Crusades, Inquisition, Jews

[Petergee]

It certainly does. What else would dislocate arms mean after one was held hanging by the wrists and lifted up slowly and then let down with a severe jerk. This obviously resulted in a dislocation of the arms and legs.

Not “obviously” but “perhaps”. And definitely not “their limbs were pulled out of their sockets”!

 

[Petergee]

I have also noitced that.

I’ve also “noitced” that you continually make allegations like this against others with no evidence. And that your idea of a discussion is that you give everyone a lecture full of outrageous and irrelevant accusations and then you tell us we’re not allowed to reply. I guess discussion boards are not your forte.

 

[bobzills]

I’ve also “noitced” that you continually make allegations like this against others with no evidence. And that your idea of a discussion is that you give everyone a lecture full of outrageous and irrelevant accusations and then you tell us we’re not allowed to reply. I guess discussion boards are not your forte.

Despite the ad hominem arguments, sarcasm and misdirection we see here, the fact is that the inquisitors tortured people to extract confessions and that torture was allowed by a papal decree. This involved several horrific methods of torture, one of which was to hang people by their wrists, slowly pull them up and then suddenly let them go in a jerk, which resulted in excruciating pain and their limbs being dislocated. There were other forms of torture also, such as waterboarding methods to simulate the sensation of drowning. People were brought before the inquisition for allegations of crimes such as being a Greek Orthodox Christian.

 

[bobzills]

What there was was a simple observation that, 800 years later, 26 generations later, a papal apology later, an apologists apologist later, all parties agreeing this sad chapter was sinful…

But one party is holding on to stolen booty which it took from the Greek Orthodox Churches.

 

[bobzills]

Utter nonsense.

There was no ad hominem attack.
…Bob, how long have you been Eastern Orthodox?

Why are you asking about my personal religious affiliation, when the topic at hand is the Inquistion and the Crusades? These historical events occurred before I was born and have nothing at all to do with my religious affiliation.

 

[Petergee]

Despite the ad hominem arguments, sarcasm and misdirection we see here, the fact is that the inquisitors tortured people to extract confessions and that torture was allowed by a papal decree. This involved several horrific methods of torture, one of which was to hang people by their wrists, slowly pull them up and then suddenly let them go in a jerk, which resulted in excruciating pain and their limbs being dislocated. There were other forms of torture also, such as waterboarding methods to simulate the sensation of drowning. People were brought before the inquisition for allegations of crimes such as being a Greek Orthodox Christian.

No they weren’t. Being a Greek Orthodox Christian was not a crime, well not in countries where the Inquisition functioned anyway.
And most of the ad hominems and misdirection here are coming from you.

 

[bobzills]

No they weren’t. Being a Greek Orthodox Christian was not a crime, well not in countries where the Inquisition functioned anyway.

Greek Orthodox Christians were targeted and brought before the Inquisition and questioned for their crime of Greek Orthodoxy in Sicily, southern Italy and Venice.
And people were burned alive at the stake for their crimes.

 

[bobzills]

As to the other, it has everything to do with the subject at hand. Its all about fighting Protestant bigotry towards Catholics.

The Inquisition is not about Protestant bigotry because it was in place before Martin Luther, and involved other issues besides Protestantism (although later on, it may have involved Protestant issues). The whole methodology of the inquisition was wrong to begin with. The methodology of the inquisition was for the judges to assume that the accused was guilty and to use various methods, including torture to get him to confess. The accused was not allowed to hear the accusations against him nor was anyone allowed to defend him. The case was conducted in secret, and was not in public. People were tortured if someone accused them of not eating pork. Frequently, their limbs, both arms and legs were irreparably broken, while others died under torture. Girls as young as thirteen years old were tortured . For example, there is a case of a woman accused in 1568 of not eating pork. She obviously does not know the charges lodged against her and is not permitted to have anyone to defend her. The whole process of torture is simply to get her to admit that she did not eat pork, and this has nothing at all to do with Protestantism.
“She was ordered to be placed on the potro. She said, ‘Senores, when will you not tell me what I have to say? Senor, put me on the ground – have I not said that I did it all ? ‘ She was told to talk. She said ‘I don’t remember – take me away – I did what the witnesses say.’ She was told to tell in detail what the witnesses said. She said, ‘Senor, as I have told you, I do not know for certain. I have said that I did all that the witnesses say. Senores, release me, for I do not remember.’ She was told to talk. She said, ‘Senores, it does not help me to say that I did it and I have admitted that what I have done has brought me to this suffering – Senor, you know the truth – Senores, for God’s sake have mercy on me. Oh Senor, take these things from my arms – Senor release me, they are killing me.’….’I did it – for God’s sake let me go.”

 

[Unitas]

Greek Orthodox Christians were targeted and brought before the Inquisition and questioned for their crime of Greek Orthodoxy in Sicily, southern Italy and Venice.
And people were burned alive at the stake for their crimes.

