CDXIV – Squatters Crusade

Preface

There’s an odd quirk to human nature. Whenever a person/a group of people/the Church does something that is A) Unequivocally good and B) Aggressively anti-evil, it draws people towards it.

In the book The Lord of the World (which I still haven’t read), the Pope creates an Order of Christ Crucified and essentially sends people out to be martyrs. It was unequivocally good in that it was calling people to accept a life of complete sacrifice in the name of God; it was aggressively anti-evil because these sacrifices were taken on in reparation for the sins of the world.

The Crusades, despite all the political baggage time and modernity have opted to heap onto those events were unequivocally good in that it called upon good Christian men and women to take the Holy Land out of the hands of heretics; it was aggressively anti-evil because it fought evil at swordpoint in the name of reclaiming and protecting the land of Christ’s birth.

I’ve often observed, […], that children can handle much more than we give them credit for. There’s no need to sugar coat (to use a recent example) the story of St. Nicholas in favor of the unobjectionable infantility of cartoon Santa. St. Nicholas was interesting and we can rely on children to find him interesting also; especially if we are also interested.

Likewise, the faithful are more willing than perhaps the leaders of Holy Mother Church give us credit for. We are willing to take on penances, say prayers, give our resources–if only our Shepherds call us to do so. Shepherds that want us to sleep in the pasture with unobjectionable cliches–there’s a purpose for them, for sure; God called them to the priesthood for a reason. But There’s time we need a virile and vigorous Church which calls on her faithful to take up extreme projects which are unequivocally good and aggressively anti-evil.

A New Crusade

So now we get to the point of this article.

I had an idea, the ramifications of which I have not explored, because the idea itself struck me as something that could be A) Unequivocally good and B) Aggressively anti-evil. I will share the idea more or less as it occurred to me and if I don’t think of good reasons why it’s a terrible idea then I might expand on the idea. If there’s any future Popes reading this, please disregard everything I’ve written and pray for my soul.

The idea is this: What if the Pope called for a new crusade–but instead of one characterized by outright warfare, it was characterized by immigration. I call it the Squatters Crusade because the Pope should call on the faithful to sell all their possessions and relocate to the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and Israel proper. The Call to Arms should stipulate that lay faithful should take pains to legally relocate and become resident aliens. There should be a stipulation that new Churches constructed come with 500 years’ indulgence, new schools come with 50 years’ indulgence, new homes come with 5 years’ indulgence; that every year of residence there grants an additional 10 years’ indulgence. The likelihood of Martyrdom in palestinian-controlled areas is high, the martyrs crown is it’s own reward. The likelihood of rejection and stigma from Israel is high, where immigration is tightly controlled as I understand it.

The idea is to create an incentive for the faithful to return to the Holy Land by any means necessary and begin to settle; and by their example, evangelize and grow the Church. The effort undertaken to increase the Christians in the Holy Land; to preserve and protect the Christian sites and relics; to preach to and convert the heretics in the Holy Land. I can’t help but think this would contribute to peace in the middle east.

I like to think that a non trivial number of people would answer this call. The indulgences alone are non-trivial and indulgence have been known to motivate the faithful to act.

But once there, we recall that possession is 9/10ths of the law: It is easier to prevent people from arriving, and very difficult too remove people once they have arrived.

Food for thought.

AMDG

CCCXXXII – Know Your Role & Your Rhetorical Weapons

Thinking about rhetorical techniques added to an undeveloped topic I already had in my queue, and that is apologetical archetypes, now joined with rhetorical weapons. I’m going to run through these in a Quick Take and I welcome any correction, modification, or amplification. To wit:

The Missionary. Role: Evangelism–telling people about a truth they were previously unaware of. Weapon: Explanation–simple teaching of truths to those hungry for truth. Field: New Worlds or New Minds.

The Catechist. Role: Education & Training–reinforcing the ranks of the faithful with new and willing souls, leading them through the sacraments of initiation. Weapon: Catechesis–educating willing minds on the truths of the Magisterium. Field: Willing minds already in the Church.

The Shepherd. Role: Correction & Clarification–caring for the sheep and keeping them with the flock. Weapon: Dialectic–show the sheep the truth and help to bring them to it. Provide for their spiritual and material needs. Field: Anywhere the faithful are found.

