Questions & Answers On The Inquisition/s

[Shadowcry]

Mercurius:

The Inquistition excluded those who poison the soul which is a far greater crime than poisoning the body. In any case the inquisition was not as “bad” as anti-Catholics make it out to be. I for one consider it a blessing and we are in need another inquisition in these days of rapant heresy. Recent research into the trial documents confirm this. Here are some good resources: thedavincicodedemolished.com/The-Inquisition.html

As to the Crusades they were necessary defence of Christendom against the Islamic hordes. Coming out of Arabia they invaded CHRISTIAN LANDS in North Africa and the Middle East. They even came into Eastern Europe and Spain and up to the gates of Austria. Good resources can be found here: thedavincicodedemolished.com/The-Crusades.html

So then do you believe that torture is necessary and killing heathens and heretics is good?

 

[Shadowcry]

yinekka:

Shadowcry, you said The church supported hate during the crusades by merly issuing them. Could you explain what you mean by this statement.

Let me ask you this how does a war not inspire hate especially when it is directed at another religion?

 

[Mercurius]

Just to remind the follower of Mohammad from Pakistan that the inquisition ONLY dealt with CATHOLICS. The WORD Inquisition comes from INQUIRY. Indeed, in many societies today the government sets up an INQUIRY (aka INQUISITION) to find what went wrong, who was responsible and what is the appropriate penalty. So non-Catholics should not even complain about it!!!

 

[pro_universal]

yinekka,

You asked for a short history of the Mughals…sure, here’s a good link:

wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MUGHAL/MUGHAL.HTM

Specifically, here’s a map of how far the Muslims went in India:

wsu.edu:8080/~dee/MUGHAL/MUGHMAP.HTM

 

[yinekka]

Shadowcry, you answer my questions with other questions.

I will try to make my question as simple as possible.

What is your understanding of the Inquisitions? In concrete terms please. I genuinely wish to dialogue with you but I can’t if you just make vague statements and not elaborate on them.

You raised this topic and it is up to you to come up with the goods re supporting statements. Are you not used to discussions?

 

[Shadowcry]

No I would rather speak then type lol.

I already told you. So ill just copy and paste and hope you can understand. I like to brief. Rarely people will take the time to read the whole thing if I wrote something big, plus it would be futile anyway.

I belive the Inquisition was a horrible event which included the use of tortue to persecute heretics or supposed heretics.

I summed it u the best I could now may ask what is your opinion

 

[Shadowcry]

Mercurius:

Just to remind the follower of Mohammad from Pakistan that the inquisition ONLY dealt with CATHOLICS. The WORD Inquisition comes from INQUIRY. Indeed, in many societies today the government sets up an INQUIRY (aka INQUISITION) to find what went wrong, who was responsible and what is the appropriate penalty. So non-Catholics should not even complain about it!!!

Who are you talking about.

 

[yinekka]

How do you define heretic?

Are you aware that the use of torture was sanctioned by civil authorities all over Europe at this time? Torture is still practised today in the 21st century.

Of course the use of torture to extract a confession means that the confession is not very reliable. The men who confessed,under torture, to having sexual intercourse with Henry VIII’s wives later recanted their confessions.

 

[Shadowcry]

Yes I was aware abotu torture. I would define torture the same way as a dictionary would descibe torture.

Now what is your opinion on the inquisition?

 

[yinekka]

The Inqusitions were legal trials.

 

[dacs]

I am quite interested on how this dialogue would proceed. I truly hope it will progress to something for both sides.

God is great.

 

[Shadowcry]

yinekka:

The Inqusitions were legal trials.

which also involved torture

 

[Shadowcry]

dacs:

I am quite interested on how this dialogue would proceed. I truly hope it will progress to something for both sides.

God is great.

Welcome to Catholic forums dacs

 

[yinekka]

dacs, this is not a dialogue.

Shadowcry wrote: I still believe the inquisition were horrible and that there is no use denying it.

