The two religious groups of Orthodox Christians and the Roman Catholics have many similarities, as well as differences when looking back through the course of history concerning what doctrine they follow, who they believe God truly is, and how their contrasting churches are organized. All of these factors are crucial when contrasting the differences between the two institutions, in addition to how they have functioned previously in the past and how they operate currently.
When the Orthodox Church is mentioned, it is most commonly referring to the Eastern Orthodox Church, which is the second largest. When the development of the Orthodox Church is concerned, which dates back to both the Byzantine and Roman empires. This branch of the Orthodox Church was originally established by St. Paulin addition to the Apostles and its practices are comprised of the original ancient traditions, which believed in promoting development without causing modifications. Where the church was concerned, it occasionally adopted derisive influences from neighboring, Slavic, Greek, and Middle Eastern traditions, in order to form the cultural expansion of these institutions. Along with this practice came the various positions in which church leaders were authorized to hold and the importance of each rank was established wherein each bishop had different ranks such as patriarchs and archbishops, and were all viewed as being equal. The reasoning attributed to this was because the Orthodox Church frequently taught that every bishop is “the living icon of Christ” and is encouraged to spread the true faith and have an influence on the people they would likely encounter.
One of the primary goals of Orthodox Christians is to strive to become like God, or what they refer to as “little Christs” within Jesus, and this is a practice known as theosis, or deification. "They derive this from the Biblical text that they utilize from the Greek Septuagint and the New Testament. Deuterocanonical Books are comprised within this and are known as Anagignoskomena, coming from a Greek word which receives them as devout catechetical writings."(Brown 91) The Orthodox also believes that scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit as to its authors who wrote them down, as well as having an influence among the speakers and editors. Orthodox Christians also utilize symbols as focal points when worshipping the saints as part of their daily routine. The Orthodox Church maintains and utilizes this symbolism in order to serve as a means of identifying a God-created person, which is what brings value to human beings and their lives.
In comparison, the Roman Catholics hold a different view when it comes to these various areas. Where their doctrine is concerned, this branch of Catholicism believes that while the idea of having faith in God should remain consistent, it also justifies the idea of a renewing doctrine also known as “doctrinal development.” At the heart of this idea was faith, as the foundation from which this religion is built starts from the premise that God gave us the original interjection of faith, symbolizing a seed that is intended to grow throughout the generations. It is then the work of the Holy Spirit to enlarge this movement, and truly amplify the religion to many people.
Roman Catholicism also differed where the concept of the church is concerned with the belief that instead of there being a bishop at the head of the church, a pope was placed in that position. “The Pope is then the Bishop of the Catholic church. He is the interpreter of the Catholic tradition. When he speaks for the whole church, he is therefore infallible on matters of moral doctrine. He is the symbol of episcopate’s unity.”(White 83) This presents the thought that the Catholic principles are derived from the Body of Christ with the visible head being the Pope.
As demonstrated, the comparison between the Orthodox Christians and the Roman Catholicism faiths both correspond with each other in some respects, in addition to having their differences. When it comes to them being dissimilar, it is within the area of which leader takes the responsibility of being head of the church between a bishop and a pope that displays a defining factoring element. However, they reach a common ground when they both find identity as their belief that God is the primary factor of both bringing and uniting human beings through him. Both religions lead to the conclusion that ultimate faith is found in Christ, through which we should conduct a purpose driven life.
White, Bender R. Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity: Chelsea House Publishers: United States, 2009.
Brown, Stephen F. Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity World Religions: Facts on File Publishers: United States, 2006.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Just War and Jihad: How they lead to the Crusades
The names of just war and jihad both had a significant influence in leading to the Crusades, which happened during the 11th through 12th centuries. It was through these two approaches to a peaceful war that would influence the way the Crusades operated. With the very word Crusade itself implies a brave struggle for a righteous cause. This is clearly presented and supported in history as the Crusaders sincerely believed that they were carrying out God's will, however when exploring the various aspects, many of them were characterized as being ignorant and forceful.
