The Spanish Inquisition

[1234]

The Reformation had very, very little to do with the Spanish Inquisition. Yes, later on the Inquisition targeted Protestants, but in and of itself, it was not a major contributing factor to the actual reformation. In fact, the stated goal of the early Inquisition of targeting “crypto-jews” and “crypto-muslims” was one that Luther and Calvin almost certainly would have agreed with. Certainly, neither Luther, Calvin nor any of the major Reformation figures were arguing for a separation of Church and State. Trying the link the Reformation with the founding of our Country (which owes far more to the Enlightment than to the Reformation) is a serious historical mistake at best.​

Bill

I did not mean to imply that the Reformation (a phenomenon of northern Europe) had anything to do with the Inquisition.

I merely mentioned that our founding fathers were, by and large, Protestant (John Carroll was RC, an exception).

The Inquisition has created a lot of trouble for the RCC, as this forum has attested. I am sure that you are familiar with the fact that a series on The SI is being aired on PBS now --I haven’t watched it. It has taken and will take hundreds of years for the RCC to live down the Inquisition. RC historians are constantly explaining it, clarifying it and basically willing it away. It is an example of what the Holocaust has become for the Germans, something that will take centuries for them to live down.

 

[peary]

I did not mean to imply that the Reformation (a phenomenon of northern Europe) had anything to do with the Inquisition.

I merely mentioned that our founding fathers were, by and large, Protestant (John Carroll was RC, an exception).

The Inquisition has created a lot of trouble for the RCC, as this forum has attested. I am sure that you are familiar with the fact that a series on The SI is being aired on PBS now --I haven’t watched it. It has taken and will take hundreds of years for the RCC to live down the Inquisition. RC historians are constantly explaining it, clarifying it and basically willing it away. It is an example of what the Holocaust has become for the Germans, something that will take centuries for them to live down.

After studying the various inquisitions throughout history, I conclude that the created problem for the Church is the almost successful revisionism by the media and anti-Catholic forces about them. So many fail to understand the existence or purpose of inquisitions at particular moments in western history from the Church’s point of view which is, of course, according to the secular media and many nonCatholic groups, always wrong. It’s like the Crusades or, as you mentioned, the Holocaust. The greatest fault is that individuals attempt to interpret history through the eyes of their own experience and 21st century ideas, not what was back then. And that is a big error.

 

[mchale]

I did not mean to imply that the Reformation (a phenomenon of northern Europe) had anything to do with the Inquisition.

Then why did you list the Reformation as one of the unintended consequences of the Inquisition?

I merely mentioned that our founding fathers were, by and large, Protestant (John Carroll was RC, an exception).

Actually, you stated that it was the reformers who wanted to seperate Church and State and then afterwards added that it was the goal of our founding fathers who were mostly Protestant.

Of course you conveniently ignored the fact that the first colony to allow Freedom of Religion was in fact Maryland which was at the time under the control of the Catholic Lord of Baltimore; when the Protestants took over, they repealed the right to worship as one chooses.

The Inquisition has created a lot of trouble for the RCC, as this forum has attested. I am sure that you are familiar with the fact that a series on The SI is being aired on PBS now --I haven’t watched it. It has taken and will take hundreds of years for the RCC to live down the Inquisition. RC historians are constantly explaining it, clarifying it and basically willing it away. It is an example of what the Holocaust has become for the Germans, something that will take centuries for them to live down.

It will take hundreds of years for the Catholic Church to live down the Inquisition, but more because of the Black Legend than the actual facts of the Spanish Inquisition. If we compare the numbers killed by the Inquisition with the numbers of Catholics killed by Protestant Persecution in say Ireland, I think we will find that it is the Protestants who come off the worse in the historical record. Mind you I am not trying to justify the Inquisition but rather to point out that attitudes promoted by the Catholic Church were not unique to the Church and were in fact shared by the Protestants of the day.

–
Bill

 

[1234]

It will take hundreds of years for the Catholic Church to live down the Inquisition, but more because of the Black Legend than the actual facts of the Spanish Inquisition. If we compare the numbers killed by the Inquisition with the numbers of Catholics killed by Protestant Persecution in say Ireland, I think we will find that it is the Protestants who come off the worse in the historical record. Mind you I am not trying to justify the Inquisition but rather to point out that attitudes promoted by the Catholic Church were not unique to the Church and were in fact shared by the Protestants of the day.​

Bill

True about the Prots in Ireland, but the Prot persecution of the RCC and the Irish was insidious, over hundreds of years, where as the Inquisition was so much more spectacular–all those autos da fe!

