The Sword and the Cross

The Forgotten Tradition of Christian Combat

“The knights are dust,
And their good swords are rust,
Their souls are with the saints, we trust.”

- The history of the Knights Templars

The relationship between Christianity and violence is a thread I’ve been unraveling for some time. It’s a complex and often misunderstood topic, particularly in today’s world. When we survey the Christian landscape, it becomes apparent that violence, especially in defense of the faith, is now widely considered unchristian. The very notion of using force to confront evil has become so unpopular that we tolerate actions and behaviors that would have been inconceivable to Christians of the past. Consider, for example, the statue of Satan standing in the Iowa State Capitol—an act that would have been unthinkable to a Christian just a hundred years ago. Yet modern Christians are often told that opposing such things would be intolerant and, worse, unchristian.

But how did we get here?

How did Christians lose their teeth?

Today, interpretations of “love thy neighbor” abound, with countless sermons preaching a form of suicidal pacifism, all in the name of nonviolence and tolerance.

Yet, a striking paradox emerges. The same Bible verses now used to advocate tolerance were once the rallying cries of Christendom’s fiercest warriors—men who shared more in common with monks than with everyday Christians. These were deeply devout men, whose faith would likely put even the most earnest modern believers to shame.

Understanding how these warriors of faith perceived the relationship between Christianity and violence is not only intriguing but vital. For many, myself included, one of the most significant barriers to engaging with today’s Church is its overly passive, often feminized nature. What role is there for a man, for a husband and father, in a Church that elevates tolerance to the highest virtue?

It wasn’t always this way. Medieval Christian warriors, especially members of holy orders like the Knights Templar and the Hospitallers, held a profoundly different view of how faith and violence could coexist. Their mission was crystal clear: to defend the faith with sword in hand, protecting Christendom. They carried out their duty with full conviction that they were fulfilling God’s will.

Holy Orders and the Sanctification of Combat

In the medieval period, military religious orders such as the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller emerged as defenders of Christian lands and protectors of pilgrims. Sanctioned by the Church, these men committed their lives to prayer, contemplation, and the defense of the faith. For them, violence wasn’t merely permitted—it was sanctified. They saw themselves as part of a divine martial tradition.

For these military orders, taking up arms was not just a right but a divine expectation. They believed they were the protectors of the faithful, with their actions rooted in scripture. Nicolaus von Jeroschin, a 14th-century chronicler of the Teutonic Knights, provides insight into their mindset. He refers to Old Testament figures like Abraham, who led men to rescue his brother Lot from captivity, as divine precedents for their actions.

Jeroschin writes:

“This praiseworthy order of knights was not only confirmed by the decision of men here on earth, but gracious God in heaven has also confirmed it and praised it in the heavenly kingdom and given many prefigurations of it… We can read in the Old Testament that good Abraham, the great patriarch, chose 318 of his men and rode with them against the heathens to fight for his brother, Lot, whom they had taken prisoner, freed him and all those in prison with him from their captivity and defeated the heathens in battle. When he was on his way home from the battle Abraham met Melchisidech, who, I have read, was both king and priest, who gave him bread and wine and encouraged him always to pursue blessings from God on high, whose protection allowed him to defeat his enemy.

From this time the faithful began enter into fierce knightly battles against the heathens. It was also at this time that the Holy Ghost revealed how the head of the church should show favour to knights, bless them and receive them into the protection of the church and should also confirm with privileges and deeds their rights to benefit from the use of any of the property good people gave to them as an act of piety. This body of knights is the most pleasing of its kind and rightly so, because it has sworn itself to avenge God’s torments and His crucifixion and to fight for the Holy Land, which rightfully belonged to Christians but had been seized by the heathens.”¹

From these biblical accounts, Jeroschin draws a clear line between medieval knights and Old Testament warriors, suggesting that God had always called upon certain men to protect the faithful. In much the same way that Abraham fought for his people, these Christian knights believed they were divinely appointed to defend the Church and fight its enemies.

