The second basic element consisted of papal approval of the expedition. Those who took the cross were granted special privileges as well. One of the major concerns for warriors was the protection of their family and property while they were away. Since the Crusading movement developed in a feudal society, warriors were afraid that while overseas fighting for Christ their neighbor might invade and take their land. In order to allay that fear, the Church promised protection of a Crusader’s property through the threat of excommunication for violators. Crusaders received secular as well as spiritual privileges. They could demand and receive hospitality from the Church on their journey. They were exempt from taxes and tolls, and held immunity from arrest. But the main motivator for participation was the granting of an indulgence—the remission of the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven in the sacrament of penance.
Crusading was an integral part of the lived expression of the Faith for multiple centuries and cannot be considered an aberration in Church history.50 It was the teaching of the Church for nearly 700 years that men had a moral obligation to take the cross in order to liberate and defend Christian territory. Popes from Bl. Urban II to Bl. Innocent XI exhorted the faithful to participate in these armed expeditions, providing spiritual benefits to encourage participation.
Indeed, participation in Crusades was not limited to laymen, for even bishops, abbots, papal legates, and even popes (Pius II) took the cross. St. Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Hildegard of Bingen, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Siena and other saints supported the Crusades and encouraged warriors to take the cross.
The Crusades were even a topic at six of the twenty-one ecumenical councils. These six councils either called for Crusades or spent considerable time planning expeditions. In fact, the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Second Council of Lyons (1274) crafted two of the Crusades’ main documents.51
The Rise and Expansion of Islam
While it is vital to recognize the Crusades as integral events in the life of the Church, it is at least equally important to understand why they were undertaken. The seventh-century rise of the militaristic and imperialistic movement known as Islam, and its subsequent conquest of ancient Christian territory, was the prime cause for the creation of the Crusading movement and the reason for its longevity.
Islam’s entrance onto the world stage is steeped in mystery. The standard historical narrative presents the story of a solitary Arab receiving alleged divine inspiration and revelations, which spontaneously produced a radically new civilization in the seventh century. Recent scholarship challenges this narrative and posits that Islam instead grew by reshaping elements of existing surrounding civilizations into a new community: “The puzzle of Islam’s origins might be viewed … as a black hole sucking in a great spiraling swirl of influences before casting them back out in a radically different form.”52 Over the last generation, much of what has traditionally been known about the origins of Islam and its founder Mohammed has come into question; modern studies have even led some historians to question the very existence of Mohammed.53 The first recorded public reference to Mohammed occurred sixty years after his death and the first biographies were not written until 150 years later.54
The traditional Muslim narrative of Mohammed describes a man born in the city of Mecca in the Arabian Peninsula in the late sixth century. He was the member of an important and wealthy tribe that generated its wealth from lucrative trade with pilgrims coming to Mecca to worship the pantheon of Arabian gods in the Kaaba shrine. At this time the Arabian Peninsula contained various nomadic tribes that were “the most superstitious and ignorant in the world.”55 They were also vicious and ruthless warriors who found employment in the Roman Empire as auxiliary troops, augmenting the Roman legions when the need arose.56 In A.D. 610, while in a cave near Mecca, Mohammed allegedly experienced “history’s most epochal mid-life crisis.”57 Later Muslim tradition (the story is not recounted in the Qur’an), related that Mohammed was awoken from a deep sleep by the voice of a heavenly messenger, later identified as the Archangel Gabriel, which informed him of his calling as the messenger of God.
Mohammed’s initial reaction to this voice was terror, and belief that he was possessed of an evil spirit. Distraught, he contemplated suicide: “I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest.”58 The messenger consoled Mohammed and ordered him to recite the words of God. Mohammed continued to receive private revelations for the following three years. Finally, in 613, Mohammed was ordered to make his revelations public.
