The Spanish Inquisition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Righteousone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wouldn’t worry so much what the pope said, but worry about what Jesus said…and if I were to list websites containing atrocities against Christians, I’d be here all day AND all night. but it is a beautiful day today and I must go and enjoy it. Peace.
But, as a Catholic, don’t you believe the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth?

Or will you now reject the Pope because you don’t like what he said?

You challenged me to give you PROOF that he apologized for the Spanish Inquisition. I GAVE you more proof than you asked for.

And your only response is to say have a nice day?

Is the ktichen getting too hot for you? 😃
 
But, as a Catholic, don’t you believe the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth?

Or will you now reject the Pope because you don’t like what he said?

You challenged me to give you PROOF that he apologized for the Spanish Inquisition. I GAVE you more proof than you asked for.

And your only response is to say have a nice day?

Is the ktichen getting too hot for you? 😃
Hashem:

In my time here I have learned that some Catholics have little respect for the words and actions of their own popes (see the thread “Do Protestants Have Faith”).

I have learned that there is a name for this: cafeteria Catholicism.
 
Hashem:

In my time here I have learned that some Catholics have little respect for the words and actions of their own popes (see the thread “Do Protestants Have Faith”).

I have learned that there is a name for this: cafeteria Catholicism.
It certainly isn’t simple as that. Disagreeing with the opinion of the pope is perfectly fine. In modern times it is quite normal to paint the medieval Church as barbaric and cruel and so in response to all this negativity many Catholics have become quite reactionary to any kind of negative assessment of the medieval Church. The result is that we sometimes end up defending illegitimate positions. I find that it is unusual to find a Catholic who 'defends" the inquisition, rather you’re much more likely to find a Catholic who questions just how much the Church was involved in the inquisitions and to ask just what the nature of these events were and to what extent did they go?

Also, cafeteria catholicism almost always suggests a form of liberal Catholicism. If anything, Righteousone seems to be expressing a conservative/traditionalist mindset. It would be unfair to paint traditionalist Catholics as cafeteria Catholics, especially when their opinion agrees with past popes.
 
It certainly isn’t simple as that. Disagreeing with the opinion of the pope is perfectly fine. In modern times it is quite normal to paint the medieval Church as barbaric and cruel and so in response to all this negativity many Catholics have become quite reactionary to any kind of negative assessment of the medieval Church. The result is that we sometimes end up defending illegitimate positions. I find that it is unusual to find a Catholic who 'defends" the inquisition, rather you’re much more likely to find a Catholic who questions just how much the Church was involved in the inquisitions and to ask just what the nature of these events were and to what extent did they go?

Also, cafeteria catholicism almost always suggests a form of liberal Catholicism. If anything, Righteousone seems to be expressing a conservative/traditionalist mindset. It would be unfair to paint traditionalist Catholics as cafeteria Catholics, especially when their opinion agrees with past popes.
👍 👍 👍
 
Also, cafeteria catholicism almost always suggests a form of liberal Catholicism. If anything, Righteousone seems to be expressing a conservative/traditionalist mindset. It would be unfair to paint traditionalist Catholics as cafeteria Catholics, especially when their opinion agrees with past popes.
Hmmm?

I thought the term “Cafeteria Catholic” was neutral ideollogically.

Although it commonly applies to pro-choice Catholics, I would think that it would apply the other way (for example those who reject Vatican II.).

Anyway, when I read (on a Catholic forum) certain Catholic posters who are not taking the words and actions of their current Pontiffs seriously, red flags go up all over in my mind and these posters lose all credibility to me. I would be one to give Pope Benedictus and Pope JP II much more respect than an anonymous poster over the internet. I think Hashem would also.
 
Hmmm?
I thought the term “Cafeteria Catholic” was neutral ideollogically.
It isn’t. The term cafeteria Catholic is deragatory way of referring to liberal Catholics who simply pick and chose which doctrines they are to believe in.
Although it commonly applies to pro-choice Catholics, I would think that it would apply the other way .
It doesn’t apply the other way. The traditionalist mindset is miles apart from the liberal/cafeteria catholic mindset. Wheras the liberal is faithful to their own vague set of human rights, the traditionalist is faithful to the traditional opinions and practices of the Church. The traditionalist isn’t concerned with doctrine, instead they are more concerned with practices/opinions. In fact traditionalists are usually hardcore supporters of Catholic doctrine.
Anyway, when I read (on a Catholic forum) certain Catholic posters who are not taking the words and actions of their current Pontiffs seriously, red flags go up all over in my mind and these posters lose all credibility to me. I would be one to give Pope Benedictus and Pope JP II much more respect than an anonymous poster over the internet. I think Hashem would also.
I can see that, but most traditional catholics are not taking some opinions as seriously as others because some modern opinions contradict what was at one time the established position of the Church.
 