The Crusades were a sequence of military operations within the time period of Medieval England, wherein the European Christians were fighting against the Muslims of the Middle East and their objective was to conquer the Holy Lands that the Muslims had previously taken over. The concept of jihad that originated within the Islamic community directly related to the idea of starting these various battles because the word crusade itself means "a war of the cross." This was a perspective held by the Christians that stated that war could be carried out, as they saw it as a duty of carrying out religious causes. A clear resemblance surfaces in that the premise of jihad centers around the thought that war is thought of as right if done in the way of Allah.
In a further explanation of this view, most Muslim scholars who functioned according to this standard saw the world as if it were divided into two houses, the House of Peace (Dar Al-Salaam) and the House of War (Dar Al-Harb). "The lands controlled by Muslims belong to the House of Peace, while those who have not yet submitted to Islam belong to the House of War, until they are utterly subdued."(Caroll 165) The Qur'an explains this approach to non-Muslims very clearly, which is vital in how the Crusades occurred. As stated in section 8:39, "Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." It is according to this that we should give people only a few choices when fighting war in reverence to Allah; these being to convert to the religion, pay a tax, or die. They would commonly kill people because they thought of it as an example for non-believers as a type of motivation to accept the religion. It was because of this belief that jihad was an extremely popular choice of how to approach war during the Crusades.
The Crusades not only applies to jihad, but also to the similar concept of just war. It is vital to understand that the Crusades were a form of just war, as established by Pope Gregory within the church. It is a foundation for several Christian lands located in Europe, as many of the aggressors were motivated by the Popes. At times they would receive conflicting views in that some believed that even benevolent war was wrong to fight, while others held the outlook that immoral events took place in avoiding the minor aspects of just war.
In addition to this, the theory of just war was widespread throughout the European Christian perspective of the Crusades because of Pope Urban II. This was because mercenaries were trying to help him avoid Muslim invasions into the Byzantine Empire. Ultimately, Urban II declared war, branching off of the idea of a just war, and the premise of these factors that contributed to how the fighting was conducted. The thought process followed that, "With its sense that the highest good was to die fighting for the cause of the right deity, in a Christian just war. (Madden 82) The prominent social value became religion expressed as a religious act imposed by military nobility.
As demonstrated, the ideas of just war and jihad as they were expressed during the Crusades were very similar in their standard and motivation for war. While jihad was primarily inspired by religion through the Muslims, just war was carried out as a more peaceful expression demonstrated by European Christians. It was the common ground influence that sought to justify war from both people groups, portrayed through an instrument of brutal fighting, over a longing for the Holy Land, through sacred methods.
Caroll, Anne W. The Crusades In Christ the King: Lord of History: Tan Rock Publishers Inc, United States.: 1994.
Madden, Thomas F. The New Consise History of the Crusades: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, United States.: 1999.
The Crusades were a sequence of military operations within the time period of Medieval England, wherein the European Christians were fighting against the Muslims of the Middle East and their objective was to conquer the Holy Lands that the Muslims had previously taken over. The concept of jihad that originated within the Islamic community directly related to the idea of starting these various battles because the word crusade itself means "a war of the cross." This was a perspective held by the Christians that stated that war could be carried out, as they saw it as a duty of carrying out religious causes. A clear resemblance surfaces in that the premise of jihad centers around the thought that war is thought of as right if done in the way of Allah.
In a further explanation of this view, most Muslim scholars who functioned according to this standard saw the world as if it were divided into two houses, the House of Peace (Dar Al-Salaam) and the House of War (Dar Al-Harb). "The lands controlled by Muslims belong to the House of Peace, while those who have not yet submitted to Islam belong to the House of War, until they are utterly subdued."(Caroll 165) The Qur'an explains this approach to non-Muslims very clearly, which is vital in how the Crusades occurred. As stated in section 8:39, "Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." It is according to this that we should give people only a few choices when fighting war in reverence to Allah; these being to convert to the religion, pay a tax, or die. They would commonly kill people because they thought of it as an example for non-believers as a type of motivation to accept the religion. It was because of this belief that jihad was an extremely popular choice of how to approach war during the Crusades.