Mohammed revealed the contents of his private revelations in Mecca, but initially met indifference. However, the frequency and urgency of his teachings eventually drew heightened responses. His teachings were radical and revolutionary. He claimed there was only one God and it did not have an idol in the Kaaba. Mohammed demanded also total submission (islam) to the will of God. His most revolutionary teaching, and the one that most influenced future events, was the call to abandon tribal relationships. This was “the most stomach-churning prospect imaginable for any Arab.”59 Those who submitted to the will of God joined a unique community (umma) where all were considered equal. The formation of this community created a sharp distinction between Muslims and non-believers. Those in the community lived in the House of Islam; those without lived in the House of War. This relationship presupposed a permanent state of war between the two houses. The unity of the umma, in theory, prevented infighting and led to outward expansion from the beginnings of Islam.
After fleeing Mecca for fear of his life in 622, Mohammed and his initial followers settled in Medina, which later became known as the “City of the Prophet.” Medina was the site of Mohammed’s militant revelations and the base of combat operations. According to a later biographer, Mohammed personally led nine combat raids from Medina wielding his favorite sword known as “the Cleaver of Vertebrae.”60 Another biographer quotes Mohammed as saying, “[T]he gates of Paradise lie in the shadow of the sword.”61
Mohammed laid the foundation for the Crusades when, at the end of his life, he instructed his followers to “fight all men until they say there is no God but Allah.”62 This statement was later written into the Qur’an as “fight those who believe not in God.”63 During his life, Mohammed embodied these words in his campaigns against his fellow Arabs as well as against Jews. Mohammed’s militaristic teachings and actions set the example for his followers who sought to emulate the jihad undertaken by the prophet. Jihad and imperial expansion of the umma promised not only material but also spiritual riches for the Muslim, as heaven awaited him if he died on jihad and hell awaited those who fought against him.64
Mohammed’s teachings on the umma and jihad oriented Islam toward imperialistic expansion. The conflict between the House of Islam and the House of War began during Mohammed’s lifetime when Islamic forces raided Palestine and Syria. Within a decade of his death in 632, Muslim armies conquered the Christian areas of Syria (635), Jerusalem (638), and Egypt (642). In 674, Muslim forces even laid siege to the capital city of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople, but were repulsed. Islam also expanded westward through North Africa, sweeping away all resistance so that by 700 the last Christian stronghold fell. Former pagan nomads from the Arabian Peninsula now ruled the ancient Roman provinces, which had once converted to the Catholic Faith by the blood of the martyrs.
Mohammed’s focus on building a community united in political and military purpose through religion was tested mightily after his death, as competing families engaged in a game of thrones. The pursuit of power produced conquered territories which, although originally provinces of a united Muslim empire, soon became independent territories in competition with one another. In the century before the Crusades, the Muslim world was united by language and religion but broken into regional centers of power: the Abbasid (Sunni) caliphate in Baghdad, the Fatimid (Shi’ite) caliphate in Egypt, and the Umayyad caliphate of Cordoba in Spain.
The early e
leventh century witnessed a destructive event that shook Europe to its core. Egypt was controlled by the demented caliph al-Hakim who, in 1009, ordered the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, known at the time in the Islamic world as the “church of the dung heap.”65 Al-Hakim’s reign was marked by bizarre regulations against his Muslim subjects and persecution against the dhimmi (non-Muslims). He mandated Muslim women wear a veil in public but then ordered them to not leave their homes.66 He required all Christians and Jews to wear a black turban and either a cross or a block of wood in public.67 Edicts passed in 1011 and 1012 prohibited the use of wine even in the celebration of the Eucharist, required the removal of all exterior crosses and destruction of all missals.68 The persecution came to an end when al-Hakim was murdered in 1021. Al-Hakim’s destruction of one of the most important churches in Christendom and his persecution of indigenous Christians were horrific events that left a lasting imprint on the people of Europe.
