Christian Jihad acts as a splash of cold water in the face of a historically illiterate society. The book recalls to life over a thousand year period which has almost been forgotten in the pages of time. The word crusade is recognized as a familiar term but its horrors and caprice have been diluted along with the general facts and truth of what took place. In Christian Jihad, Ergun and Emir Caner gave a detailed account of the atrocities in which both the Christian and Muslim worlds took part; all having believed themselves to have been fighting a holy war. The evaluation of these occurrences testifies to the evil mankind is capable of when he strays from the Word and rests instead on his own understanding.
The first issue the Caner brothers addressed is the pacifistic stand taken by the Early Church. The Churches were against participating in violence for the reason that they themselves for many years had been the recipients of such pain and bloodshed.
With the shifting of times, there also came a shifting of motive. Beginning with the first persecution under Nero in the year 67 AD, most Christians vehemently opposed conflict; though this stance was taken by the majority, there persisted a small vein of believers who were not against Christian involvement in the military. As time progressed into the third and fourth centuries, changes took place in which some Christians were allowed to serve under strict conditions. It is stated by the authors that [1]“the ascension of Constantine in 324 marks the point of transition in the teaching of the church regarding warfare.” The book addresses the tumult of conflicts and decisions the Christians were facing which accompanied this new found freedom. After enduring centuries of persecution, hatred and scorn, the Church was now able to participate in every realm of society. Once Constantine established Christianity as the official Roman religion, the next six hundred years [2]“served as a bridge in between the Church persecuted (30-324) and the Church powerful and political (1095-1300).” Christian Jihad covers this tragic history.
In response to the circumstances of the Christian Church, Augustine of Hippo attempted to formulate a just war criteria. Thereby he gave believers a guide by which to measure and justify their involvement in military. The Caners wrote that [3]“If Pope Urban had not abandoned the Just War thesis, perhaps the Crusades would not be as dark a spot on the map of Christian history.” Unfortunately, the Caners go on to paint a different picture as this dark history is revealed.
The first major war between the Christian forces and Islam was the battle of Tours in 732. Charlemagne came on the scene in 768 and was responsible for the marriage of Church and State. The consequences of such an arrangement were quickly unveiled as soon as the views of Emperor and Pope clashed. One would have to bow to the other. In 1084, Guibert of Ravenna was named Pope and consequently subjugated himself to the king.
The Church and State took on opposite roles in 1088, when Pope Urban II came to the throne. From the beginning of his reign, his independence of providence made crooked the dark paths he chose to follow. The Caner brothers explained [4]“Urban’s method of rescuing the church at Rome was simple. He proclaimed a larger cause that would stir the hearts of all – the recapture of the Holy Land of Jerusalem.” This motive started a fire in the hearts of the Christian military which soon spread into a conflagration of twisted theology and self-serving revenge.
In Christian Jihad, the Caners evaluated the tragic battles which ensued after the spring of vengeance erupted into a blood bath of martyrs both Christian and Islamic. After a detailed account of the crusades, Ergun and Emer Caner wrote of the long-lasting effects that the period had on later generations and how today society is still tainted by its influence.
Christian Jihad acts as a beacon warning this present generation of the eminent consequences which prevail when a society kills God. The Caners offer an imperishable gift by allowing people the opportunity to relive history before it is lost forever. Humans have long been slipping into amnesia which threatens man to repeat his past mistakes. The historical account of the Crusades is much closer to America than people would believe. It all began with a shift in purpose. The Post-Modern worldview has long taken its eyes off of Jesus. All that has followed is an echo of historical patterns. For when a nation forgets God, it is doomed to suffer unfathomable consequences in His absence.
IN HIS ABSENCE: A Book Report On Christian Jihad
Reference
a great site to go to for any biblical references is http://www.studylight.org/ this site is a great resource.
Onward Christian Soldiers?
