And I’ll repeat, does the questioning of the hagiographic and romantic view of Church history mean that I’m a Marxist? Are we allowed to do honest history or not? Does such a read represent some kind of betrayal? It would seem you think so?

To the webhost: I’ve already mentioned the fact that this new site design is rather unpalatable. Just trying to type this note, I cannot see the lines clearly, started typing my message on the website line, but then when I delete it, the label disappears and it was very difficult to find again. Very frustrating. The old website design was much better. The bells, whistles and effects are basically driving me away from the site.

“…saying peace, peace; when there is no peace.”

Islam’s definition of peace is when everybody on the planet is a muslim.

So we rename the Crusades to something else and then all is well? I dont think that I am following your counter.

The Crusades and the Wars of Religion… all wars for that matter (apart from Herem) are Satanic evil.

Why is it anytime someone suggests something other than the hagiographic or Romantic view of history they get accused of being Marxist?

There were Protestants aiding the Turks in the Siege of Vienna. To them better a Turk than a Habsburg eh?

And what did we get in Spain? The most anti-Christian regime and culture in all of Europe, one in which Biblical Christianity could not even begin to function in.

It’s more complicated than ‘sympathy with the Devil’ and the assumptions need to be challenged. That’s all Mr. Cassidy was attempting to do.

Christ’s words to the Crusaders, Habsburgs (as well as the Protestant warriors) would be something along the lines of… those who take up the sword will perish by it, a lesson most of ‘the Church’ has largely ignored throughout history.

If one had simply switched from the Pope to the Civil Magistrate calling for the same things in the name of justice and righteousness, then wouldn’t your objections go away?