That was under the spanish inquisition which operated independently from the Holy See.

A little intellectual honesty, or at least a citation for any of your claims wouldn’t hurt.

 

[bobzills]

A little intellectual honesty, …

Intellectual honesty? When we have people here objecting to my statement that Greek Orthodox were brought before the Inquisition?

 

[Unitas]

Intellectual honesty? When we have people here objecting to my statement that Greek Orthodox were brought before the Inquisition?

Oh, well then, in that case toss intellectual honesty to the wind!

Seriously. Your comment was obviously aimed to attribute such persecution to the Church. I merely pointed out that you conveniently left out the fact that the inquisition that was responsible for such crimes was operated independently from the Holy See, therefore you cannot attribute its actions to it.

Oh, and btw, in regards to Zara: Link

There was a lively opposition to the proposal. The papal prohibition to attack Christian States, disobedience to which entailed excommunication, stood in the way; but in the end the plan was accepted and in November, 1202, Zara was captured from the Hungarians and restored to Venice.

And Innocent III’s reaction to the sack of Constantinople: Link

It was your duty to attend to the business of your legation and to give careful consideration, not to the capture of the Empire of Constantinople, but rather to the defense of what is left of the Holy Land and, with the Lord’s leave, the restoration of what has been lost. We made you our representative and we sent you to gain, not temporal, but rather eternal riches. And for this purpose, our brethren provided adequately for your needs.

We have just beard and discovered from your letters that you have absolved from their pilgrimage vows and their crusading obligations all the Crusaders who have remained to defend Constantinople from last March to the present. It is impossible not to be moved against you, for you neither should nor could give any such absolution.

Whoever suggested such a thing to you and how did they ever lead your mind astray?. . .

How, indeed, is the Greek church to be brought back into ecclesiastical union and to a devotion for the Apostolic See when she has been beset with so many afflictions and persecutions that she sees in the Latins only an example of perdition and the works of darkness, so that she now, and with reason, detests the Latins more than dogs? As for those who were supposed to be seeking the ends of Jesus Christ, not their own ends, whose swords, which they were supposed to use against the pagans, are now dripping with Christian blood * they have spared neither age nor sex. They have committed incest, adultery, and fornication before the eyes of men. They have exposed both matrons and virgins, even those dedicated to God, to the sordid lusts of boys. Not satisfied with breaking open the imperial treasury and plundering the goods of princes and lesser men, they also laid their hands on the treasures of the churches and, what is more serious, on their very possessions. They have even ripped silver plates from the altars and have hacked them to pieces among themselves. They violated the holy places and have carried off crosses and relics. .

Needless to say he wasn’t pleased.

 

[bobzills]

Oh, well then, in that case toss intellectual honesty to the wind!

Seriously. Your comment was obviously aimed to attribute such persecution to the Church. I merely pointed out that you conveniently left out the fact that the inquisition that was responsible for such crimes was operated independently from the Holy See, therefore you cannot attribute its actions to it…

My statement stands that Greek Orthodox were targeted by the Inquisition.

 

[bobzills]

And Innocent III’s reaction to the sack of Constantinople: Link
.

I agree wholeheartedly with Pope Innocent III’s statement in reaction to the Fourth Crusade. In fact, his statement is a clear indication that my description of what happened was accurate.
Where I see a problem after such an apology is in the failure to return the booty. For example, suppose my son trashes the house of my neighbor, rapes his wife and daughters, and steals diamonds, gold and other jewelry, and brings this booty over to my house. I found out what happened and I then wrote a letter deploring this and saying I was sorry about it. But I did not make a serious effort to return the diamonds. What would be your opinion of such an apology?

 

[bobzills]

Your comment was obviously aimed to attribute such persecution to the Church. I merely pointed out that you conveniently left out the fact that the inquisition that was responsible for such crimes was operated independently from the Holy See, therefore you cannot attribute its actions to it…

Well let’s see whether or not the Holy See approved some Inquisitions:
“On June 11, 1251, [Pope] Innocent IV ordered the Frati Vicenzo of Milan and Giovanni of Vercelli to proceed to Venice and persecute heretics here with the same powers as those exercised by inquisitors elsewhere in Lombardy.” P. 393, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, by Henry Charles Lea.
“…about 186 Fra Filippo of Mantua, the Inquisitor of Treviso, was sent by [Pope] Honorius IV with a summons to the republic to inscribe in its laws the constitutions against heresy of Frederic and of the popes. “ In 1288, Pope Nicholas IV ordered the doge to assist the Inquisitor of Treviso. P. 393, op.cit.
Also, in 1407, Pope Gregory XII declared that any Greek who reverted to Greek Orthodoxy after participating in Catholic Sacraments was to be punished, and he ordered the inquisitor Elias Petit to punish him for such. Notice that in 1351, there was passed a law in Nicosia Cypress that ordered all Greeks to confess and take Holy Communion from a Latin priest.

