Struggling With the Inquisition

[Drawmack]

One cannot pas judgment on the Spanish Inquisition without understanding how the legal system worked in its time and how criminal punishment was administered.

For what it’s worth King Henry VIII - the one time son in law of Queen Isabel - permitted and enforced tortures and executions in severity and number greater than that of the Inquisition, but because we in the English speaking world get our history from the English, the Inquisition is part of the Black Legend, the propaganda created by Protestant English and Dutch to smear Spain.

If someone threw the Inquisition in my face, I would ask what would that person do if their nation had been overrun and conquered by militant Islam and had innocent people sold off into slavery. The Catholics of Spain struggled for nearly 800 years to free their nation of the Muslim invaders and religious unity was necessary to unite the nation in its struggle for freedom from the invaders.

Queen Isabel, far from the bloodthirsty torturer the Black Legend makes her out to be, was a loyal Catholic and spouse and mother and the best Queen in world history.

You should read those articles linked in the second post. I think you have some misunderstandings about the inquisition yourself. BTW: I read all but one of them so far and I plan to read that one I was just a little burned after reading three of them back to back.

 

[lookaround]

Do you not understand that the Catholic Church was and is composed of sinners and of fallen people?

If a Christian sins, does that mean that the Christian faith is not THE FAITH?

Christians do sin.
but should we sin so that grace may increase? May it never be so!

 

[VociMike]

honestly
maybe it does (although we do know that governments which practice moral laws are instituted by God)

So you’re not actually sure what the passage means after all. And that is the point.

I disagree (it was obvious to the Jews and they didn’t know Jesus and I hope you do :no joke: )

What was obvious to the Jews? That they should not do what God had commanded them to do (Lev 20:10)? That they should ignore the Law given by God himself? How can you make such a claim?

Actually this passage is usually understood as pointing out the hypocrisy of those who would stone the woman. Not that stoning the woman was wrong (how could it be, since it was commanded by God?), but that those would would do the stoning should themselves be stoned for the same crime.

that we are not to judge another and we must examine ourselves
(this is a constant message in the Bible)

I disagree that this is the message of the passage. I submit that the message is that one should not seek to avoid being judged by the same standards one judges others. Did the Apostles not judge? Tell that to Ananias and Sapphira. Were they not given the divine authority to forgive or retain the sins of others? Did this not involve judging?

Again, my point is simple. Reasonable, honest people, especially from a different time or culture, can honestly and reasonably come to a different understanding of what their duties are as Christians. We do not whitewash any sins they may have committed by recognizing this rather self-evident fact.

 

[VociMike]

I understand all that, that’s why my post finished up by saying what, IMHO, should actually be addressed.

Matter of fact if you search my posts you’ll note that I’ve only brought the up inquisition once on these boards and that was in response to someone suggesting that in areas where Catholics control the secular governments these secular governments should be used to force, through legal punishments, the Protestants not to attempt conversion of the Catholics. And, in that case I felt, and still feel, it was fair to point out that this is a dangerous path by comparing it with the inquisition.

I agree that the inquisition is an embarrassment and possibly a black eye for the Catholic Church but any institution comprised of men that’s been around for as long as the Catholic Church that doesn’t have a couple embarrassments and black eyes is just really good at hiding them. And, anyone who attempts to debate by pointing out embarrassments and black eyes should expect to have theirs brought up as well. It’s all mud slinging as far as I’m concerned.

I was pretty sure, from your other posts that I have read, that you would feel this way, and I commend you for it. I think you would agree with me that we owe it both to those we judge (from a distance) and to ourselves to seek the truth behind their actions rather than just force them to be puppet actors in morality plays that prove “we” are right and “they” (whoever they may be) are wrong. In other words, that we have an obligation to be serious about serious things.

 

[Drawmack]

I was pretty sure, from your other posts that I have read, that you would feel this way, and I commend you for it. I think you would agree with me that we owe it both to those we judge (from a distance) and to ourselves to seek the truth behind their actions rather than just force them to be puppet actors in morality plays that prove “we” are right and “they” (whoever they may be) are wrong. In other words, that we have an obligation to be serious about serious things.

