Did the Crusades serve any purpose?

The first results of the call for the Crusades by Pope Urban II were masssacres of Jews in Europe.

Another early result of the Crusades was the conquering of the Christian city of Edessa by a Christian army.

More later.

 

The real benefit of the Crusades was a weakening of feudalism, the rise of an active middle class, and the subsequent increase in learning brought about by contact with Islam, which had preserved (and added to) much of the science and mathematics of the Roman and Greek civilizations.

 

Those weren't Christians crusading all over Europe and the Middle East. Those were Catholics, themselves deceived since the aberration of Constantine. Hapless peasants forced into Catholic armies, barely understanding scripture, if at all. The Catholic leadership bore no resemblance to authentic, spiritual, scriptural Christianity. Learning from Islam? That's akin to saying we learned from the Germans and Japanese during WW-II!

 

The Crusades were rife with the ideas of visions and "holy" relics - filled with Roman Catholic mysticism.

There was also the capture of the city of M'arrat-an-Numan where the Crusaders killed women and children, Muslims and Christians - and then ate their flesh.

The bottom line of course is that even though the First Crusade resulted in the Crusaders capturing Jerusalem, Jerusalem is not in Christian hands today.

 

The Second Crusade was a complete failure and only served to lead the uniting the Muslim world militarily.

The Third Crusade had some successes along the Mediterranean Sea but fell short of retaking Jerusalem. But it did provide us with the fame of Richard the Lionheart and of Saladin.

The Crusades managed to sow distrust of the Muslim world toward the Christian West - a distrust that we are still, unfortunately, dealing with today.