Perhaps this is more well suited to the History board. If so, staff, please move it. And I'll admit I only lurk on this board because I couldn't hang with you guys on Theological discussions.

I'm curious about what has made the Catholic leadership, in this day and age, abandon the war on Islam? I mean, as we all know, there were numerous religious crusades called against Islamic armies and occupations by various Popes, numerous times. And to this day, Islam calls their own crusades against the West all the time.

So, what changed? What made Catholics go soft on their existential threat to the East? Why does the current Pope preach things that seem to actually promote the radical Islamist agenda? Where's the backbone anymore?

I recognize this is a very deep and probably EXTREMELY complex question in terms of giving an answer so I'd appreciate any sort of scholarly pieces or books on this as well.

BenFiasco14 said:

---

And to this day, Islam calls their own crusades against the West all the time.

So, what changed? What made Catholics go soft on their existential threat to the East? Why does the current Pope preach things that seem to actually promote the radical Islamist agenda? Where's the backbone anymore?

I recognize this is a very deep and probably EXTREMELY complex question in terms of giving an answer so I'd appreciate any sort of scholarly pieces or books on this as well.

---

Hello, friend. I'd like to clarify a few things. "Islam" does not call crusades because "Islam" isn't really one thing. There are almost 2 billion Muslims making up about a quarter of the world, the overwhelming majority of which do not officially recognize any form of living religious authority. The few living authorities recognized by less than 10% of Muslims worldwide certainly have not been calling any crusades.

Even the original crusades were called by a central Christian authority to recover land conquered by Seljuk Turks. They weren't "Islam" either - they were a group of Turkic dudes who went around empire building, you know, the way Turks do. Their leader's grandfather or something had become Muslim about a hundred years before. They were a minority of Muslims then, too.

Who today is calling for crusades? Al-Baghdadi? That guy has a tiny bit of power over an extremely small group of Muslims, most of whom apparently are just looking for someone who can keep the lights on. He only has any power at all because of the vacuum left behind by the complete destruction of Iraqi and Syrian societies by invading aggressive armies. Did "Christianity" destroy some of the oldest societies in the world? No, it was an effort largely led by GWB & co., who by the way, called it a "crusade" against terrorism. Funny how Osama bin laden responded to that by basically saying, "he took the words right out of my mouth."

It's only fringe radicals like Baghdadi, OBL, GWB and I guess people like you that want a "crusade," and there aren't as many radicals as you might think. The current pope is a uniter and good for him. I think posts like yours do more to make the world a more dangerous place to be honest.

The Turks were from Central Asia and took over the Byzantine Empire and much of Eastern Europe.
The Almohads took over North Africa and Spain.
Various other aggressions were performed over the years by various groups using Islam as an excuse, as can also be said of Christians.
It seems to me that one reason the Pope became a powerful figure was because he served as a central planner for the defense of Europe...once the Islamic attacks were beaten back, the Reformation started and that got completely out of hand (from the Roman Catholic viewpoint) producing massive schisms and social change. Society is much different now than from the days of the Crusades, but both the Catholics and Islamicists still believe their vision is correct and will eventually take over the world, while most educated people no longer believe...

Rongagin71 said:

---

Society is much different now than from the days of the Crusades, but both the Catholics and Islamicists still believe their vision is correct and will eventually take over the world, while most educated people no longer believe...

---

Some would call this hubris and arrogance.

The Pope's political arm is limited to Vatican City State. He really only has the power to defend that. Italy, France, Germany, UK all have their own standing armies who are headed by a secular government to defend their own states. The Pope knows there will be no invasion by Muslims of Vatican City without going through NATO. There really is no threat.

Aggiefan#1 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

Society is much different now than from the days of the Crusades, but both the Catholics and Islamicists still believe their vision is correct and will eventually take over the world, while most educated people no longer believe...

---

Some would call this hubris and arrogance.

---

I cannot argue with you since for a fact I do enjoy a bit of hubrically didactivism on occasion.
But I try to avoid the stench of errofragrance.

I went to school a long time and still believe. As do most of my doctor friends.

Weird.

And edited to add you might check out Psalm 14:1.

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

The Pope's political arm is limited to Vatican City State. He really only has the power to defend that. Italy, France, Germany, UK all have their own standing armies who are headed by a secular government to defend their own states. The Pope knows there will be no invasion by Muslims of Vatican City without going through NATO. There really is no threat.

---

not to mention, which Muslims exactly are looking to invade the Vatican? A handful of the aftermath of a conquered, destroyed state? Sure, there's a solid defense ready, but there is no threat in the first place.

Rongagin71 said:

---

The Turks were from Central Asia and took over the Byzantine Empire and much of Eastern Europe.
The Almohads took over North Africa and Spain.
Various other aggressions were performed over the years by various groups using Islam as an excuse, as can also be said of Christians.
It seems to me that one reason the Pope became a powerful figure was because he served as a central planner for the defense of Europe...once the Islamic attacks were beaten back, the Reformation started and that got completely out of hand (from the Roman Catholic viewpoint) producing massive schisms and social change. Society is much different now than from the days of the Crusades, but both the Catholics and Islamicists still believe their vision is correct and will eventually take over the world, while most educated people no longer believe...

---

The Pope wasn't a central planner for the defense of Europe. Half the time the Popes were playing the lords of the Holy Roman Empire against the Emperor in a bid to secure his ecclesiastical authority over Europe.

We are a territorial species.