As Jeroschin notes:

“St. John saw the church militant coming down from heaven like the New Jerusalem, and among other heavenly hordes were the angels potestates, who fight to drive off the devil’s power. Potestates means the powerful ones, and this proves to us that the church is meant to have this knighthood, which protects it and by its mighty power drives off the forces of unbelief and all visible dangers, just as the potestates exerted themselves to protect Christianity from invisible threats, It is clear that by engaging in warfare the knights of the Teutonic Order drive danger away from Christendom.David was a king of whom God approved, whom He himself chose for his people’s kingdom. He was also a great prophet and had foreknowledge of future events. For this reason he knew in advance of this body of knights and wanted to prefigure them as they were to be. He chose two tribes from among his people, one called the Cherethites and the other the Pelethites, and gave them the task of protecting him from all danger, according to the meaning of their names: ‘Cherethite’ means much the same as ‘destroyer’; ‘Pelethite’ means ‘wonderful Rescuer’.²

This tradition found its roots in stories like those of King David’s Cherethites and Pelethites, symbolic protectors of the king. These biblical warriors were precursors to the holy knights, who were seen as defenders of Christ, the true head of the Church. Knights were celebrated not only for their willingness to die in battle but also for their care for the sick and poor, defending Christian lands from both physical and spiritual threats.

Unlike today, where violence is seen as inherently unchristian, these holy warriors were driven by a belief that they were executing divine justice. Their motto, Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam—“Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but to Your name give glory”—was a clear statement that their actions, even in battle, were dedicated to the glory of God, not personal gain.

“They are true knights and elect warriors who risk death for the honour of God. For the sake of their Father’s land they destroy and eradicate the enemies of the faith with a strong arm. In the abundance of their love the good knights receive guests, pilgrims and the poor. They also take pity on the sick, lying in all manner of distress in hospitals, whom they tend generously, humbly and ardently in the course of their duty.” ³

These knights were not just warriors; they were symbolic protectors, whose role was to shield the king. The knights of Christendom were similarly tasked with protecting Christian lands from physical and spiritual threats, seeing themselves as defenders of Christ, the true head of the Church.

Just War: A Moral Framework for Violence

Throughout Christian history, the tension between peace and violence has been navigated through doctrines such as Just War theory. First articulated by St. Augustine and later expanded by St. Thomas Aquinas, this theory laid down clear guidelines for when and how war could be morally justified.⁴

The knights of the medieval Church were well aware of these teachings. They didn’t view their position as warriors as a blank check for violence. Instead, they clung to strict principles, only taking up arms when they believed it was necessary and righteous. St. Bernard of Clairvaux, in In Praise of the New Knighthood, warns against the dangers of secular warfare. He stresses that fighting with sinful motives—such as the desire for conquest or revenge—would damn the soul, even in victory. For Bernard, the morality of warfare wasn’t determined by the outcome but by the purity of the heart and the righteousness of the cause.

“As often as thou who wagest a secular warfare marchest forth to battle, it is greatly to be feared lest when thou slayest thine enemy in the body, he should destroy thee in the spirit, or lest peradventure thou shouldst be at once slain by him both in body and soul. From the disposition of the heart, indeed, not by the event of the fight, is to be estimated either the jeopardy or the victory of the Christian. If, fighting with the desire of killing another, thou shouldest chance to get killed thyself, thou diest a man-slayer; if, on the other hand, thou prevailest, and through a desire of conquest or revenge killest a man, thou livest a man-slayer.... O unfortunate victory, when in overcoming thine adversary thou fallest into sin, and anger or pride having the mastery over thee, in vain thou gloriest over the vanquished...”⁵

St. Bernard’s words make it clear that the morality of war lies not in winning or losing, but in the condition of the soul and the righteousness of the motives. Fighting with desires for conquest or revenge would corrupt the soul, turning even a physical victory into a spiritual defeat.