The Crusades not only applies to jihad, but also to the similar concept of just war. It is vital to understand that the Crusades were a form of just war, as established by Pope Gregory within the church. It is a foundation for several Christian lands located in Europe, as many of the aggressors were motivated by the Popes. At times they would receive conflicting views in that some believed that even benevolent war was wrong to fight, while others held the outlook that immoral events took place in avoiding the minor aspects of just war.
In addition to this, the theory of just war was widespread throughout the European Christian perspective of the Crusades because of Pope Urban II. This was because mercenaries were trying to help him avoid Muslim invasions into the Byzantine Empire. Ultimately, Urban II declared war, branching off of the idea of a just war, and the premise of these factors that contributed to how the fighting was conducted. The thought process followed that, "With its sense that the highest good was to die fighting for the cause of the right deity, in a Christian just war. (Madden 82) The prominent social value became religion expressed as a religious act imposed by military nobility.
As demonstrated, the ideas of just war and jihad as they were expressed during the Crusades were very similar in their standard and motivation for war. While jihad was primarily inspired by religion through the Muslims, just war was carried out as a more peaceful expression demonstrated by European Christians. It was the common ground influence that sought to justify war from both people groups, portrayed through an instrument of brutal fighting, over a longing for the Holy Land, through sacred methods.
Caroll, Anne W. The Crusades In Christ the King: Lord of History: Tan Rock Publishers Inc, United States.: 1994.
Madden, Thomas F. The New Consise History of the Crusades: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, United States.: 1999.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Jihad and Just War
The concepts of jihad and St. Augustine’s theory of just war had both similarities and differences and contained aspects that were trying to establish a way to declare war in a just manner. However, a difference in these two concepts arises when considering why they developed these methods in the first place. The idea of jihad was expanded upon as the religious statement of struggling in the way of God. In other words, they were obeying their calling of fighting for a higher purpose. Just war on the other hand, had a more practical and applicable reasoning behind it. War wasn’t necessarily viewed as a bad thing; it just had to be performed in the right manner and this included abiding by several regulations in order for the performed action of aggression to be considered just. Both were significant methods that examined the overall morality of war, but are different when it comes to approaching religion through this observance.
Where the jihad is concerned, its primary goal is to maintain the constant reflection on religion, and how ethical principles apply to the steps taken concerning just warfare. It is with the culture that each Muslim thinks it is their call of duty of kill opposing civilians, along with their followers. “This is in accordance with the words of the Almighty God, and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together, and fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.”(Donner 132) In summation, this concept relies on religious transcripts, primarily the Qur’an as its standard on determining if war is pronounced in the right context that is holy and pleasing to God. It is this manuscript that entails a clear and direct message of “fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.” This was designed to imply that war had the potential of being put into action according to this, and that it was dependent upon the devout follower of Allah to strategize according to this.
In contrast, the theory of just war, as established by Saint Augustine, relied primarily on New Testament writings, as well as the works of the renowned philosopher Saint Augustine. It was through him making use of these two components that developed this moral perspective on declaring war, which has influenced several philosophers throughout time. It was because of these people that the main goal of just war was made clear; which was to re-institute peace in an appropriate and fair manner. This peace must be the favorable method of demeanor that would be successful despite whether the war had occurred or not.
It is in addition to this principle that establishes the fact that the theory of just war has the potential of being both theoretical and historical. Where the theoretical position is concerned, it deals with the true ethics and reasoning behind the agreements that have been established concerning the rules that were put in place. This then leads to the characteristics that justified war can display, in that it must agree with the set standards. In addition to this, the historical aspect is also included, which is the actual concrete rules that have been evident in various wars over the course of history. These were not only put in place for authority figures to condemn wrong doings, but also for inspecting the philosophical facets on how the regulations should be altered. Both of these areas have contributed significant ideas that has formed the true meaning and theory of just war through the work of Saint Augustine.
