🎥The rest of this series will only be available to the TH-cam Members th-cam.com/channels/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin and Patrons: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals along 160 other exclusive videos. We are thankful to youtube members and patrons for supporting our channel!
Just to correct some mistake but at 1:32, Aquitaine wasn't part of england but france and it was just the duke of aquitaine who was also king of england, which still made both entities separate.
I've already watched this video before, when it was released for channel members. It's one of the lesser known, yet important an topic, lots of people don't know anything about the Albigensian Crusade. So, thanks again to Kings and General's team for creating this series .
Funnily enough, there’s a novella by Gram MacNeil that has the Emperor of Mankind discussing theology with the last preacher on earth. One of the things Big E uses an example of the deferments of religion is that exact moment.
I actually did a term paper on this subject. My takeaway was that when you factor in how small, theologically divided, and disorganized the Cathers where, it becomes harder to believe the Church saw the group itself as a real threat. Much more pressing was the pluralistic culture that both tolerated and sheltered the Albigensians, with many defended by their friends and neighbors who refused to turn them over for the usual punishment for heretics in the middle ages, as well as ambivalence and sometimes outright protection provided by local feudal lords like the Raymonds. This coupled with how decentralized authority was in the region as well as its more distant relationship with Northern France played a large part in creating a safe haven for the Cathers while the more metropolitan culture of the Languedoc fostered opportunities for evangelism both by this organization as well as the Waldensians, who some historians look at as a proto-protestant movement of sorts. But yea, my argument was that this crusade was waged mainly to crush the culture that allowed the Cathers to arise in the first place, backed up by the churches reliance on the inquisition to finish the job of stamping them out over the next few decades. Throw in the opportunity for France's monarchy to centralize authority once it dealt with other business (if memory serves, they were fighting the English near the start of the conflict...it's been a few years) it had ample incentive to get involved. Meanwhile, because the pope gave this the sanction of a crusade, it allowed for the level of penance to drastically lower one's time in purgatory without going across the Mediterranean to fight in the Holy Land, so that likely helped keep a steady supply of manpower. (Addendum): Worth noting-this was a period where it was becoming increasingly common for people take issue with the church establishment. Mind, this wasn't out of some pre-modern "down with organized religion" thinking, but because they wanted to be *more* involved with their church, pursue a more personal relationship to God rather than relying on the hierarchy exclusively (hence the rise in mystic orders at around this time), and a growing frustration with priests who neglected their parishes. Keep in mind, while lower clergy (Monks and Abbots) *could* be made up of normal people, high clergy (priests and bishops) at this time were largely if not exclusively drawn from the nobility, often from sons who stood to inherit little because they were firstborn. As may be expected, a lot of these nobles preferred sticking to the cities rather than their more rural diocese, leaving many of their flocks to go months or years between being able to properly attend mass. As one may imagine, this neglect led many to start looking for ways to take care of their own spiritual needs, which provided a perfect breeding ground for movements that allowed and encouraged this type of lay involvement, such as the Cathers and Waldensians.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 I'm afraid not. It was a term paper for my last undergraduate class, and so not published. I could make a video on it someday though.
I was so jealous when I heard this was a Patreon only video, so glad it's been released on youtube! I used to live in the area so I've been to many of these places
@@KingsandGenerals And the history of reformation. We know very little except Luther, Henry VIII, 30 years war, and that there were some other conflicts and peace agreements
Weird timing. I was just writing (briefly) about this crusade for a school assignment about the Medieval inquisition the other day. I'm glad to get some more info from one of my favorite channels!
Or you could be a Fransiscan since they also prioritized a philosophy and work ethic that centered of living life with the least dependencies on the material world and focusing of erudition and meditation. The founder of the order himself, Saint Francis of Assisi, had previously been the son of a wealthy merchant before publicly renouncing his inheritance to his fathes wealth and choosing to live a life of piety and study withh and christian-stoic discipline.
Also not stated: they threatened and killed people who did not agree with them, and formed gangs and mobs to get what they wanted from not only the lords but normal people who don't want to do anything to do with them.
@@lordguan88 Wierd. As far as I read it, he was killed by a hired Assasin. That was later also made a Saint? Funny how Catholics make you a Saint, for killing their Saint?
@@christopherg2347 yes it is called repentance. Remember the Good Thief (St. Dismas) that led a life of crime/mayhem until he repented in front of Jesus? Even the worst gnostic murderer could come to Jesus and ask for mercy and repentance.
Caesarius of Heisterbach : "Kill them all. The Lord knows whi are his own". You forget to mention that Caesarius of Heisterbach didn't participate to this crusade and that citation is very probably a legend.
Yeah, kings & generals have been slowly getting sloppier with their videos. The 2nd crusade also had a massive error by presenting the fanciful armenian account of a battle as a "Major victory of the crusade" despite it not changing anything, not being decisive, and not even being a part of the 2nd crusade at all. Great history channel but it has kind of been slowly falling apart ever since they started doing the "modern" videos with clear bias involved.
Fantastic as usual do you guys plan to redo the third crusade? Just curious I think the video even though the graphics are a little outdated are pretty good. I don’t think you have to go through all that effort again.
Every time a massive army returns home, it spells disaster for the ruling class. I don’t mean because you have an influx of a bunch of men trained to kill other men- but because that kind of exposure to the outside world invites all sorts of criticism, criticism that comes from experience. I’m not going as far as to say every globe-trotting conquest inevitably results in social upheaval, but that it definitely injects new perspectives into what is historically the most influential demographic in any pre-industrial society: young men. Watergate was wild, it’s no accident that the hippie movement came after Vietnam. Those conscientious objectors didn’t have the life changing experience of war, nor the convenient solution of eastern mysticism running through their minds like the young returning soldiers had. Pacifism was their epiphany. And this epiphany is repeated throughout all of history, by the common soldiers who returned changed. The European crusades were not explicitly religious, it was feudalism fighting for its life. These Christians learned how other Christian’s lived, that there was no fiefdom, no dukedom, in Egypt, Constantinople, or Syria. That freedom of movement was a given. That the enemy used mercenaries, not civilians, to wage war. The Cathars were a different religion yes, but that was secondary to the root of their difference. France sent the most soldiers out of any European kingdom to the Holy Lands, so of course there would be enough of them left to form an entire nation on their triumphal return. These commoners were the ones to revive the old folklore. The English had King Arthur, Merlin, Morgan Le Fey. Folk heroes adapted to fit the modern world. While the French had Robin Hood and his merry men, their adventures containing a distinct Celtic and pastoralist flavour that was quite different to the France of that era. Robin Hood wasn’t chivalrous, nor he was he a knight because the westernmost Gauls valued archers over horsemen. His adventures occur as he wanders from place to place, impossible for a land divided into various dukedoms/fiefdoms. Returning the English, or rather ‘The Matter of Britain’ as it is called, does Merlin not read as a pagan? As a Druid? His story existed with the commoners and no doubt resonated with the travelling soldiers, soldiers who spread and adapted these tales eagerly as they reconnected with their ancestral roots. That excitement, that desire for peace, for culture: in its purest form, is the goal of wanderlust. whereas Populists and Fascists create a mythical past, and isolate themselves from the outside world. It is with travel and exposure to other cultures that our own identity springs forth. it is not ‘multiculturalism’ to blame for the alienation of the native, but Imperialism, the assimilation of all identities to cohere with the state ideology. Assimilation is the death of culture, it seeks to unite vast swaths of land under a single state identity. Borders are discrete where humans exist on gradients.
It was a pretty new term at the time :P The first crusade was only about a hundred years before in 1096. Christianity didn't have any concept of a holy war for 1000 years, the pope had to sell the 1st crusade as a "pilgrimage". Crusade, a very new concept to christendom, meant a war for christ. We often think of the crusades as being against muslims, but there were alot of crusades against christians. "For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 The idea of fighting with weapons for Christ was foreign to the Apostles. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.” John 18:36 It wasn't after a while that crusade became a loose term. It's only recently that people use it narrowly to refer to the europe/muslim conflicts.
