The not-so-evil Spanish Inquisition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Curious11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
KevinK said:
What case have you made for you authoritarian book-burning censorship?
Click to expand...
Let’s see.

First, it might have prevented WW2 and Holocaust. No certainty here, of course, but that’s a lot of killing and suffering to prevent. Atheists are usually willing to point just to one of them to justify claims that good God would have removed free will. Do you want to burn your chance to use that argument? 🙂

Second, many democratic nations have them. It does not prove that those laws are just, but it proves that they do not lead to instant failure of democracy. And that, perhaps, they deserve a serious answer.

That might not be much, but then, they only have to outrank name-calling, which is all you seem to have offered.
 
Let’s not forget also that an important part of the “Leyenda negra” has to do with the distorted numbers some priests (and laymen) were reporting back to Europe from the Nueva España.

It’s interesting to see that one of the most frequent posters in this thread just got temporarily suspended a few days ago for attacking others in this forum who did not agree with his views that the Church was a great ally to the Nazi regime… And, that wasn’t even the topic of dicussion there.

It seems that some individuals take every opportunity to attack the Catholic faith and the Church but they never seem to mention the atrocities commited by the atheist/communist regimes, the guerra cristera here in North America (anti-Catholic politicians outside of México were very supportive), the “terror rojo” (red terror) or the fact that (the VERY Catholic) Spain saved the entire Christian world more than once (remember Lepanto?). Let’s not forget that they built hospitals, public schools and brought civilisation and Christian ideals with them to many parts of the world.

Nobody defends the idea that the Church should punish people the way it did during the Inquisiciones. But, we must understand the historical context. They faced numerous threats that today seem very, very distant to us but to them those were real and constant dangers/problems.

When approaching history it is absolutely necessary to put things into perspective. No, self-respecting philologist/exegete/philisopher/historian would do otherwise. And the reality is that most of what people (even catholics) believe about the Inquisición are grossly distorted statistics and myths created by people who hated Catholicism (and España) with a passion. Myths that have been debunked a long time ago.

What the original poster is saying is perfectly reasonable and it might be a first step (especially for English-speaking Catholics) to a better understanding of the role Spain played, for centuries, in the spreading and defence of the Catholic faith.
 
Last edited:
In general, I like your approach, as to historical context. What is your attitude to books such as Kamen’s SPANISH INQUISITION or Netanyahu’s THE ORIGIN OF THE INQUISITION IN FIFTEENTH CENTURY SPAIN? Or, on the general topic, Peters’ INQUISITION?
 
Hello, GK. I’m sorry but I can’t comment on that.

I do read about almost all sorts of topics in English, but, when it comes to the history of México and España I tend to stick with books and articles written in Spanish (and many sources for this topic, las inquisiciones, are written in latin of course).

Now that I think of it, I have read parts of a few books, written by english-speaking priests, that mention this topic. But, it was very basic stuff: Paulist press, Ignatius press and the like (you know, more “popular” than academic).
 
jfz178 said:
This is spin. Saying the Inquisition was “fair for its day” is like saying the Holocaust was “fair for Nazi Germany” or that slavery was “fair for the US in the 1700’s.” It was wrong, wrong, wrong, period. Excusing it even a little is unconscionable…
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but there are a number of incorrect, misleading or irrelevant statements here
  1. St Pope John Paul II did not apologize for anything the Church did. He apologized for the sins of Catholics, but he did not apologize for the Crusades or the any of the Inquisitions
  2. Ad extirpanda" of 1252 has NOTHING to do with the Spanish Inquisition. 1252 was against the Cathars. Catharism was an extreme and PHYSICALLY DANGEROUS heresy. The Cathers taught that the spirit was good but that the body was bad. They used to perform ritual suicide and abort babies because they believed it was evil to bring children into the world. Catharsim wasn’t some harmless disagreement with the Church, nor a political disagreement. They were an EXTREAMLY DANGEROUS sect that was an danger to everyone.
  3. Jews and Protestants had nothing to do with Ad extirpanda either, because the Protestant revolution had not happened yet. And Jews were NEVER subject to inquisition
  4. Inqusitions only had jurisdiction over BAPTIZED Catholics. A Jew was never subject to the inquisition.
  5. The main issue of the Spanish Inquisition was the Conversos. These were Jews and Muslims who converted and were Baptized Catholics. The problem was that average lay people felt that most converts were getting Baptized without meaning it and secretly practicing another religion after being Baptized a Catholic. This also lead to a number of conspiracy theories that people had that these “fake converts” were trying to undermine the King & Queen. So, they started taking up the law in their own hands and started mob justice.
6). In the Spanish Inquisition, the Church set up Inquisition in an attempt to end the mobs and provide justice and defend the accused (since it was a captial offense in Spain to commit blasphemy).