“What, therefore, is the fruit of this secular, I will not say ‘militia,’ but ‘malitia,’ if the slayer committeth a deadly sin, and the slain perisheth eternally? Verily, to use the words of the apostle, he that ploweth should plow in hope, and he that thresheth should be partaker of his hope. Whence, therefore, O soldiers, cometh this so stupendous error? What insufferable madness is this—to wage war with so great cost and labour, but with no pay except either death or crime?”⁶

By contrast, knights of the Holy Orders fought not for personal gain but for the glory of God. As St. Bernard emphasizes, the soldiers of Christ fight the battles of their Lord, unafraid of sin from the slaughter of enemies or the danger of their own death. In this framework, death in service to Christ was not a crime but a pathway to glory. This allowed the knights to engage in battle with a clear conscience, confident they were fulfilling divine justice.

However, Bernard also underscores that violence was to be a last resort, used only when absolutely necessary. He writes:

“I do not mean to say that the pagans are to be slaughtered when there is any other way to prevent them from harassing and persecuting the faithful, but only that it now seems better to destroy them than that the rod of sinners be lifted over the lot of the just, and the righteous perhaps put forth their hands unto iniquity.”⁷

He continues…

“What then? If it is never permissible for a Christian to strike with the sword, why did the Savior's precursor bid the soldiers to be content with their pay, and not rather forbid them to follow this calling? But if it is permitted to all those so destined by God, as is indeed the case provided they have not embraced a higher calling, to whom, I ask, may it be allowed more rightly than to those whose hands and hearts hold for us Sion, the city of our strength?⁸

Thus, even within the framework of just war, there remained a profound caution against the irresponsible use of violence.

The Discipline and Conduct of the Knights

What set the Holy Orders apart from secular knights was not just their motivations, but also their strict discipline, both in battle and in daily life. Their rules were steeped in Christian virtue. Unlike the secular warriors of the time, knights of the Holy Orders were expected to shun worldly desires and focus solely on their mission.

Before battle, these knights fortified themselves with faith rather than ornamentation. They adorned themselves with armor and steel, not gold, seeking to inspire fear in their enemies rather than admiration for their wealth. Their conduct was dictated by a higher calling, aiming to terrify their foes through their strength, not their appearance.

“…on the approach of battle they fortify themselves with faith within, and with steel without, and not with gold, so that, armed and not adorned, they may strike terror into the enemy, rather than awaken his lust of plunder. They strive earnestly to possess strong and swift horses, but not garnished with ornaments or decked with trappings, thinking of battle and of victory, and not of pomp and show, and studying to inspire fear rather than admiration.”⁹

Outside of battle, the knights devoted themselves to caring for the sick, tending to the wounded, and living a life of quiet contemplation and religious devotion. The Rule of the Templars, for instance, emphasized humility and simplicity. Knights were forbidden from owning private wealth, and any splendor they received had to be muted to avoid fostering pride. Their mission was to serve God, not to seek personal glory.¹⁰

“If a brother acquired any money,  it was  tied around his neck and he was led naked through the house with another brother beating him severely.”¹¹

Even contact with women was sticky limited.

"LASTLY. We hold it dangerous to all religion to gaze too much on the countenance of women; and therefore no brother shall presume to kiss neither widow, nor virgin, nor mother, nor sister, nor aunt, nor any other woman. Let the knighthood of Christ shun feminine kisses, through which men have very often been drawn into danger, so that each, with a pure conscience and secure life, may be able to walk everlastingly in the sight of God."¹²

The Laws of the Teutonic Knights are more succinct: it is  a fault when "a brother on a journey knowingly, and secretly or openly, consorts with bad women”¹³

Similarly, the Statutes of the Teutonic Knights strictly regulated battlefield conduct. Cowardice in battle or fleeing from the Christian army was seen as the gravest sin, one that could lead to expulsion from the Order. The knights understood that their duty was to fight with both courage and integrity, knowing that their actions on the battlefield reflected their commitment to Christ.

