i don't mind the camp...it's Terry Jones after all. but who are these dusty talking heads? they appear without introduction, no name given. i suspect they are Terry's relatives.
I find this series excellent as a history student and having studied the Crusades extensively. The off hand approach to it gives it a fresh view and adds understanding.
Also it is a lie that the cristians were living peacfully, you should go and read more history, they were always treated as slaves, in fact in the early 1900´s about 2.000.000 armenias where brutaly killed by starvation. like I said nothing is justified I hate when people try to prove someone good or bad. The Pope was not the most iluminated person in that time, I agree but this is not a religios quest thia is a political quest Religion was just in the middle for control.
@gopconservative78 right wing nationalism is a evil religion detrimental to capitalism and the rest of the developing world go fuk ur self and fuk obama too since all u cunts are in the same boat of destroying America and taking away american rights like the last 20 -30 years
Now people actually know that the catholic church brainedwashed people to fight for the cause.. why are people retarded enough to remain catholic today
@TheCreatorTheGreat Yes but my point is why are they still catholics -- if they knew how corrupt and wrong catholism was in the past why not just abandon catholism..
Catholism should have been buried in the past where it belongs
I'm replying about your original comment about brainwashing...no religion is true if you think about it, a religion is faith, and religion helps those be a better person than who they were. So really 'brainwashing' is not only in Catholicism, but every religion in the world, in the past and now, even if it's for war, money, or for anything else that exists...
@cleanhomer Why modern day? Why not make something like this about Timur the lame, who conquered India in the name of Islam, because he opened the Qur'an and read the ayah saying "Slay the pagans wherever you find them". He described his conquests as a religious quest to purge India of Hindu idolatry. The resulting casualties were higher than the Crusades, but how many know of it? Do you think it just that we present Christian civilization as the only religiously zealous aggressor in history?
@Re5Publica Yeah, but Timur was a little different. He was more about himself- like Mussolini- & glorifying himself in the name of Allah. He even got to the point of slaughtering other Muslims, causing the rest of Islam not to like him, either. I came across Timur in my studies of India.
@cleanhomer It could easily be about any generation of Muslims, who believed waging continuous warfare against non-Muslims was their religious duty. It was a recurring phenomenon throughout Islamic history, until the Western Imperial age when the West was so far advanced of Islam, any Muslim conquests were impossible. Muslims even began hostilities against the USA in the 19th century., in what were called the barbary wars, for what they claimed was their religious duty to attack non-Muslims.
@whichoney One of the ways Muhammad inticed his followers to engage in wars, was to lure them with the prospect of war booty, as well as entrance to paradise. He combined spiritual gain with material gain.
But, you're totally mistaken. John Jay had told Congress (the letter still exists in the library of Congress) that the barbary envoy told sec of state Jefferson that the Qur'an & Muhammad's example gave them cassus belli 2 attack american shipping because Americans were unbelievers.
The Roman Catholic Church condemned there followers for eternity through these EVIL actions including the inquisitions, The Killing of the Creators Children in his name will never be forgotten. The Pope and his followers have there punishment waiting for them!!!
I think BBC has done a poor job of interpreting the History of the Crusades. Islam was a real threat since the rise of Islam in the Middle East. Remember that Islam had taken by force and the sword 2/3 of the Christian lands! They had tried to take Europe and stopped by Charles Martel only a short distance from Paris. BBC is known to be Islam friendly and has twisted the facts to gain political correctness. The Crusades were a response to the wild sons of Ishmael.
@jackals77777 of course,they dont like to talk about how the Islamic hordes conquered these cities ,they only talk about how the Crusaders took them back. lol. Muslim Colonialism and Imperialism was stopped in its tracks and the road was cleared for the superior Christian values.
I think BBC has done a poor job of interpreting the History of the Crusades. Islam was a real threat since the rise of Islam in the Middle East. Remember that Islam had taken by force and the sword 2/3 of the Christian lands! They had tried to take Europe and stopped by Charles Martel only a short distance from Paris. BBC is know to be Islam Friendly and has twisted the facts to gain political correctness. The Crusades were a response to the Wild sons of Ismael.
For a deeper understanding of the mindset of penances, forgiveness, and how the masses were manipulated and bled to fiscal penury, read "The Indifferent Mean", by Professor Bernard Verkamp. His is an excellent explication of the period and the church's general demeanor.
The Crusades sowed the seeds of "Jihad"? Prominent Mid-East historian Bernard Lewis argues the exact opposite, that the Crusades were a belated imitation of the Muslim Jihad. After all, Jerusalem was first captured by Muslims, who believed spreading Islam, the empire, as well as the religion, was a deed that granted them the favour of their God, and that if they would die fighting, they would be automatically forgiven of all their sins and be granted entrance to paradise.
@Re5Publica well this is a fact 400 years before any christians crusaded any where ,,, the islamic moors were jihadding in europe tours france 732 oct 10 th , charels martel stopped the moors ,,,, thats was 732
@Re5Publica yup,they dont like to talk about the Muslim Colonialism. Muslims today talk about overthrowing Allied Imperialism ,lol, so they can build a Muslim Empire,lol,total hypocrisy.
@PAULOcbi Exactly, I frequently hear people bemoaning "american imperialism" in the Mid-East, but they always fail to mention, or perhaps even realize, that the goal of america's enemies in that region is an empire - an old school empire; with a single leader, that extracts tribute from his subjects, and has nearly half the globe at his command, in other words, an ACTUAL empire; like the galactic empire in Star Wars - to give a modern pop culture referrence :)
@Re5Publica listen this war is old,Ive read about these Caliphates thru history,besides the Ottoman Empire the Caliphates fail with none lasting longer than a 100yrs. from ,corruption,nepotism,and tyranical mismanagement,lol. Its run like a fascist-theology style govt. ,and it never lasts for long.Democracy is the NewWorldOrder,and end to Communism,Fascism,Totalitarianism and Theocracies.
@Re5Publica American empire, old-school Mid-East empire... neither one is good. It'd be far better to help the Mid-East to be a realm of liberty, like the rest of the free world!