It's also important to note that the allegorical sense of the word 'crusade' such as campus crusade for christ or others usually refers to the sense of enaging in a concerted conflict for Christ or sometimes just for a belief. They aren't necessarily supposed to bring up images of the actual crusades. Many Christians think of imagery far older than the crusades when they reference military allegories. Things like "Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand." Ephesians 6:11-13 Paul goes on to explain that we need to be on guard with accouterments not of armed conflict, but of faithful endurance in serving God. "Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God." Ephesians 6:14-17
Crusade was always a lose term, they were killing fellow christians in the first one before they got to the holy land, broke promises constantly, and preceding the crusade butchered jews in the hre for no reason. Basically the crusades had an idealistic view of itsself that, in reality, was nothing like what it actually was. Even IF they had only killed non-christians, the sheer barbarity of their actions in the middle east shows that they were nothing like the image they portrayed. The crusades were messed up from the very start.
Great video and thanks for your work (it applies to all your videos) ! However a dedicated video or a more detailed intro should have been made about the key words, such as Cathars and heresy. At least to clarify or define some terms and contexts => Catharism or Cathars aren't the historical terms : cathar is a word used for designating many heresies throughout medieval christian Occident, not specifically the Albigensians (as the Church designated them) or Good men (as they designated themselves). The word catharism was popularised by Charles Schmidt in 1848, then popularised in the 50s-60s by movements promoting the local cultures and the history of the Occitanie region (in a brief summary). To designate these heretics, the terms Albigensians, Good men or even Albigenses should be employed (as the primary source from both side, Inquisition and Albigensians, never designated the heretics or themselves as Cathars) Similarly, the fight against heresies, such as the albigensian or waldensian, is associated with a great effort from the Church to quell any dissident movements while the Church try to ensure its oversight and supervision of the medieval life in Occident. For example: the Gregorian Reforms sharpen the religious dogma in order to ensure a more homogeneous religious framework, cohesive and loyal structure under the Pope. By sharpening the dogma, inevitably what you accepted earlier can now be excluded ; thus becoming a potential heresy and adversary if it doesn't integrate the new mold : leading to great efforts from the Church in order to ensure the respect of its tenets and to fight (not necesseraly militarily) dissident movements. I am not an expert, but some exhibitions and museum in the South of France (such as Toulouse) insist a lot on these details --- So I humbly place them here in complement to K&G great work
Thank you for this video! I was led to it. The Morrigan is my Matron Goddess. I am a Wiccan and also a physical Medium. My story is similar to yours in that I was an adopted daughter of an Episcopal Priest (and the adopted granddaughter of one, too). I grew up in a fishbowl, basically, with the parish's eyes on me. Ha. An odd little girl who only wanted to be good but was very quietly rebellious (when I wasn't melting down). I did manage to find a husband in my late 30's who loved me for who I was (and didn't care that I didn't want children, and that I was very odd and different). In 2009 I became a Wiccan and the Morrigan chose me, I believe, in 2021 or thereabouts. This was a huge "death" for me, because I also had, in 2019, shed my identity as someone who didn't know her biological family when my half-sister found me. I also, in 2021, discovered through watching a video of the only person who ever truly reminded me of me... that I was ADD and autistic (AuDHD). So... when the Morrigan and other deities approached me after that, I was like, "You DO know I'm AuDHD and won't remember to do all the ritual things and offerings and such? If you can accept me as I am, then, yes, I'd love to work with You!" The Morrigan, when I have channeled Her, basically has said that what She most wants for me is "Personal Sovereignty." She (and the other Dark Goddesses I work with, as well as the Dark Gods) want me to learn to stand up for myself, and to be my authentic self. So... at the age of 64 years young, I am finally learning to shed all of the masks I had put on since childhood, and to be authentically me. I am finding that many people are resistant, and do not like it, but I am persevering. (Let's just say that I am finding out who my true friends are.) I am serving the Morrigan best with my art and my poetry, but I think also in being a medium as well as a witch. My pantheons are both Celtic and Norse, because that is my background... UK (and Ireland), Germany, and France. Again, thank you for this video, and subscribed.
Crusades were not unique to the Middle East. As the video said, there were Crusades in France. But there were also Crusades in Spain, the Balkans, Romania, and Eastern Europe.
@@thieph in the Romanian region of Translyvania, there was a Crusade lead by Austrian and Hungarian Catholics against Romanian pagans and heretical Psuedo-Christian cults.
@thieph the tuetonic knights began in what is today Romania. Later, the "northern" crusades were against Lithuanian and Polish pagans. Many smaller crusades were more building fortified strongholds to pacify but ensure Christian footprints in regions.
A marvelous documentary! I have been to the Saint Mary Magdalene church in Beziers and you can truly feel an ominous atmosphere there, as if stone had memory.
French already difficult situation to reclaim English occupied lands and threat , yet the nobles willing to participate in crusade and rob their own countryman instead of united fighting English. Sad
They're not robbing their own countrymen because: 1. Countries weren't a thing back then. 2. Occitans aren't Frenchmen, and probably still find it offensive when someone refers to them as "Southern French".
@@MarfSantangelothe french government made sure to ban local dialects in the last century, and nobody rose to oppose it in the inter-war period, so they may scoff at the notion, but they are french now, as their culture was exterminated. Same thing with the Normans and Bretons
The war between the plantagenet and the capetians wasn't a fight between french and english. Aquitaine also wasn't occupied by english as the duchy was part of france but the duke was also king of england while the duchy of aquitaine and the kingdom of england were two separate entities so the war was just between a liege (the king of france) who tried expand the royal domain and his vassal (the duke of aquitaine). In the 13th century, france was also culturally split in half with the northern part which spoke the oil language while the southern part spoke the oc language and was closer to the iberian culture. The nobles at the time also didn't care about anything outside of their own lands and tried to gain/robbed as much as they can for their neighbour without any feeling of national unity with the religion being a pretense.
Quite the title but Cathars are not Christian, they are gnostics Gnostics are as Christians as Muslims are Shintoist The early church fathers and Saint Augustin, who was a former gnostic himself, spent countless years saying that Gnosticism is not Christianity since they are that different. Denying the Resurrection is a start for one.
Gnostics weren't denying the resurrection, they believed that after death Jesus spirit was freed and returned to God. Also deciding who is a part of a given religion based on polemics by competing sects is ridiculous. You may as well use Protestant texts to prove that Catholics aren't really Christians and vice versa. A completely flawed methodology.
@JediMasterRadek A quick Google of who the Gnostics and what they believe in. They denied the Incarnation, death and ressurection. The main point of Gnosticism is that the material world is bad since it was created by an evil God(heresy number 1) hence the main goal of men is to achieve gnosis and be free as spirits(heresy number 2) Basic Christianity teaches that Jesus became flesh since God wants to redeem the world since it was originally good since He created it. That is already a contradiction to Gnostic beliefs since God can't become flesh since flesh is evil. Hence they have this lore of Jesus being a hologtam projection. You cannot die and be resurrected if you weren't flesh to begin with. To believe that is mental gymnastics which the Gnostics themselves did not bother with. The difference between Catholicism and Protestantism(atleast the historic Mainline ones) is still closer than that between Catholicism and Gnosticism. With that said, changing the very foundation and definition of something is basically making something else, especially when the new thing fundamentally contradicts the old. Claiming Gnosticism is Christianity is like saying an apple is an orange. Yes both are fruits and both have seeds but it does not change the fact both are still different fruits, that looks and tastes different.
@@JediMasterRadek A quick Google search on who the Gnostics are and what they believed in refutes your claim. The Gnostics believed the flesh is evil hence God cannot incarnate as flesh which contradicts the point of Christianity that God became man to redeem man. Also they believed in an equally powerful evil god who created the material world which contradicts Christianity even more. Believing Gnosticism and Christianity are somewhat compatibile is bizarre mental gymnastics of you actually know what both believed in. Do you even know th fundamentals of what both religions believe in? If you don't know the basics of Christianity, then you are in no position to define what is or isn't. Apples are not oranges. They might have seeds but they look, feel and taste different
They may have been heretical in the eyes of the Catholic church but there are many sects of Christianity. Saint Augustin lived a millennia before the Cathars so that's not really relevant.
18:00 The Cathars weren’t Christians though. They were ultimately a dualistic sect that preached an entirely different religion from traditional Christianity.
@@ramonessix No, they were Gnostics. An entirely different religion to Christianity. They rejected one of the most important parts of the Christian faith, the Crucifixion of Jesus, the Son of God, among other beliefs as well. They just borrowed certain Christian aspects.
