Sep 7, 2014
We Need Backbones, Not Wishbones
9-8-14
History knows two kinds of war, generally: those that are declared, with precise commencements, formalities, and peace treaties; and those that begin from a host of various grievances or jealousies, have hazy – usually multiple – flash-points, and drag on, and on, spreading misery and atrocities over civilian populations no less than enemy forces. Both sorts of war can change the course of history to equal degrees.
The United States – the West; the Christian church – is engaged in the second form of these wars. We are not anticipating it. We are IN it. And we have been for some time. That the “enemy” can be defined in several ways does not diminish the fact that there is one war. And it is not new, although our dim-witted realization, as if awakening from a dream, might be new.
I am writing of Islam, of course. It is instructive, even vital, that we review how we got here. “Past is prologue,” Shakespeare wrote.
The hideous barbarism of ISIS / ISIL is the latest. We should call it the Islamic State, as its leaders do, although our own “leaders” believe that would reveal us to be politically incorrect if we call them either Muslims or terrorists. (They are merely “extremists,” you see). We can go back to 9-11; to the various Palestinian terror groups, modeling themselves, by the way, after the Zionist terror groups before 1948. We can go back and back in history.
The history of Islam, or the Mohammedans, as the West used to call them, is as rich in politics and warfare as it is in theology. After the death of Mohammed, probably in 632, Muslim factions started warring, partly as a byproduct of factionalism, but also to spread their religion’s overall influence, expanding in an imperialist mode. Throughout the Levant, to Asia Minor, to north Africa. And to Europe.
Through formal invasions and persistent incursions, Muslims spread into Europe. It was a time after the collapse of the Roman Empire. Civic, military, and social systems had deteriorated, and Islam tried to fill the vacuum. The remnants of the Visigoth Empire were supplanted in modern-day Spain. Pockets in southern France were overrun. Strongholds of the old Byzantine Empire were no longer strong, and Mohammedan armies pushed them back.
For a millennium the Arabs and Islam continued squabbling over men’s minds and men’s land, while over the time also mastering various cultural advances in mathematics, science, poetry, astronomy, medicine, and art. But the doors of Europe and Christianity, whether to knock or kick down, were seldom far from the expansionists’ minds, either.
Around 700 and for roughly a half-century, a fierce battle over the survival and character of Christian Europe was fought on the Iberian peninsula and in southern France. The romanticized legend known as The Song of Roland, a landmark in Western literature, nevertheless tells the facts that Charles Martel, his son Pepin le Bref, and his son Charlemagne, combined through persistent bravery and bloody sacrifice to defend Western civilization.
Not only was militant Islam turned away from Europe, but Charlemagne, in present-day German lands, reestablished the Holy Roman Empire. Yet the inexorable “soft” invasions continued. After a siege on Constantinople roughly contemporaneous with the Battle of Saragossa in Spain, the Bulgarian Emperor Khan Tervel turned back vicious Moslem fighters and earned the title “Savior of Europe.”
Around 900, Moslems attacked the Italian peninsula. Rome was sacked, and an emirate was established in Sicily. Three centuries later a resurgent Mongol empire swept across Eurasia, defeating Moslem strongholds in their path, most notably as far south as in the Battle of Baghdad, 1258… but then its leaders, following the mighty Timur, converted to Islam. The effect was a victory for the consolidation and spread of a militant Islam, from Egypt through Syria to India.
Thereafter, the Islamic Ottoman Empire invaded Western Europe and colonized Greece, all of the Balkans, Romania, Bessarabia, and Hungary, and was stopped only at the outskirts of Vienna. In 1683 a brutal force of militant Islamic soldiers besieged Vienna, which literally, geographically, was a gateway to Europe. Only the fierce rescue by brave Polish, Austrian, and German Hapsburg troops led by the Polish king Jan Sobieski turned back the Muslim invaders.
The Ottoman Empire remained a diminished irritant to European Christianity, and was dispatched after World War I after it chose the wrong side – the defeated Central Powers – and was dismembered. Greece became independent, the British typically gained territories-by-peace-treaties, and Turkey became a constitutionally secular country in 1923.
With that – and buying off Islamic leaders with protected artificial statehoods (Iraq, Iran, Trans-Jordan, etc), trade favors, and other emoluments after both world wars – Western Europe thought that radical Islam was a thing of the past.
But as recent events have shown (including a quiet resurgence of a radically Islamic Turkey), the last century was just a breathing-period. The incessant 1500-year war of Islam against Christianity continues.
I do not apologize to readers for this brief history lesson. As George Santayana said, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Shame on Americans for being generally ignorant about such vital matters. I will go further and wager that most Americans could not fill in the names of many Middle East countries on a blank map of the region. Nor assign the Sunni or Shi’ite loyalties of the players in the current crises, much less Alawite or Ba’athist roles in the conflicts.