 

[bobzills]

No they weren’t. Being a Greek Orthodox Christian was not a crime, well not in countries where the Inquisition functioned anyway.

False.
Concerning the charges of Greek Orthodoxy,
an analysis of a manuscript volume in the library of the University of Halle, containing reports to the Suprema by the tribunal of Toledo, from the auto de fe of September 4, 1575 to February 7, 1610, shows that there were 3 cases of individuals prosecuted for being a Greek Christian. P. 552, vol iii, A History of the Inquisition of Spain, by Henry Charles Lea.
And according to “The Inquisition in Early Modern Europe,” by Gustav Henningsen and John Tedeschi and Charles Amiel, p. 144, 145, in the Venetian inquisition, there were 3 people accused of Greek Orthodoxy in the period from 1547 to 1585. There were 8 so accused during the period 1586 – 1630, there were 11 so accused in the period from 1631 to 1720, which makes a total of 22 people accused of the offense of Greek Orthodoxy in the Venetian Inquisition. And in the Frulian inquisition, there were a total of 43 accused of the offense of Greek Orthodoxy during the period from 1611 to 1786.
And you can also independently verify that Greek Orthodox were targeted from the following link:
"The Spanish Inquisition was set up by King Ferdinand of Aragon and Queen Isabella of Castile in 1478 with the forced approval of Pope Sixtus IV. … in Sicily and Southern Italy, which were under Spanish rule, it targeted Greek Orthodox Christians.
answers.com/topic/inquisition

 

[Petergee]

The Inquisition is not about Protestant bigotry because it was in place before Martin Luther, and involved other issues besides Protestantism (although later on, it may have involved Protestant issues). The whole methodology of the inquisition was wrong to begin with. The methodology of the inquisition was for the judges to assume that the accused was guilty and to use various methods, including torture to get him to confess. The accused was not allowed to hear the accusations against him nor was anyone allowed to defend him. The case was conducted in secret, and was not in public. People were tortured if someone accused them of not eating pork. Frequently, their limbs, both arms and legs were irreparably broken, while others died under torture. Girls as young as thirteen years old were tortured . For example, there is a case of a woman accused in 1568 of not eating pork. She obviously does not know the charges lodged against her and is not permitted to have anyone to defend her. The whole process of torture is simply to get her to admit that she did not eat pork, and this has nothing at all to do with Protestantism.
“She was ordered to be placed on the potro. She said, ‘Senores, when will you not tell me what I have to say? Senor, put me on the ground – have I not said that I did it all ? ‘ She was told to talk. She said ‘I don’t remember – take me away – I did what the witnesses say.’ She was told to tell in detail what the witnesses said. She said, ‘Senor, as I have told you, I do not know for certain. I have said that I did all that the witnesses say. Senores, release me, for I do not remember.’ She was told to talk. She said, ‘Senores, it does not help me to say that I did it and I have admitted that what I have done has brought me to this suffering – Senor, you know the truth – Senores, for God’s sake have mercy on me. Oh Senor, take these things from my arms – Senor release me, they are killing me.’….’I did it – for God’s sake let me go.”

The blatant lies in this are so numerous I’m not going to waste my time refuting them individually. This farrago of nonsense invented by Dutch and English protestants has been thoroughly discredited by modern historians.

 

[Petergee]

My statement stands that Greek Orthodox were targeted by the Inquisition.

This is possible though I doubt it. But your statement was “People were brought before the inquisition for allegations of crimes such as being a Greek Orthodox Christian.”. You are obviously NOT standing on this since it has been disputed, so you now claim that you in fact made a different statement. A very dishonest tactic.

 

[Petergee]

I agree wholeheartedly with Pope Innocent III’s statement in reaction to the Fourth Crusade. In fact, his statement is a clear indication that my description of what happened was accurate.
Where I see a problem after such an apology is in the failure to return the booty. For example, suppose my son trashes the house of my neighbor, rapes his wife and daughters, and steals diamonds, gold and other jewelry, and brings this booty over to my house. I found out what happened and I then wrote a letter deploring this and saying I was sorry about it. But I did not make a serious effort to return the diamonds. What would be your opinion of such an apology?

You imply that Innocent “did not make a serious effort” to get the Venetians to return the booty. What evidence do you have for this accusation?

 

[bobzills]

This is possible though I doubt it. But your statement was “People were brought before the inquisition for allegations of crimes such as being a Greek Orthodox Christian.”. You are obviously NOT standing on this since it has been disputed, so you now claim that you in fact made a different statement. A very dishonest tactic.

I do not retreat from the statement that people were brought before the inquisition for the offense of being Greek Orthodox, and unlike some others on the forum, I have given the references to back it up.

 

[bobzills]

You imply that Innocent “did not make a serious effort” to get the Venetians to return the booty. What evidence do you have for this accusation?

St. Mark’s in Venice is one such Church, where booty has remained for 800 years.