 AM]Not all Crusades were in the Middle East. See, for example, Albigenses Crusade, directed at Southern France.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the term Crusade has been applied to these activities as well.

[QUOTE=Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas,Feb 24 2004, 05:43 AM]Up until recent times, the Pope at Rome has been responsible for his followers directing a good deal of brutality toward non-Roman Catholic Christians.

While the Church has been responsible for many bad, even "evil" episodes (see John Paul II's apologies for many of these), there has been a great deal of violence against Roman Catholics, as well (see Elizabethan England, for example). No ones hands are clean when it comes to history.

[QUOTE=Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas,Feb 24 2004, 05:43 AM]A good argument can be made that, particularly at the higher levels of hierarchy, the Roman Church was more political than religious.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. The Catholic Church, while until 1871 also a secular state, the emphasis has ALWAYS been on the spiritual element of its mission. Even today, with the smaller secular state of the Lateran Accords, the emphasis is on the spiritual life of its members. The Roman Catholic Church is first, and foremost, a Church. All else comes secondarily

Just my tuppence.

Andy
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas 
Posted: 24-Feb-2004, 08:48 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 911
Joined: 18-Nov-2003
ZodiacOak


male





Here's what the Holy See has to say on the use of force in the service of truth:
QUOTE
5.3. The Use of Force in the Service of Truth

To the counter-witness of the division between Christians should be added that of the various occasions in the past millennium when doubtful means were employed in the pursuit of good ends, such as the proclamation of the Gospel or the defense of the unity of the faith. ?Another sad chapter of history to which the sons and daughters of the Church must return with a spirit of repentance is that of the acquiescence given, especially in certain centuries, to intolerance and even the use of force in the service of truth.?(78) This refers to forms of evangelization that employed improper means to announce the revealed truth or did not include an evangelical discernment suited to the cultural values of peoples or did not respect the consciences of the persons to whom the faith was presented, as well as all forms of force used in the repression and correction of errors.

Analogous attention should be paid to all the failures, for which the sons and daughters of the Church may have been responsible, to denounce injustice and violence in the great variety of historical situations: ?Then there is the lack of discernment by many Christians in situations where basic human rights were violated. The request for forgiveness applies to whatever should have been done or was passed over in silence because of weakness or bad judgement, to what was done or said hesitantly or inappropriately.?(79)

As always, establishing the historical truth by means of historical-critical research is decisive. Once the facts have been established, it will be necessary to evaluate their spiritual and moral value, as well as their objective significance. Only thus will it be possible to avoid every form of mythical memory and reach a fair critical memory capable - in the light of faith - of producing fruits of conversion and renewal. ?From these painful moments of the past a lesson can be drawn for the future, leading all Christians to adhere fully to the sublime principle stated by the Council: ?The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it wins over the mind with both gentleness and power.??(80)


MEMORY AND RECONCILIATION: THE CHURCH AND THE FAULTS OF THE PAST
I am well aware of continuing discrimination against Roman Catholics, as I discovered when my oldest son graduated from a well-regarded Jesuit high school, and learned that it would be pointless to apply for admission to any Ivy League university. When I asked a former recon crewmember who took up teaching at a Jesuit college after he got out of the Air Force about the Ivy League prejudice against graduates of Jesuit schools, he told me that his biggest disappointment in 20 plus years of teaching was the blatant prejudice by the Ivies against Jesuit graduates.
John Paul II has done much for Christian reconciliation. His confession of past sins is particularly remarkable. IMHO, if anyone now alive is deserving of sainthood, it is the Holy Father.
I am certainly not ant-Catholic, and although a Protestant, have been awarded a Bronze Pelican for my work with Catholic scouts. Nonetheless, my study of church history has convinced me that many medieval Popes, particularly in the 15th and 16th Centuries, were politicians first, and theologians second.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Raven 
Posted: 25-Feb-2004, 03:54 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,994
Joined: 23-Oct-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: Indianapolis, IN

male





QUOTE (andylucy @ Feb 8 2004, 06:15 AM)


By the way, at the time of the Crusades, there were no non-Catholic Christians. There were only heretics and apostates to fill that category. It was the apostate Christians, who professed belief in Islam to avoid martyrdom at the hands of the invading Moslems, who were counted among the enemies.


