In years to come, will
the secular world speak of sending military aid to Iraq as a repeat of the Crusades?
And if they do not, why not? If Muslims are ousting Christians from their ancient
Christian homeland at the point of the sword and we Western nations take
military action to end this, are we doing anything less than was done during
the Crusades?
The Crusades are often
misrepresented as an aggressive act of Western Christendom (specifically, Catholic Christendom) when in fact they
were about defending Christians and regaining holy Christian sites taken by
Muslims. Is there not a parallel in the
current situation in Iraq? I stand to be corrected but I think the comparison
can be made. It is surprising that those who so willingly vilify the
Catholic Church for the Crusades are not vilifying Western nations for doing the
same in Iraq today. A more honest appreciation of the Crusades as acts of defence (before they went astray...) is necessary.
Personally, I suspect
military intervention by the West will remain very limited not only because of our
respect for national sovereignty, but our need for oil and, perhaps, because Western
leaders living in fear of antagonising Muslim extremists in their respective Western
countries and causing more events like 9/11 and 7/7.
Meanwhile, I contend that those who
call the Crusades a blight on Christianity have an opportunity to develop a perspective that views them as a defence –either that, or they must affirm their position on the Crusades as acts of aggression and call for the absence of military intervention by the West in Iraq.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please comment using a pseudonym, not as 'anonymous'.
If you challenge the Magisterium, please do so respectfully.
We reserve the right to delete from comments any inflammatory remarks.
If we do not reply to your comment it is through lack of time rather than interest.