@cleanhomer The term American empire has a loose meaning, after all, the states in this supposed "American empire" don't pay tribute, in fact, they're more likely to get financial and military aid from the U.S., rather than vice versa. Whereas Rome was considered an empire for extracting men and treasure from territory it conquered and governed, America is curiously considered an empire for instead donating men and treasure to countries it does not govern.
@Re5Publica Or donates money to countries they might find useful, and also gives donations to make themselves look good. You do know that the American government is run by POLITICIANS, don't you?
@Re5Publica Yes, but that's not charity. Charity means giving & not asking or expecting anything in return. These diplomatic donations DO expect something in return.
very informative but horribly funky dramatized graphics. it should have taken a more serious note, seriously. i was expecting monty pyton at any moment.
What Gregory condemned was the expropriation of the title Universal Bishop by Bishop John the Faster, the patriarch of Constantinople, who proclaimed himself Universal Bishop at the Synod of Constantinople in 588. Gregory condemned the patriarch's act because universal jurisdiction applies solely to the pope.
Some anti-Catholics cite the following quotations to give the false impression that Gregory was rejecting his own universal authority:
@martlut - Now go to catholic education . org and read Benjamin D Wicker on the same subject. Stop acting so "persecuted"-you and I have never known persecution. What are you so filled with hate about?
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker What we term the “Inquisition” is simply the ecclesiastical tribunal with specially appointed judges (inquisitors) answerable to both the local bishop and the pope, whose task it was to investigate charges of heresy in a systematic and fair way.
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker The Spanish Inquisition is the most notorious of the inquisitions for three reasons. First, it was more cruel precisely because it was administered by the secular government. care to continue
really a sermon gee and I always thought it was called a bull or encyclical by the way Im familiar with you line of crap on this. since I stay on top of the phony lies and posting from your type get on the ball get some sources for it then I bust your bubble again..
The papel system was and is ANYTHING but Christian. Pope Innocent III launched the Inquisitions which tortured and killed believers for following the Bible instead of the Pope. Guess Innocent didn't find Gregory to be infallable....oh yeah that doctrine came later.
@martlut 1199 (March 25) Vergentis in senium Innocent III This bull, addressed to the city of Viterbo, announced that heresy would be considered, in terms of punishment, the same as treason.[10]
1205 Etsi non displaceat Innocent III
1213 Quia maior Innocent III Calls for the Fifth Crusade
@carriebrk Vergentis in senium (March 25, 1199), States, Innocent declared that heresy was treason against God so tell me what did the Cathars believe the same as you maybe you do know how they got that name don’t you it was derived from Cat worshipers boy defending a Pagan Faith how un-fundie of you. Birds of a feather flock together I guess
@martlut - In 1208, a declaration of crusade against the Albigenses was made by Pope Innocent III in his words "The civil law punishes traitors, with confiscation of their goods and with death; it is only out of kindness that their children's lives are spared. All the more, then, should we excommunicate and confiscate the property of those who are traitors to the faith, for it is an infinitely greater crime to offend the Divine Majesty than to attack a sovereign's dignity" Colliers Encyclo.
@martlut , dares to inflict injury on churches or ecclesiastical persons, let him be restrained by ecclesiastical censure. A cleric may not write or dictate letters which require punishments involving the shedding of blood, in the courts of princes this responsibility should be entrusted to laymen and not to clerics.
@carriebrk now tell me what those Albigenses believed and how christian like they were and how similar they are to your faith LOL Maybe you should follow their doctrine of Killing yourself for Jesus to gain salvation
@carriebrk Moreover no cleric may be put in command of mercenaries or crossbowmen or suchlike men of blood; nor may a subdeacon, deacon or priest practise the art of surgery, which involves cauterizing and making incisions; nor may anyone confer a rite of blessing or consecration on a purgation by ordeal of boiling or cold water or of the red-hot iron, saving nevertheless the previously promulgated prohibitions regarding single combats and duels.
@carriebrk gee why did you leave this part out about what Pope Innocent wrote I wonder
Clerics to dissociate from shedding-blood
No cleric may decree or pronounce a sentence involving the shedding of blood, or carry out a punishment involving the same, or be present when such punishment is carried out. If anyone, however, under cover of this statute
@martlut - so the rack, or hanging someone by their wrists with their arms behind their back is ok-it doesn't draw blood. You're rediculous and you know it. Let's back up to should any "sentence" be given to anyone who doesn't believe what you think they should? They can decree it but just not witness it? Funny your initial response was accusing me of "phony babble" to which you ended up quoting from yourself.
@carriebrk so right off the racj if you actually read the documents you posted you would not find your babble in those documents second the church never executed anyone or called for anyone's execution.Great documentation. Kinda like, “Once upon a time there were three bears….”
The silliness that you hold to be true is mind-boggling.
@carriebrk Is it against your religion to actually READ the documents you preach about?
Anyone who has read the original document knows how ridiculous that lie is. Only by ignoring the original document and relying on second-hand falsifications will people be deceived.
@martlut - of course you are correct. It's all been just a vast conspiracy, everybody from so many different countries are all lying-even to the point of erecting statues and museums to martyres. The catholic church has been infallable and perfect throughout the ages. Just a poor, poor victim of evil heratics. Did you go to your confessor to get proper pennance for your potty mouth the other day? You better make a pilgimage and pray to some relics or something-shorten your pergatory time.
@carriebrk quite correct when you search out your supposed quotes where are you directed too with Google to anti catholic bigoted sites LOL by they way dope you don't know what infallible means in the church either yup you should try a confessor Thats the Biblical thing to Do Nope we don't pray to relics only God sorry your an imbecile and cant grasp that as well
@martlut - I am so amazed-I just finished this lecture series-was introduced to the 30 yrs. war. Catholics beating down Protestants, Protestants beating down Catholics-both beating down Anibaptists. I suddenly realize the impact of "separation of church and state"-and why the founding fathers were so intense on that subject. I wasn't refering to the church's definition of infallability-I was refering to your general attitude-you seem to find it very difficult admit any flaw in your church.