I have tried to draw Shadowcry out re his/her opinions and reasons for them and sources for them but I think at bottom we have ‘I have my opinion and there is no use in denying it.’ which means that he/she is not open to discussion. I’m not a big fan of global statements which one seem to have to accept without question.

Shadowcry is playing some game; I’ve got better things to do with my time. I really would have liked to dialogue but he/she obviously doesn’t want that.

 

[Eden]

pro_universal:

Eden, I think you have a good point, but look at it this way:

for most of history, India has been ruled by Muslims…if islam demands forced conversion, why are most Indians still hindu?

Most of the “conversions” were not conversions at all:

boloji.com/history/002.htm

‘Islamization’ of India did not occur as a result of mass conversions. The process took several centuries. Though the province of Sindh was conquered in early 8th century it was not until the incursions of Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad of Ghor that serious settlement of the subcontinent with Muslims took place. Even then contrary to belief it was not the forced conversions that increased the number of Muslims in India. Of course, the unfair taxes called jizya of all non-Muslims had an effect. Many Hindus were forced to convert to Islam to escape from the punishing taxes. The invading sultans like Qutb ud-din Aibak and Ala-ud-din Khilji often offered clemency to the enemy after their defeat if they converted to Islam. Many of these local rulers switched back to Hinduism as soon as the sultans turned their backs and returned to Delhi. The major reason for mass settlement of India by Muslims was the invasion of Mongols into central Asia. Genghis Khan, his grandsons and later Timurlane wreaked havoc in the Central Asian countries causing migration of countless number of people seeking refuge in the relative safety of India.

**Just how disastrous Muslim conquest was for India and how much resistance had been offered to preserve its heritage by Hindu rulers are controversial subjects. Much of the history was written by Muslim historians and could be biased. The little history documented by Indians was also written with an eye towards glorifying their kings. These as well could be simply exaggerations. Hindu writers write about countless accounts of heroism by their warrior, some of them mere boys in their teens. Some of the fiercest resistance probably came from lesser tribes and simply went undocumented. However, it is clear that the Muslim conquest of India took several centuries. Idolatry was condemned but many sultans simply ignored the practice by the Hindus and did not impose Islam on them forcibly. Better results were obtained by imposing taxes on non-Muslims, although the Brahmins and some Buddhists were exempt form it until the rule of Feroz Shah Tughlaq in the latter half of 14th century. When the Mughals established their empire, the whole of India was almost completely under the Muslim rule, especially during the rule of Aurangazeb. Religious fanaticism of Aurangazeb, unlike his ancestor Mughals finally led to the cessation of Muslim control of India. As a consequence of his intolerance, the Mughal Empire weakened precipitously after his death and steadily shrank in size over the next century and a half, to finally be taken over by another foreign force in the nineteenth century, the British. What Akbar had achieved with tolerance and reconciliation was reversed by Aurangzeb’s zeal to force Islam on Hindus. **

I never said anything about Muslims forcing their religion on India, by the way. I was responding to shadowcry’s assertion that Catholicism was forced through violence on the people of Goa. Your comment does not contradict my statement that the Church did not force faith on the people of Goa. It looks like your response to me is a combination of my comments and someone else’s.

 

[Eden]

Here is what I found about the Church’s presence in Goa:

St. Francis Xavier

On 7 April, 1541, he embarked in a sailing vessel for India, and after a tedious and dangerous voyage landed at Goa, 6 May, 1542. The first five months he spent in preaching and ministering to the sick in the hospitals. He would go through the streets ringing a little bell and inviting the children to hear the word of God. When he had gathered a number, he would take them to a certain church and would there explain the catechism to them. About October, 1542,he started for the pearl fisheries of the extreme southern coast of the peninsula, desirous of restoring Christanity which, although introduced years before, had almost disappeared on account of the lack of priests. He devoted almost three years to the work of preaching to the people of Western India, converting many, and reaching in his journeys even the Island of Ceylon. Many were the difficulties and hardships which Xavier had to encounter at this time, sometimes on account of the cruel persecutions which some of the petty kings of the country carried on against the neophytes, and again because the Portuguese soldiers, far from seconding the work of the saint, retarded it by their bad example and vicious habits.