I believe that the record in Fox's Book of Martyrs contradicts this idea. There was no "official protestant" church ala Luther at this time, but history shows that there have always been those who have not gone along with the Roman Catholic church since it's inception. (I realize that this date is a point of contention but I would contend that the Roman Catholic church came into being with Constantine)



--------------------
He is no fool who gives up that which he can not keep to gain that which he cannot loose

www.arminta.net
PMEmail PosterUsers Website               View My Space Profile.
Top
Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas 
Posted: 25-Feb-2004, 04:21 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 911
Joined: 18-Nov-2003
ZodiacOak


male





QUOTE (Raven @ Feb 25 2004, 03:54 PM)
[H]istory shows that there have always been those who have not gone along with the Roman Catholic church

For proof of this, you need look no further than the text of various Roman Catholic Councils. See, for example, text of Fourth Lateran Council : 1215, in which it is stated:
QUOTE
Renewing the ancient privileges of the patriarchal sees, we decree, with the approval of this sacred universal synod, that after the Roman church, which through the Lord's disposition has a primacy of ordinary power over all other churches inasmuch as it is the mother and mistress of all Christ's faithful, the church of Constantinople shall have the first place, the church of Alexandria the second place, the church of Antioch the third place, and the church of Jerusalem the fourth place, each maintaining its own rank. Thus after their pontiffs have received from the Roman pontiff the pallium, which is the sign of the fullness of the pontifical office, and have taken an oath of fidelity and obedience to him they may lawfully confer the pallium on their own suffragans, receiving from them for themselves canonical profession and for the Roman church the promise of obedience.

This would seem to indicate that at the time of the Crusades, as throughout most of its history, the Roman Catholic Church was asserting primacy over all Christian churches, which means there must have been competing churches the Roman church felt compelled to assert primacy over.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
andylucy 
Posted: 26-Feb-2004, 01:36 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



High Chief Of The Dartboard
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 466
Joined: 06-Jul-2003
ZodiacOak

Realm: Western Kentucky

male





QUOTE (Mailagnas maqqas Dunaidonas @ Feb 25 2004, 03:21 PM)
This would seem to indicate that at the time of the Crusades, as throughout most of its history, the Roman Catholic Church was asserting primacy over all Christian churches, which means there must have been competing churches the Roman church felt compelled to assert primacy over.

Actually, this was referring to the different Rites of the Catholic Church. The Roman Rite, the Chaldean Rite, the Greek Rite, etc. It was not referring to different faith types, as they all exhibited the same sacramental and eucharistic theology. The 4th Lateran simply stated the order of primacy of the Rites of the Catholic Church, the Roman Rite maintaining primacy, with the Roman Pontiff conferring the ability to ordain bishops to the Patriarchs of the existing Rites.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 








Celtic RadioTM broadcasts through Live365.com and StreamLicensing.com which are officially licensed under SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SOCAN.
©2014 Celtic Radio Network, Highlander Radio, Celtic Moon, Celtic Dance, Ye O' Celtic Pub and Celt-Rock-Radio.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.
Celtic Graphics ©2014, Cari Buziak


Link to CelticRadio.net!
Link to CelticRadio.net
View Broadcast Status and Statistics!

Best Viewed With IE 8.0 (1680 x 1050 Resolution), Javascript & Cookies Enabled.


[Home] [Top]

Celtic Hearts Gallery | Celtic Mates Dating | My Celtic Friends | Celtic Music Radio | Family Heraldry | Medival Kingdom | Top Celtic Sites | Web Celt Blog | Video Celt