@carriebrk their were two sets of the 30 years war which Martin Luther was in favor of the Protestants started them which decimated the population of Germany now if you would like to talk more about protestant atrocites I can help you out. I love American History as you will find the history of the USA was defiantly anti Catholic even going as far as prohibiting catholic from owning land so they could not vote barring them practicing their faith etc. All they way up to Kennedy
@martlut-I was raised catholic, most of the people I love are catholic. At one time I very strongly adhered to catholic doctrine. When I started reading the Bible and seeing inconsistancies with what I'd been taught, I studied more. That was over 20 years ago now. The past couple years I've been drawn to study the history of religions. Everybody (including the vatican) slants and rewrites history to it's own favor. That's why "fundys" rely on just the Bible. I'm so greatful to have it.
@carriebrk sorry their are no inconsistencies no changing f history you give the church way to much power you dwell in unprovable facts written by the bigots you hold dear and immerse yourself in these inconstancys faith alone bible alone once saved always saved all made up nonsense sorry.
@martlut - They fell into seven general categories of wrongs which include, without being too specific, everything from the Crusades to the Inquisition, the forced conversions, to sins against women and anti- Jewish acts. It was a first for the church, which has only rarely and only in specific instances confessed errors in the past. The pope's sermon offered an explanation for today's day of pardon.
An excerpt from Pope Paul's apology-March 12th, 2000-guess he didn't talk to you first
@carriebrk really a sermon gee and I always thought it was called a bull or encyclical by the way Im familiar with you line of crap on this. since I stay on top of the phony lies and posting from your type get on the ball get some sources for it then I bust your bubble again...
@martlut -google Joan of Arc-4th entry down has documents concerning the overturned ruling of Joan of Arc. It has with it explination of the legal means by which such an overturning can be accomplished. In mideavel times the church was the law, the clergy the judges, lawyers etc. It also reports several other overturned convictions (of people already executed for heresy by the church) as prescidence. You, sir, are the one with his head in the sand.
@martlut -Another factor in the decrease of royal authority was the ever-increasing power of the Church, which was only answerable to the Pope (not the English Monarch). In 1164, King Henry II issued the Constitutions of Clarendon, which were intended to restrict the power of the church courts.
@martlut -Edict Against the Waldenses.—A considerable portion of the text of the papal bull issued by Innocent VIII in 1487 against the Waldenses (the original of which is in the library of the University of Cambridge) is given, in an English translation, in John Dowling's History of Romanism (1871 ed.), b.6, ch.5, sec.62.
@carriebrk lets see the link for this edict against the Waldensian sorry the original would be in the Vatican . By the way how do you like those nuts the Waldensian you do know they were a suicide cult don't you. The original would have the name John downing ...
@martlut - it doesn't say the original says John Dowling-it says the original is in the library of the University of Cambridge-it says a considerable portion translated into English is in John Dowling's book. I'm finding their are many varied accounts of the Waldensian beliefs-I'm not surprised though-there are varied beliefs with everybody-not every catholic is a "Flagellen" for instance. In any case-such an account should not warrant the aire of mocking superiority you seem to adopt.
@martlut -documents? google the epistles of gregory-go to book VI epistle XXXIII to Mauricius Augustus and you can read how upset he was that his rival Cyriacus of Constantinople because Cyriacus wanted the title of "universal bishop" with chief authority-he goes on and on (also in other letters) of how dangerous and arrogant it is to have one bishop with authority over the entire church. (Gregory was at the time the Bishop of Rome)
@carriebrk His rival Cyriacus you must be hallucinating now this is what he said to Augustus Whence also I think that my brother and fellow-priest Cyriacus is proved to be exceedingly fit for pastoral rule, so not only did you get the epistle wrong but also that he was a rival In fact the Universal Bishop controversy you claim was John the Fastor who the pope enlisted Cyriacus to deliver a letter too about the subject now go crawl into your little hole and get some facts
@martlut - there's a lot of epistles-if at one time Gregory didn't have the same opinion as he did at a later time when the subject was introduced doesn't mean anything-there was a rivalry for authority, and the epistle I referred to I referenced and that's what it said. Which epistle are you referring to? You never put any reference on anything. They are numbered by book and by epistle.
@carriebrk really a rivalry for authority only in your mind you cant even get the people involved correct or the bigot story line. What doesn't mean anything is your baloney you cant get correct. The story line is supposed to be Gregory didn't believe in the universal Bishop LOL now go check your bigotry again and at least ne on the same page as your breatheran. Now go read the Epistle given to John by Cyriacus no rivalry their at all LOL
@martlut -Since the Roman Catholic Church ('the Church') was such a powerful part of Medieval Europe, there were also church courts. Church courts ruled over religious matters, including that of heresy (an opinion that is different to the Church's teachings). The punishment for being charged with heresy (heretics) was torture or death.
@carriebrk it was the only church during the middle ages and had no civil power . Yup they set up today's modern justice system we enjoy in the USA today in fact during the inquestion the people favored the church inquisitors they knew they would get a fair trial. The church never put a person to death sorry it was the civil government.
@carriebrk better throw out that papal Bible of your then .. By the way the King Of Spain launched the Inquisitions not the Pope LOL. Really killed believers for following the Bible another fabrication. you see it was the Protestants who slaughtered each other for following each reformers version of the bible they didn't agree with LOL
@martlut -catholic education . org is a catholic website - concerning the inquisitions they themselves state that it was instituted by the Pope, and that secular and church court were totally intertwined. It addresses the Papal bull, and the cathers (doesn't call them cat worshipers though-I've never seen that anywhere)-and if you want to see the news coverage for Paul's apology than google it and look for yourself. The catholic news agency even refers to it-do your own homework.
@carriebrk Ive read Pope Johns Paul's apology had nothing to do with the crusades I don't need news reports I go to the source unlike you which can easily be done by anyone but a Bigot who would rather use a third person account now where did he mention the crusades or inquisition again.. By the way it inst Pope Paul you cant even get the name right LOL. By the way the Pope Instituted the Inquisitor's not the inguistion
to stop the whole sale slaughter being done by the Spaniards
@martlut - What is with you and your name calling, it's really obnoxious and unnecessary. Can you not have a civilized discussion about anything? What is the matter with you? There is nothing wrong with searching into history, nor is there anything wrong with researching different people's viewpoints and oppinions. When you pointed to quotes from Luthor that were questionable I didn't attack you personally, I would appreciate it if you would show me the same respect.