BINGO! “Goa Inquisition” refers to criminal Portuguese soldiers who happened to be “Catholic” NOT the Catholic Church!!!

Secondly, it states that the newly converted to Catholicism were subjected to cruel persecutions by their rulers.

newadvent.org/cathen/06233b.htm

 

[dacs]

**The “Auto da Fes” took place once every two or three years. On the day of the ceremony, the prisoners were dressed in black, with black stripes. Those condemned wore a red cross painted on a yellow cloth scarf that was worn over the black dress. The sound of the large “Bell of the Inquisition”, heralded the beginning of the “Auto da Fes”. At its ringing, the prisoners walked out of the Palace in a procession headed by the Dominican Friars with the standard of the Holy Office in front and an effigy of St. Peter. After passing through the streets , they would move to the Cathedral or the Church of St. Francis. Here on one side of the high altar, two dais were raised, one to the right for the Inquisitor and one to the left for the Viceroy and his staff. The prisoners sat on a bench on a gallery in front. A sermon was then preached, and the proceedings of the Inquisition relating to each prisoner read. Then the Confession of the faith and absolution from excommunication was granted to those prisoners whose lives would be spared. This group usually formed a large majority. Those sentenced to death were handed over to the secular authority who burnt them on the stake on the Campo de Sao Lazaro, the next day in the presence of the Viceroy.

Approximately about 71 “Auto da Fes” took place between 1600-1773. About 4046 people were sentenced to various punishments. Of these 3034 were males and 1012 were females. Of those condemned to death by burning on the stake, 105 were men and 16 women. Of these only 54 were alive at the time of burning, 64 had died previously.**

(This information was taken from goacentral.com/Goahistory/TheGoaInquisition.htm)

The last paragraph contradicts the information I have read on some websites which insist that hundred of thousands died during the Goa inquisition. Is it really possible for Goa during those times to have a population of more than hundreds of thousands or is this just another ‘amplification of facts for effect’?

Could anyone point me to verifiable and authoritative source? Preferably, online (I don’t have the money to spend on books nor is the libraries in the Philippines that good.).

 

[Shadowcry]

Eden:

Here is what I found about the Church’s presence in Goa:

St. Francis Xavier

On 7 April, 1541, he embarked in a sailing vessel for India, and after a tedious and dangerous voyage landed at Goa, 6 May, 1542. The first five months he spent in preaching and ministering to the sick in the hospitals. He would go through the streets ringing a little bell and inviting the children to hear the word of God. When he had gathered a number, he would take them to a certain church and would there explain the catechism to them. About October, 1542,he started for the pearl fisheries of the extreme southern coast of the peninsula, desirous of restoring Christanity which, although introduced years before, had almost disappeared on account of the lack of priests. He devoted almost three years to the work of preaching to the people of Western India, converting many, and reaching in his journeys even the Island of Ceylon. Many were the difficulties and hardships which Xavier had to encounter at this time, sometimes on account of the cruel persecutions which some of the petty kings of the country carried on against the neophytes, and again because the Portuguese soldiers, far from seconding the work of the saint, retarded it by their bad example and vicious habits.

BINGO! “Goa Inquisition” refers to criminal Portuguese soldiers who happened to be “Catholic” NOT the Catholic Church!!!

Secondly, it states that the newly converted to Catholicism were subjected to cruel persecutions by their rulers.

newadvent.org/cathen/06233b.htm

Good work researching!

I wouldnt use New Advent as my site for looking everything up though as there is a lot of propoganda in it.

 

[Eden]

Shadowcry:

Good work researching!

I wouldnt use New Advent as my site for looking everything up though as there is a lot of propoganda in it.

Can you give me instances of missionaries, for instance St. Francis Xavier, forcing Christianity on the people of Goa through violence?

If you provide some links, perhaps we can find the truth between the two extremes of “propaganda”.

 

[Shadowcry]

I never said Francis Xavier used violence.