Indubitably

 

[lookaround]

So you’re not actually sure what the passage means after all. And that is the point.

???
are you saying this because I used the word “maybe”?

What was obvious to the Jews?

that they were sinners

That they should not do what God had commanded them to do (Lev 20:10)?

that they already did not do what God commanded them to do

That they should ignore the Law given by God himself? How can you make such a claim?

that they already “ignored” the law

Actually this passage is usually understood as pointing out the hypocrisy of those who would stone the woman. Not that stoning the woman was wrong (how could it be, since it was commanded by God?), but that those would would do the stoning should themselves be stoned for the same crime.

brother
if you believe Jesus is God, then under your understanding why did He not do it?
you are inadvertently suggesting that Jesus did not follow God’s commandments

I disagree that this is the message of the passage. I submit that the message is that one should not seek to avoid being judged by the same standards one judges others. Did the Apostles not judge? Tell that to Ananias and Sapphira. Were they not given the divine authority to forgive or retain the sins of others? Did this not involve judging?

and after it was given (and after Peter asked about forgiveness)
Jesus told them the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant
do you understand why?

Again, my point is simple. Reasonable, honest people, especially from a different time or culture, can honestly and reasonably come to a different understanding of what their duties are as Christians. We do not whitewash any sins they may have committed by recognizing this rather self-evident fact.

God does not change
if God exist (like I believe He does) and He is with His people (which I believe He is) His people will who are not of this world (if you can understand it) will not be “effected” by such things

 

[JW10631]

You should read those articles linked in the second post. I think you have some misunderstandings about the inquisition yourself. BTW: I read all but one of them so far and I plan to read that one I was just a little burned after reading three of them back to back.

I don’t know what you are talking about. I’ve read those articles in the past and many more.

 

[Steadfast_love]

nationalreview.com/comment/madden200406181026.asp

Its most startling conclusion is that the Inquisition was not so bad after all. Torture was rare and only about 1 percent of those brought before the Spanish Inquisition were actually executed. As one headline read “Vatican Downsizes Inquisition.”

The amazed gasps and cynical sneers that have greeted this report are just further evidence of the lamentable gulf that exists between professional historians and the general public…

This is very old news, but if you haven’t heard it yet be sure to take a look.

 

[JW10631]

There is the truth, and there is what people believe. A chasm is between them.

 

[TLM08]

Hi I could use some help…

I’m on a protestant forum and it usually goes very well. But I am struggling with how the Popes such as Innocent IV authorized torture cf. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_extirpanda

This was brought up to me by a strong protestant and I am also troubled by what I am reading about how the Church allowed and authorized people to be burned at the stake, or at least turned people over to said treatment. I suppose this happened with Jan Hus at the hand of the Council of Constance.

I need someone really well-versed in this area who can shed some light and context without excusing the sins of those in the Church, or even those leading the Church.

It wonder who has shed more innocent blood over the course of history: Catholic Church authorities or followers of Islam?

 

[patricius79]

Thanks everyone. I feel a lot better after these responses and reading the Catholic Anwers articles on the Inquisition.

 

[Drawmack]

I don’t know what you are talking about. I’ve read those articles in the past and many more.

If someone threw the Inquisition in my face, I would ask what would that person do if their nation had been overrun and conquered by militant Islam and had innocent people sold off into slavery. The Catholics of Spain struggled for nearly 800 years to free their nation of the Muslim invaders and religious unity was necessary to unite the nation in its struggle for freedom from the invaders.

I have never heard of this as being a reason for the inquisition and the articles linked actually say that the inquisition was not attempting to root out Islam or Judaism but rather was attempting to root out those who pretended to convert for the secular benefits but actually maintained the heretical beliefs. This theory makes more sense to me than yours because, as far as I know, someone must be a Catholic in order to be a heretic. I could be wrong and please correct me if I am. If you have resources supporting your claim of the inquisition being sent to root out Islam I would love to read them.