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker With all that said, we must distinguish between the facts of the Inquisition and the fiction. As recent scholarship has shown, both Protestants and secularists, from the 16th century to the present, have wildly exaggerated the evils of the Inquisition in order to further their own ends,
@martlut - and what were those facts? The very things you've been denying exist? What else did he say martlut? Did he mention the papal bull you denied existed? Did he concede there were in fact attrocities? Did he state that the church and the government were "inexticably intertwined"? Did he refute your assertions all the way down this page?
@carriebrk gee you used it as a source shouldn't you know the answer to that one I never said a Bull didn't exist now did I I said it was in the Vatican and its not the one your buddy quoted from you know that Baptist bigot
If you covet your neighbors' property, murder (and then try to justify murder in the name of God), steal your neighbor's property, stand a false witness against your neighbor (lie in such a way so as to gain favor from your friends and get them to help you invade your neighbors) . . .then are you being a CHRISTIAN?
IF you carry a big red cross on your banner, sing praise to God but at the same time DISOBEY God's commandments are you a good Christian or a good pawn of Satan?
The problem is, since the 15th-16th centuries and the decline of the Ottoman Empire the Islamic world (if you can call it that way) that didn't passed the evolution of Renaissance and reformation like in Europe.its stuck in cultural stagnation, reactionary and fundamentalism that emerge out of Inferiority complex. (especially since Napoleons' invasion to the ME)
Today's Islamic / Arab world makes small cultural, scientific, technological, and economical (not Oil) to mankind. (but brings AlQeada)
@osufritz The renaissance was started by the Muslims. Europe was in need of a renaissance because they were going through the dark ages and a lot of knowledge was suppressed by rulers. The islamic community preserved texts like Aristotle and when the crusaders came back they were able to brin back works by the ancient greeks, which had been condemned by the church. Even though I don't believe in islam, I have to admit that they have done a lot to improve society.
@SonnyDelight55 - This is a common mistake, although Muslim scholars did preserve Greek writing and contribute to it's preservation, they used the knowledge in mathematics and medicine, usually in Andalusia with cooperation with Jewish scholars. This knowledge went to the monasteries and the church (Thomas Aquinas for example represents Christian Aristotle) - however the Renaissance began in Italian cities as a result of traders and bourgeois from emerging high middle class Not from Muslims
@osufritz Yes, I knew about major contribution that trade had to the renaissance. What I meant to say was that once the crusaders returned they had become more interested about learning about other cultures.
3:37 Christ was not a pacifist. He whipped money-changers to drive them from a temple.
The movie theater scene's rather clever.
6:40 I doubt farmers neglected their duties to hear a guy talk. More like some went when the day's work was done and those with free time told the rest what they heard.
People believe hype. Just by base probability, the more a message's put out the more likely it's believed. That's why states insist on raising your children in schools.
Tancred's got some pretty fuckin' nice teeth, for someone living in the crusade era.
KajexFiredrake 3 weeks ago in playlist BBC Crusades
i don't mind the camp...it's Terry Jones after all. but who are these dusty talking heads? they appear without introduction, no name given. i suspect they are Terry's relatives.
sybyly 1 month ago
3:35
This went from a little campy to really campy.
Tonio31 1 month ago
I find this series excellent as a history student and having studied the Crusades extensively. The off hand approach to it gives it a fresh view and adds understanding.
realityright 1 month ago
I am one of the ''cursed race'' he was talking about... Turks :)
MrDenocan 1 month ago
great funny way to explain what really Crusade were up to and who put them on this holly war.
shazhussain25 1 month ago
Amusing way of teaching history..but times like these were just plain sad for humanity, not funny.
LeagueWithASmile 1 month ago 4
HAHAH the goose interview really cracked me up.
xeenslayer 2 months ago
Also it is a lie that the cristians were living peacfully, you should go and read more history, they were always treated as slaves, in fact in the early 1900´s about 2.000.000 armenias where brutaly killed by starvation. like I said nothing is justified I hate when people try to prove someone good or bad. The Pope was not the most iluminated person in that time, I agree but this is not a religios quest thia is a political quest Religion was just in the middle for control.
ueorozco 2 months ago
Islam is a evil religion and should be wiped off the face of the Earth
gopconservative78 4 months ago
@gopconservative78 All religion should be :)
MrJoey2269 3 months ago
@gopconservative78 can't tell if trolling, or just very stupid....
AtomicChickenRacing 2 months ago
@gopconservative78 right wing nationalism is a evil religion detrimental to capitalism and the rest of the developing world go fuk ur self and fuk obama too since all u cunts are in the same boat of destroying America and taking away american rights like the last 20 -30 years
kaindrg 1 month ago
Dudeeee leave the poor goose alone D:
XzozoX123 4 months ago
Killing each other to see who has the better imaginary friend........ smart, real smart
deependofshallow 4 months ago
christianity is not a religion it's called faith
501alistair 5 months ago
Now people actually know that the catholic church brainedwashed people to fight for the cause.. why are people retarded enough to remain catholic today
badpanda84 6 months ago
@badpanda84
You close minded idiot, there is a difference how they acted then from now.
TheCreatorTheGreat 5 months ago
@TheCreatorTheGreat Not really -- only diffrence is that its illegal to torutrue and kill hertics and burn people at the stake.
Besides the catholic church claims to follow a 2000 year old book -- that sound very resitant to change
badpanda84 5 months ago
@TheCreatorTheGreat Yes but my point is why are they still catholics -- if they knew how corrupt and wrong catholism was in the past why not just abandon catholism..
Catholism should have been buried in the past where it belongs
badpanda84 5 months ago
@badpanda84
I'm replying about your original comment about brainwashing...no religion is true if you think about it, a religion is faith, and religion helps those be a better person than who they were. So really 'brainwashing' is not only in Catholicism, but every religion in the world, in the past and now, even if it's for war, money, or for anything else that exists...
TheCreatorTheGreat 5 months ago
@TheCreatorTheGreat "I'm replying about your original comment about brainwashing...no religion is true if you think about it"
I agree 100% -- of course the only relgions that had a crusades were the Catholics and Mulsims.