Christian Jihad was a book on the Christian perspective on the relationship between the Church, State and Warfare. The authors, Ergun Caner and Emir Caner, are two former Muslims who converted to Christianity. They provide an eclectic perspective of Islam, Christianity and their relationship now and during the Crusades. The Caner brothers dealt with the age old question, “Is it right for a Christian to kill another person during battle?” This has been asked by countless Christians especially recently with America currently participating in a war. In addition to this they show the relationship that existed between the Church and State throughout history. Beginning with the reign of Emperor Constantine, the Church has been in constant struggle over what its relationship should be with the government. This book was very insightful and helpful in answering some of the more difficult questions of the Christian faith.
The Caner brothers began their address of Christianity and Warfare by defining a word that has been mostly linked with terrorism in this present day, Jihad or Holy War. They discuss the similarities between the ideas of Pope Urban II and Usamah Bin Ladin on the subject of declaring “Holy War” on a different religious group in the name of god. Both Bin Laden and Pope Urban promised salvation as the reward of those “Holy Warriors” who died or killed for a “Holy Cause”. The “Warrior” would be obligated to kill others and die for the glorious “Cause”. Holy Martyrdom was best achieved if one took as many people with him as possible. Pope Urban declared this Jihad against the Muslims in direct contradiction to the direct teachings of Jesus. The Caner Brother’s point in this comparison was to show that there really was no difference in the declaration of Jihad by the Christians of the first and second century to that of the Muslims on Jews, Christians and everyone else who was not Muslim. The conclusion was- any war that was and is fought in the name of or political gain of a deity or person is not grounds for a just war and clearly Christians should not participate in such a campaign.
Apparent Pacifism in scripture was one of the reasons that the Caners used for Christians not participating in warfare. They showed that Christ was adamant in His followers “Turning the other cheek” when wronged. Even the Church Fathers such as Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Origen and Tertullian especially believed that it was problematic for a Christian to serve in the military because violence rebels against the principles of the Christian life. Tertullian went even further and asks if a Christian could in good conscience swear oaths to a master other than Christ, imprison anyone, guard pagan temples, fly the banner of a regime that persecutes Christians or even be buried in an unchristian manner? Tertullian deemed such acts as possible expressions of denial of Christ’s power and control over His Creation. The Church Fathers were adamant in their beliefs about not shedding blood and being empathetic towards the hunted or persecuted. Up until the reign of Emperor Constantine, the Church was mercilessly persecuted by the government and the conversion of Constantine heralded in a new era of some freedom of religion. Sadly this new relationship between the Church and State would produce an unhealthy society in the future. The Caners showed the progression of this exceedingly unhealthy relationship in their book Christian Jihad.
From the time of Constantine to the Fall of Rome in 410 AD the Church was the official religion of the Roman Empire. The Bishop of Rome was constantly gaining power and precedence over the other Bishops in the Empire and after Rome fell, the people looked to the Bishop of Rome for political as well as spiritual guidance. This led into the elevation of the Roman Bishop or the Pope as the head of the Church. With the coronation of Charlemagne by Emperor Leo the III exhibited the fact that the Church was the one who “Wielded the Sword of power” in the Empire. Charlemagne made certain that his son would not be subjected to the same type of political slight and did not invite the Pope to his son’s coronation. During the dark ages and crusades the powers at be were always in constant struggle as to who would control the empire, the Church or State. This struggle would come to fruition during the Protestant Reformation.
The Caner brothers described the Protestant Reformation in a rather “shady light”. They portrayed the Anabaptists as the only group that was hunted down and persecuted during the time of the Reformation. While they may have been persecuted by the Roman Catholics and the Reformers unjustifiably, there were other groups who were persecuted as well. The Caner brothers only looked at one particular group and portrayed everyone else (Catholics and Reformers) as being the enemy when in reality they were all followers of Christ. If the Caner brother’s main thesis was granting religious freedom to all, then shouldn’t the same luxury be afforded the Catholics and the Reformers? Now granted, there was evil and all sorts of injustices that were committed during that time. The ends did not justify the means in any way. But does portraying an entirely biased opinion on the subject justify the end? The discussion heated when they began discussing the relationship between the Church and State.