The Defender. Role: Defense–protect the Church and respond to attacks from assailants of all stripes. Weapon: Apologetics–explain to opponents the reason we believe what we believe. Field: Anywhere the Church is under attack.

The Crusader. Role: Attack–go out and knock some heretical heads together. Weapon: Argumentation–show people complacent in error the truths of the Church and the error of their ways. Field: Anywhere the truths of the Church are known and rejected.

The Martyr. Role: Witness–Live the faith to death, and follow Christ to His cross. Weapon: Action–demonstrate through deeds (and subsequent death) the truths of the Church. Much ink can be spilled in discussing the truths of the Church, but no amount of spilled ink can equal the value of a drop of blood spilled in defense of God’s Church and God’s Truth. Field: Anywhere the truths of the Church are under violent attack and the faithful are under persecution. (Hattip to JMSmith for bringing this archetype to my attention).

The Monastic. Role: Prayer–prayer for all those people who are Catholic, and all those people who should be Catholic; there is no other category of people. Weapon: Prayer–appeal to God on our behalf, ask for the intercession of Mary and the Saints and the Legions of Angels. Field: Cloister, away from the distractions of the world, so your focus can be on prayer.

The Peasant. Role: Work–provide for the needs of the Church and the other roles, so they don’t have to spend time on providing and preparing food or other necessities. Look after the Church and the Parish as if they were your home–as if they were houses for your King. Weapon: Honest Labor–it is not our lot to know the high theological truths of the Church but it is our lot to help the people who do. We can unite our Labor with God and make our work a prayer. Field: The field–anywhere necessities can be provided, the Peasant ought to be there to provide it.

---

Notably absent: Bureaucrats and Administrators. Anyway, what do you think? Have I missed any roles?

I consider my writing work more under the “Catechist” archetype. I think Zippy was a “Crusader”. Anyone else?

AMDG

CCCXVIII – An Apologia For Crusades

I read a cool article about St. Gottschalk who was a key figure in the Wendish Crusades. It got me thinking about the Crusades in general, and I would like to present here a brief defense of Crusades.

We need to agree first on what exactly a crusade is. A crusade is A) a military expedition B) commissioned by the Pope or an authorized representative thereof C) with the intention of converting enemies or D) protecting Holy people, places, or things.

The first Crusade was a military expedition commissioned by the Pope with the intention of reclaiming the Holy Land from Muslims. The Wendish Crusade was a military expedition commissioned by the Pope with the intention of converting the Wendish pagans who threatened the Northern flank of the Holy Roman Empire.

Crusades are Good because they are Commissioned by the Pope. The Pope is the highest authority on Earth, and as the Vicar of Christ on Earth, has a special relationship with the Holy Spirit. A Crusade commissioned by the Pope is good because the Pope is good, and the crusade must be truly necessary if the Pope has commissioned it. The Pope would not commission a frivolous crusade into the back garden of a Muslim civilian, but something as important as the Holy Land is worth a serious campaign to liberate it.

Crusades are Good because they are military expeditions. A military expedition with a Holy purpose shows the virile and vigorous arm of the Church. The Church today is weak and political–a strong and militant Church is a Church that successfully converts pagans and protects the Holy Land. A weak and political Church is ecumenical. I say this not because the world needs a Crusade, but because the Church needs vigor. The Church gets vigor from an obedient laity who elevate vigorous priests who become vigorous bishops. God has given us the modern Church for some purpose, and our modern Church leaders for some purpose, but maybe that purpose is to remind us of the necessity of a vigorous and virile Church.

Crusades are good because they convert our enemies and/or protect Holy people, places, and things. Too often we want to remove our enemies forcefully. Converting our enemies is a much more powerful witness. To truly love our enemies, we should wish that they go to Heaven–the highest possible good we could wish for them. Protecting holy people, places, and things with military force shows that we believe that those people, places, and things are truly holy and worth protecting with our lives. A virile and vigorous Church is ready to sacrifice and suffer in the name of God.

Crusades are not so much the thing that is good, but the product of the thing that is good. The thing that is good is a virile and vigorous Church. Such a Church is capable of a crusade.

AMDG