You dont see buddist go around killing people in the name of Buddha
badpanda84 5 months ago
@badpanda84
Nowadays, no, but generally because Buddhism today is treated less as a religion and more a state of mind.
KajexFiredrake 5 months ago
LOL! This really is the best way to tell the story of the Crusades: in a mocking, Monty Python-style, cuz the Crusades were really just a big joke!
I really hope somebody in the Muslim world can make this kind of documentary about modern day Muslim extremists.
cleanhomer 7 months ago 19
@cleanhomer Why modern day? Why not make something like this about Timur the lame, who conquered India in the name of Islam, because he opened the Qur'an and read the ayah saying "Slay the pagans wherever you find them". He described his conquests as a religious quest to purge India of Hindu idolatry. The resulting casualties were higher than the Crusades, but how many know of it? Do you think it just that we present Christian civilization as the only religiously zealous aggressor in history?
Re5Publica 7 months ago
@Re5Publica Yeah, but Timur was a little different. He was more about himself- like Mussolini- & glorifying himself in the name of Allah. He even got to the point of slaughtering other Muslims, causing the rest of Islam not to like him, either. I came across Timur in my studies of India.
cleanhomer 7 months ago
@cleanhomer It could easily be about any generation of Muslims, who believed waging continuous warfare against non-Muslims was their religious duty. It was a recurring phenomenon throughout Islamic history, until the Western Imperial age when the West was so far advanced of Islam, any Muslim conquests were impossible. Muslims even began hostilities against the USA in the 19th century., in what were called the barbary wars, for what they claimed was their religious duty to attack non-Muslims.
Re5Publica 7 months ago
@Re5Publica they didn't attack because of jihad, they were pirates seeking profits.
whichoney 5 months ago
@whichoney One of the ways Muhammad inticed his followers to engage in wars, was to lure them with the prospect of war booty, as well as entrance to paradise. He combined spiritual gain with material gain.
But, you're totally mistaken. John Jay had told Congress (the letter still exists in the library of Congress) that the barbary envoy told sec of state Jefferson that the Qur'an & Muhammad's example gave them cassus belli 2 attack american shipping because Americans were unbelievers.
Re5Publica 5 months ago
there is some monthy python flavour somewhere between the lines.
satanic666sonic 7 months ago
The Roman Catholic Church condemned there followers for eternity through these EVIL actions including the inquisitions, The Killing of the Creators Children in his name will never be forgotten. The Pope and his followers have there punishment waiting for them!!!
maxcat67 7 months ago
I think BBC has done a poor job of interpreting the History of the Crusades. Islam was a real threat since the rise of Islam in the Middle East. Remember that Islam had taken by force and the sword 2/3 of the Christian lands! They had tried to take Europe and stopped by Charles Martel only a short distance from Paris. BBC is known to be Islam friendly and has twisted the facts to gain political correctness. The Crusades were a response to the wild sons of Ishmael.
jackals77777 8 months ago
@jackals77777 well said
gianlucanders 8 months ago
@jackals77777 of course,they dont like to talk about how the Islamic hordes conquered these cities ,they only talk about how the Crusaders took them back. lol. Muslim Colonialism and Imperialism was stopped in its tracks and the road was cleared for the superior Christian values.
PAULOcbi 7 months ago
I think BBC has done a poor job of interpreting the History of the Crusades. Islam was a real threat since the rise of Islam in the Middle East. Remember that Islam had taken by force and the sword 2/3 of the Christian lands! They had tried to take Europe and stopped by Charles Martel only a short distance from Paris. BBC is know to be Islam Friendly and has twisted the facts to gain political correctness. The Crusades were a response to the Wild sons of Ismael.
jackals77777 8 months ago
Comment removed
AdviceBro 10 months ago
For a deeper understanding of the mindset of penances, forgiveness, and how the masses were manipulated and bled to fiscal penury, read "The Indifferent Mean", by Professor Bernard Verkamp. His is an excellent explication of the period and the church's general demeanor.
vinha1006 10 months ago
The Crusades sowed the seeds of "Jihad"? Prominent Mid-East historian Bernard Lewis argues the exact opposite, that the Crusades were a belated imitation of the Muslim Jihad. After all, Jerusalem was first captured by Muslims, who believed spreading Islam, the empire, as well as the religion, was a deed that granted them the favour of their God, and that if they would die fighting, they would be automatically forgiven of all their sins and be granted entrance to paradise.
Re5Publica 11 months ago
@Re5Publica well this is a fact 400 years before any christians crusaded any where ,,, the islamic moors were jihadding in europe tours france 732 oct 10 th , charels martel stopped the moors ,,,, thats was 732
lesterclaypool1 9 months ago
@Re5Publica yup,they dont like to talk about the Muslim Colonialism. Muslims today talk about overthrowing Allied Imperialism ,lol, so they can build a Muslim Empire,lol,total hypocrisy.
PAULOcbi 7 months ago
@PAULOcbi Exactly, I frequently hear people bemoaning "american imperialism" in the Mid-East, but they always fail to mention, or perhaps even realize, that the goal of america's enemies in that region is an empire - an old school empire; with a single leader, that extracts tribute from his subjects, and has nearly half the globe at his command, in other words, an ACTUAL empire; like the galactic empire in Star Wars - to give a modern pop culture referrence :)
Re5Publica 7 months ago
@Re5Publica listen this war is old,Ive read about these Caliphates thru history,besides the Ottoman Empire the Caliphates fail with none lasting longer than a 100yrs. from ,corruption,nepotism,and tyranical mismanagement,lol. Its run like a fascist-theology style govt. ,and it never lasts for long.Democracy is the NewWorldOrder,and end to Communism,Fascism,Totalitarianism and Theocracies.
PAULOcbi 7 months ago
@Re5Publica American empire, old-school Mid-East empire... neither one is good. It'd be far better to help the Mid-East to be a realm of liberty, like the rest of the free world!
cleanhomer 7 months ago
@cleanhomer The term American empire has a loose meaning, after all, the states in this supposed "American empire" don't pay tribute, in fact, they're more likely to get financial and military aid from the U.S., rather than vice versa. Whereas Rome was considered an empire for extracting men and treasure from territory it conquered and governed, America is curiously considered an empire for instead donating men and treasure to countries it does not govern.
