The Spanish Inquisition: so what?

[mschrank]

As bad as any Medevial society was, at least they didn’t kill 50 million people within 30 years.

Perspective…

 

[Genesis315]

Not to the 2000 people killed it wasn’t. Or do the Ten Commandments say:

Thou shalt not kill…much?

That is not to be taken as an absolute. In the next couple passages it says that blasphemers are to be stoned to death.

Anyway, the state has always had the authority to use the death penalty.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

The “history” of the Spanish Inquisition that we hear in the English speaking world is largely the “Black Legend”; Protestant propaganda meant to smear Catholicism and Spain. Since revisionist historians like Kamen have reported the cold facts, it has become apparent that the Spanish Inqusition was far milder than most early modern judicial efforts.

God Bless

I would hardly call the death of 2,000 people burned to death, MILD.

I think it was in Lea’s history, where it is pointed out that a leader was accused of witchcraft because that is what the interigators told the victim of torture that is what they wanted to hear.

LEA, CHARLES HENRY
A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (1887, 4 volumes)
swrb.com/catalog/l.htm

 

[bobzills]

I think it was in Lea’s history, where it is pointed out that a leader was accused of witchcraft because that is what the interigators told the victim of torture that is what they wanted to hear.

LEA, CHARLES HENRY
A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages (1887, 4 volumes)
swrb.com/catalog/l.htm

I don’t think it was right to use torture to extract confessions.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

No, it wasn’t right to use torture–which is why the Church tried so hard to convince the GOVERMENTS (you know the people actually DOING the torture) to regulate themselves, to be more moderate, and spoke AGAINST torture.

 

[rpp]

OK, I didn’t want to do this, but now you’ve forced my hand.

youtube.com/watch?v=zO68fUMWx3g

Thank you for this! Very informative.

 

[bobzills]

No, it wasn’t right to use torture–which is why the Church tried so hard to convince the GOVERMENTS (you know the people actually DOING the torture) to regulate themselves, to be more moderate, and spoke AGAINST torture.

Well, the Church has changed its teaching on the use of torture to extract confessions. This is seen from the papal bull Ad extirpanda. Ad exstirpanda is the incipit designating a papal bull issued on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which was confirmed by Pope Alexander IV on November 30, 1259, and by Pope Clement IV on November 3, 1265. It explicitly authorized the use of torture for eliciting confessions.

 

[VociMike]

It was a lot worse than silly if you were the one caught not eating a hot dog. If you were brought before the Inquisition, they could hang you by your wrists, slowly bring up up off the floor and then suddenly let you go to a point with a jerk and this oftentimes resulted in pulling your arms out of their sockets or dislocating them, leaving you crippled for life.
And people were tortured for other reasons also. Take for example, the case of Giordano Bruno, who taugh that the stars might be other suns with their own planetary systems. He was brought to the Campo de Fiori, a central Roman market square, tied naked to a pole, and burned alive at the stake on February 17, 1600.

You do understand that torture was used much less in the Inquisition than in the civil courts of the day, don’t you.

It’s easy to find fault with ages past. What’s more difficult is to view those ages with proper perspective.

 

[rpp]

It wasn’t only Muslims that were targeted by the Inquisition. Greek Orthodox were also targeted and innocent people such as St. Joan of Arc were handed over to the state to be burned alive at the stake. I am opposed to burning people such as St. Joan of Arc alive at the stake on trumped up charges as were brought against her.
Also the Inquisition tortured people who were accused of things such as not eating pork.

Muslims (and Jews) were never “targeted” by the Inquisition. The Inquisition only had authority over those who professed to be Christian. I know nothing about Greek Orthodox.

It was a lot worse than silly if you were the one caught not eating a hot dog. If you were brought before the Inquisition, they could hang you by your wrists, slowly bring up up off the floor and then suddenly let you go to a point with a jerk and this oftentimes resulted in pulling your arms out of their sockets or dislocating them, leaving you crippled for life.

There were very strict rules for administering torture. The most notable were:

1. 
   *] A person may only be tortured once.
   *]A person must be examined by a doctor and determined to be healthy and in no danger of death.
   *]The torture cannot last more than 15 minutes
   That is not to say some people abused these rules.
   

   And people were tortured for other reasons also. Take for example, the case of Giordano Bruno, who taugh that the stars might be other suns with their own planetary systems. He was brought to the Campo de Fiori, a central Roman market square, tied naked to a pole, and burned alive at the stake on February 17, 1600.

   Bruno was executed for witchcraft, not heresy. In addition to his prescient astronomical observations, he was also an alchemist who called upon demons in attempt to change various materials into gold. He also poisoned some of his customers “accidentally”.

 

[manualman]

People will never learn. The scriptures themselves clearly demonstrate that people within the Church are not perfect and still commit sins and mistakes. The striking thing about the Catholic Church throughout its history is that she has ALWAYS been a beacon of light that has resisted the predominating ‘spirit of the age’ in greater or lesser degrees. Sure, you will find individuals who committed torture and murder in the name of God. But look closer and you will always find that the catholic church was better behaved and taught a higher/better ethic compared to the culture at large in the day.