@@ramonessix Rejecting the divinity of Christ does not make you a Christian. This is the same reason why Christians don’t consider Mormons to be Christian.
Will this series cover the vaudois(aka waldenses)? They were not as big of a movement as the albigensians but they were around at the same time, they got caught in the cross fire (Since they weren't loyal to the pope). They are very interesting, especially to protestants, since they were a bible movement (unlike the albigensians who rejected the bible). And of course, they still exist today!
A quick search will show that Cathars aren't/weren't Christian, and not just from a Catholic perspective. For example, Dualism: The Cathars believed in two gods: a good god and an evil god. This dualistic view contradicts the monotheistic teaching of Scripture, which asserts the existence of only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus said it is literally the the Greatest Commandment, and they broke it. If you think Jesus can be wrong, you aren't a Christian. Rejection of the Old Testament: The Cathars rejected the Old Testament, viewing it as the work of the evil god. This is in direct opposition to the Christian belief that the Old Testament is divinely inspired and an integral part of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). The NT can't exist without the OT. It is a single story with over 300 prophecies fulfilled by Jesus.
Jesus’ Humanity: The Cathars denied the humanity of Jesus, believing Him to be purely a spiritual being. This contradicts the Scriptural teaching of the incarnation, which states that Jesus was both fully God and fully man (John 1:14, Philippians 2:6-8). If Jesus wasn't/isn't a man, we are all still dead in our sins, and the NT also makes no sense, even if you sweep the OT under the rug as a "cope." Reincarnation: The Cathars believed in reincarnation, which is not supported by Scripture. The Bible teaches that humans die once and then face judgment (Hebrews 9:27). Cathars were about as Christian as Muslims, Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses are, since they also believe in a fake Jesus, not rooted in Scripture or history. I'm not saying the Crusade was or wasn't justified, but they were pagans, not Christians. Christianity is not a "pick and choose" faith when it comes to the foundational elements of it. Good people can have disagreements about certain interpretations, but not these I've listed, at the least.
I think I’d put them more in the camp of Moonies, Mormons, or as you said, Jehovah’s Witnesses. They claim to be Christians because they are superficially similar to Christians and it helps attract converts by being able to claim “oh we’re just Christians, nothing too crazy”. But then when you look under the surface, they’ve got completely divergent philosophies, and worship something other than Jesus and the Bible. I wouldn’t say they’re like Jews or Muslims though, as those groups are not Christians and don’t claim to be. The Cathars, Moonies, JWs, Mormons, etc would be considered heresies specifically because they claim to be Christian despite rejecting the majority of the Bible and traditional beliefs. And for a non-religious metaphor, it would be like me claiming to have a degree in engineering despite my real degree being in physics. Like, I still have a perfectly good degree, and to people who don’t know better engineering and physics probably seem similar, but I definitely should NOT go around claiming to be an engineer, because if someone asks me to build a bridge, it’ll probably collapse and kill people 😅 (And if you don’t know the difference, fair enough. A one sentence summary would be that engineering focuses far more on practical real world applications to build things, whereas physics focuses on theoretical concepts to develop ideas. Tbh engineering is way harder imo and they scare me lol)
Yeah, happened many times. Crusades against fellow christians have always been tragic and sad events. I can't make an excuse for the cathars, because they were gnostics and did child sacrifice
The very definition of heresy was that you are making stuff up about God that its entirely a new religion. The gnostics were as Christian as the Shinto are Muslim
@cianbradley7273 the video explicitly points out that the Kingdom of France wasn't participating in the Albigensian Crusade. The masses of soldiers wouldn't join and so many atrocities wouldn't be made if there was no religious intolerance and fanaticism .
I see a lot of people in the comments who clearly misunderstand what “heresy” means and why it matters, so I’ll try to put it into a secular context. To people who don’t know better, engineering and physics probably seem very similar. They are similar, yes, but definitely not the same. Physicists focus on learning about abstract concepts and ideas to develop theories to advance the cutting edge of science. Engineers learn about all the factors which go into building real-world objects, with all of the messy variables and imperfections that come with it. I’m not saying either is better or worse, I’m a physicist and my wife is an engineer, but they’re definitely not the same thing. I should not go around claiming to be an engineer, because if I attempted to build a bridge, people might get hurt. Similarly, my wife should not claim to be a physicist, because… idk she’d waste grant money or something (admittedly engineers are more important lol). Now then, before looking back at the Cathars, let’s take a detour to look at a much more clear heresy: The Moonies. The Moonies, who call themselves the “Family Federation for World Peace and Unification” or “Unification Church” are a sect from South Korea who believe that their founder, Sun Moon, was the second coming of Christ and that his teachings supersede anything in the Bible, they deny both the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds which most Christians hold, and a bunch of other wild things like mass weddings and of course that all women should sleep with Sun Moon lol. To anyone who actually knows about them, they are seen as a non-Christian cult, but they wear the skin of Christianity to lure in followers who don’t know the truth about them so that they can take their money. Back to the Cathars, they are MUCH weaker heresy. What do they believe in? Well mostly similarish stuff, but a dualistic god? The material world is Satanic? Admittedly I don’t know much about Cathars, but I know that those beliefs are pretty unique to Gnosticism. But is it heresy? Well that’s pretty subjective. Most Catholics and Protestants still see each other as Christians despite their differences, so why is Gnosticism a step too far? Or Moonism for that matter? The most common things I see Christians using as baselines for heresy are the following: 1) Do they not hold the Apostle’s and/or Nicene creeds? 2) Do they believe some other text is above the Bible? 3) Do they have a suspiciously charismatic leader? 4) By far the most subjective, Do they hold any beliefs that just plain seem weird? If the answer to any of the above is yes, then it’s probably considered a heresy by most Christians. If you’re not religious, this all probably sounds like stupid made up nonsense, and you’ve probably thought “look at these idiots caring about their made up stories” or something similar. But please, try to think about how you would feel if you genuinely believed people’s immortal souls were on the line here. Or if we must remain secular, imagine that if these people continue believing incorrectly they’ll get cancer or something. Suddenly this matters a whole lot more, doesn’t it? I’m definitely not apologizing for the massacre of the Cathars or saying that [insert religious war of choice here] is justified, but it annoys me to no end every time I see atheists running around smugly proclaiming that these people were just stupid or petty or whatever else. The people of the past weren’t stupid, they were just like us, and we should try to remember that. Thank you to anyone who actually bothered to read all of that lol
Sadly you really don't know much about cathars or the system, how a heresy was identified... Firstly, read som work like say Montaillou, the most famous book writen about them, then tell us anything about "weak" gnosticism...
Your generic, and curiously modern, criteria for the conduct of a Catholic inquisition and its verification of heresy bear little to no resemblance to the actual criteria implemented - nor account for any of the far more prosaic and earthly motives and political rationales behind the actions of Jacques Fournier and others. As you have been advised, before you make any further claims concerning this topic, read 'Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324,' and other relevant historical works. What will you discover from that work - complied from the meticulous notes of a chief inquisitor and future Pope? Well, that the people of Montaillou were rich in thought, independence, and curiosity, and had indeed come to question some of the very core elements that the Catholic Church championed as essential to their creed. But that was merely the pretext for their eventual persecution and horrific deaths. The fundamental motive for Fournier and the temporal lords who burned, murdered and raped their way through the land was power. They saw a community that was dangerously ambivalent about the authority of established power structures: religious orthodoxy and the basis of the land and property of the Church; the right to rule of feudal overlords in lands which neither shared their language, customs, or faith; a lack of recognition for borders between the sovereign territories of rival rulers; a growing atmosphere of ideas about representation and changes to social status, which challenged the economic dominance of the landowning class in an agrarian society that benefited from a compliant labour force with reduced mobility and economic independence. You cannot get any more petty than that. Projecting some motive of benign spiritual concern upon the brutal reality of the scenes of horror perpetrated is to reveal an utter naivety and blind trust in the propaganda of the perpetrators... even in the face of the very evidence which they complied themselves that discredits that justification.