Re5Publica 7 months ago
@Re5Publica Or donates money to countries they might find useful, and also gives donations to make themselves look good. You do know that the American government is run by POLITICIANS, don't you?
cleanhomer 7 months ago
@cleanhomer What you just described is diplomacy.... not the acts of empire; and not at all unique to the U.S. or modern history.
Re5Publica 7 months ago
@Re5Publica Yes, but that's not charity. Charity means giving & not asking or expecting anything in return. These diplomatic donations DO expect something in return.
cleanhomer 7 months ago
very informative but horribly funky dramatized graphics. it should have taken a more serious note, seriously. i was expecting monty pyton at any moment.
lallope 11 months ago
@lallope What you say is true but it is also full of incorrections.
scorpio6715 10 months ago
very informative but horribly funky dramatized graphics. it should have taken a more serious note, seriously.
lallope 11 months ago
very informative but horrible funky dramatized graphics.
lallope 11 months ago
What Gregory condemned was the expropriation of the title Universal Bishop by Bishop John the Faster, the patriarch of Constantinople, who proclaimed himself Universal Bishop at the Synod of Constantinople in 588. Gregory condemned the patriarch's act because universal jurisdiction applies solely to the pope.
Some anti-Catholics cite the following quotations to give the false impression that Gregory was rejecting his own universal authority:
martlut 1 year ago
google the epistles of gregory-go to book VI epistle XXXIII
Epistle XXXIII. To Dynamius, Patrician
Looks like you have the wrong link their
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - I'm sorry it was book VII, the page is scroll down and I missed that the book had changed, my mistake.
carriebrk 11 months ago
@carriebrk some good reading for you at the catholic education . org
The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition - Ellen Rice
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut - Now go to catholic education . org and read Benjamin D Wicker on the same subject. Stop acting so "persecuted"-you and I have never known persecution. What are you so filled with hate about?
carriebrk 11 months ago
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker What we term the “Inquisition” is simply the ecclesiastical tribunal with specially appointed judges (inquisitors) answerable to both the local bishop and the pope, whose task it was to investigate charges of heresy in a systematic and fair way.
martlut 11 months ago
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker The Spanish Inquisition is the most notorious of the inquisitions for three reasons. First, it was more cruel precisely because it was administered by the secular government. care to continue
martlut 11 months ago
really a sermon gee and I always thought it was called a bull or encyclical by the way Im familiar with you line of crap on this. since I stay on top of the phony lies and posting from your type get on the ball get some sources for it then I bust your bubble again..
martlut 1 year ago
The papel system was and is ANYTHING but Christian. Pope Innocent III launched the Inquisitions which tortured and killed believers for following the Bible instead of the Pope. Guess Innocent didn't find Gregory to be infallable....oh yeah that doctrine came later.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk sorry to burst your bubble that was the King Of Spain who instituted the inquestion LOL
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut 1199 (March 25) Vergentis in senium Innocent III This bull, addressed to the city of Viterbo, announced that heresy would be considered, in terms of punishment, the same as treason.[10]
1205 Etsi non displaceat Innocent III
1213 Quia maior Innocent III Calls for the Fifth Crusade
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk Vergentis in senium (March 25, 1199), States, Innocent declared that heresy was treason against God so tell me what did the Cathars believe the same as you maybe you do know how they got that name don’t you it was derived from Cat worshipers boy defending a Pagan Faith how un-fundie of you. Birds of a feather flock together I guess
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - In 1208, a declaration of crusade against the Albigenses was made by Pope Innocent III in his words "The civil law punishes traitors, with confiscation of their goods and with death; it is only out of kindness that their children's lives are spared. All the more, then, should we excommunicate and confiscate the property of those who are traitors to the faith, for it is an infinitely greater crime to offend the Divine Majesty than to attack a sovereign's dignity" Colliers Encyclo.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk really now go get me this so called declaration by Pope Innocent Lol all you have their is your nonsensical phony babble
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut , dares to inflict injury on churches or ecclesiastical persons, let him be restrained by ecclesiastical censure. A cleric may not write or dictate letters which require punishments involving the shedding of blood, in the courts of princes this responsibility should be entrusted to laymen and not to clerics.
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk now tell me what those Albigenses believed and how christian like they were and how similar they are to your faith LOL Maybe you should follow their doctrine of Killing yourself for Jesus to gain salvation
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk Moreover no cleric may be put in command of mercenaries or crossbowmen or suchlike men of blood; nor may a subdeacon, deacon or priest practise the art of surgery, which involves cauterizing and making incisions; nor may anyone confer a rite of blessing or consecration on a purgation by ordeal of boiling or cold water or of the red-hot iron, saving nevertheless the previously promulgated prohibitions regarding single combats and duels.
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk gee why did you leave this part out about what Pope Innocent wrote I wonder
Clerics to dissociate from shedding-blood
No cleric may decree or pronounce a sentence involving the shedding of blood, or carry out a punishment involving the same, or be present when such punishment is carried out. If anyone, however, under cover of this statute
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - so the rack, or hanging someone by their wrists with their arms behind their back is ok-it doesn't draw blood. You're rediculous and you know it. Let's back up to should any "sentence" be given to anyone who doesn't believe what you think they should? They can decree it but just not witness it? Funny your initial response was accusing me of "phony babble" to which you ended up quoting from yourself.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk so right off the racj if you actually read the documents you posted you would not find your babble in those documents second the church never executed anyone or called for anyone's execution.Great documentation. Kinda like, “Once upon a time there were three bears….”
The silliness that you hold to be true is mind-boggling.
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk Is it against your religion to actually READ the documents you preach about?
Anyone who has read the original document knows how ridiculous that lie is. Only by ignoring the original document and relying on second-hand falsifications will people be deceived.