I love God, I love my church, I love my faith, I love my pope. 🙂
Do you love every Pope? Or just the current one? You’re not a sedevacantist, are you?

And if you loved Pope John Paul II, why do you not agree with his apology on behalf of your church for abuses that took place during the Spanish Inquisition?
 
But, as a Catholic, don’t you believe the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth?

Or will you now reject the Pope because you don’t like what he said?

You challenged me to give you PROOF that he apologized for the Spanish Inquisition. I GAVE you more proof than you asked for.

And your only response is to say have a nice day?

Is the ktichen getting too hot for you? 😃
Did JPII specifically mention the Spanish Inquisition? I think that he didn’t. I think that he gave sort of a blanket apology for the past, not saying what actions he was apologizing for. This weakens the force and value of the apology, I think.

Can anyone produce a valid translation of JPII’s remarks?
 
Did JPII specifically mention the Spanish Inquisition? I think that he didn’t. I think that he gave sort of a blanket apology for the past, not saying what actions he was apologizing for. This weakens the force and value of the apology, I think.

Can anyone produce a valid translation of JPII’s remarks?
I posted a link directly to the Vatican website, which contains the full text of his statement (click on the English version).
 
**
My question is - if performed under duress, would a baptism be ‘valid’?
In the same veign, if performed under duress, would a marriage be valid?
Or, how about this one - if performed under duress, would ANY sacrament actually be valid? What
And - what would make one sacrament more valid than the other if performed under duress?**
Edgar Mortara was baptised under duress without either his wanting it or his parents wanting it. Yet the Pope ruled that his baptism was valid and he had him kidnapped at gunpoint and brought to the Vatican under duress to remain there away from his Jewish parents for the rest of his life.
 
Edgar Mortara was baptised under duress without either his wanting it or his parents wanting it. Yet the Pope ruled that his baptism was valid and he had him kidnapped at gunpoint and brought to the Vatican under duress to remain there away from his Jewish parents for the rest of his life.
I was somewhat familiar with the Edgar Mortara case, but didn’t know about the gunpoint part—:eek:

Pretty pathetic, the entire case. We’ve never stolen Catholic children to forcibly raise them as Jews…
 
I was somewhat familiar with the Edgar Mortara case, but didn’t know about the gunpoint part—:eek:

Pretty pathetic, the entire case. We’ve never stolen Catholic children to forcibly raise them as Jews…
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my recollection of the event was that:
armed guards came to the door of the parents and told them that they were there to take the boy.
 
Please correct me if I am wrong, but my recollection of the event was that:
armed guards came to the door of the parents and told them that they were there to take the boy.
I just looked the case up again, to refresh my memory.

Yes, armed guards did appear at the home of his parents to take him. The article I found also said that Mortara would periodically be paraded in the Jewish community, to annoy the Jews!

What I don’t understand is why they targeted that one child.

I also wonder if this case is why most very Orthodox Jews I know will not hire a religious Christian caretaker for their children, only Muslim, Jewish or nonreligious? To make sure their children are not baptized behind their backs?
 
The Mortara Case:

During the early 1850’s, the Italian city of Bologna was still under the temporal rule of the Pope, a portion of the traditional Papal States. There was resident in Bologna at this time a certain Mortara family, Jews who, while excluded by the Pope from the privileges of citizenship, managed to make a very comfortable living among their Catholic neighbors. Encouraged by the growing revolutionary spirit of the city (which was soon to be out of Papal hands and annexed by the Masonic government of Italy), the Mortaras had lately defied the very explicit Papal law which forbids Jews to have Christian servants. A young Catholic girl of Bologna, Anna Morisi, had been hired as a domestic in the Mortara household.

One day in November of 1857, Anna was describing to a friend the highly serious illness of one of the Mortara children. At the friend’s suggestion that perhaps the child should be baptized, discreetly, before it died, Anna protested that under no circumstances could she do that. She then proceeded to unburden her Catholic conscience by revealing that once before, in a similar circumstance, she had baptized a dying Mortara baby, and the child had afterward recovered — was now, in fact, a healthy six-year-old, and being raised as a Jew!

