Was the liberation of the Holy Land and the Christians of Antioch and Edessa and Jerusalem an evil "war of conquest"? How about the Reconquest of Spain? How about the reconquest of Caucasia, the Balkans, or Central Asia fromthe forces of Mohammed?
Should we all have just sought out the nearest Muslim with a sword and insulted them instead?
After Mazinkert, why didn't Byzantium just rush out unarmed into the glorious martyrdom they could have had from the Seljuk Turks?
It was Augustine with his double procession theory who iniated the change to the filioque, and the Roman need to rule and change things that brought it about.
You can say that it means the same thing, and if you are comfortable with the consequences of praying in such a manner, good for you. But I believe there is a warning in Holy Scripture about just this kind of disregard for the Holy Spirit.
The 2nd Council of Lyons, 1274, Constitution on the Procession of the Holy Spirit ...we confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one; not by two spirations but by one.
The Council of Florence, 1438-45, Decree for the Jacobites The Father is not begotten; the Son is begotten of the Father; the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
The Roman Catechism (the official RC catechism from 1566-1994), I.8.6 With regard to the words immediately succeeding: “who proceeds from the Father and the Son,” the faithful are to be taught that the Holy Spirit proceeds, by eternal procession, from the Father and the Son as from one principle. This is a truth taught to us by the rule of the Church [sic] from which the least departure is unwarrantable on the part of Christians.
Vatican I, 1869-70, Dogmatic Constitution on the Principal Mysteries of the Faith For from all eternity the Father generates the Son, not in producing by emanation another essence equal to his [sic] own, but in communicating his [sic] own simple essence. And in like manner, the Holy Spirit proceeds, not by a multiplication of the essence, but he [sic] proceeds by a communication of the same singular essence by one eternal spiration from the Father and the Son as from one principle.
Catechism of the Catholic Church (the new, official catechism), 246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque).” The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: “The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his [sic] nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration . . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he [sic] is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.”
Catechism of the Catholic Church (the new, official catechism), 248 At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father’s character as first origin [sic] of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he “who proceeds from the Father,” it affirms that he [sic] comes from the Father through the Son. The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque).
The 11th Council of Toledo, 675 We also believe that the Holy Spirit, the Third Person in the Trinity is God, and that he [sic] is one and equal with God the Father and God the Son, of one substance as well as of one nature. However, he [sic] is not begotten nor created, but he [sic] proceeds from both and is the Spirit of both. We believe that the Holy Spirit is neither unbegotten nor begotten: lest, if we say unbegotten we should be asserting two Fathers; and if we said begotten we should appear to be preaching two Sons. He is called the Spirit, not only of the Father nor only of the Son but equally of the Father and of the Son. He proceeds not from the Father into the Son nor from the Son to sanctify creatures; but he [sic] is shown to have proceeded from both equally, because he [sic] is known as the love or the sanctity of both.
Ahh yes, where all Muslims, Jews and Orthodox Christians butchered in Jerusalem, where by own crusader accounts blood was ankle deep and piles of bodies laid everywhere...yes, you be proud of butchers work. One thing to take city, another to the excesses of Crusades.