A very interesting small series that we could enjoy month ago with the subscription! Glad than gradually more of this content we helped to create gets to the wider audience
Cathars were not christians, they held numerous tenents deriving from gnosticism, an ancient cult that was condemned even by the Church Fathers around the time as the Nicaean Creed. They borrowed some aspects from Christianity but their theology overall was contradictory to core principles of scripture, therefore not christian. ''Dualism: The Cathars believed in two gods: a good god and an evil god. This dualistic view contradicts the monotheistic teaching of Scripture, which asserts the existence of only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus said it is literally the the Greatest Commandment, and they broke it. If you think Jesus can be wrong, you aren't a Christian. Rejection of the Old Testament: The Cathars rejected the Old Testament, viewing it as the work of the evil god. This is in direct opposition to the Christian belief that the Old Testament is divinely inspired and an integral part of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). The NT can't exist without the OT. It is a single story with over 300 prophecies fulfilled by Jesus.
Jesus’ Humanity: The Cathars denied the humanity of Jesus, believing Him to be purely a spiritual being. This contradicts the Scriptural teaching of the incarnation, which states that Jesus was both fully God and fully man (John 1:14, Philippians 2:6-8). If Jesus wasn't/isn't a man, we are all still dead in our sins, and the NT also makes no sense, even if you sweep the OT under the rug as a "cope." Reincarnation: The Cathars believed in reincarnation, which is not supported by Scripture. The Bible teaches that humans die once and then will face judgment at some point (Hebrews 9:27)" Saint Augustine himself had once been part of the Manicheans, a gnostic offshot from the larger overall cult, before he converted and dedicated his scholarly and canon career to defending Christianity and compiling criticism and warnings against his former belief. So your attempt to insert this quote thinking it emphasizes a christian vs christian context is erroneous.
I was just reading about Catharism the other day. Apparently there are a bunch of scholars who now think the Cathar heresy might not have actually existed, but was fabricated by the Church in the same way they levelled fake accusations at the Knights Templar
Love your channel but please please please stop pronouncing envoy as ON-voy. The commentary is in english it should be N-voy as in enveloped, endorsed, etc etc. Minor I know but really irritating 😭😭😭 Other than that great work as always ❤
MY FAVORITE CHANNEL KINGS ND GENERALS CAN YOU MAKE A VIDEO ON THE AFGHANS (PASHTUNS) PEOPLE LIVING IN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN SPEAKING PASHTO, NATIONAL LANGUAGE OF AFGHANISTAN
I visited Carcassonne and Béziers while staying in Sète. Beautiful places. Hard to believe such death and destruction occurred there. They were fighting and killing for their beliefs in who believes in God the proper way? Unbelievable to me.
Religious conflict isn't unique to Christians. People throughout history commit atrocities for much lesser reasons. It is difficult to prevent organisms from destroying each other, nature is conflict as they say.
The pope hated the Cathars because they didn't collect any taxes for him. If their doctrine were to spread, Catholicism could well run out of money and go extinct. Of course that could not be tolerated. Rome also ordered the king of Hungary to go after the Bogomils of Bosnia (same doctrine as the Cathars of France). There are conflicting accounts on whether the Hungarians actually did it.
After finishing the 5 episodes of the Albigensian Crusades, idk if he is going to finish on the Reconquista episode or any other videos from Members Only because I'm excited to watch more episodes from Members Only since I can't buy it.
The intro is really problematic. It is very questionable whether cathars really were dualists or had anything to do with bogomils. Furthermore there is no contemporary evidence of bogomils being dualist in the firs place. But the claim that "cathar priests and bishops took less money from their subjects" is just strange. Show me one document abouth "cathar bishops" (somewhat elusive phenomenon itself) taking any money from anyone.
Using mercenaries worked out pretty well in that initial siege by chance, but it doesn't end well in terms of restraint. A larger and more organized force at a different time would have dealt with the issue better in my limited view. The massacre of Catholics, the young, and the (likely/possibly) majority of the less truly committed gnostics was morality and even practically unacceptable. To go along with that though, the fact that these gnostics still get apologia dished out for them even today is disturbing. Their beliefs and actions weren't harmless.
İf you interest with cathars, you should search Paulikians Massacre on East Rome. Cathars, Paulikians, Monthanists were child of Maniheists religion. Rome never want the Parh Prophets Mani and his religions on their lands. Cathars shared same destiny as Maniheists...
🎥The rest of this series will only be available to the TH-cam Members th-cam.com/channels/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin and Patrons: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals along 160 other exclusive videos. We are thankful to youtube members and patrons for supporting our channel!
do you ever plan to release the punic war series for non TH-cam member
@@shubhamagarwal8960 not at the moment
@@shubhamagarwal8960 that's like, the number one draw of being a member.
Just to correct some mistake but at 1:32, Aquitaine wasn't part of england but france and it was just the duke of aquitaine who was also king of england, which still made both entities separate.
@@robert-surcouf yes they are saying the english king owned the land
I've already watched this video before, when it was released for channel members. It's one of the lesser known, yet important an topic, lots of people don't know anything about the Albigensian Crusade. So, thanks again to Kings and General's team for creating this series .
What in the 40K happened here? "Kill them all, God knows who are His own" is an insane line of thinking
Funnily enough, there’s a novella by Gram MacNeil that has the Emperor of Mankind discussing theology with the last preacher on earth. One of the things Big E uses an example of the deferments of religion is that exact moment.
Thats religion for ya. It's an excuse to F up in the name of some fictional being.
If I'm not mistaken, there has been some question whether this statement was ever made.
@@shanebrown2009 true.
Well today no historian claim it's true. They dismissed it as Caesarius von Heisterbach used to colorised a lot in his writings
I actually did a term paper on this subject. My takeaway was that when you factor in how small, theologically divided, and disorganized the Cathers where, it becomes harder to believe the Church saw the group itself as a real threat. Much more pressing was the pluralistic culture that both tolerated and sheltered the Albigensians, with many defended by their friends and neighbors who refused to turn them over for the usual punishment for heretics in the middle ages, as well as ambivalence and sometimes outright protection provided by local feudal lords like the Raymonds. This coupled with how decentralized authority was in the region as well as its more distant relationship with Northern France played a large part in creating a safe haven for the Cathers while the more metropolitan culture of the Languedoc fostered opportunities for evangelism both by this organization as well as the Waldensians, who some historians look at as a proto-protestant movement of sorts.
But yea, my argument was that this crusade was waged mainly to crush the culture that allowed the Cathers to arise in the first place, backed up by the churches reliance on the inquisition to finish the job of stamping them out over the next few decades. Throw in the opportunity for France's monarchy to centralize authority once it dealt with other business (if memory serves, they were fighting the English near the start of the conflict...it's been a few years) it had ample incentive to get involved. Meanwhile, because the pope gave this the sanction of a crusade, it allowed for the level of penance to drastically lower one's time in purgatory without going across the Mediterranean to fight in the Holy Land, so that likely helped keep a steady supply of manpower.
(Addendum): Worth noting-this was a period where it was becoming increasingly common for people take issue with the church establishment. Mind, this wasn't out of some pre-modern "down with organized religion" thinking, but because they wanted to be *more* involved with their church, pursue a more personal relationship to God rather than relying on the hierarchy exclusively (hence the rise in mystic orders at around this time), and a growing frustration with priests who neglected their parishes. Keep in mind, while lower clergy (Monks and Abbots) *could* be made up of normal people, high clergy (priests and bishops) at this time were largely if not exclusively drawn from the nobility, often from sons who stood to inherit little because they were firstborn. As may be expected, a lot of these nobles preferred sticking to the cities rather than their more rural diocese, leaving many of their flocks to go months or years between being able to properly attend mass. As one may imagine, this neglect led many to start looking for ways to take care of their own spiritual needs, which provided a perfect breeding ground for movements that allowed and encouraged this type of lay involvement, such as the Cathers and Waldensians.
@@morgant.dulaman8733 is there anyway I could read your paper? I really liked your comment.
@@robertortiz-wilson1588 I'm afraid not. It was a term paper for my last undergraduate class, and so not published.
I could make a video on it someday though.
@@morgant.dulaman8733 Thanks for the response! That could be good.
Quality post.
I was so jealous when I heard this was a Patreon only video, so glad it's been released on youtube! I used to live in the area so I've been to many of these places
Will you one day cover the French wars of Religion? A very overlooked topic, just like the Albegensian Crusades!!
Yep
Can you please do the 80 years’ war (Dutch revolt) as well someday?
@@JulesFaraday22 planning to!
