0
gohistoric_17135_m

malachi1

Note: This is part of a long series of essays about how the Church’s situation today is connected to events of the past.

Last week I posted an interview between the late Fr. Malachi Martin and radio personality Art Bell from 1998. It was Fr. Martin’s last interview before he was found dead under suspicious circumstances the next year. I promised this would be the beginning of a series about a certain topics in the Catholic Church of grave concern to us today.

Fr. Martin’s interview was, in a sense, a foretaste of the “end” of this series- it is ultimately where I will go. What I am going to do now is to go back to the beginning- way beginning- so to understand how the increasing horrors of the 20th century not only are connected to the events of the past, but also how they will culminate in this 21st century in a way that will not only shock and disturb billions, but will be the advent of a struggle between the powers of Heaven and the underworld on a level of Biblical proportions.

Now ultimately, we know how this story ends. Indeed, the first end was fulfilled at the crucifixion when Christ broke the chains of sin and death. The second end will come when Christ returns as promised. The details as to how all this plays out, however, are not as clear. We have evidence from Sacred Scripture and Sacred tradition, as we have discussed extensively on Shoebat.com, as to what will happen. However, there is also the human aspect- how God’s plan of salvation works into the matrix of history, for it was Christ who stepped into and worked within time for our salvation.

This story begins in the middle of the twelfth century during the height of the second crusade.

Bernard_of_Clairvaux_-_Gutenburg_-_13206

The second crusade was proposed by Bl. Pope Eugene III and was preached to the Europeans by his close friend and founder of the Cistercian order, St. Bernard of Clairvaux. It came about in response to the rise of (in what is today northern Iraq) Kurdish Muslim warlord Nur Ad-Din’s attacks against the Crusader states, and in particular his conquest of the province of Edessa:

But now, our sins and those of the people themselves requiring it, a thing which we can not relate without great grief and wailing, the city of Edessa which in our tongue is called Rohais,-which also, as is said, once when the whole land in the east was held by the pagans, alone by herself served God under the power of the Christians-has been taken and many, of the castles of the Christians occupied by them (the pagans). The archbishop, moreover, of this same city, together with his clergy and many other Christians, have there been slain, and the relics of the saints have been given over to the trampling under foot of the infidels, and dispersed.

The second crusade was meant to confront and destroy Nur Ad-Din’s armies. However, what happened during this crusade- and would happen later that century that would precipitate the third crusade- was that various European “leaders” of the crusader states (a) acted on impulse before thinking and (b) acted out of a lust for the acquisition of money and power.

2ndCrusadeCouncilatJerusalem

The Second Crusade

Nur Ad-Din at that time was attempting to conquer Syria. He was besieging Damascus heavily and had offered to forge an alliance in exchange for a truce with the Seljuk Turkish ruler of Damascus, Mu’in Ad-Din Unur Al-Atabegi. He initially refused to accept because he already had an alliance with the Crusader States. However, Nur Ad-Din forced a marriage between himself and Mu’in’s daughter. Nevertheless, they did not attack direct Crusader holdings. It was when Crusader allies in the area were attacked that prompted the Second Crusade. Nevertheless, it was the rash decision making of the Crusader state leaders who elected to attack the well-fortified city of Damascus.

While there were other victories, the crucial and central 1148 siege of Damascus was an abject failure, as it not only defeated the crusaders but weakened their armies, the states, and left them vulnerable to subsequent Muslim attacking, which would increase in number and intensity and would finally culminate at the massacre of Hattin in 1187. St. Bernard was gravely embarrassed, and he wrote a severe criticism of the crusaders’ actions, saying that it was because of their sins in the matter that they were defeated:

When Moses was going to lead the people out of the land of Egypt, he promised them a better land. Otherwise, would that people, who knew only earthly things, ever have followed him? He led them away-but he did not lead them into the land which he had promised them. The sad and unexpected outcome, however, cannot be laid to the rashness of the leader, for he did everything at the Lord’s command, with “the Lord aiding them and attesting his word by the miracles that went with them.” But, you may say, they were a stiff-necked race ’20 forever contending against the Lord and Moses his servant. Very well, they were rebellious and unbelieving; but what about these other people? Ask them. Why should it be my task to speak of what they have done? One thing I shall say: How could they make progress when they were always looking backward as they walked? Was there a time in the whole journey when they were not in their hearts returning to Egypt? But if the Jews were vanquished and “perished because their iniquity,” is it any wonder that those who did likewise suffered a similar fate? Would anyone say that the fate of the former was contrary to God’s promise?

 

That was the situation in the Christian east. The situation in the Christian West, however, was a different story.

Since European knights responded to the Pope and St. Bernard’s call from across Europe, they naturally had to travel a long distance to reach the Holy Land. Most traveled a combination of land and sea routes across Central Europe the Balkans, and the eastern Mediterranean. However, some knights in northern and western Europe- Belgium, the British Isles, Denmark, Holland, Norway, and northwestern France- decided to take an all-water route to the crusader states by sailing- or at least attempting to sail- around the Iberian Peninsula, through the Straight of Gibraltar, and across the Mediterranean. Most of these knights stopped on the western Iberian coastline, and most of them never left.

