Another example is the private debate last September amongst the Pope's inner circle of former students about the relations with Islam, which was reported by the Vatican beat reporter for L'espresso, Sandro Magister. As Magister reminds us in a piece published back in December, Holy War: The Year the Muslims Took Rome, the Vatican is no stranger to the assaults of the Islamic hordes. In 846, Rome and the Vatican were sacked by the Muslims in a hit-and-run raid. Here's how Magister describes it:
"What happened is that in 846 some Muslim Arabs arrived in a fleet at the mouth of the Tiber, made their way to Rome, sacked the city, and carried away from the basilica of St. Peter all of the gold and silver it contained. And this was not just an incidental attack. In 827 the Arabs had conquered Sicily, which they kept under their dominion for two and a half centuries. Rome was under serious threat from nearby. In 847, the year after the assault, the newly elected pope Leo IV began the construction of walls around the entire perimeter of the Vatican, 12 meters high and equipped with 44 towers. He completed the project in six years. These are the “Leonine” walls, and significant traces of them still remain. But very few today know that these walls were erected to defend the see of Peter from an Islamic jihad. And many of those who do know this remain silent out of discretion. “Bridges, not walls” is the fashionable slogan today."
Magister has also reported recently that the Papal Secretariat of State has lodged diplomatic complaints against Iran's treatment of Christians, and that La Civilita Cattolica, a publication of the Jesuit order, has also chronicled the abuse of Christians in Muslim countries (link includes translated excerpts from the article). This is especially important as the world hears in recent days of the pending execution of an Afghani man for converting to Christianity.
A revisiting of the Crusades is not only helpful to understand past events, but imperative to comprehend present ones. The war against the West by Islam is just another stage in a conflict that has been raging since the Seventh Century. The West has been made to feel shame regarding the Crusades, but this sense of shame wasn't developed by Islamic propaganda, but by the Western critics of Western Civilization/Christendom.
In fact, the Crusades were an effort to take the battle to the Islamic world and reverse the gains of the Muslim world at the expense of Christianity that had accumulated for several hundred years. The Christian occupants of those lands were given two options: forceable conversion or the sword. While many in the West forget about the Muslim invasions of Europe in the Middle Ages that were turned back only with the Christian victory by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours/Poitiers (732) and the battles of "El Cid Campeador" immortalized by the Lay of the Cid, they have even more forgetfulness of the Reconquista of Spain from the Moors by Isabella of Castile (1492), the Siege of Vienna by Sulieman (1529), the great naval Battle of Lepanto (1571; see G.K. Chesterton's poem about the battle, Lepanto) and the Battle of Vienna (1683) between Mehmed IV and Jan Sobieski in the Modern Era. These battles and Christian victories ought to be fresh in the minds and familiar on the lips of every Christian child and adult in the West.
If you're interested in an alternative version of the Crusades to the hand-wringing "Kingdom of Heaven" version made popular over the past century, check out this short but informative article by Crusade scholar Thomas Madden from the April 2002 edition of Crisis Magazine, "The Real History of the Crusades."
And bully for the Papists who are showing signs of cultural courage by challenging the revisionist history of the brave defense of Christendom in the Crusades. If only Protestants and Evangelicals were equally willing to show such courage. Do yourself a favor tonight. Go to Blockbuster and rent the epic film, El Cid.
No comments:
Post a Comment