(Neither can most Americans identify the role of British and American manipulation of events since the end of World War I, prompted by trade and oil and geopolitical interest, including doing others’ bidding; and usually bungled. But that is another essay.)
The fact – the hard fact – remains: we are engaged in a religious war. And that is very bad news, because America is hardly a religious nation any more.
We are, therefore, losing before we realize we are being attacked. Feeding our lack of conviction is the notion that to recognize Islam’s war on us is to be “unfair.” “Prejudiced.” The political and cultural leaders who feed these concepts are, simply, traitors to the nation, to our culture, and to our faith.
We should recognize them as traitors, and deal with them as traitors. And shame on the American public – traditional Christian patriots – for surrendering. Not just to notions of “Arab extremism” or “Islamic terror,” but surrendering to the traitors who soften or minds and wills.
The United States is a Christian nation, founded by Christians, dedicated to God by countless pilgrims and pioneers in the name of Christ. That does not means we hate or should exclude others, but it traditionally meant that we invited others to live at peace in a Christian nation. Christians like to say “Judeo-Christian” often so they will not be accused of wanting another “Holocaust,” but our values and traditions are Christian.
We are under attack. “We” are not only Americans – Islam does not care so much about our passports. It is not a question of their wanting more real estate.
Christianity is under attack. You can respond by softening your faith. By being “tolerant” of those who wish you dead and happy to help in the effort. Or you can join the historic ranks of forgotten heroes and martyrs like Charles Martel, Pepin le Bref, Charlemagne, Khan Tervel, and Jan Sobieski, willing to die if necessary for Western civilization and for Christianity.
The war, like it or not a real war, is being waged by Islam.
But the real enemy, admit it or not, is our own culture’s loss of faith.
We cannot pretend that — for the first time in history — this condition, a lost foundation of faith, will not be fatal to a culture. We cannot wish this away. We need backbones, not wishbones.
The first battle – or is it our last? – seems to be lost already. How many of us will enlist?
+ + +
We are not helpless or clueless if we choose to engage. We have the words of the Bible, and the example of Christ. There is the example of uncountable martyrs and warriors who loved the Word so much – who savored the sacrifices of those who have gone before; and who cherish the dream for the sake of their children – so we might be encouraged. For Christ’s sake, not just our own. An inspiring version of an old hymn of the church, and a rousing video message, by Michael Card.
Click: How Firm a Foundation
A timely message as we learn of IS’s presence in Ciudad Juarez and alleged plans to infiltrate El Paso.
I cannot agree more. As an observant Jew, it is clear to me why Islam rages against Israel and Jews across the world and (mistakenly) perceives us as “colonialists” derived from Europe (and hence loosely linked with Christianity) for precisely the reasons the author states. Israel (and Judaism as a whole) have been the trip wire to this war of civilizations. Yes, religion loosely defines civilizations, even in these secular times. Another old saying that applies here is an Arabic warning issued long ago: “Islam will do away with the Saturday people (Jews) and then the Sunday people (Christians). We have been seeeing this for over 70 years. Israel (and Judaism) is miraculously fighting for its survival and we would welcome the children of Esau (the Christian West) joining forces with its biblical brothers to stop biblical Ishmael from his advance. This cannot continue to be a proxy war, nor resolved by assuming simplistic rationales like negotiable borders and land. This is an ideological (hence religious) war. Since you cannot really “kill” ideas, you have to go after carriers of the ideas.
Thanks, Rick. We need the perspective of the history lesson!
I certainly agree that there is a struggle for civilizations between Islam and the (not-so) Christian West.
That said, for the love of God, if your going to make a claim like this which is prone to be accused of sensationalism, get your facts straight.
Charlegmagne did not “reestablish” the Holy Roman Empire. There was no Holy Roman Empire until Charlegmagne established it, and it definitely was not a continuation of the actual Roman Empire, but an attempt to emulate it.
Also the Mongolian successor states who converted to Islam were simply not very Islamist in the same way, for example, ISIS is. Even Tamerlane (maybe the author is confusing him with Timur Tughlugh?) did not seem to be motivated by any particularly strong religious goals, and while in most respects his government was a travesty for the rest of mankind, his empire was notably tolerant of religious divisions as compared to some Muslim regimes throughout history. In other words, the Mongols and the Timurids all went around behaving like themselves, before and after their conversion to Islam.
Thank you… for a pointed and correct assessment of our situation.
We desperately need political leaders, as well as Church leaders, who can establish criteria and boundaries for us to implement, to “fight back”.
Perhaps our greatest task, as individuals, is to re-establish a moral standard for our countries and ourselves that prepares us to resist those who threaten our freedoms. It will take a massive effort, constantly undermined by all who listen to the seductive whispers of Satan.
We have no real “choice”; the alternative is annihilation.
May G-d have mercy on us!