@@KingsandGenerals Now that gets me excited! You’d be the perfect channel to cover that awesome conflict.
@@KingsandGenerals And the history of reformation. We know very little except Luther, Henry VIII, 30 years war, and that there were some other conflicts and peace agreements
Weird timing. I was just writing (briefly) about this crusade for a school assignment about the Medieval inquisition the other day. I'm glad to get some more info from one of my favorite channels!
Nice!
They lived a life of abstinence and total poverty...
I didn't know I was a Cathar!
Or you could be a Fransiscan since they also prioritized a philosophy and work ethic that centered of living life with the least dependencies on the material world and focusing of erudition and meditation. The founder of the order himself, Saint Francis of Assisi, had previously been the son of a wealthy merchant before publicly renouncing his inheritance to his fathes wealth and choosing to live a life of piety and study withh and christian-stoic discipline.
Also not stated: they threatened and killed people who did not agree with them, and formed gangs and mobs to get what they wanted from not only the lords but normal people who don't want to do anything to do with them.
@@rennor3498 Saint Peter of Verona was a victim of the Cathars in northern Italy. The Cathars were actually very violent people
@@lordguan88 Wierd. As far as I read it, he was killed by a hired Assasin. That was later also made a Saint?
Funny how Catholics make you a Saint, for killing their Saint?
@@christopherg2347 yes it is called repentance. Remember the Good Thief (St. Dismas) that led a life of crime/mayhem until he repented in front of Jesus? Even the worst gnostic murderer could come to Jesus and ask for mercy and repentance.
Caesarius of Heisterbach : "Kill them all. The Lord knows whi are his own".
You forget to mention that Caesarius of Heisterbach didn't participate to this crusade and that citation is very probably a legend.
Yeah, kings & generals have been slowly getting sloppier with their videos.
The 2nd crusade also had a massive error by presenting the fanciful armenian account of a battle as a "Major victory of the crusade" despite it not changing anything, not being decisive, and not even being a part of the 2nd crusade at all.
Great history channel but it has kind of been slowly falling apart ever since they started doing the "modern" videos with clear bias involved.
Myth is truer than history
This was the first patreon series that I fully watched so it's nice seeing it here, hopefully other people will find it entertaining
Scary, I was just watching videos about Catharism, Gnosticism and the Bogomils and now you upload this
You're all good. I had never heard of Catharism, Gnosticism or the Bogomils before this video. Pure coincidence
Great video. you really put a lot of detail in this.
Crusaders: are we the baddies?
This one is uniquely bad
Deus Vult
Always been bad
Yes...yes they are.
@@DrKarmolol that is not true at all
A TH-camr known as Jack Rackham did a video on Innocent III a few years ago. It was really funny. It might worth a watch.
Fantastic as usual do you guys plan to redo the third crusade? Just curious I think the video even though the graphics are a little outdated are pretty good. I don’t think you have to go through all that effort again.
They mentioned that on the membership Q&A. I think it might happen but def not a priority rn cuz they wanna redo Mongols after finishing 2nd crusade
Yep, yep, longer 3rd crusade series with a heavy emphasis on the events before and after the crusade
@@KingsandGenerals finally we’re getting the Mongol. Let’s go is Genghis time.
Glad non members can also enjoy this excellent series now!
Only the first episode ;-)
Beem waiting for this. Thank you ❤️
Another amazing video! Thanks for this KnG.
Thanks!
Wonderful video, again! 🏹🔥⚔
Unfortunately, the Cathars didn't have any Jan Zizka among them.
Very informative❤
Thanks for the video
Every time a massive army returns home, it spells disaster for the ruling class. I don’t mean because you have an influx of a bunch of men trained to kill other men- but because that kind of exposure to the outside world invites all sorts of criticism, criticism that comes from experience.
I’m not going as far as to say every globe-trotting conquest inevitably results in social upheaval, but that it definitely injects new perspectives into what is historically the most influential demographic in any pre-industrial society: young men.
Watergate was wild, it’s no accident that the hippie movement came after Vietnam. Those conscientious objectors didn’t have the life changing experience of war, nor the convenient solution of eastern mysticism running through their minds like the young returning soldiers had. Pacifism was their epiphany.
And this epiphany is repeated throughout all of history, by the common soldiers who returned changed.
The European crusades were not explicitly religious, it was feudalism fighting for its life. These Christians learned how other Christian’s lived, that there was no fiefdom, no dukedom, in Egypt, Constantinople, or Syria. That freedom of movement was a given. That the enemy used mercenaries, not civilians, to wage war.
The Cathars were a different religion yes, but that was secondary to the root of their difference. France sent the most soldiers out of any European kingdom to the Holy Lands, so of course there would be enough of them left to form an entire nation on their triumphal return.
These commoners were the ones to revive the old folklore. The English had King Arthur, Merlin, Morgan Le Fey. Folk heroes adapted to fit the modern world. While the French had Robin Hood and his merry men, their adventures containing a distinct Celtic and pastoralist flavour that was quite different to the France of that era.
Robin Hood wasn’t chivalrous, nor he was he a knight because the westernmost Gauls valued archers over horsemen. His adventures occur as he wanders from place to place, impossible for a land divided into various dukedoms/fiefdoms.
Returning the English, or rather ‘The Matter of Britain’ as it is called, does Merlin not read as a pagan? As a Druid? His story existed with the commoners and no doubt resonated with the travelling soldiers, soldiers who spread and adapted these tales eagerly as they reconnected with their ancestral roots.
That excitement, that desire for peace, for culture: in its purest form, is the goal of wanderlust. whereas Populists and Fascists create a mythical past, and isolate themselves from the outside world. It is with travel and exposure to other cultures that our own identity springs forth.
it is not ‘multiculturalism’ to blame for the alienation of the native, but Imperialism, the assimilation of all identities to cohere with the state ideology. Assimilation is the death of culture, it seeks to unite vast swaths of land under a single state identity. Borders are discrete where humans exist on gradients.
Yeah… Crusade became a pretty loose term after a while
It was a pretty new term at the time :P
The first crusade was only about a hundred years before in 1096.
Christianity didn't have any concept of a holy war for 1000 years, the pope had to sell the 1st crusade as a "pilgrimage".
Crusade, a very new concept to christendom, meant a war for christ. We often think of the crusades as being against muslims, but there were alot of crusades against christians.
"For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." 2 Corinthians 10:3-5
The idea of fighting with weapons for Christ was foreign to the Apostles.
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.” John 18:36
It wasn't after a while that crusade became a loose term. It's only recently that people use it narrowly to refer to the europe/muslim conflicts.
It's also important to note that the allegorical sense of the word 'crusade' such as campus crusade for christ or others usually refers to the sense of enaging in a concerted conflict for Christ or sometimes just for a belief. They aren't necessarily supposed to bring up images of the actual crusades.
Many Christians think of imagery far older than the crusades when they reference military allegories.
Things like
"Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand."
Ephesians 6:11-13
Paul goes on to explain that we need to be on guard with accouterments not of armed conflict, but of faithful endurance in serving God.
"Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."
Ephesians 6:14-17
Crusade is only the Christian version of the Muslim jihad.
What are you on about that was early on.
Crusade was always a lose term, they were killing fellow christians in the first one before they got to the holy land, broke promises constantly, and preceding the crusade butchered jews in the hre for no reason.
Basically the crusades had an idealistic view of itsself that, in reality, was nothing like what it actually was.
Even IF they had only killed non-christians, the sheer barbarity of their actions in the middle east shows that they were nothing like the image they portrayed.
The crusades were messed up from the very start.
Great video and thanks for your work (it applies to all your videos) !
However a dedicated video or a more detailed intro should have been made about the key words, such as Cathars and heresy.
At least to clarify or define some terms and contexts => Catharism or Cathars aren't the historical terms : cathar is a word used for designating many heresies throughout medieval christian Occident, not specifically the Albigensians (as the Church designated them) or Good men (as they designated themselves). The word catharism was popularised by Charles Schmidt in 1848, then popularised in the 50s-60s by movements promoting the local cultures and the history of the Occitanie region (in a brief summary). To designate these heretics, the terms Albigensians, Good men or even Albigenses should be employed (as the primary source from both side, Inquisition and Albigensians, never designated the heretics or themselves as Cathars)
Similarly, the fight against heresies, such as the albigensian or waldensian, is associated with a great effort from the Church to quell any dissident movements while the Church try to ensure its oversight and supervision of the medieval life in Occident. For example: the Gregorian Reforms sharpen the religious dogma in order to ensure a more homogeneous religious framework, cohesive and loyal structure under the Pope. By sharpening the dogma, inevitably what you accepted earlier can now be excluded ; thus becoming a potential heresy and adversary if it doesn't integrate the new mold : leading to great efforts from the Church in order to ensure the respect of its tenets and to fight (not necesseraly militarily) dissident movements.
