Musafir's Musings

Pope Urban II and doctrine of "Positive Violence"

Years ago I attended a seminar in which the time management guru Alan Lakein expounded on "postive procrastination". Not easy to practise but I could see the merits of Professor Lakein's theory. "Positive violence", however, is another matter. Two recent books contain fascinating details about the crusades and "positive violence".

The First Crusade: A New History by Thomas Asbridge (Oxford University Press, 2004)
The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinopole by Jonathan Phillips (Viking Books, 2004)

The authors teach medieval history at the University of London.

In her review of the books, Joan Acocella wrote in The New Yorker: "Whenever a war needed to be viewed as a sacred enterprise, the word (Crusade) came up. George W. Bush used it to describe his war on terrorism."

We know that President Bush backed off from continuing with the theme because of its connotations; it was not considered politically correct. For his war, he needed support of Islamic countries.

I learned that it was Pope Urban II (1035-1099) who preached about "positive violence" to motivate the knights of the First Crusade who were facing pangs of conscience and doubts about what they were doing and what they were taught about heaven, hell and sins. Later, when the Fourth Crusade came around, Crusaders were assured of absolution of all "confessed transgressions". I quote Ms. Acocella: "So it was two in one: the knights could go on slaughtering people and get to Heaven thereby. That was 'positive violence', and according to Asbridge and Phillips, it was the motor of the Crusades."

Ms. Acocella's review mentioned that the beginning of the First Crusade might have had something to do with faith but it didn't take long to turn into looting and pillaging expeditions. She cited another British historian Steven Runciman and his "History of The Crusades". Mr. Runciman wrote that "....the Holy War itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God." For instance, on their way to Constantinopole, the People's Crusade (a rabble army organized by a French monk, Peter the Hermit) killed a large number of Rhineland Jews.

Today we are told that we are waging war to fight terrorism and to spread democracy. The other sides tell their followers of a holy war against infidels! While the Muslims don't shy away from using the term "Jihad", our policy makers painstakingly avoid "Crusade" in their speeches and exhortations. There are similarities in what they believe and zealously pursue--that the end justifies the means; violence is necessary....and positive. There seems to be very little concern about the innocent civilians caught in the middle. We have coined a term for them--"collateral damage". Perhaps the Muslims say "mekhtub" (It was written).

Positive procrastination is worth thinking about. Pursuit of the policy of positive violence ought to be shunned by all.
*****