You can’t predict which atrocities are going to get the most press, which is why it’s best to try to avoid them altogether.

 

[bobzills]

True about the Prots in Ireland, but the Prot persecution of the RCC and the Irish was insidious, over hundreds of years, where as the Inquisition was so much more spectacular–all those autos da fe!

You can’t predict which atrocities are going to get the most press, which is why it’s best to try to avoid them altogether.

I am very much opposed to the enslavement of the Irish people and to the occupation of Northern Ireland by the Protestant group. Why not return Northern Ireland to the Irish who are the rightful citizens of the country?

 

[peary]

I am very much opposed to the enslavement of the Irish people and to the occupation of Northern Ireland by the Protestant group. Why not return Northern Ireland to the Irish who are the rightful citizens of the country?

You’ll have to ask England and the protestants about that.

 

[mchale]

True about the Prots in Ireland, but the Prot persecution of the RCC and the Irish was insidious, over hundreds of years, where as the Inquisition was so much more spectacular–all those autos da fe!

As opposed to the death of thousands of Irish in 1649-50? The thousands more sold into slavery?

You can’t predict which atrocities are going to get the most press, which is why it’s best to try to avoid them altogether.

Sure you can; look at who wrote the history? The Inquisition got its Black reputation in the 19th century in English speaking countries. It should be no suprise that the dominant social class was (and to a large part remains) culturally Protestant. Such historians were happy to attack the Church for the Inquisition while ignoring the massacres of Catholics in Ireland (and indeed ignoring the Potato Famine in Ireland… indeed forcing Ireland to export grain while the people starved!).

–
Bill

 

[bobzills]

As opposed to the death of thousands of Irish in 1649-50? The thousands more sold into slavery?

Unfortunately, though, it looks to me like the Church at times, did not come down hard enough against slavery. It is true that there were many occasions when slavery was opposed by the Church, however, I don;t think that it was entirely consistent on this issue at all times in the past.

 

[peary]

**Throughout history, the Church found Herself among cultures practicing slavery and had to deal with it. An early example is St. Paul’s Epistle to Philemon. St. Paul appears to tolerate slavery, but he also warned slave masters that they too have a Master in Heaven who would judge them (Col. 4:1). Due to Her weakness in political affairs, the Church could not stop every evil practice. However, political weakness is quite different than approval. There are many examples of saints buying slaves and then setting them free (e.g. St. Nicholas, Trinitarian Fathers & White Fathers). Unfortunately there were also Catholics and even clergy, who participated in slavery, and their sins caused scandal to the Church.

To further complicate this issue, there are different forms of slavery. Even though repugnant to our modern sensitivity, servitude is not always unjust, such as penal servitude for convicted criminals or servitude freely chosen for personal financial reasons. These forms are called just-title servitude. The Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which brought an end to racial slavery in the U.S., does allow for just-title servitude to punish criminals: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

During biblical times, a man could voluntarily sell himself into slavery in order to pay off his debts (Deut. 15:12-18). But such slaves were to be freed on the seventh year or the Jubilee year (Lev. 25:54). The Church tolerated just-title servitude for a time because it is not wrong in itself, though it can be seriously abused. The Popes did, however, consistently oppose racial slavery which completely lacks any moral justification.

Racial slavery, began in large-scale during the 15th century and was formally condemned by the Popes as early as 1435, fifty-seven years before Columbus discovered America. In 1404, the Spanish discovered the Canary Islands. They began to colonize the island and enslave its people. Pope Eugene IV in 1435 wrote to Bishop Ferdinand of Lanzarote in his Bull, Sicut Dudum, ordered those in charge to restore full rights to these people.

A century later, the Spanish and Portuguese were colonizing South America. Unfortunately the practice of slavery did not end. Even though far from being a saint, Pope Paul III in 1537 issued a Bull against slavery, entitled Sublimis Deus, to the universal Church.

Pope Paul not only condemned the slavery of Indians but also “all other peoples.” In his phrase “unheard of before now”, he seems to see a difference between this new form of slavery (i.e. racial slavery) and the ancient forms of just-title slavery. A few days before, he also issued a Brief, entitled *Pastorale Officium *to Cardinal Juan de Tavera of Toledo, which warned the Catholic faithful of excommunication for participating in slavery.