"if a brother in cowardice flees from the standard or from the army,"  or "goes over from the Christians  to the heathen,” he was  committing the most  serious  sin,  for which was no pardon or redress and he is lost the Order forever. ¹⁴

When the Knight of the holy order met the enemy he had only one choice summarized in the words of Hartman von Aue.

Nu zinzent, ritter,

dein leben und such den geist

durch in who in da hat

gegeben liebe under gut

Das er da wol gevert

Daz giltet beidiu teil

Der werlte lop er sele heil¹⁵

---

Now pay interest, knight,

your life and also your spirit

Through in who has given

love and good spirit

His belief in this gives him

A chance of seeing glory

in both parts of the world

and the salvation of the soul¹⁶

The Shift in Christian Views on Violence

So, how did we go from knights of the cross to a Church that preaches near-total nonviolence? Several key factors contributed to this shift. One major influence was the Protestant Reformation, which rejected many of the medieval Church’s teachings, including those surrounding holy warfare. The Enlightenment further reshaped Christian thought, with its emphasis on human reason, individual rights, and a growing distaste for religiousness.

The trauma of the world wars also played a significant role, as did the rise of globalism. In a pluralistic world that values tolerance and peace, the idea of using violence to defend the faith has become increasingly unpopular. Modern Christianity, particularly in the West, has moved away from the martial mindset of the medieval Church, embracing pacifism and tolerance as its highest virtue.

Rediscovering the Balance

While the modern Church has largely embraced pacifism and tolerance, history shows that the relationship between Christianity and violence is far more nuanced. Medieval Christians, particularly the holy orders, saw a place for righteous violence in defense of the faith. They did not glorify violence for its own sake, but they understood it as sometimes necessary to protect what was sacred.

Perhaps modern Christians can find wisdom in this history. While nonviolence and tolerance are indeed virtues, so too are strength, courage, and the willingness to defend what is holy. The challenge lies in rediscovering the balance between these ideals, understanding that there is room in the Christian tradition for both the monk and the warrior, that often they are one and the same.

TJS

1. Nicolaus von Jeroschin. The Chronicle of Prussia. Translated by Mary Fischer. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2010.

2. Ibid

3. Ibid

4. Frowe, Helen. "Just War Theory." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. University of Tennessee at Martin. Accessed September 15, 2024. https://iep.utm.edu/justwar/.

5. Bernard of Clairvaux. In Praise of the New Knighthood. Translated by Conrad Greenia, ocso. In Bernard of Clairvaux: Treatises Three, Cistercian Fathers Series, No. 19. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1977, 127-145

6. Ibid

7. Ibid

8. Ibid

9. Charles G. Addison, The History of the Knights Templars, the Temple Church, and the Temple. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1842.

10. Regula Pauperum Commilitonum Christi et Templi Salomonis (The Rule of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon), by Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153), in In Praise of the New Knighthood (Liber ad milites Templi: De laude novae militae). 

11. The Rule of the Teutonic Knights (Ordo domus Sanctae Mariae Teutonicorum). Translated by Uwe Ziegler. In The Military Orders: History and Heritage, edited by Malcolm Barber. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1994.

12. Regula Pauperum Commilitonum Christi et Templi Salomonis (The Rule of the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon), by Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153), in In Praise of the New Knighthood (Liber ad milites Templi: De laude novae militae). 

13. Acta Hospitalis: A Compendium of Records from the Administration of the Hospitaller Knights, Including Reports from the Grand Master.

14. Ibid

15. The Rule of the Teutonic Knights (Ordo domus Sanctae Mariae Teutonicorum). Translated by Uwe Ziegler. In The Military Orders: History and Heritage, edited by Malcolm Barber. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1994.

16. I translated this from Middle German and it may not be accurate as I could not find a direct translation in any historical records.