The Caner brothers also looked at the relationship between the Church and the State at the time. However they only looked at it from the view of the Roman Catholics, the Reformers and the Anabaptists. The Catholics believed that the Church should be closely tied with the government and in some cases have power over the government. While the Reformers took two different approaches following Calvin and Luther mainly. Calvin believed that the believer was a citizen of the State and the Church, that the State gains it’s authority directly from God and that the Church is to renovate the world including the State while the State is to help the Church with evangelism. Luther basically held the same beliefs as Calvin except that the Church should not impose it’s precepts onto a lost world. The Anabaptists believed that there was a distinct separation between the Church and State and that neither one should impose on the other’s rights. They believed that believers belonged to the church while the non-believers belonged to the state. What the Caner brothers failed to bring into the discussion was the thoughts of Spurgeon who lived only a short while after these other men. Spurgeon takes a nice medium between the extremes. While scripture supports more of Spurgeon’s beliefs, the Caner Brothers did not make a very just case. Everyone brings their own pre-suppositions to any conflict, granted. But perhaps a more thorough look at all the parties involved would have provided better insight on the subject.
Overall, the Caners took a very interesting and perhaps untouched view of the Crusades in Christian Jihad. They proved that no one country, religious group or person is without some guilt for past or current grievances. They showed that the Crusades, Reformation and current times have not occurred with out people, even professing Christians, have behaved in a very “Un-Christ like” manner. The Caners left the reader challenged to right the wrongs of the past, and to prayerfully not repeat them.
Loyal New Testament Churches, Martyrdom, War, Constantine and Catholicism
Death is seen overall as the ultimate sacrifice of a human, when met in the name of something they believe and taken from them without protest. You surrender all tangibly known, and all too often suffer much to arrive at your demise. As a Believer, one’s eternity is secured. Because of the security, fear of death is scarce in the Christian community; yet outside of the host of saints lies a clear dismay of the reality of death. It is martyrdom at which outsiders are in awe, and believers encouraged. Within Christian Jihad the notions of death and more specifically martyrdom are addressed and expounded upon to highlight their role in the procession of Christianity and the modern day Catholic Church.
The power of the Christian religion is undeniable, as seen in chapter one. The body of believers swells and thrives amidst persecution. It was this characteristic of martyrdom that first intrigued Constantine, who proceeded to bring a marriage to church and state. Soon wars were waged against not only non-believers but against the Christians themselves, although Christianity had been declared the religion of Rome, it was not a true form of Christianity, but there were loyal New Testament Christians that remained. James Milton Carroll puts it best; “Loyal New Testament churches, by whatever name called, were hunted and hounded to the utmost limit of the new Catholic temporal power.” The reign of Constantine, removing Christ as head of the church and replacing Him with himself, gave birth to the modern day Catholic Church, amending old laws and enacting new ones. This was a clear split from the New Testament teachings of Christ, and a dark point in history only to overflow and grow to a darker Catholic religion.
In regards to the call of a Christian to war, death is the ultimate point of consideration. Is it truly just to kill pagans and send them on their way to Hell in order to defend your home front where Christ is known? We are provided with guidelines for just war in Appendix A, such as implementing peace and justice as the goal of war. So as the Bible states, there is a time for war and a time for peace, the time for war for a Christian is carefully outlined with many circumstantial guidelines.
The loyal New Testament churches and their perseverance to Biblical guidelines of the church spoke louder than any crusade or marriage of church and state. It’s commonly overlooked that there were those that remained constant to the Faith. It is their death that I found most notable, while others were giving their lives in war to be assured salvation they stood by Scripture.
Albert Barnes states;
“It has become a settled principle that nothing which is good and true can be destroyed by persecution, but that the effect ultimately is to establish more firmly, and to spread more widely, that which it was designed to overthrow. It has long since passed into a proverb that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.”
Something to make you mad over, or A Book Report
Christian Jihad- A Book Report
I feel less inclined to write about the history of violence in the community of Christians that chose to even address the issue, and more inclined to write about the impact that the current stance on the issue has on our modern body of believers.