The danger grew for native Holy Land Christians and the Byzantine Empire in the middle of the eleventh century with the arrival of a new group of people onto the world stage: the Seljuk Turks. The Seljuks were nomadic people from the Asian steppes who converted to Sunni Islam and consolidated their power in the Abbasid caliphate based in Baghdad. The Seljuks mistreated indigenous Christians by destroying churches, killing priests, and harassing European pilgrims to the Holy Land. One example of Seljuk brutality is found in the story of Günther, bishop of Bamberg, who led a group of 12,000 pilgrims to the Holy Land in 1065. The group managed to survive great trials in Hungary, mistreatment by the Byzantines, and the general discomfort and hardship involved in such a journey, but they were not to survive their encounter with the Seljuks, who massacred the entire group on Good Friday; only two days march from Jerusalem.69
The Seljuks were not content to control Armenia, Syria, and Palestine, and soon set their sights on Anatolia (modern-day Turkey), a very important province of the Byzantine Empire. Unfortunately, the arrival of the Seljuks occurred at the worst possible time for the Byzantines, who were ruled in the later eleventh century by a series of incompetent emperors who allowed the army to decline. This decline in readiness was manifested in the result of the Battle of Manzikert on August 19, 1071. The news of the Seljuk invasion of Anatolia reached Emperor Romanus IV Diogenes (r. 1068–1071), who gathered a force of 60,000, including Western mercenaries, to fight the Turks. The fighting was intense but the numerically superior Seljuks were victorious when they succeeded in wounding and capturing Emperor Romanus.
Manzikert was a disaster for the Byzantines. The imperial army was in shambles, the emperor had been captured, and the province that provided the bulk of military recruitment and economic prosperity was in enemy hands. The Seljuks would consolidate their power in Anatolia, establishing it as the Sultanate of Rum with its capital in the ancient Christian city of Nicaea—site of the first ecumenical council in 325 and within striking distance of Constantinople. By all accounts, the disaster of Manzikert was the “shock that launched the Crusades.”70
The Byzantine Empire began to recover under the vital leadership of Emperor Alexius I Comnenus (r. 1081–1118). Alexius knew the threat posed to Byzantium by the Seljuk Turks was so dire that it required extreme measures and more manpower than he could raise or afford, so he decided to seek help from the West. He sent ambassadors to the pope, the one person with the universal authority required to organize and recruit a rescue effort of such immensity.
The Call to Arms
Many men give speeches; some are memorable, others are forgotten; few speeches are world changing. The speech given by Bl. Urban II at the council of Clermont in November 1095 changed the world.
Urban was born into a northern French noble family and, although he entered the service of the Church, he understood the martial class and how to motivate it.71 He used this knowledge to great effect at Clermont. The main event of the council occurred on November 27 when Urban spoke to a large assembly in the open air.
Urban’s speech, which inaugurated the Crusading movement, focused on three main themes: the liberation of the Holy City of Jerusalem, the violent activities of the Turks, and an exhortation to Western warriors to take up arms.72 The central element in his speech was the cross, and it is clear that Urban intended the journey to the east to be penitential.
The liberation of Jerusalem was paramount for Urban and he knew this focus would resonate with the assembled French nobility and knights. There was much devotion to the Holy City in France, which spread due to the influence of the great monastery of Cluny, and pilgrimages were very popular even among the nobles, many of whom had taken to naming their daughters “Jerusalem.”73 The Holy City was considered the center of the world, and its occupation by the Muslims was distasteful to the citizens of Christendom. Urban’s call was focused on rousing warriors from their slumber and their selfish interests, to valiantly march to the East to restore ancient Christian lands, most importantly Jerusalem, to Christ and the Church:
This royal city, therefore, situated at the center of the world, is now held captive by his enemies, and is in subjection to those who do not know God… She seeks therefore and desires to be liberated, and does not cease to implore you to come to her aid.74
Urban’s preaching also focused on the plight of Christians in the Holy Land, who were subject to cruel tortures and punishments at the hands of the Turks. His graphic description of Turkish atrocities was designed to elicit a visceral response from his hearers in order that they might take up their arms to liberate their Christian brothers and sisters.