Well said. Christians in Indonesia and Malaysia would say “Amen”.
Life ain’t so simple Rick. “Islam” isn’t at war with Christianity. Islam is going through it’s 30 Year War (as an “historian” you no doubt understand the implications of that).
Your reading of history is so simplistic and one-sided that you’d be laughed out of any college classroom but then again, can’t trust those liberal “traitors” (your words) anyways, right?
Was all of the Islamic empire in Spain “militant?” Why was it called the “Ornament of the World” with Jewish secretaries of defense running the Islamic empire’s army and Maimonides thriving? What of the Inquisition? And no mention of the British invasion (conveniently not Christian when you desire) of the Middle East, Africa and India and those missionaries they left behind? No mention of Sykes-Pikot? All of this is Islam’s fault? Christianity has been a force for good but also a force for tremendous evil in this world.
What a sad ruse your reading of the world is.
The above plea is essentially a call to reestablish the Medieval crusades of the Roman Catholic Church against Islam though now it is on behalf of the Judeo-Christian religion of Americanism. As such it is a call to embrace the methods of the First Century zealots who repudiated Jesus of Nazareth because he refused to lead the Judean people in armed rebellion against the empire of their day.
It is no doubt true that the Empire of the United States with it’s European and and Middle East allies cannot be maintained without mass violence. But maintaining or defending the Powers and Principalities of this world is not the mission of the Body of Christ. We are indeed called to engage all those who would use violence against their fellow human beings such as militant Islam and the United States et al. But the idolatry of these political and religious entities will not be and cannot be defeated by the slaughter of “flesh and blood.”
If the Way of Jesus is true then such calls to become involved in one more violent crusade must be repudiated by all those who profess to be follower of Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. It is the cross of Christ that we must bear against the evils of this world. To become involved in one more crusade against this or that Principality and Power on behalf of another Principality or Power is to give into the call of Satan that Jesus repudiated in the wilderness following his baptism. Let us who are faithful and in the light of our baptisms also repudiate the call to crusade against those whom our Lord loves and for whose salvation he gave his life.
[Response to Nick Rogers] For the love of God, is it? On the facts you challenge — Yes, Charles the Great did not technically re-establish the Holy Roman Empire. It was not called that during his reign. He wanted to re-establish the Roman Empire, from his central location, ruling the Germanic Frankish tribes, and others outward, through central Europe. The Pope bestowed a “holy” aspect by insisting (or agreeing with Charlemagne) that a coronation be at the hands of the Pope. But Otto I, and Friedrich Barbarossa, in Charles’ line, surely asserted suzerainty as Holy Roman Emperors. The point I was making is that Charlemagne, in repelling Arabs/Moslems, preserved the Christian aspects of Europe that enabled him to claim, champion, consolidate, and establish (as close to “re-establish” as his goals foresaw) a unified, Christian Europe. Emulate, fine. Your citation of Tamerlane (Timur the Lame) and/or Timur Tughlugh as you call him, is the same Tughluk Timur, Khan of Moghulistan, I wrote about. Call him what you wish. Why do you “refute” points I do not make? I am not saying that he was like his model Genghis Kahn, nor much like ISIS fighters. I am merely saying that Christianity (and other belief systems) were challenged when he ruled. Was he a benevolent emperor? You say “notably tolerant compared to other Muslim regimes throughout history.” So what? You answer a question I do not ask. The point of my essay is to sound the tocsin for Christians, not to surrender rights/lands/practices. Wake up, is my lesson; NOT slaughter the apostates or some such battle-cry. I am sorry, but you show your prejudice (besides nit-picking with faulty history) by snark denigrations of the “not-so-Christian West.” I never claimed the church militant was pure, nor that Europeans have not committed atrocities: in fact I hinted at my belief that these are true — but only hinted, because the side issues would bubble up in the hands of the Smokescreen Brigade, committing diversions.
[Response to David] I would like to thank you for your well-intentioned response. But I cannot because it is not well-intentioned. “It’s [sic] 30 Year War” is an inapt comparison, as I limned a 1500-year trajectory of ideological, religious, and territorial expansion. Thank you for the quotation marks around “historian,” by the way. I might not meet your standards, but my degree is in History; I am a member of Phi Alpha Theta, the national history honorary society, with recognition for “conspicuous attainments and scholarship”; I have written several dozens books of history; have lectured at the Library of Congress; on C-SPAN, etc. None of this means anything special, perhaps, but please spare me the gratuitous quotation marks. It is the technique of a third-rater. Which reminds me that there are many college classrooms that I would escape, laughing, myself. Bastions of the close-minded, tools of insular propagandists or corporate interests. My “wordS” were NOT “liberal traitors.” I trust few liberals and few conservatives (and few academics at all), and especially despise the neocons who have dragged us into wars, who continue the traditions of manipulating the pieces on the Middle Eastern chessboard, and are happy to send everybody’s children but their own to die for their schemes. As with other respondents here (and in my private in-box) you are answering questions I did not ask. What of the Inquisition, indeed? It was monstrous. But I was writing to ask Christians to be aware of history and current events… not to dismember heathens. What is wrong with you? No, “all” the Islamic empire in Spain was not militant, and some Jews were comfortable. Again, so what? I hinted (not wanting to discourse on diversions with nitwits) at the atrocities of Christians, British, and Americans; and Zionists. But, to my thesis, my argument, my tocsin, that is all irrelevant. I am asking Christians to realize what is being threatened, and you want me to self-flagellate, instead, over past deeds. I imagine ISIS would be impressed by your open mind (er, no pun intended). It is a condition, not a history-lesson, that confronts us.