Warning, if the one reading this is easily offended, its best to leave the room now.
First we must take a rule from our friend Socrates’ rulebook and define the terms we will be using, lest we loose the effectiveness of the arguments to come. When we talk about “Christians,” we will either be talking about one of three groups of people: 1) The global, time-spanning body of men, women and children who profess with their mouths and actions to believe that Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God, fully God, came to Earth, was born of a virgin, lived a sin-less life, preformed miracles, died on the cross as substitutionary atonement for the sins of the world so that man and God might be reconciled through belief in that sacrifice. 2) A local group of the same believers, confined to a certain culture and time. 3) A local group of people who profess with their mouth the same as the two mentioned above, but live a life contrary to that profession. Now we will define other terms as they come but for now we will leave that for that time.
The view of killing in the name of Christ has been around longer than most dirt, but in all seriousness, it has seldom been dealt with. Even today when the means of projecting ones ideas is at its greatest, it still lies untouched, for the most part. Dr. Emir Caner and his brother Dr. Ergun Caner addresses this issue, in their book Christian Jihad the Caner’s go through history recounting the various transformations of the Churches outlook on killing, the move from early pacifism to modern justification of killing. But the meat does not really come out until the very end of the book where they bring it all in to central core, page 212 bring the whole historical account to a close and opens the central nut of truth, “ The shedding of more blood isn’t required. Jesus Christ’s spilled blood is enough. His sacrifice was both justified and justifies.”
Now if this is true, we have a split in our churches, taking into account that the Christian worldview, as a general whole, advocates gun control, supporting the president in war (without questioning) and even goes to say that serving in the military is right and good. That’s all and fine, but I feel that if you can stand to put tradition and what is expected behind you then search the Bible for guidance on the issue, I feel you get a completely different view. Stephen was stoned for believing and preaching, but did anyone defend him? Did Peter, or John or James, his closest friends, come and with the same sword that sliced an ear off, kill those men then grab Stephens bloody body and drag his to safety? No, in fact Stephen felt sympathy for the people who were plunging rocks into his body. That is certainty not what grandpa Joe would do if his friend was being mistreated, he would say that it is his religious duty to protect him and if necessary kill to do so.
This false view of Christianity is void of Christ entirely, but is full of conservativism because that is what good Christian boys and girls believe. Christ preached blessed are the poor in spirit, but what does one feel when shooting a sawed off shotgun at a couple of targets? Pride. Pride in ones accomplishment of being a being of intelligence and power.
So now that I have thoroughly made mad everyone from the president to my father very angry I will close with saying what Dr. Emir and Ergun Caner said, Jesus’ blood was the only blood ever spilt that needed to be, and we are under it to be saved, not to push back those who are not.
To love those like Christ loved us is the point i want to drive home in this, nothing more, nothing less. Jesus did not come to wage war and kill those whom he opposed, but he came to give shelter to the weak and water to the thirsty(in irony, he opposed the religious leaders of the day). Please if you have more questions I am always open to discussion.
With his love
StevenBenjamin
Christian Jihad
A lot of times we Christians look at the violent Martyr deaths of Muslims. We forget, however, that people, who called themselves Christians, used to do likewise and maybe even worse. Ergun and Emir Caner are trying to convey the truth about a dark chapter in the history of the church. Their book “Christian Jihad” informs us about the crusades and other horrible slaughters made in the name of Christ.
The authors start with the pacifistic mindset of the Early Church Fathers and about the change that took place about this issue when Christianity became a religion under Constantine. He also arranged a marriage between the state and the church, which will turn out to be bad. The moment when Pope Urban, as the head of the church and therefore also head of the state, challenged Christians to conquer the Holy Land from the Muslims, is considered to be the low point for Christianity. The time of Invasions, murders and slaughters started and resulted in more than three crusades in the beginning of the second millennium. Later the church even justified the death of heretics. Opponents of the church were not tolerated at all. Instead the most happened consequence for holding different views than the Catholic Church would end in a death by burning at the stake. The authors also describe the relationship of the church to the Jews and notice that it also was not free of violence and maledictions. “Christian Jihad” wants to challenge us to have a critical view on our mostly not known history and warns of the consequences of the question on separation of church and state.