Since participation in the Crusades was voluntary, it was necessary for Urban to find ways to motivate the assembled warriors at Clermont to travel thousands of miles from home and risk certain death. Urban knew that few knights would undertake the arduous journey simply to help the Byzantine Christians, since they were schismatics who rejected the universal jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff. So, Urban appealed to the military adventures of the great warriors in French history in order to exhort his listeners to join the Crusade:
Let the deeds of your ancestors move you and incite your minds to manly achievements; Oh, most valiant soldiers and descendants of invincible ancestors, be not degenerate, but recall the valor of your progenitors.75
Finally, Urban offered the spiritual incentive of a plenary indulgence, which was unique and provided the main motivator for those who undertook the journey. Through the power and authority of the Petrine Office, Urban decreed: “Whoever goes on the journey to free the church of God in Jerusalem out of devotion alone, and not for the gaining of glory or money, can substitute the journey for all penance for sin.”76 Urban repeated this spiritual incentive in his letter to the clergy and people of Bologna where many were considering taking the cross. Urban exhorted them to do so: “[I]f any among you travel, not for the desire of the goods of this world, but only those who go for the good of their souls and the liberty of the churches, they will be relieved of the penance for all of their sins, for which they have made a full and perfect confession.”77
Urban announced the departure for what came to be known later as the First Crusade for the Feast of the Assumption of Mary: August 15, 1096. He appointed Bishop Adhemar de Monteil as leader of the expedition and the official papal representative.
The Church and War
Pope Bl. Urban II asked soldiers to volunteer to utilize their martial skills, and this call to arms is one thing many modern-day Catholics and secularists find distasteful about the Crusades. Critics believe the Crusades highlight the hypocrisy of Christians, who, on the one hand, profess to follow Jesus who willingly accepted his passion and death, and on the other participated in and supported an armed expedition to violently recover the Holy Land.
Ignoring the historical context of the Crusades or applying modern-day sensibilities and political conditions to events in the past produces a gross misunderstanding of the Crusades and those who participated in them. The answer to this objec
tion, then, lies in understanding the Church’s teaching on warfare and its application in various historical periods.
The Church’s teaching on violence is a combination of the understanding and purpose of warfare from two traditions: the Jewish and the Greco-Roman, with both influenced by the teachings of Christ.78 The Old Testament is replete with examples of legitimate warfare undertaken by the Jewish people and sanctioned by God. The Lord rescued the people of Israel by drowning Pharaoh’s crack troops as they chased the Israelites through the parted Red Sea. Witnessing the destruction of their enemy, the Israelites shouted in joy, “The Lord is a warrior; the Lord is his name.”79 Additionally, the Israelites were commanded by God to fight the tribes inhabiting the Promised Land in order to remain pure in their worship to God and not succumb to pagan practices. Once in the Promised Land, warfare did not cease as the Israelites throughout their history were ordered by God to fight their enemies.80
The justification for warfare in the New Testament is more nuanced than in the Old Testament, for the teachings of Christ demand more deliberation concerning the use of violence. On one hand Jesus seems to discourage the use of violence, as when he rebuked Simon Peter for cutting off the ear of Malchus in the Garden of Gethsemane; 81 on the other hand, Jesus acknowledged division in the world and the possibility of violence when he said, “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34). Elsewhere in the New Testament the military profession is shown in a positive light. Centurions (Roman officers) are presented as examples of great faith in several episodes, including at the Cross.82 The conversion of the centurion Cornelius is a defining moment in the Acts of the Apostles and justifies the missionary outreach efforts to the Gentiles.83 John the Baptist also influenced Christian understanding of the warrior when he instructed soldiers to “rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your wages” (Luke 3:14). Since his admonition did not repudiate the military profession, the Church acknowledged the legitimacy of soldiering.
The Glory of the Crusades Page 3