I am not an expert, but some exhibitions and museum in the South of France (such as Toulouse) insist a lot on these details --- So I humbly place them here in complement to K&G great work
Life was mental back then.
You guys shoud try A-B testing with various narrators, tbh it's the main reason I don't watch this channel much (but like the content)
Been a good year of videos
Saw this as a channel exclusive. Glad to see it get wider exposure.
Thank you for this video! I was led to it. The Morrigan is my Matron Goddess. I am a Wiccan and also a physical Medium. My story is similar to yours in that I was an adopted daughter of an Episcopal Priest (and the adopted granddaughter of one, too). I grew up in a fishbowl, basically, with the parish's eyes on me. Ha. An odd little girl who only wanted to be good but was very quietly rebellious (when I wasn't melting down). I did manage to find a husband in my late 30's who loved me for who I was (and didn't care that I didn't want children, and that I was very odd and different). In 2009 I became a Wiccan and the Morrigan chose me, I believe, in 2021 or thereabouts. This was a huge "death" for me, because I also had, in 2019, shed my identity as someone who didn't know her biological family when my half-sister found me. I also, in 2021, discovered through watching a video of the only person who ever truly reminded me of me... that I was ADD and autistic (AuDHD). So... when the Morrigan and other deities approached me after that, I was like, "You DO know I'm AuDHD and won't remember to do all the ritual things and offerings and such? If you can accept me as I am, then, yes, I'd love to work with You!" The Morrigan, when I have channeled Her, basically has said that what She most wants for me is "Personal Sovereignty." She (and the other Dark Goddesses I work with, as well as the Dark Gods) want me to learn to stand up for myself, and to be my authentic self. So... at the age of 64 years young, I am finally learning to shed all of the masks I had put on since childhood, and to be authentically me. I am finding that many people are resistant, and do not like it, but I am persevering. (Let's just say that I am finding out who my true friends are.) I am serving the Morrigan best with my art and my poetry, but I think also in being a medium as well as a witch. My pantheons are both Celtic and Norse, because that is my background... UK (and Ireland), Germany, and France. Again, thank you for this video, and subscribed.
What game is used for the 3D scenes? They look great btw.
It's Total War, either Attila or Rome 2 with the medieval mods
total war attila with medieval kingdoms 1212ad mod. highly recommend u try it out.
@@henrycheng7598 Thx!
@@Entroxity Sure will
Crusades were not unique to the Middle East.
As the video said, there were Crusades in France.
But there were also Crusades in Spain, the Balkans, Romania, and Eastern Europe.
What crusade was in Romania?
@@thieph in the Romanian region of Translyvania, there was a Crusade lead by Austrian and Hungarian Catholics against Romanian pagans and heretical Psuedo-Christian cults.
In Scandinavia and Russia too
@@theawesomeman9821 i am romanian, never heard of the movie🤣
@thieph the tuetonic knights began in what is today Romania. Later, the "northern" crusades were against Lithuanian and Polish pagans. Many smaller crusades were more building fortified strongholds to pacify but ensure Christian footprints in regions.
There is an exposition dedicated to the Cathares in Toulouse. Very interesting of you get the chance
A marvelous documentary! I have been to the Saint Mary Magdalene church in Beziers and you can truly feel an ominous atmosphere there, as if stone had memory.
Great Video.
Truly an epic gamer moment
Never forget how bad we're capable of being.
Human potential both for good and evil is limitless. We can only hope that we are getting a bit better every day.
@@KingsandGenerals be the change you wanna see, amirite
40 Day Rule... considering the expense, difficulty and time the journey to get there and back, 40 days doesn't seem much time once you get there! 😮
There is a special exhibition in the museum st raymond and couvent des jacobins on the subject at Toulouse until january the 5
On support videos you have history of prussia. I have one question in which period you start this series?
I already watched. But - I'm here again
French already difficult situation to reclaim English occupied lands and threat , yet the nobles willing to participate in crusade and rob their own countryman instead of united fighting English. Sad
They're not robbing their own countrymen because:
1. Countries weren't a thing back then.
2. Occitans aren't Frenchmen, and probably still find it offensive when someone refers to them as "Southern French".
@@MarfSantangelothe french government made sure to ban local dialects in the last century, and nobody rose to oppose it in the inter-war period, so they may scoff at the notion, but they are french now, as their culture was exterminated. Same thing with the Normans and Bretons
The war between the plantagenet and the capetians wasn't a fight between french and english.
Aquitaine also wasn't occupied by english as the duchy was part of france but the duke was also king of england while the duchy of aquitaine and the kingdom of england were two separate entities so the war was just between a liege (the king of france) who tried expand the royal domain and his vassal (the duke of aquitaine).
In the 13th century, france was also culturally split in half with the northern part which spoke the oil language while the southern part spoke the oc language and was closer to the iberian culture.
The nobles at the time also didn't care about anything outside of their own lands and tried to gain/robbed as much as they can for their neighbour without any feeling of national unity with the religion being a pretense.
@@MarfSantangelo Today, Occitans are frenchmen and nobody finds that offensive...
No English here. It was more Frankish lords native to the regions who governed these lands in allegiance to the Plantagenets, and not the Capetians.
Pope Innocent III is such a misleading name.
Pope Not guilty III is more like it.
You heretic!
Fascinating!
10:35 he have become the spacemarine of warhammer 40k
Yes! Finally, we're going into 11 eyes lore now!
I'm surprised anyone else even got that reference!
Didn't they already do the Albigensian crusades?
publishing episode #1 for the non-patrons/members
Quite the title but Cathars are not Christian, they are gnostics
Gnostics are as Christians as Muslims are Shintoist
The early church fathers and Saint Augustin, who was a former gnostic himself, spent countless years saying that Gnosticism is not Christianity since they are that different.
Denying the Resurrection is a start for one.
Gnostics weren't denying the resurrection, they believed that after death Jesus spirit was freed and returned to God. Also deciding who is a part of a given religion based on polemics by competing sects is ridiculous. You may as well use Protestant texts to prove that Catholics aren't really Christians and vice versa. A completely flawed methodology.
@JediMasterRadek A quick Google of who the Gnostics and what they believe in. They denied the Incarnation, death and ressurection.
The main point of Gnosticism is that the material world is bad since it was created by an evil God(heresy number 1) hence the main goal of men is to achieve gnosis and be free as spirits(heresy number 2)
Basic Christianity teaches that Jesus became flesh since God wants to redeem the world since it was originally good since He created it. That is already a contradiction to Gnostic beliefs since God can't become flesh since flesh is evil. Hence they have this lore of Jesus being a hologtam projection. You cannot die and be resurrected if you weren't flesh to begin with. To believe that is mental gymnastics which the Gnostics themselves did not bother with.
The difference between Catholicism and Protestantism(atleast the historic Mainline ones) is still closer than that between Catholicism and Gnosticism.
With that said, changing the very foundation and definition of something is basically making something else, especially when the new thing fundamentally contradicts the old.
Claiming Gnosticism is Christianity is like saying an apple is an orange.
Yes both are fruits and both have seeds but it does not change the fact both are still different fruits, that looks and tastes different.
@@JediMasterRadek A quick Google search on who the Gnostics are and what they believed in refutes your claim.
The Gnostics believed the flesh is evil hence God cannot incarnate as flesh which contradicts the point of Christianity that God became man to redeem man. Also they believed in an equally powerful evil god who created the material world which contradicts Christianity even more.
Believing Gnosticism and Christianity are somewhat compatibile is bizarre mental gymnastics of you actually know what both believed in.
Do you even know th fundamentals of what both religions believe in?
If you don't know the basics of Christianity, then you are in no position to define what is or isn't.
Apples are not oranges. They might have seeds but they look, feel and taste different
They may have been heretical in the eyes of the Catholic church but there are many sects of Christianity. Saint Augustin lived a millennia before the Cathars so that's not really relevant.