How could such horrible things like the killing of so many people in the name of Jesus Christ happen? This is an often asked question that I want to answer, based on the Research the authors have done.
The most important reason is the situation Christianity and Christian people were at that time. Before the first millennium ended people in Europe were pretty desperate. After a time of moderate conditions for Europeans, it was much easier to find something to look forward to. People were not satisfied with their situation at all; they did not really have purpose they would like to die for. This is the first condition to start something like the crusades. Pope Urban knew very well to take advantage of this situation. He mobilized almost all of Europe to recapture the Holy Land together. He promised them forgiveness of their sins and the assertion of eternal life. Of course, Pope Urban had in mind also the reaffirmation of the papacy, which had lost a little bit of reputation.
As a German, I would like to compare this initial situation of the crusades with the situation in Germany which led to the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler. The German people around the thirties were as well a very desperate people. Branded by the consequences of World War 1, the economic crisis, and a political mess people were looking for somebody to put the blame on. Hitler, who was a great orator and like Pope Urban, could unify and mobilize people. They both used their talent to abuse people for their own ideals and motivations. At this point it is important to state that I do not want to trivialize either of these occurrences. However, it could be important for us to see what exactly caused people to join such a cruelty.
It is our responsibility to learn from our past. As Christians we ought to live accordingly in every part of our life.
Christian Jihad book report
Christian Jihad
In their book, Christian Jihad, authors Ergun and Emir Caner wanted to show the mistakes of the Christians during the Crusades so that we will learn from them and not re-live the same mistakes. The book illustrates the steps that took place in order for the church to fall so far away from the truth. The authors give warnings to secure our liberty and freedoms. A few things the authors strongly insist are: to have enough independence to know when we are faced with lies, to fear extreme tolerance, and that torture is never in the will of God.
Common belief around 300 AD was that Christians should not be involved in warfare. It was believed that Christians were to offer themselves in death rather that taking the life of another. Christians suffered through many horrific persecutions, and they highly honored the martyrs of the faith. Constantine’s rise to power in 324 began the transition in the teaching of the church, regarding the evils of warfare, away from this previous belief. Believers were now allowed to be in the military but were given specific restrictions against duties that involved violence. Jobs such as guarding the emperor, care of public transportation and mails, secretarial duties, and others like these, were now seen in a positive light. Emperor Constantine looks back to the Old Testament and reminds the people of Rome the situations in which the Israelites killed for God’s purposes. He believed that war was for protecting the innocent; it was honorable, virtuous, and God-ordained. He also believed the innocent should be defended even to the point of slaughtering the enemy. During the time of Constantine, Christians began to give explicit approval of warfare as a restraint of evil. They even took it as far as to discharge all pagans, and allow only Christians to serve in the military. They took it upon themselves to judge the wicked instead of waiting for God.
In the year of 800, Charlemagne and Leo III entered into an unholy marriage between the church and the state. The Christians took many political positions and some became addicted to the taste of power. When the church was no longer useful to the state, it tossed her aside as an unwanted mistress. In 1088, Urban II was brought into power. There was turbulence in the church and many were concerned about the future. It is said that, “If he were unable to unite the people of the faith quickly, the Church would divide into warring factions bent on self-rule and domination.”[1] He was able to unite them with a common enemy. That enemy was the Muslims and Jews. He was determined to take Jerusalem from these pagans. He justified killing by saying that God was placing His judgment on this place, since it had suffered so long under the blasphemies of the pagans. He promised Christians that they would receive God’s salvation for their martyrdom. Most of the people who joined his army were illiterate. This disabled them from learning that the Crusades were, after all, not “God’s will.” They were completely dependent on the Church leaders to care for their souls. In Urban’s eyes, it was necessary to substitute a war against the pagans for wars between Christians. Christian brothers even began betraying one another. They were more interested in personal gain than unity by the time of the second Crusade, in 1147. Christians were undistinguishable from non-Christians for each were reaching new heights in brutality and deceit. They had come a long way from there criteria of a “Just War.” Christians now turned from shedding the blood of others to the killing of their own. Sufferings were believed to lead to repentance, so they began torturing people in order to save the sinners soul from eternal damnation. This was the time of the Inquisitions. Anyone could be accused of heresy and would most likely suffer tortures since the people could easily and innocently answer a question incorrectly.