Popes Gregory XIV (Cum Sicuti, 1591), Urban VIII (Commissum Nobis, 1639) and Benedict XIV (Immensa Pastorum, 1741) also condemned slavery and the slave trade. Unlike the earlier papal letters, these excommunications were more directed towards the clergy than the laity. In 1839, Pope Gregory XVI issued a Bull, entitled In Supremo. Its main focus was against slave trading, but it also clearly condemned racial slavery.

With all these formal condemnations, it is a shame that the Popes were largely ignored by the Catholic laity and clergy. Two Catholic nations were largely involved with slave trafficking. Many Catholics at that time owned or sold slaves. Even some Catholic bishops during the 19th-century appeared to support slavery. The Popes were so ignored that some people today claim that they were silent. These sins brought great scandal to Christ’s Church. Unfortunately history does repeat itself. Today the majority of Catholics admit to using artificial contraceptives, even though the Popes have condemned contraception (e.g. Humane vitae, Catechism of the Catholic Church 2370, 2399).

 

[bobzills]

Popes Gregory XIV (Cum Sicuti, 1591), Urban VIII (Commissum Nobis, 1639) and Benedict XIV (Immensa Pastorum, 1741) also condemned slavery and the slave trade. Unlike the earlier papal letters, these excommunications were more directed towards the clergy than the laity. In 1839, Pope Gregory XVI issued a Bull, entitled In Supremo. Its main focus was against slave trading, but it also clearly condemned racial slavery.

Yes, this is something we should discuss on another thread, since it might be off topic from the Spanish Inquisition. There are a lot of questions that have been brought up. For example, there is supposedly an Instruction from the Holy Office, signed by Pope Pius IX in 1866, which supposedly declares: “Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature,
is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can
be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by
approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons …
It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be
sold, bought, exchanged or given”

 

[peary]

Yes, this is something we should discuss on another thread, since it might be off topic from the Spanish Inquisition. There are a lot of questions that have been brought up. For example, there is supposedly an Instruction from the Holy Office, signed by Pope Pius IX in 1866, which supposedly declares: “Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature,
is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can
be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by
approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons …
It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be
sold, bought, exchanged or given”

In the Bull of Canonization of the St. Peter Claver, Pope Pius IX branded the “supreme villainy” (summum nefas) of the slave traders. Pope Leo XIII, in 1888, addressed an encyclical to the Brazilian bishops, *In Plurimism *[2] (On the Abolition of Slavery), exhorting them to banish the remnants of slavery from their country.

The Bull of Pius IX is the only one that I know from this pope that referred to the slave trade as “supreme villainy” but I’ll keep searching for anything else.**

 

[josephdaniel29]

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!

http://www.qrz.com/uploads/post-7-71517-Monty_Python_Spanish_Inquisition.jpg

Sorry…

 

[bobzills]

In the Bull of Canonization of the St. Peter Claver**, Pope Pius IX branded the “supreme villainy” (summum nefas) of the slave traders. Pope Leo XIII, in 1888, addressed an encyclical to the Brazilian bishops, *In Plurimism *[2] (On the Abolition of Slavery), exhorting them to banish the remnants of slavery from their country.

The Bull of Pius IX is the only one that I know from this pope that referred to the slave trade as “supreme villainy” but I’ll keep searching for anything else.

The instruction from the Holy Office, signed in 1866.

 

[peary]

The instruction from the Holy Office, signed in 1866.

That is in the Bull of the Canonization of Peter Claver.

 

[bobzills]

In the Bull of Canonization of the St. Peter Claver**, Pope Pius IX branded the “supreme villainy” (summum nefas) of the slave traders. Pope Leo XIII, in 1888, addressed an encyclical to the Brazilian bishops, *In Plurimism *[2] (On the Abolition of Slavery), exhorting them to banish the remnants of slavery from their country.

The Bull of Pius IX is the only one that I know from this pope that referred to the slave trade as “supreme villainy” but I’ll keep searching for anything else.

Actually, the quote that I was referring to was: Instructio Number 1293: Found in Collectanea, Vol. 1, pp. 715-720. It is an “Instructio” of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office on some disputed questions, including questions of “servitude.” However, on further investigation, although it does say it is not contrary to the natural law, as quoted above, it adds that the Roman Pontiffs have made every effort to abolish slavery.
However, there are other documents such as Dum diversas of Nicholas V, which David Love says ushered in the West African slave trade:
"“We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property …] and to reduce their persons into perpetual slavery.”
there is a similar bull issued by Nicholas V, Romanus Pontifex, which was a followup to Dum Diversas:
“…weighing all and singular the premises with due meditation, and noting that since we had formerly by other letters of ours granted among other things free and ample faculty to the aforesaid King Alfonso – to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit – by having secured the said faculty, the said King Alfonso, or, by his authority, the aforesaid infante, justly and lawfully has acquired and possessed, and doth possess, these islands, lands, harbors, and seas, and they do of right belong and pertain to the said King Alfonso and his successors.”
Still, this is off the topic of the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[peary]