Those who dredge up ancient atrocities and are offended because the behavior doesn’t meet our modern standards miss the crucial point: our modern standards of morality and decency came about BECAUSE of the divine guidance given to the Catholic Church. Without her, we’d still be barbarians. (and in many ways, our society is well along the path to reverting to that status).

 

[bobzills]

There were very strict rules for administering torture. The most notable were:

1. 
   *] A person may only be tortured once.
   *]A person must be examined by a doctor and determined to be healthy and in no danger of death.
   *]The torture cannot last more than 15 minutes
   .

1. 
   After they pulled your arms and legs out of your sockets and crippled you for life, what good did an examination by the doctor do?

 

[Liberanosamalo]

I like to imagine how much worse the Grand Inquisitors would have been had they NOT been devout Catholics.



Maybe they would have systematically put their victims into ovens by the tens of thousands. Or starved out whole villages. Or massacred the families of heretics to prove their point.

Perhaps there really IS something to Catholicism after all!

 

[rpp]

After they pulled your arms and legs out of your sockets and crippled you for life, what good did an examination by the doctor do?

You keep using this as an example. Can you please let us know this source for this.

The Inquisition has been an area of personal study for many years for. Years ago, when I was an atheist, I wanted to learn more about it so that I could mock Christians and Catholics. Unfortunately, my idea backfired because all the really juicy stories came from discredited sources, mostly English and Lutheran. I learned that the Church, given the jurisprudence of the times and not projecting neo-feminist and 21st century politically correct attitudes onto the times, behaved with remarkable gentleness. A Gentleness that often brought it into conflict with civil authorities who were always much more bloodthirsty.

So I, as an atheist and an enemy of the Church, realized that I could not, in truth, mock the Church over her conduct during the Inquisition. Now that I am a Catholic, I will defend Holy Mother Church from those who would seek to unjustly accuse her of wrong-doing. Even if the accusations come from within. And I have the truth and historical fact on my side.

So why do you as a Catholic seek to mock your own Church with falsehoods?

 

[rpp]

I like to imagine how much worse the Grand Inquisitors would have been had they NOT been devout Catholics.



Maybe they would have systematically put their victims into ovens by the tens of thousands. Or starved out whole villages. Or massacred the families of heretics to prove their point.

Perhaps there really IS something to Catholicism after all!

Actually, there was never a post with the title “Grand Inquisitor”. That came from a Dostoevsky novel, The Idiot I believe, but I may be mistaken.

But what you have described is what some civil authorities would have liked to do had the Church not been around.

And of course some civil leaders, particularly in the bloody 20th century, did those very things.

 

[bobzills]

You keep using this as an example. Can you please let us know this source for this. …
So why do you as a Catholic seek to mock your own Church with falsehoods?

1. You might try the book by Kamen, or the more scholarly book by Lea.
2. Sorry, but Kamen is judged by many Catholics to be a moderate and fair book, and you can find the information about torture in his book. So you have some reading to do before you start talking about falsehoods and making your unconvincing, ignorant and slanderous ad hominem arguments.

 

[rpp]

1. You might try the book by Kamen, or the more scholarly book by Lea.
2. Sorry, but Kamen is judged by many Catholics to be a moderate and fair book, and you can find the information about torture in his book. So you have some reading to do before you start talking about falsehoods and making your unconvincing, ignorant and slanderous ad hominem arguments.

Please point out the slander in my post. And what is ad hominem about describing my own personal experience?

I have indeed read The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision by Kamen a few years ago. Very enlightening.

Lea’s book, is written in a rather boring style and was tough for me to get through. In fact, I only read about half of it.

Be careful about giving advice.

 

[VociMike]

After they pulled your arms and legs out of your sockets and crippled you for life, what good did an examination by the doctor do?

What exactly is your point in all of this, because I can’t see any point in your comments. All I see is continual sniping over something that happened 500 years ago in a world vastly different than our own.

 

[goofyjim]

I don’t wish to offend any Catholics or Holy Mother Church but she has made her mistakes like everyone else has. That is why my faith is not in the Church but in Christ. This is the only way to get through any rough times.

 

[bobzills]

Please point out the slander in my post. And what is ad hominem about describing my own personal experience?

I have indeed read The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision by Kamen a few years ago. Very enlightening.

Lea’s book, is written in a rather boring style and was tough for me to get through. In fact, I only read about half of it.

Be careful about giving advice.

The following quote from you is a slander:

:So why do you as a Catholic seek to mock your own Church with falsehoods?

If you have read Kamen, then you know that what I have referred to is not false.

 

[bobzills]

What exactly is your point in all of this, because I can’t see any point in your comments. All I see is continual sniping over something that happened 500 years ago in a world vastly different than our own.

The point is that it set a bad precedent for the Church to approve of torture to extract confessions. The title of the thread sasy “So what?” I am responding to this ignorant question “so what?” by showing that people were hurt by the inquisition.