News of the Mortaras’ baptized boy ultimately reached the Archbishop of Bologna. The sacred integrity of Baptism, and the Church’s obligation to provide for the Christian upbringing of baptized children, left only one course of action to the prelate. Under orders approved by the Holy Office, Anna Morisi, protected by Papal guards, left her Jewish employer’s house, and with her there went the baptized child, Edgar Mortara.

The arrival of Edgar in Rome, where he was to be raised as a ward of Pius IX, made hotly-protested news in every major city of Europe and America. There were cries of “Medievalism!” “Inquisition.” “Popish Tyranny!” Immediately, mass meetings of protest were organized in England and the United States. The powerful alliance of German rabbis sent a formal petition to Pius IX, demanding the Mortara child’s immediate release. Sir Moses Montefiore, the Rothschilds’ roving ambassador, rushed to the Papal Palace at Rome to deliver a personal protest to the Pope. Unmoved, His Holiness dispatched Cardinal Antonelli to tell Sir Moses about the Church’s ancient position in the matter of baptized children, adding that by their boldness in employing a Catholic servant, the Mortaras themselves must take full responsibility for any unpleasantness that had resulted. Other indignant callers, and many appeared, got similar receptions.

Within two years of Edgar Mortara’s arrival at Rome, the city of Bologna was seized by the Italian Kingdom. Under this new and anti-papal government, the Jews attempted to institute criminal proceedings against the servant-girl, Anna Morisi, charging her with kidnapping. Anna, however, had since entered a convent, and when it became known that the Jews were proposing to violate the sacredness of the cloister and drag a nun into the civil courts, popular indignation forced them to abandon the cause, and to consider the whole Mortara Case ended.

Actually, the end did not come until 1940. In March of that year, a white-haired Augustinian priest died at Liege in Belgium. He was nearly ninety years old and all during his priestly life he had been known as Father Pius, O.S.A., a name which he had taken in honor of his beloved guardian, Pope Pius IX. There were few who took notice of Father Pius’ death, and fewer who realized that he was the same Edgar Mortara who close to a century before had so electrified the world.
 
Peary,

I also saw that website when I did my search (the one you quoted from verbatim without giving credit, btw).

Why didn’t you link to the site? Here it is:

fatherfeeney.org/point/56-sep.html

(scroll down to the Mortara segment)

The site reproduces Father Leonard Feeney’s 1950s magazines, called THE POINT, and as I read that site, I saw it is an antisemitic Catholic website.

I tried to find a more neutral site to get info from myself.
 
We shouldn’t forget one happy ending to the story - September 20 1870 when the Italian army entered Rome and, after an overwhelming majority in a plebiscite there voted in favor, annexed the territory of the Papal States to the Kingdom of Italy.
 
Peary,

I also saw that website when I did my search (the one you quoted from verbatim without giving credit, btw).

Why didn’t you link to the site? Here it is:

fatherfeeney.org/point/56-sep.html

(scroll down to the Mortara segment)

The site reproduces Father Leonard Feeney’s 1950s magazines, called THE POINT, and as I read that site, I saw it is an antisemitic Catholic website.

I tried to find a more neutral site to get info from myself.
I ran it off so fast that I forgot to include the website. Sorry.
I am not a Fr. Feeney fan by any means. I just thought that his explanation of the Mortara case was legitimate and historically accurate. By the way, Fr. Pius was Edgar Mortara, who remained a person quite content and happy in his priesthood, from what I gather.
 
I ran it off so fast that I forgot to include the website. Sorry.
I am not a Fr. Feeney fan by any means. I just thought that his explanation of the Mortara case was legitimate and historically accurate. By the way, Fr. Pius was Edgar Mortara, who remained a person quite content and happy in his priesthood, from what I gather.
It’s called the ‘Stockholm Effect’.
 
I ran it off so fast that I forgot to include the website. Sorry.
I am not a Fr. Feeney fan by any means. I just thought that his explanation of the Mortara case was legitimate and historically accurate. By the way, Fr. Pius was Edgar Mortara, who remained a person quite content and happy in his priesthood, from what I gather.
He remained a Catholic, perhaps because, having been kidnapped as a 5 yr old, he knew nothing else.

In Judaism, we have a term for Jews in that situation: they are regarded as being “tinok shenishbah”, which means they are not held morally accountable for joining another religion, since they were children at the time and did not know any different.

(The term actually means “children who were carried away captive” (very apt for the situation), and refers to ancient times, when Israelite soldiers would invade an enemy nation during war, and find Jewish children who had been taken captive in previous wars, and had been raised as nonJews/pagans/other religions.)

So in our eyes, Edgar Mortara did not sin and would have a place in the Olam ha’Ba!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top