Actually, the quote that I was referring to was: Instructio Number 1293: Found in Collectanea, Vol. 1, pp. 715-720. It is an “Instructio” of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office on some disputed questions, including questions of “servitude.” However, on further investigation, although it does say it is not contrary to the natural law, as quoted above, it adds that the Roman Pontiffs have made every effort to abolish slavery.
However, there are other documents such as Dum diversas of Nicholas V, which David Love says ushered in the West African slave trade:
"“We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property …] and to reduce their persons into perpetual slavery.”
there is a similar bull issued by Nicholas V, Romanus Pontifex, which was a followup to Dum Diversas:
“…weighing all and singular the premises with due meditation, and noting that since we had formerly by other letters of ours granted among other things free and ample faculty to the aforesaid King Alfonso – to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit – by having secured the said faculty, the said King Alfonso, or, by his authority, the aforesaid infante, justly and lawfully has acquired and possessed, and doth possess, these islands, lands, harbors, and seas, and they do of right belong and pertain to the said King Alfonso and his successors.”
Still, this is off the topic of the Spanish Inquisition.

It was politics…as usual.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

After studying the various inquisitions throughout history, I conclude that the created problem for the Church is the almost successful revisionism by the media and anti-Catholic forces about them. So many fail to understand the existence or purpose of inquisitions at particular moments in western history from the Church’s point of view which is, of course, according to the secular media and many nonCatholic groups, always wrong. It’s like the Crusades or, as you mentioned, the Holocaust. The greatest fault is that individuals attempt to interpret history through the eyes of their own experience and 21st century ideas, not what was back then. And that is a big error.

I generally agree with you on this. EWTN has a wonderful series on this “Catholicism: The Heart of History” in which this issue is discussed. There are several written sources around as well. I do have one question. How do you see misunderstandings about the Holocaust fitting into this? Do you mean the reinterpretations of Pope Pius XII’s part in this?

CDL

 

[peary]

I generally agree with you on this. EWTN has a wonderful series on this “Catholicism: The Heart of History” in which this issue is discussed. There are several written sources around as well. I do have one question. How do you see misunderstandings about the Holocaust fitting into this? Do you mean the reinterpretations of Pope Pius XII’s part in this?

CDL

Yes.

 

[1234]

Yes, this is something we should discuss on another thread, since it might be off topic from the Spanish Inquisition. There are a lot of questions that have been brought up. For example, there is supposedly an Instruction from the Holy Office, signed by Pope Pius IX in 1866, which supposedly declares: "Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature,
is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can
be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by
approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons …
It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be
sold, bought, exchanged or given"

This is quite a quote. Can anyone substantiate it? I would vote with the papal bulls myself, as having the force of the RCC’s authority, but if this quote is really floating around, it should be identified and refuted.

I think that the Spanish Inquisition and the English persecution of Ireland have one lethal combination in common; both are a combination of religious differences and racism. In Spain , this combination was directed against the Jews and Moors. In Ireland, it was directed against the papist Irish. In Iraq, we see Islamic factions aligned with tribal associations fighting each other. This combination is a very deadly brew.

I think that Catholics paint themselves into a corner by trying to soft-pedal the Inquisition or rely on a lot of sophistic, jesuitical, casuistic arguments to weasel out of it. Pointing a finger against Protestant England and its abuses of the Irish are a feeble defense. The issue is not what the Protestants did (which were terrible–I am more than a little interested in the potato famine and events which led up to it), but what happened in Spain under the Inquisition–that’s the topic thread.

SOMEone could open a new one about Ireland…

For example, I think that it’s interesting that NOW that peace has come to Ireland and it’s no longer under the thumb of the Brits (“the Celtic Tiger”), that the island is becoming more secular by the minute. There’s nothing like persecution of a religion to keep it alive.

 

[peary]

This is quite a quote. Can anyone substantiate it? I would vote with the papal bulls myself, as having the force of the RCC’s authority, but if this quote is really floating around, it should be identified and refuted.

.

As I posted last evening, the Church did not consider certain forms of slavery to be unjust, such as just-title servitude, but slavery based on race was openly condemned by several popes until all forms of slavery were condemned in the 19th century.