As a result of the crusades “The Christians lost stature as the reasonable voice of peace in the midst of conflict. They also abandoned perspective, as a holy band working toward the kingdom of Jesus Christ.”[2] The Christians held to the concept of converting the world by the sword, instead of by the gospel. Though it seemed that they had gained the whole world, they had lost their souls. The Caner brothers state that “…forced orthodoxy cannot biblically or logically lead to genuine adoration.”[3] War is not the way to handle salvation. God alone is the righteous judge. Jesus warned against events such as the Crusades in Matthew 13:24-30, when he told His parable of the wheat and the tares. Christ died for all sinners. When the time is right, God Himself will sift through the crop and decipher between the wheat and the tares. The crusades teach us that we must keep watch on our state to ensure that our freedoms are not hindered upon. The authors warn us to make certain that liberty is not replaced with tolerance in our own government. They say that we should not fall into the lie of being tolerant. No religion is a religion just like any other. Slaughter such as this is never the answer. It is never the will of God. God is a just God, and He never calls us to such horrendous acts such as torture.
Book Report On The Christian Jihad
Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner and Dr. Emir Fethi Caner reveal the damage that has come as a result of the crusades and the consequences of killing in the name of Christ throught the book Christian Jihad. The first chapter describes the ten persecutions, giving stories of brave, commited individuals who considered their lives a small sacrifice for the cause of Christ. This chapter ends with many stories of these heroic Christians and the cruel injustices that were forced upon them, raising a sense of compassion and and upset in the reader. To think that anyone could treat such brave soldiers for Christ in these inhumane ways is quite angering. The Christian reader may also feel a sort of admiration and comradeship with the persecuted Christian, knowing that both serve the same God and have the same end in sight.
The second chapter begins on a different note, it starts with a report of the conquest Jerusalem from July 17, 1099. It is a description of what the Christian crusaders had done to the Muslims in Jerusalem. The attitudeof the author appears to be excited, some what joyful, and definitely without any sense of remorse. The Christian men had gone into the city and killed all the Muslims without any mercy and treated their corpses without the slightest hint of respect. It appears that the Christians have completely swapped sides, they had gone from being the persecuted to the persecutors.
The contrast between the first two chapters is very striking. the rest of the book is an in depth look at the progression of the contrast, and why Christians would persecute others in the name of Christ. Over time killing in the name of Christ has had many different reasons and results. Christians have killed Muslims, jews and each other, all in the name of Christ, with the idea that it is either what the Lord wills or that it will secure a place in heaven for the persecutor of the heathen or heretic.
Most of the chapters are divided into different time periods, and give examples of what brutal event the Christian community was participating in at the time. Many tactics have been used to get people to fight, one example is when the Pope told the Christains – many of which were illiterate – that if they would just participate in the crusade they would have the assurance of salvation. Another time thousands of children felt called to go and fight in the name of Christ, many turned back and went home, some were sold into slavery and many were killed, very few of them returned home.
It is also quite eye opening to see that men who are very highly esteemed for their sound doctrine and theology such as Luther and Calvin, were responsible for killing many Christians whom they considered to be heretics. Killing in Christ’s name really opposes His examples of love, healing and forgiveness. Chritians are commanded to “turn the other cheek” but they are not required to be pacifists.
The end of the book gives the guidelines for a “just war” and defends the legitmacy af the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is the belief of both Dr. Caners that there is a time and there are circumstances in which wars are acceptable. It is acceptable to fight to defend freedom but attempting to make followers of Christ by the sword is never an option.