200px-AfonsoI-P

Alfonso I of Portugal

Why did they never leave? Because while they were resting and replenishing their wares before continuing on, there was another crusade taking place in the Iberian Peninsula. A minor count named Alfonso was leading a crusade against the Muslim occupiers on the western Iberian coastline. He was already having great success against them, and he was beloved and respected by his men. Naturally, many of these knights decided to continue no further than here, since there was already a crusade going on that they could assist with. In 1148, the same year that the Crusaders in the east betrayed their Damascene ally and failed in their quest to conquer the city, in the west these other Crusaders attacked and conquered the city of Al-Ushbuna. Count Alfonso became King Alfonso, and he latinized the city’s name to “Lisbon,” and he renamed his kingdom after the ancient Roman name of the area- Portus Gallus– or in his words, Portugal. As such, King Alfonso I became the first king of Portugal and fixed his capitol at Lisbon. There were several miracle which took place during the conquest, which the chroniclers have recounted:

Thereafter a miracle worthy of great admiration was reported: for fifteen days before the capture of the city, the enemy’s food supplies bad become inedible because of an intolerable stench. Afterward we tasted them and found them pleasing and acceptable, both to us and to the enemy. When the city was despoiled, there was found in the cellars some eight thousand seams” of wheat and barley and some twelve thousand pints9 of oil. . . . There was discovered in their temple, which rises on seven ranks of columns with arches atop them, nearly two hundred corpses as well as more than eight hundred other people who were sick and remained there in all their squalor and filth.

King Alfonso continued his reign of territorial expansion, driving out the Muslims wherever he encounter them and also making many converts to the faith. His warriors were known for their ferocity and valor in battle, and as the Quran says, the struck terror into the hearts of the Muslim infidels. This could not have come at a better time, since Muslim armies from Morocco under Ibn Tumart had formed a new army and, like ISIS today, boldly proclaimed the oneness of Allahtawhid in Arabic- as their motto for conquest, and began a reign of terror in Iberia that nearly overthrew Spain completely, and for the Spanish who survived, they were driven deep back into Spain’s northernmost regions in retreat. This Muslim armies, calling itself the ones who proclaim the oneness of Allah- Al-Muhwahhidun- latinized ad Almohads– may have conquered Spain were it not for King Alfonso, as he kept them occupied so the Muslim could not fully concentrate their efforts on the purgation of the Catholic Faith from Spain.

Ten years after the conquest of Lisbon, with King Alfonso’s army still strong and filled with vigor, there was a young soldier who enlisted to fight for the King. His name was Goncalo Hermigues. He was as strong and bold as he was violent in battle. The Muslims were terrified of him because none who crossed his path ever survived. This was where he got his nickname, “Tragamouro,” which colloquially translated means “Bring it on, Muslim!” His bloodthirstiness was so great that even King Alfonso was concerned about him. Nevertheless, he remained one of Portugal’s great warriors.

alcacer33-cc (1)

Alcacer do Sal

Since Goncalo was dedicated to freeing Portugal and purging it from Muslim reign, he would spend his time thinking up stratagems for how he might further this aim. One day he thought of a clever plan, which he brought to the attention and received the approbation of King Alfonso for it. The plan was very simple. There was a local castle, Alcacer do Sal, which was ruled by a powerful Muslim prince who had a beautiful daughter. Goncalo’s plan was to storm the castle in secret, kidnap his daughter, and hold her as a hostage until they could negotiate terms of surrender.

With the approval of the king and the support of the army and his own band of soldier friends, Goncalo stormed Alcacer do Sal on June 24h, 1158- the feast day of the beheading of St. John the Baptist. He kidnapped the princess and stole away with her to the Serra do Aire mountains in central Portugal. However, this plan did not go as anticipated because Count Hermigues and the princess fell in love with each other.

Now in a situation like this, there has been unfortunately many a Christian who has left the Faith and become a Muslim on account of a woman. However, this situation is particularly notable because not only did Goncalo persist in the Faith, but the princess, whose name was Fatima, left Islam and embraced the true Faith. She took the name of Oureana for her Christian name, married Goncalo, and the two lived a very happy life together. Some sources debate this, but it seem that the Portugese province of “Ourem” and its very significant village, “Fatima,” were named after Goncalo’s wife. When she died he was crestfallen, and it is said that he spend his final years as a Cistercian monk.

Portugal continued to see victories against Islam up through the completion of the Reconquista in Ourem and specifically, the village of Fatima continued to see victories against Islam up through 1249, which is considered the “end” of the Portuguese Reconquista in that the last Muslim strongholds in Portugal were finally reintegrated into Christendom and the Muslims were no longer able to gain a foothold in Portuguese lands. The village of Fatima never became a prosperous area, and remained a relatively poor little town even as Lisbon, which is 76 miles south and Porto, which is 116 miles north, grew into great cities.

Fatima’s story remained in relative obscurity for many centuries. It was not until the year 1602 that the Cistercian monk Fr. Joao de Brito recorded the account in his monumental Cronica da Ordem de Cister (Cistercian Chronicles), which attempted to give a complete history of not only the order’s history, but many of the local histories in Portugal which existed up to that point.

Fatima would remain in relative obscurity until 1916 with the visions of the three Fatima children of Mary, of the Mother of God.

gohistoric_17135_m

Next Part: Heresy and Usury

-- Delivered by Feed43 service

Post a Comment

 
Top