@@JediMasterRadekThat's the same as denying the Resurrection.
Good and interesting video
Albigensians are not Christians, per Christian history. They are Gnostics.
You can be both
Thanks for proving that just a little reinterpretation is enough to discriminate against other Christians
You mean true Christians not the satanic murderous catholics?
@@GredtheManlygnostics aren't christians
@@frikko2861No.
18:00 The Cathars weren’t Christians though. They were ultimately a dualistic sect that preached an entirely different religion from traditional Christianity.
still, they were christians
@@ramonessix No, they were Gnostics. An entirely different religion to Christianity. They rejected one of the most important parts of the Christian faith, the Crucifixion of Jesus, the Son of God, among other beliefs as well. They just borrowed certain Christian aspects.
@@ramonessix Rejecting the divinity of Christ does not make you a Christian. This is the same reason why Christians don’t consider Mormons to be Christian.
@@ramonessixstill, they were not christians
@@JulesFaraday22 I'm pretty sure Mormons do consider Christ as divine?
Im a youtube member.
The member section is one long crawl.
Is there an easy way to search the member section to find the rest of this series?
Playlists should help
0:32 what are these bicycle looking ahh horse hybrids?
Horsie horsies
@@KingsandGenerals😂😂
excelllent!
Wasn‘t the first Crusade against fellow Christians the 4th Crusade?
Will this series cover the vaudois(aka waldenses)? They were not as big of a movement as the albigensians but they were around at the same time, they got caught in the cross fire (Since they weren't loyal to the pope).
They are very interesting, especially to protestants, since they were a bible movement (unlike the albigensians who rejected the bible).
And of course, they still exist today!
Not this particular series - it is done and available for the patrons/TH-cam members. But more videos on various religious groups are planned
I do hope we get a Hussite wars video soon to!
At some point!
And bosnian crusade 😂 @@KingsandGenerals
A quick search will show that Cathars aren't/weren't Christian, and not just from a Catholic perspective. For example,
Dualism: The Cathars believed in two gods: a good god and an evil god. This dualistic view contradicts the monotheistic teaching of Scripture, which asserts the existence of only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus said it is literally the the Greatest Commandment, and they broke it. If you think Jesus can be wrong, you aren't a Christian.
Rejection of the Old Testament: The Cathars rejected the Old Testament, viewing it as the work of the evil god. This is in direct opposition to the Christian belief that the Old Testament is divinely inspired and an integral part of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). The NT can't exist without the OT. It is a single story with over 300 prophecies fulfilled by Jesus.
Jesus’ Humanity: The Cathars denied the humanity of Jesus, believing Him to be purely a spiritual being. This contradicts the Scriptural teaching of the incarnation, which states that Jesus was both fully God and fully man (John 1:14, Philippians 2:6-8). If Jesus wasn't/isn't a man, we are all still dead in our sins, and the NT also makes no sense, even if you sweep the OT under the rug as a "cope."
Reincarnation: The Cathars believed in reincarnation, which is not supported by Scripture. The Bible teaches that humans die once and then face judgment (Hebrews 9:27).
Cathars were about as Christian as Muslims, Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses are, since they also believe in a fake Jesus, not rooted in Scripture or history. I'm not saying the Crusade was or wasn't justified, but they were pagans, not Christians. Christianity is not a "pick and choose" faith when it comes to the foundational elements of it. Good people can have disagreements about certain interpretations, but not these I've listed, at the least.
Well put, excellently explained.
I think I’d put them more in the camp of Moonies, Mormons, or as you said, Jehovah’s Witnesses. They claim to be Christians because they are superficially similar to Christians and it helps attract converts by being able to claim “oh we’re just Christians, nothing too crazy”. But then when you look under the surface, they’ve got completely divergent philosophies, and worship something other than Jesus and the Bible.
I wouldn’t say they’re like Jews or Muslims though, as those groups are not Christians and don’t claim to be. The Cathars, Moonies, JWs, Mormons, etc would be considered heresies specifically because they claim to be Christian despite rejecting the majority of the Bible and traditional beliefs.
And for a non-religious metaphor, it would be like me claiming to have a degree in engineering despite my real degree being in physics. Like, I still have a perfectly good degree, and to people who don’t know better engineering and physics probably seem similar, but I definitely should NOT go around claiming to be an engineer, because if someone asks me to build a bridge, it’ll probably collapse and kill people 😅
(And if you don’t know the difference, fair enough. A one sentence summary would be that engineering focuses far more on practical real world applications to build things, whereas physics focuses on theoretical concepts to develop ideas. Tbh engineering is way harder imo and they scare me lol)
Not true at all lol, this is a straight up lie
yet in everyday life they were way much closer to the christ way of life than the christians themselves
Can't wait for Christian nationalism when you all can fight over which Christianity is the true one.
Ah yes, the crusades against others who interpreted God in other ways.
This is always the case.
Yeah, happened many times. Crusades against fellow christians have always been tragic and sad events. I can't make an excuse for the cathars, because they were gnostics and did child sacrifice
You have no clue about the evils of heresy
The very definition of heresy was that you are making stuff up about God that its entirely a new religion.
The gnostics were as Christian as the Shinto are Muslim
@cianbradley7273 the video explicitly points out that the Kingdom of France wasn't participating in the Albigensian Crusade. The masses of soldiers wouldn't join and so many atrocities wouldn't be made if there was no religious intolerance and fanaticism .
I see a lot of people in the comments who clearly misunderstand what “heresy” means and why it matters, so I’ll try to put it into a secular context.
To people who don’t know better, engineering and physics probably seem very similar. They are similar, yes, but definitely not the same. Physicists focus on learning about abstract concepts and ideas to develop theories to advance the cutting edge of science. Engineers learn about all the factors which go into building real-world objects, with all of the messy variables and imperfections that come with it. I’m not saying either is better or worse, I’m a physicist and my wife is an engineer, but they’re definitely not the same thing. I should not go around claiming to be an engineer, because if I attempted to build a bridge, people might get hurt. Similarly, my wife should not claim to be a physicist, because… idk she’d waste grant money or something (admittedly engineers are more important lol).
Now then, before looking back at the Cathars, let’s take a detour to look at a much more clear heresy: The Moonies. The Moonies, who call themselves the “Family Federation for World Peace and Unification” or “Unification Church” are a sect from South Korea who believe that their founder, Sun Moon, was the second coming of Christ and that his teachings supersede anything in the Bible, they deny both the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds which most Christians hold, and a bunch of other wild things like mass weddings and of course that all women should sleep with Sun Moon lol. To anyone who actually knows about them, they are seen as a non-Christian cult, but they wear the skin of Christianity to lure in followers who don’t know the truth about them so that they can take their money.
Back to the Cathars, they are MUCH weaker heresy. What do they believe in? Well mostly similarish stuff, but a dualistic god? The material world is Satanic? Admittedly I don’t know much about Cathars, but I know that those beliefs are pretty unique to Gnosticism. But is it heresy? Well that’s pretty subjective. Most Catholics and Protestants still see each other as Christians despite their differences, so why is Gnosticism a step too far? Or Moonism for that matter?
The most common things I see Christians using as baselines for heresy are the following:
1) Do they not hold the Apostle’s and/or Nicene creeds?
2) Do they believe some other text is above the Bible?
3) Do they have a suspiciously charismatic leader?
4) By far the most subjective, Do they hold any beliefs that just plain seem weird?
If the answer to any of the above is yes, then it’s probably considered a heresy by most Christians.
If you’re not religious, this all probably sounds like stupid made up nonsense, and you’ve probably thought “look at these idiots caring about their made up stories” or something similar. But please, try to think about how you would feel if you genuinely believed people’s immortal souls were on the line here. Or if we must remain secular, imagine that if these people continue believing incorrectly they’ll get cancer or something. Suddenly this matters a whole lot more, doesn’t it?
I’m definitely not apologizing for the massacre of the Cathars or saying that [insert religious war of choice here] is justified, but it annoys me to no end every time I see atheists running around smugly proclaiming that these people were just stupid or petty or whatever else. The people of the past weren’t stupid, they were just like us, and we should try to remember that.
