The History of the Crusades (vol. 2 of 3)Michaud, J. Fr. (Joseph Fr.)
History
The History of the Crusades (vol. 2 of 3)
Michaud, J. Fr. (Joseph Fr.)
Crusades
We find another remarkable difference in the preaching of this
crusade,—the refusal to admit great criminals under the banners of
the cross. The astonishment which the enrolment of a crowd of obscure
persons in the holy militia caused among the Christian knights,
suffices to denote a great change in the manners and opinions of
the Crusaders. The sentiment of honour, which is allied with a love
of glory, and has a tendency to establish distinctions among men,
appears to have prevailed over the purely religious feeling which
inspires humility, acknowledges the equal rights of all Christians, and
confounds repentance with virtue. The crusade, into which none were
admitted but men of acknowledged bravery and good conduct, ceased, in
some sort, to be a simply religious war, and began to resemble other
wars, in which leaders have the power of selecting the soldiers they
have to command.
The enthusiasm for the holy wars only revived at intervals, like a
fire upon the point of going out of itself; the people required some
great event, some extraordinary circumstance, some striking example of
princes or warriors, to induce them to take arms against the infidels;
the subtleties of theologians, who insisted upon everything being
subservient to their discussions, contributed to cool the remains of
that pious and warlike ardour, which, till that time, it had been
found necessary to moderate and restrain within just limits. Disputes
were started in the schools upon such questions as these: In what case
was a Christian exempt from the accomplishment of his vow? What sum
was sufficient to redeem a promise made to Christ? If certain pious
exercises could be substituted for pilgrimage? If an heir was bound
to fulfil the oath of a testator? Whether the pilgrim who died on his
way to the Holy Land, had more merit in the eyes of God than one who
died on his return?[252] Whether a wife could take the cross without
the consent of her husband, or the husband without the consent of the
wife? &c. From the moment in which all these questions were solemnly
discussed, and, upon several points, the opinions of theologians
differed, enthusiasm, which never reasons, was rendered languid by the
cold arguments of the doctors; and pilgrims appeared to yield less
to the transports of a generous feeling, than to the necessity of
performing a duty or of following an established rule.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account