Queen Isabel, far from the bloodthirsty torturer the Black Legend makes her out to be, was a loyal Catholic and spouse and mother and the best Queen in world history.

Just a minor point. Saying that Queen Isabel, or any monarch for that matter, is the best queen in world history is a matter of opinion and not fact. Thus, it is probably best left out of apologetics as inserting matters of opinions gives the one you are talking to a place to sew doubt about your arguments.

 

[Drawmack]

It wonder who has shed more innocent blood over the course of history: Catholic Church authorities or followers of Islam?

You know something, that could actually be a really interesting comparative study especially when covering the times that Catholicism and Islam went to war.

DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER: I’m not attempting to throw up anything disparaging about Catholicism when I bring the up crusades. I really and honestly do think that looking at them from this perspective would make for an incredibly interesting read.

 

[Randy_Carson]

honestly
this would be a fine answer if the RCC was just a church and did not claim to be THE CHURCH

Your statement prompts me to ask this question:

What is it that you believe the Catholic Church to be guilty of with regard to the Inquisition?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Thanks everyone. I feel a lot better after these responses and reading the Catholic Anwers articles on the Inquisition.

:tiphat:

The Catholics will read them…the Protestants will (typically) ignore them in order to maintain their pet theories.

 

[Drawmack]

:tiphat:

The Catholics will read them…the Protestants will (typically) ignore them in order to maintain their pet theories.

How is a statement like this any better than a Protestant saying bad things about Catholics?

 

[Randy_Carson]

How is a statement like this any better than a Protestant saying bad things about Catholics?

First, I qualified my statement.

Second, my experience here in this forum tells me that what I wrote is true.

However, if it makes you feel better, I can say that Catholics probably don’t read every link or lengthy post from the non-Catholic members. I know I don’t.

Still, the phenomenon is curious. Non-Catholics come to this forum to either A) learn or B) debate.

If the former, then read the articles to learn. If the latter, then read the articles to understand our arguments so that you might be better prepared to debate us.

Either way, read.

 

[Drawmack]

First, I qualified my statement.

Okay, then How is your statement different from Protestants who say bad things about what most Catholics will do? (I’m being rhetorical in the interests of clarity and fairness and believe you have addressed this below.)

Second, my experience here in this forum tells me that what I wrote is true.

However, if it makes you feel better, I can say that Catholics probably don’t read every link or lengthy post from the non-Catholic members. I know I don’t.

Still, the phenomenon is curious. Non-Catholics come to this forum to either A) learn or B) debate.

If the former, then read the articles to learn. If the latter, then read the articles to understand our arguments so that you might be better prepared to debate us.

Either way, read.

I agree and that’s why I read those things I wish to discuss or am interested in. Often times it is interesting to read a Catholic, Protestant, and Secular history of the same events when they relate to Christian history. Sometimes the differences between all three are so egregious that I just laugh and shake my head no more certain of the truth when I finish than when I started. (I’m not talking about the inquisition here.)

 

[chosen_people]

Stop!

Don’t read another post in this thread until you have read all of the following:

Articles on the Inquisition

---

The Inquisition
catholic.com/library/Inquisition.asp

**An Inquisition Primer **
By Robert P. Lockwood
catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0709tbt.asp

**Secrets of the Spanish Inquisition Revealed **
By Robert P. Lockwood
catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0711tbt.asp

A New Look At the Spanish Inquisition
by Edward O’Brien
ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/SPANINQ.TXT

Then we can talk, okay?

 

[lookaround]

Your statement prompts me to ask this question:

What is it that you believe the Catholic Church to be guilty of with regard to the Inquisition?

for starters I don’t think there is a Mr.CatholicChurch who is guilty of every sin by every Catholic ever ever.

as for the people (its up to God to judge)
at the minimum (unless they repented) the level by which they judged others with be the level by which they will be judged.