Despite their differences, the idea of jihad and just war had some similarities. The first one being that they both included the concept of self-defense as a main focus concerning the cause of war at its very origin. The reasoning of both of these views ultimately embraces the idea of expressing war righteously. In conclusion, though they come at the idea of war in slightly different ways, jihad and just war are very similar. “The scholars of jihad, for example, possess an abundance of scripture and traditions regarding the ethics of war and are motivated by religious doctrine stating that God's law is superior to man-made law. They are therefore more capable of including religion in their assessments.”(Rudolph 103) This is displayed through the religious teachings of Mohammad and the Qur’an that inspired the interworkings of how jihad was both thought of and portrayed. The development of just war followed a similar development pattern in that it was most influenced by Augustine. In addition, just war focused more on direct references to warfare through a more secular perspective, through intellectual reasoning. Despite the two outlooks, the goal was common, which was to fight a war justly.
Donner, Fred. The Sources of Islamic Conceptions of War: Greenwood Press: New York, 1996.
Peters, Rudolph. Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam: Markus Wiener Publishers: United States, 1996.
Where the jihad is concerned, its primary goal is to maintain the constant reflection on religion, and how ethical principles apply to the steps taken concerning just warfare. It is with the culture that each Muslim thinks it is their call of duty of kill opposing civilians, along with their followers. “This is in accordance with the words of the Almighty God, and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together, and fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.”(Donner 132) In summation, this concept relies on religious transcripts, primarily the Qur’an as its standard on determining if war is pronounced in the right context that is holy and pleasing to God. It is this manuscript that entails a clear and direct message of “fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.” This was designed to imply that war had the potential of being put into action according to this, and that it was dependent upon the devout follower of Allah to strategize according to this.
In contrast, the theory of just war, as established by Saint Augustine, relied primarily on New Testament writings, as well as the works of the renowned philosopher Saint Augustine. It was through him making use of these two components that developed this moral perspective on declaring war, which has influenced several philosophers throughout time. It was because of these people that the main goal of just war was made clear; which was to re-institute peace in an appropriate and fair manner. This peace must be the favorable method of demeanor that would be successful despite whether the war had occurred or not.
It is in addition to this principle that establishes the fact that the theory of just war has the potential of being both theoretical and historical. Where the theoretical position is concerned, it deals with the true ethics and reasoning behind the agreements that have been established concerning the rules that were put in place. This then leads to the characteristics that justified war can display, in that it must agree with the set standards. In addition to this, the historical aspect is also included, which is the actual concrete rules that have been evident in various wars over the course of history. These were not only put in place for authority figures to condemn wrong doings, but also for inspecting the philosophical facets on how the regulations should be altered. Both of these areas have contributed significant ideas that has formed the true meaning and theory of just war through the work of Saint Augustine.
Despite their differences, the idea of jihad and just war had some similarities. The first one being that they both included the concept of self-defense as a main focus concerning the cause of war at its very origin. The reasoning of both of these views ultimately embraces the idea of expressing war righteously. In conclusion, though they come at the idea of war in slightly different ways, jihad and just war are very similar. “The scholars of jihad, for example, possess an abundance of scripture and traditions regarding the ethics of war and are motivated by religious doctrine stating that God's law is superior to man-made law. They are therefore more capable of including religion in their assessments.”(Rudolph 103) This is displayed through the religious teachings of Mohammad and the Qur’an that inspired the interworkings of how jihad was both thought of and portrayed. The development of just war followed a similar development pattern in that it was most influenced by Augustine. In addition, just war focused more on direct references to warfare through a more secular perspective, through intellectual reasoning. Despite the two outlooks, the goal was common, which was to fight a war justly.
Donner, Fred. The Sources of Islamic Conceptions of War: Greenwood Press: New York, 1996.
Peters, Rudolph. Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam: Markus Wiener Publishers: United States, 1996.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)