7). Regardless of what Hollywood and some Protestants say, Protestants were never the target of Inquisition. Perhaps a some got sweeped up in it, but the Spainish Inquisition’s purpose / goal was to SAVE people from being sentenced to death by the Spanish govt and save them from lynch mobs.

I recommended the following resources:




shop.catholic.com

Catholic Controversies: Understanding Church Teachings And Events In History

This valuable resource collects the very best articles addressing most of the “hot-button” issues used to undermine both the authority of the Church and the faith of Catholics.
shop.catholic.com shop.catholic.com

https://shop.catholic.com/the-glory-of-the-crusades/



God Bless
 
Last edited:
Augustinian said:
40.png
JimR-OCDS:
The British accusations about the wide use of torture and such, came from what is known by historians as the “Black Legends.” This was the anti-Catholic propaganda the English used to create anti-Catholic sentiments among the people.
Click to expand...
I think it goes beyond just anti-catholic sentiments, but also anti-Spaniard sentiments. During the epoch of the Spanish Inquisition, Spain was the biggest rival to England as far as world affairs with the Spanish Armada and all that. Religion was just one of the differences they had, but even if that didn’t exist, the animosity would have still been there.
Click to expand...
Yes. Back then, Spain had the backing of the Pope in regards to bringing Catholicism to the New World. Except what was to become the eastern United States (until England took Canada away from France - and the United States took over former Franch and Spanish lands) the majority of the New World was Spanish.

Anything the English (and other nations) could do to make Spain look bad to the Pope was seen as a way to loosen Spanish control of the New World.

So many myths and exaggerations were created in attempts to make Spain look bad.
 
Last edited:
I’m out “likes” for today, apparently. But, great post, my friend.

About the marranos, some of them were not exactly prizes, they were pretty subversive. But, yes, it got out of control. Curiously enough persecuting them was more of a secular thing than a matter concerning the Church. Some of the members of the nobleza felt they (los marranos) were dangerous in some ways. (Understandable considering the situations they were facing in other parts of Europe, there were a lot of rebellions against the corona española at that time.)
 
Fair enough. It’s not a subject I have a great interest in, but those are the last 3 books I’ve read on it, and the Peters and Kamen books are well written and well reviewed. I suggest them whenever the topic comes up. They are a correction to the black legend, but they are not a white wash.

The Netanyahu book is really for the specialist.

Thanks for the reply.
 
Last edited:
And, as I’ve done before, I recommend Peters/INQUISITION, on the general topic, and Kamen/THE SPANISH INQUISITION on that one in particular. Balanced and scholarly.
 
The damned are tortured forever.

The Good Thief said he deserved his punishment, Jesus didn’t correct him.
 
I don’t presume to question what the church deemed necessary at the time. Combating heresy and building Western Civilization wasn’t going to happen with hugs and kisses 100% of the time.
 
KevinK said:
You are right about one thing: it’s not much.
Click to expand...
Great! Now we have a bit more variety in name-calling! 🙂

It would be nice to have actual arguments, but I guess that is all we will get here…
 
Last edited:
I think it’s also important to be specific regarding which group you are talking about when refering to the Spanish Inquisition.

Besides the accused, there were the following main parties:

– The Spanish Sovereign and other Spanish Royals
– The members of the Spanish Royal Court and other nobles.
– The mobs
– The Church

The accused was pretty much always accused by the civil authorities and/or the mob. When the crime was a blasphemy charge, the Church was brought in as “expert witness” and the Church gladly took these matters away from the civil authorities in hopes of either finding innocence or bringing about conversion.

But when the accused was found guilty and refused to repent or have a conversion of heart, the state carried out sentencing.

The Church tried to help people during this Spanish Inquisition, to the best of the Church’s ability. But there were others involved in the Spanish Inquisition who were not innocent.

And things only got worse from the Royal Court and King after the death of Queen Isabella.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
MPat said:
KevinK:

You are right about one thing: it’s not much.

Great! Now we have a bit more variety in name-calling! 🙂

It would be nice to have actual arguments, but I guess that is all we will get her
Click to expand...
Please point out the name I called you in the above sentence.
 
Especially considering how people who judge them today would have acted back then. Such scenarios may shock everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top