Most Christians have no idea about the history of brutality in the Christian faith, this book is a nust read for them. the Caner brothers have done a phenomenal job of putting together an incredible book that sheds light on the history of persecution performed by the Christian Church.
Book Report on Christian Jihad
The introduction to the book reads like a popular novel. The descriptive tale was an extremely effective manner of introducing the subject that these authors undertook. To grab the attention of the reader by such an appalling concept established a solid point. What many of us would consider outright atrocities, the authors described as acts of worship and piety toward the one true God. Their point was that this type of thing has actually occurred and can still occur. To kill in the name of God is a dangerous thing.
The Caners begin to chronicle the Christian response to war from the beginning of Christianity. In the early stages, several of the church fathers were pacifists for all practical purposes. They taught that to be a Christian meant that one would not serve in the armies of pagan kings because to do so would often mean the Christian soldiers would have to accomplish ungodly tasks. Tasks the early church fathers believed a Christian simply could not do such as taking up arms against other Christians, fighting on the Sabbath, swearing an oath to another master, or guarding pagan temples to name a few (Caner). As chapter one implies in its title, they also believed that the only blood a Christian should be responsible for shedding was his own blood (not in suicide, but in martyrdom).
In chapter two, the Caners discuss some of the early steps towards Christians being involved in warfare. Little by little, more Christians began to join the ranks of the military forces. After Constantine, especially, the Christians became the preferred and protected ones in the military. Steps were made which allowed the Christian to perform certain military duties without question of conscience (e.g. no bloodshed). Policing roles were common to these early Christian soldiers. Sure enough, the groundwork was being laid for further participation in the Roman army.
Chapter three described the proceedings that brought about what the authors described to be an unholy marriage. Thomas Aquinas wrote about justification for war. He outlined some specific reasons for having war. Even these rules can become easily twisted to suit someone’s agenda. Coinciding with the growing inclusion of Christians in the army was a power struggle between church and state. The authors stated in a thought provoking way that “the question of whether the Church should be invested in temporal authority was never raised. Sadly, the Church had become addicted to its power, politics, and intrigue.” (Caner 79) Whenever any religious organization becomes more focused on its ability to exercise its might over other people rather than its ability to make a positive difference in the world then it has lost sight of what is needed.
Truly from the time of Constantine, the groundwork was being laid for what Pope Urban II called a holy war. Chapter four records the beginning of the first Crusade. Claiming the war to be the will of God, he swayed the hearts of the people to follow him. More devastating, he announced that anyone who would follow would receive the reward of heaven. In other words, one could obtain salvation fighting this holy war to take back Jerusalem. Much emphasis was placed on the cross as well. Its image was placed on some part of every soldier’s uniform or armor. Interestingly, the First Crusade was “successful.” The Christian soldiers did in fact take back Jerusalem, but at what cost?
There were several motivations by which Urban justified or was driven to accomplish this holy war. One was protection for the Western Roman Empire from the Muslims. If the Christians could keep them busy in the Middle East, then they would not be attacking western parts of the empire. Many of the poor, down-and-outers, and illiterate were deceived into following this pope believing that they would receive eternal life from their faithfulness to this mission. Perhaps this was the most significant loss of the First Crusade despite the alleged victory.
Chapter six discusses the concept of the Pyrrhic victory in which a win becomes a loss. Much more harm came from the “victory” of the First Crusade than good. The Christian community could no longer be sought or trusted as a source for seeking peace and the Church became more ‘inebriated’ with power (Caner 121). Such power too easily corrupts what used to be good intentions. The Church was more interested in making more money and having more influence than actually being a church that worships the one true God. It is important to note that the Muslims were not the only victims of the holy wars called by these Christian popes. Jews were often the target of such “holy vendettas.”
Chapter seven reveals that as time progressed, the holy wars evolved into holy inquisitions that attempted to eradicate heresies from the Church. Certain lines of monks became instruments for tracking such heretical individuals. After finding the heretics, the various religious leaders became the judge, jury, and executioner. The major problem lies in the fact that there is no religious freedom in this type of system. Jesus never forced anyone to love or obey him, yet He had devoted followers. The Church, drunken with power, felt the need to destroy anyone who might threaten its authority. The Caners revealed that even dead bodies were exhumed and re-burnt as an expression that no one can get away with defying the Church. Recently, the Church accepted a position of allowing others a right to religious freedom.