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - of course you are correct. It's all been just a vast conspiracy, everybody from so many different countries are all lying-even to the point of erecting statues and museums to martyres. The catholic church has been infallable and perfect throughout the ages. Just a poor, poor victim of evil heratics. Did you go to your confessor to get proper pennance for your potty mouth the other day? You better make a pilgimage and pray to some relics or something-shorten your pergatory time.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk quite correct when you search out your supposed quotes where are you directed too with Google to anti catholic bigoted sites LOL by they way dope you don't know what infallible means in the church either yup you should try a confessor Thats the Biblical thing to Do Nope we don't pray to relics only God sorry your an imbecile and cant grasp that as well
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - I am so amazed-I just finished this lecture series-was introduced to the 30 yrs. war. Catholics beating down Protestants, Protestants beating down Catholics-both beating down Anibaptists. I suddenly realize the impact of "separation of church and state"-and why the founding fathers were so intense on that subject. I wasn't refering to the church's definition of infallability-I was refering to your general attitude-you seem to find it very difficult admit any flaw in your church.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk their were two sets of the 30 years war which Martin Luther was in favor of the Protestants started them which decimated the population of Germany now if you would like to talk more about protestant atrocites I can help you out. I love American History as you will find the history of the USA was defiantly anti Catholic even going as far as prohibiting catholic from owning land so they could not vote barring them practicing their faith etc. All they way up to Kennedy
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut-I was raised catholic, most of the people I love are catholic. At one time I very strongly adhered to catholic doctrine. When I started reading the Bible and seeing inconsistancies with what I'd been taught, I studied more. That was over 20 years ago now. The past couple years I've been drawn to study the history of religions. Everybody (including the vatican) slants and rewrites history to it's own favor. That's why "fundys" rely on just the Bible. I'm so greatful to have it.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk sorry their are no inconsistencies no changing f history you give the church way to much power you dwell in unprovable facts written by the bigots you hold dear and immerse yourself in these inconstancys faith alone bible alone once saved always saved all made up nonsense sorry.
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - the gospel according to martlut, the all knowing all seeing
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk yea with their heads in the sand
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - They fell into seven general categories of wrongs which include, without being too specific, everything from the Crusades to the Inquisition, the forced conversions, to sins against women and anti- Jewish acts. It was a first for the church, which has only rarely and only in specific instances confessed errors in the past. The pope's sermon offered an explanation for today's day of pardon.
An excerpt from Pope Paul's apology-March 12th, 2000-guess he didn't talk to you first
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk gee show these forced conversions lol
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut -that is an excerpt from Pope Paul's sermon. He said that.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk really a sermon gee and I always thought it was called a bull or encyclical by the way Im familiar with you line of crap on this. since I stay on top of the phony lies and posting from your type get on the ball get some sources for it then I bust your bubble again...
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk gee where do you find John Pauls apology for the crusades again not their another fallacy
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut -google Joan of Arc-4th entry down has documents concerning the overturned ruling of Joan of Arc. It has with it explination of the legal means by which such an overturning can be accomplished. In mideavel times the church was the law, the clergy the judges, lawyers etc. It also reports several other overturned convictions (of people already executed for heresy by the church) as prescidence. You, sir, are the one with his head in the sand.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@martlut -Another factor in the decrease of royal authority was the ever-increasing power of the Church, which was only answerable to the Pope (not the English Monarch). In 1164, King Henry II issued the Constitutions of Clarendon, which were intended to restrict the power of the church courts.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk now show some of this non existent power of the church in civil matters
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut-it's too big to fit in this space, that's why I posted the source.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk no such thing as bible alone, the word bible was coined by a Catholic Saint. LOL
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut -Edict Against the Waldenses.—A considerable portion of the text of the papal bull issued by Innocent VIII in 1487 against the Waldenses (the original of which is in the library of the University of Cambridge) is given, in an English translation, in John Dowling's History of Romanism (1871 ed.), b.6, ch.5, sec.62.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk lets see the link for this edict against the Waldensian sorry the original would be in the Vatican . By the way how do you like those nuts the Waldensian you do know they were a suicide cult don't you. The original would have the name John downing ...
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - it doesn't say the original says John Dowling-it says the original is in the library of the University of Cambridge-it says a considerable portion translated into English is in John Dowling's book. I'm finding their are many varied accounts of the Waldensian beliefs-I'm not surprised though-there are varied beliefs with everybody-not every catholic is a "Flagellen" for instance. In any case-such an account should not warrant the aire of mocking superiority you seem to adopt.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk h can say pigs fly as well sorry
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - very insightful, rational response. You are a skilled, and knowledgeable debater.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk give me something to debate and not made up whimsical baloney
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut -documents? google the epistles of gregory-go to book VI epistle XXXIII to Mauricius Augustus and you can read how upset he was that his rival Cyriacus of Constantinople because Cyriacus wanted the title of "universal bishop" with chief authority-he goes on and on (also in other letters) of how dangerous and arrogant it is to have one bishop with authority over the entire church. (Gregory was at the time the Bishop of Rome)
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk His rival Cyriacus you must be hallucinating now this is what he said to Augustus Whence also I think that my brother and fellow-priest Cyriacus is proved to be exceedingly fit for pastoral rule, so not only did you get the epistle wrong but also that he was a rival In fact the Universal Bishop controversy you claim was John the Fastor who the pope enlisted Cyriacus to deliver a letter too about the subject now go crawl into your little hole and get some facts
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - there's a lot of epistles-if at one time Gregory didn't have the same opinion as he did at a later time when the subject was introduced doesn't mean anything-there was a rivalry for authority, and the epistle I referred to I referenced and that's what it said. Which epistle are you referring to? You never put any reference on anything. They are numbered by book and by epistle.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk really a rivalry for authority only in your mind you cant even get the people involved correct or the bigot story line. What doesn't mean anything is your baloney you cant get correct. The story line is supposed to be Gregory didn't believe in the universal Bishop LOL now go check your bigotry again and at least ne on the same page as your breatheran. Now go read the Epistle given to John by Cyriacus no rivalry their at all LOL
martlut 1 year ago
@carriebrk the epistle you referenced wasn't to Augustus at all and had nothing to do with the universal Bishop
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut -Since the Roman Catholic Church ('the Church') was such a powerful part of Medieval Europe, there were also church courts. Church courts ruled over religious matters, including that of heresy (an opinion that is different to the Church's teachings). The punishment for being charged with heresy (heretics) was torture or death.