[Response to John-Otto] My “plea” is NOT a call to reestablish the Crusades. Why are you readers answering questions I do not ask? Reading things I did not write?? If I were to write about issues I intentionally put aside in favor of my main points, I would have addressed crusades and offensive wars and Americanism and such. (In fact, I hoped to forestall debates with the uninformed and intentional diversionists, by hinting my disapproval of British colonialism, American corporatists, the sins committed in the name of Christianity, and the role of Zionism. But you didn’t read, or didn’t understand, that.) I don’t want armed rebellion as you assert; I want the traditional European/Christian culture to defend itself. I don’t want a Crusade, anywhere, but neither do I want our beliefs suppressed nor our heads chopped off. I call for traditionalists, Christians, and the inheritors of European culture to recognize the crisis, and defend what they love, if they still love those things. “Revive your faith, restore your values, defend your heritage” — that is my message, not a “call to crusade.” Where did you read that? But. If you assume that I would have stood with Martel and Sobieski, and urge Christians to feel the same way… Yes. The “Empire” of the United States you describe, I too am against. Have we committed wrongs? I say Yes, and I was against the first and second Gulf Wars, and (did you read me?) the manipulation of people and movements. And — by the way — another reason I believe we should stay OUT of those regional conflicts, stay “home” and rediscover our heritage and values, is because we can only see a fraction of what really goes on in those lands; who pulls the strings. ISIS leaders were trained by the CIA, MI5, and the Mossad. The Levant roughly corresponds (have mercy, I am saying “roughly”) to Eretz Yisrael Hashlemah — Greater Israel of the Zionists. We will notice that as “moderate” Arab nations like Egypt and the Emirates and Saudi Arabia (which is more hardline Shi’ite than moderate-anything) move toward alliance with Israel, it is interesting that ISIS threatens the West, America, Christians… but, strangely, not Israel. Perhaps the backdrop for Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is the discovery of undersea oil reserves in the Levantine Mediterranean, off the coast of Gaza; and all of Gaza’s ports have been closed. Et cetera. We cannot know all that goes on, but I feel that there is a “back story” to everything happening in the world today. And my “plea” is — let us reconnect with our heritage, rediscover our faith, defend our culture… and mind our own business. No Crusades. BUT enlist in efforts to assert our precious traditions here at home. Stand for something.
Rick –
I’m blown away with your blog… Who knew?!
What extraordinary thought and analysis…
Onward with your march of truth!
Best-
ds
[…] Read More […]
David criticizes Rick’s article and says “Life ain’t so simple Rick. “Islam” isn’t at war with Christianity.” David should be laughed off this board because his ignorance of Islam. Islam is at war with anything that is non-Islamic.
When Muhammad gained his first followers who committed themselves to defend Muhammad with their swords they were challenged with the statement: “In swearing allegiance to him you are pledging yourselves to wage war against all mankind.” These Muslim converts affirmed their commitment to do so. Tabari vol 6, page 134
Years later, Muhammad/Allah commanded the Muslims to make war against Christians and Jews: “Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.” Quran 9:29
Likewise that very command was put in action when Muhammad encountered the Christians of Aylah: “Believe, or else pay tribute. And be obedient unto the Lord and his Prophet, and the messengers of his Prophet. … Ye know the tribute. If ye desire to have security by sea and by land, obey the Lord and his Apostle, and he will defend you from every claim, whether by Arab or foreigner, saving the claim of the Lord and his Apostle. But if ye oppose and displease them, I will not accept from you a single thing, until I have fought against you and taken captive your little ones and slain the elder.” http://answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life4/chap28.htm. (Page 188)
Yes, Islam is at war with Christianity, and Judaism, and atheism, and Hinduism, etc.
David,
Instead of forcing your understanding of European history onto Islam’s history, study Islam’s history and theology and do some logical thinking. The fact that not all Muslims are violent does not negate Islam’s core tenet that it is to subject the world to itself. As Muhammad said,
“Allah’s Apostle said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah.” Sahih Bukhari, volume 1 #24