Chapter eight describes some of the early sects considered heretical by the Church. Among those were the roots of the Anabaptist movement who believed that both institutions (church and state) corrupted each other. They believed that both were ordained by God and have their role within life. As the authors state, “worship must be voluntary if it is to be true worship.” (Caner 169) Thus, if worship is controlled by either the state or the church, then it cannot be true worship. One does not have to forsake the teaching that Jesus is the only way to the Father. One must accept the fact that all individuals have a right to accept or reject that fact (Caner 171).
Ultimately, when the powers of the church are used to attain political gain, a dangerous combination is being employed. The teachings of Christ and the Bible are the foundation for Christian thinking. If one seeks forgiveness for self at the injury of another, then that forgiveness is self-seeking and not centered around God. Christians must be cautious not to become the very people they seek to reach. Salvation by force is no salvation at all.
Christian Jihad
A controversial reading, Christian Jihad, is blunt, difficult and absolutely necessary. Its authors, Dr. Ergun Caner and Dr. Emir Caner are brothers, who were raised Muslim but converted to Christianity. While a mortal man cannot remain unbiased, the Caner’s have been educated from two opposing spectrums, and are perhaps less biased than many because of this.
The Caner’s began Christian Jihad by telling of the early Christians and the persecution they suffered before Christianity was legalized. They were crucified, burnt alive and torn to pieces by wild animals. This provokes understanding, as to why early Christians hated bloodshed so fervently. In the beginning, the Church did not allow Christians in the military because of the violence associated with it. Eventually this rule dissolved. This is revealed through historical records documenting Christians in battles. Allowing Christians into the military lowered the original standards of early Christianity. After Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity, the Christians realized that they disagreed on some essential doctrinal issues and the Emperor insisted they meet to resolve them. Their discussion concerning doctrine was necessary but the problem was that the leader of the country called the meeting and this was not his prerogative. Suddenly the Church and State began to rule together. The authors referred to this union as “The Unholy Marriage”. This alliance continued with the Church and State competing for ultimate power.
Eventually, the Pope gained supremacy and he taught that salvation could be gained by participating in a Crusade to rescue Jerusalem from the Muslims. They give numerous examples of Christians killing Muslim men, women and children in the name of Jesus Christ. The Caner’s explain the incentive behind Pope Urban’s push for the Crusades. They believe he was reestablishing the strength of the papacy and himself, by conquering the Muslims. Could such a man be a true follower of Christ? 2 Timothy 2:24-26 says, “The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.” Pope Urban was protecting his own power and privilege, and in doing this directly disobeyed the Bible. In the end the Muslims re-conquered Jerusalem, more lives were lost, and the animosity between the Muslims and Christians continues even today.
The Caners also speak of the Inquisition, another dark period in Christian history. This was when the Church assigned men the task of questioning the people concerning their theology. Torture was not an unusual form of questioning. Heretics were executed or imprisoned. Any person might charge another with heresy, and once accused, condemnation was dangerously close. Because of the combined Church and State, there was no vetoing power to protect the people from this practice. The Inquisition was eventually terminated by Vatican II, but persecution by the Church would continue throughout history.
These are only two of many examples, the Caners offered, of Christians killing in the name of Christ. It is a difficult book for Christians to read because it appears to attack their religion, but this is not the case. It simply tells the truth, and as in many other instances, the truth is difficult to hear. The Caners are reminding Christians of the darkness surrounding their religion’s history and through this, explaining why there is such hostility between the Muslims and the Christians.
Christian Jihad addressed some issues Christians tend to ignore. Though many crusaders and inquisitors were probably not true Christians the pagan world does not see this. The Caner’s book is excellent and controversial, offering the true and difficult history of Christianity. Christian Jihad does not attack Christians but their pride in assuming that they are guilt-free.