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk it was the only church during the middle ages and had no civil power . Yup they set up today's modern justice system we enjoy in the USA today in fact during the inquestion the people favored the church inquisitors they knew they would get a fair trial. The church never put a person to death sorry it was the civil government.
martlut 1 year ago
@martlut - you never have ANY resource for your assertions. Just because you said so?
carriebrk 1 year ago
@carriebrk better throw out that papal Bible of your then .. By the way the King Of Spain launched the Inquisitions not the Pope LOL. Really killed believers for following the Bible another fabrication. you see it was the Protestants who slaughtered each other for following each reformers version of the bible they didn't agree with LOL
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut -catholic education . org is a catholic website - concerning the inquisitions they themselves state that it was instituted by the Pope, and that secular and church court were totally intertwined. It addresses the Papal bull, and the cathers (doesn't call them cat worshipers though-I've never seen that anywhere)-and if you want to see the news coverage for Paul's apology than google it and look for yourself. The catholic news agency even refers to it-do your own homework.
carriebrk 11 months ago
@carriebrk Ive read Pope Johns Paul's apology had nothing to do with the crusades I don't need news reports I go to the source unlike you which can easily be done by anyone but a Bigot who would rather use a third person account now where did he mention the crusades or inquisition again.. By the way it inst Pope Paul you cant even get the name right LOL. By the way the Pope Instituted the Inquisitor's not the inguistion
to stop the whole sale slaughter being done by the Spaniards
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut - What is with you and your name calling, it's really obnoxious and unnecessary. Can you not have a civilized discussion about anything? What is the matter with you? There is nothing wrong with searching into history, nor is there anything wrong with researching different people's viewpoints and oppinions. When you pointed to quotes from Luthor that were questionable I didn't attack you personally, I would appreciate it if you would show me the same respect.
carriebrk 11 months ago
@carriebrk Benjamin D Wicker With all that said, we must distinguish between the facts of the Inquisition and the fiction. As recent scholarship has shown, both Protestants and secularists, from the 16th century to the present, have wildly exaggerated the evils of the Inquisition in order to further their own ends,
martlut 11 months ago
@martlut - and what were those facts? The very things you've been denying exist? What else did he say martlut? Did he mention the papal bull you denied existed? Did he concede there were in fact attrocities? Did he state that the church and the government were "inexticably intertwined"? Did he refute your assertions all the way down this page?
carriebrk 11 months ago
@carriebrk gee you used it as a source shouldn't you know the answer to that one I never said a Bull didn't exist now did I I said it was in the Vatican and its not the one your buddy quoted from you know that Baptist bigot
martlut 11 months ago
rofl whats with the geese? xD
TossTheTejp 1 year ago
If you covet your neighbors' property, murder (and then try to justify murder in the name of God), steal your neighbor's property, stand a false witness against your neighbor (lie in such a way so as to gain favor from your friends and get them to help you invade your neighbors) . . .then are you being a CHRISTIAN?
IF you carry a big red cross on your banner, sing praise to God but at the same time DISOBEY God's commandments are you a good Christian or a good pawn of Satan?
konman001 1 year ago
I love the absurdist narrative of this BBC doco...so funny, the host is mad!
millaamercer 1 year ago
@xXxAznXBoiXx I know, I did intentionally... This is so weird hahahahaha... like the little sponge xD
rafaelsot01 1 year ago
You know what? I prefer to watch Bob Sponge, cya fellas!....
rafaelsot01 1 year ago
7:00 Well-fed, soft-skinned, Hollywood actors.
campbpar 1 year ago
The problem is, since the 15th-16th centuries and the decline of the Ottoman Empire the Islamic world (if you can call it that way) that didn't passed the evolution of Renaissance and reformation like in Europe.its stuck in cultural stagnation, reactionary and fundamentalism that emerge out of Inferiority complex. (especially since Napoleons' invasion to the ME)
Today's Islamic / Arab world makes small cultural, scientific, technological, and economical (not Oil) to mankind. (but brings AlQeada)
osufritz 1 year ago
@osufritz Could do with them forgetting about nukes aswell???
dixon97a 1 year ago
@osufritz The renaissance was started by the Muslims. Europe was in need of a renaissance because they were going through the dark ages and a lot of knowledge was suppressed by rulers. The islamic community preserved texts like Aristotle and when the crusaders came back they were able to brin back works by the ancient greeks, which had been condemned by the church. Even though I don't believe in islam, I have to admit that they have done a lot to improve society.
SonnyDelight55 1 year ago
@SonnyDelight55 - This is a common mistake, although Muslim scholars did preserve Greek writing and contribute to it's preservation, they used the knowledge in mathematics and medicine, usually in Andalusia with cooperation with Jewish scholars. This knowledge went to the monasteries and the church (Thomas Aquinas for example represents Christian Aristotle) - however the Renaissance began in Italian cities as a result of traders and bourgeois from emerging high middle class Not from Muslims
osufritz 1 year ago
@osufritz Yes, I knew about major contribution that trade had to the renaissance. What I meant to say was that once the crusaders returned they had become more interested about learning about other cultures.
SonnyDelight55 1 year ago
This documentary should be more serious. If it were it would be better.
HULLOHULLO15 1 year ago 2
@HULLOHULLO15 It's too goofy. I might as well watch Monty Python.
DeeHoffner 1 year ago 2
@DeeHoffner Documentaries on the Crusades should be spoke about with some form of passion, seriousness and many emphasises.
HULLOHULLO15 1 year ago
3:37 Christ was not a pacifist. He whipped money-changers to drive them from a temple.
The movie theater scene's rather clever.
6:40 I doubt farmers neglected their duties to hear a guy talk. More like some went when the day's work was done and those with free time told the rest what they heard.
People believe hype. Just by base probability, the more a message's put out the more likely it's believed. That's why states insist on raising your children in schools.
Kogerii 1 year ago
I need a divinely inspired goose right now!
intermission101 1 year ago
we need to start a crusade these times for a direct path to heaven!
mainsync 1 year ago
complete savages?
teamgrn 1 year ago
Maybe if people had common sense there would be no pope in the first place or perhaps.
Mider999 1 year ago 2