Thank you to anyone who actually bothered to read all of that lol
Sadly you really don't know much about cathars or the system, how a heresy was identified... Firstly, read som work like say Montaillou, the most famous book writen about them, then tell us anything about "weak" gnosticism...
Your generic, and curiously modern, criteria for the conduct of a Catholic inquisition and its verification of heresy bear little to no resemblance to the actual criteria implemented - nor account for any of the far more prosaic and earthly motives and political rationales behind the actions of Jacques Fournier and others. As you have been advised, before you make any further claims concerning this topic, read 'Montaillou, village occitan de 1294 à 1324,' and other relevant historical works.
What will you discover from that work - complied from the meticulous notes of a chief inquisitor and future Pope? Well, that the people of Montaillou were rich in thought, independence, and curiosity, and had indeed come to question some of the very core elements that the Catholic Church championed as essential to their creed. But that was merely the pretext for their eventual persecution and horrific deaths. The fundamental motive for Fournier and the temporal lords who burned, murdered and raped their way through the land was power. They saw a community that was dangerously ambivalent about the authority of established power structures: religious orthodoxy and the basis of the land and property of the Church; the right to rule of feudal overlords in lands which neither shared their language, customs, or faith; a lack of recognition for borders between the sovereign territories of rival rulers; a growing atmosphere of ideas about representation and changes to social status, which challenged the economic dominance of the landowning class in an agrarian society that benefited from a compliant labour force with reduced mobility and economic independence. You cannot get any more petty than that. Projecting some motive of benign spiritual concern upon the brutal reality of the scenes of horror perpetrated is to reveal an utter naivety and blind trust in the propaganda of the perpetrators... even in the face of the very evidence which they complied themselves that discredits that justification.
Well put, daviddavis 4885
Listen to Wizz Jones’ song “Massacre at Beziers”
Yeah, this happened to a buddy of mine
Well now I know the first five parts of the story of Albi the racist dragon
A very interesting small series that we could enjoy month ago with the subscription! Glad than gradually more of this content we helped to create gets to the wider audience
The Roman soldier and historian ammianus marcellinus once said that no wild beasts are so deadly to humans as most Christians are to each other.
He was an idiot.
Cathars were not christians, they held numerous tenents deriving from gnosticism, an ancient cult that was condemned even by the Church Fathers around the time as the Nicaean Creed. They borrowed some aspects from Christianity but their theology overall was contradictory to core principles of scripture, therefore not christian.
''Dualism: The Cathars believed in two gods: a good god and an evil god. This dualistic view contradicts the monotheistic teaching of Scripture, which asserts the existence of only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus said it is literally the the Greatest Commandment, and they broke it. If you think Jesus can be wrong, you aren't a Christian.
Rejection of the Old Testament: The Cathars rejected the Old Testament, viewing it as the work of the evil god. This is in direct opposition to the Christian belief that the Old Testament is divinely inspired and an integral part of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). The NT can't exist without the OT. It is a single story with over 300 prophecies fulfilled by Jesus.
Jesus’ Humanity: The Cathars denied the humanity of Jesus, believing Him to be purely a spiritual being. This contradicts the Scriptural teaching of the incarnation, which states that Jesus was both fully God and fully man (John 1:14, Philippians 2:6-8). If Jesus wasn't/isn't a man, we are all still dead in our sins, and the NT also makes no sense, even if you sweep the OT under the rug as a "cope."
Reincarnation: The Cathars believed in reincarnation, which is not supported by Scripture. The Bible teaches that humans die once and then will face judgment at some point (Hebrews 9:27)"
Saint Augustine himself had once been part of the Manicheans, a gnostic offshot from the larger overall cult, before he converted and dedicated his scholarly and canon career to defending Christianity and compiling criticism and warnings against his former belief.
So your attempt to insert this quote thinking it emphasizes a christian vs christian context is erroneous.
@@rennor3498 was that a reason to kill them.
Is it VIS count or VI Count?
It's not ViSSSSScount, it's Vy-count.
Ahh that famous Quote from Medieval Total war 2.
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius!
Is that a good thing?
Do you guys have the invasion of south american empires by the europeeans in the 16th or so century and forward?
I was just reading about Catharism the other day. Apparently there are a bunch of scholars who now think the Cathar heresy might not have actually existed, but was fabricated by the Church in the same way they levelled fake accusations at the Knights Templar
Superb series. For the newcomers, this will be a nice journey!
Love your channel but please please please stop pronouncing envoy as ON-voy. The commentary is in english it should be N-voy as in enveloped, endorsed, etc etc.
Minor I know but really irritating 😭😭😭
Other than that great work as always ❤
Please more videos for ottman after 1488
The power of Christ compels you!
Boiling oil was never used in any siege in history. Oil was to much expensive. Any other liquid was more viable
what about the bosnian crusade? is it even well know what happend or
MY FAVORITE CHANNEL KINGS ND GENERALS CAN YOU MAKE A VIDEO ON THE AFGHANS (PASHTUNS) PEOPLE LIVING IN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN SPEAKING PASHTO, NATIONAL LANGUAGE OF AFGHANISTAN
I hope so 😊
They mostly live in England now unfortunately. Rats.
The Saracens must have felt like their noses had been put out of joint!!
damn, why did they go so hard?
Deus vult!
It was the Crown of Aragon, not the Kingdom of Aragon. Different entities.
I visited Carcassonne and Béziers while staying in Sète. Beautiful places. Hard to believe such death and destruction occurred there. They were fighting and killing for their beliefs in who believes in God the proper way? Unbelievable to me.
Religious conflict isn't unique to Christians.
People throughout history commit atrocities for much lesser reasons.
It is difficult to prevent organisms from destroying each other, nature is conflict as they say.
Christ is King 👑
The King of Christ is Allah
@@Muslim-oc6up Yes, Jehovah
I invite you to learn about Islam, have a good day
@@Muslim-oc6up Christ is the only way to salvation, i will pray for your soul.
@@DrKarmo Ameen
Fun fact: the anti-materialist world view made by Cathars would later form various esoteric movements that would lead into both marxism and naziism.
Marxism with an anti-materialist worldview? Are you sure? Shouldn't be the opposite?
The pope hated the Cathars because they didn't collect any taxes for him. If their doctrine were to spread, Catholicism could well run out of money and go extinct. Of course that could not be tolerated. Rome also ordered the king of Hungary to go after the Bogomils of Bosnia (same doctrine as the Cathars of France). There are conflicting accounts on whether the Hungarians actually did it.
Based Pope.
Things like this are tje reason we created a secular society and any form of extremism is worrying.
@@samiman5606 Stalin,Lenin,etc?
cathar its from greek καθαροι means literally the clean one but had the meaning of pure one
After finishing the 5 episodes of the Albigensian Crusades, idk if he is going to finish on the Reconquista episode or any other videos from Members Only because I'm excited to watch more episodes from Members Only since I can't buy it.
The intro is really problematic. It is very questionable whether cathars really were dualists or had anything to do with bogomils. Furthermore there is no contemporary evidence of bogomils being dualist in the firs place. But the claim that "cathar priests and bishops took less money from their subjects" is just strange. Show me one document abouth "cathar bishops" (somewhat elusive phenomenon itself) taking any money from anyone.
This channel does psy-ops. Heavy Muslim influence promoting particular views rather than history.
I was here
Using mercenaries worked out pretty well in that initial siege by chance, but it doesn't end well in terms of restraint. A larger and more organized force at a different time would have dealt with the issue better in my limited view. The massacre of Catholics, the young, and the (likely/possibly) majority of the less truly committed gnostics was morality and even practically unacceptable.
To go along with that though, the fact that these gnostics still get apologia dished out for them even today is disturbing. Their beliefs and actions weren't harmless.
🔥🔥
👍👍👍
imagine commenting AFTER September 21st LOL
Why?
@@KingsandGenerals don't you remember?
No. Tell me!
@@KingsandGenerals the 21st night of September
@@MrWaterlionmonkeywhat?
“I believe in a Christian god”
“I also believe in a Christian god, but also believe there’s another god that-“
“I’m going to burn you to death now”
İf you interest with cathars, you should search Paulikians Massacre on East Rome. Cathars, Paulikians, Monthanists were child of Maniheists religion. Rome never want the Parh Prophets Mani and his religions on their lands. Cathars shared same destiny as Maniheists...
eraaly nongel
It's pronounced Vycount .
They where heretics