Return to Crusades-Encyclopedia Return to Table of Contents
Apology for the Crusades
Pope John Paul II had little problem during his pontificate issuing apologies for historical wrongs committed by Christians in the service of the Church. He apologized in such a way at least 94 times according to one estimation. (1) Not surprisingly, a number of people have assumed that the Pope has in fact apologized for the crusades, but many scholars argue that technically he has not. This dispute arises from the fact that the former Pope chose his words very carefully, apologizing for misdeeds, but not specifically the crusades of the eleventh through thirteenth centuries or the principle of crusading in general. In fact one can read the text of Pope John Paul II's March 12, 2000 official request for pardon for such misdeeds on the Vatican's website and will notice that the word "crusade" is found nowhere in the text. Crusades scholar Dr. Helen Nicholson of Cardiff University has described the situation as follows,
In fact, my spies inform me that the pope did not actually apologise (that's apologize in U.S. spelling)
for the crusade; he apologised for things that were done in the course of the crusades. But
commentators in the media seemed to assume that he was apologising for the crusades themselves.
These commentators would have been influenced by the modern trend for politicians to apologise for
other people's actions. We may ask how appropriate it is for people to apologise for other people's
actions, but such apologies often have a political agenda.(2)
Some argue that the Church has not only declined to apologize for the crusades, but that it never will. Cambridge historian Jonathan Riley-Smith has argued that the Church will never apologize for the crusades because it cannot do so theologically. He notes, "The dilemma facing the Church, therefore, is clear. If contrition is to be expressed for the principle of crusading, as opposed to abuses committed during Crusades, either the Church can no longer be regarded as a reliable moral teacher or ethics are relative. Both conclusions are unacceptable, which is why no "apology" for the Crusades will ever be forthcoming..."(3)
While the Church may not be issuing an apology for the crusades, Pope John Paul II's apologies for specific misdeeds have carried great weight with some. In June of 2004, the during a visit with Eastern Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew I, the Pope announced, ""In particular, we cannot forget what happened in the month of April 1204," the Pope said, in reference to the sacking of Constantinople by crusaders. "How can we not share, at a distance of eight centuries, the pain and disgust." (4) Again, one should note the precise wording of this expression of sorrow in that it is not directed to the crusades in general, but only a specific event during the crusades. Nevertheless, this was apparently satisfactory for Patriarch Bartholomew I, as eight months later he formally accepted the Pope's apology and responded, ""We receive with gratitude and respect your cordial gesture for the tragic events of the Fourth Crusade." (5) It is also reported that the Vatican is giving “serious consideration” to apologizing for the persecution that led to the suppression of the Knights Templar in 1307. Members of a British association of Templars in England are hoping that such an apology might happen in 2007, the 700 year aniversary of the start of the persecution of the order. (6)
While there has been greater acceptance of an expression of Papal sorrow for abuses against Eastern Christians, Jews, and even Templars, during the crusading era, there has been considerably less enthusiasm for an apology to Muslims. Although Pope John Paul II also applied his precise formula for expressing regret for abuses during the crusades to Muslims, many scholars and non-scholars argue Muslim abuses in Christian lands far surpass those of the crusaders. St. Louis University scholar Thomas Madden has been exceptionally active in pointing out the widespread conquest and subjugation of Christian lands by Muslim armies prior to the calling of the crusades and, consequently, has like many scholars argued that the crusades were effectively defensive wars. He wrote,
Now put this down in your notebook, because it will be on the test: The crusades were in every way
a defensive war. They were the West's belated response to the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds
of the Christian world. While the Arabs were busy in the seventh through the tenth centuries winning
an opulent and sophisticated empire, Europe was defending itself against outside invaders and then
digging out from the mess they left behind. Only in the eleventh century were Europeans able to take
much notice of the East. The event that led to the crusades was the Turkish conquest of most of
Christian Asia Minor (modern Turkey). The Christian emperor in Constantinople, faced with the loss
of half of his empire, appealed for help to the rude but energetic Europeans. He got it.(7)
In light of such comments, widely held by some of the most respected crusades scholars including Jonathan Riley-Smith, it is not surprising that if one holds the crusaders were fighting a defensive war then there is no need for an apology. If anything, the aggressors, in this case Muslims, should apologize. After all, Muslims engaged in far more sweeping conquests of Christian lands that they continue to possess. In addition to the fairness issue, others oppose an apology for political reasons while others simply doubt the worthiness of an apology for the actions of ancestors that took place nine hundred years ago. Dr. Helen Nicholson has noted, "Is the king of Morocco about to apologise for invading and conquering Christian Spain in the early eighth century? I shouldn't think so, and what would such an apology gain? How can we set the clock back now, for events that happened so long ago?...When it comes to apologies, let us look to our own actions before we start criticising our ancestors." (8)
Jonathan Riley-Smith: Rethinking the Crusades- First Things- March 2000- with later Correspondence
Helen Nicholson Apology for the Crusades-FAQs, SSCLE Website
Joel Miller Put That In Your Apology and Smoke It World Net Daily 2000
Robert Spencer A Vatican Apology for the Crusades? Front Page Magazine March 2005
Jacob Thomas No Apology for the Crusades Challenging-Islam.Org
Alan Dershowitz- My Crusade Against Crusading
Jewish World Review, August, 1999
Morocco Times Al-Azhar–The Vatican Official apologies demanded March 2005
Religious Tolerance.Org Christian apology for the Crusades: The Reconciliation Walk 1996-2005
Ruth Gledhill The Last Crusade of the Templars U.K. Times November 29, 2004
CBS 47 Patriarch Accepts Catholic Apology for sacking of Constantinople April 14, 2004
Jonathan Riley-Smith- Crusades-Encyclopedia
Helen Nicholson- Crusades-Encyclopedia
Thomas Madden- Crusades-Encyclopedia
Pope's Apology National Public Radio March 12, 2000
1. Tom Bethell Is the Pope Overdoing the Apologies? Beliefnet 2000
2. Helen Nicholson Frequently Asked Questions- Apology for the Crusades- SSCLE Website
3. Jonathan Riley-Smith Correspondance First Things Aug-Sept 2000.
4. U.K. Telegraph: Pope Says Sorry for Crusader's Rampage in 1204 June 30, 2004
5. CBS 47 Patriarch Accepts Catholic Apology for sacking of Constantinople April 14, 2004
6. Ruth Gledhill The Last Crusade of the Templars U.K. Times November 29, 2004
7. Thomas Madden: Crusades Propaganda: The Abuse of Christianity's Holy Wars National Review, November 2, 2001
8. Helen Nicholson Frequently Asked Questions- Apology for the Crusades- SSCLE Website
(c) Andrew Holt- December 2005- Permission is granted for electronic copying and distribution in print for educational and personal use. No permission is granted for commercial use.