The Spanish Inquistion

branie

Anyone here think this was a rather dark period of the Catholic Church's history?

Quo Vadis

branie wrote: »

Anyone here think this was a rather dark period of the Catholic Church's history?

Is this supposed to be an OP ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

gigino

branie wrote: »

Anyone here think this was a rather dark period of the Catholic Church's history?

Its not taught about much in Irish schools so I do not expect you to get much of a response here.

Of course it was a dark period of the Roman Catholic Churches history ; the systematic torture in Catholic countries - and horiffic tortures were used - of people who were not Catholics.

Keylem

"Sooner or later, any discussion of apologetics with Fundamentalists will address the Inquisition. To non-Catholics it is a scandal; to Catholics, an embarrassment; to both, a confusion. It is a handy stick for Catholic-bashing, simply because most Catholics seem at a loss for a sensible reply. this tract will set the record straight."

MrPudding

branie wrote: »

Anyone here think this was a rather dark period of the Catholic Church's history?

Calling it a "dark period" implies that at some part it was or is in the light...

MrP

georgieporgy

Those guys did some excellent work. Unfortunately it went on too long and got corrupted so it had to be closed down.
Now would be a good time to start it up again.

Fanny Cradock

MrPudding wrote: »

Calling it a "dark period" implies that at some part it was or is in the light...

MrP

I would assume that Catholics (and probably some non-Catholics) would wish to imply such a thing. Does that come as a surprise to you?

georgieporgy wrote: »

Those guys did some excellent work. Unfortunately it went on too long and got corrupted so it had to be closed down.
Now would be a good time to start it up again.

Given that the Inquisition is almost universally associated with torture and murder, I think you probably want to expand on that quite a bit.

georgieporgy

gigino wrote: »

Its not taught about much in Irish schools so I do not expect you to get much of a response here.

Of course it was a dark period of the Roman Catholic Churches history ; the systematic torture in Catholic countries - and horiffic tortures were used - of people who were not Catholics.

only catholics were subjected to the authority of the inquisition. The idea was to root out the wolves dressed as sheep. Muslims and jews were not subject to it. But those who pretended to convert to christianity for their own nefarious reasons were subjected to it.

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

only catholics were subjected to the authority of the inquisition. The idea was to root out the wolves dressed as sheep. Muslims and jews were not subject to it. But those who pretended to convert to christianity for their own nefarious reasons were subjected to it.

"Nefarious reasons" such as wanting to continue living in the land of their birth because Muslims and Jews were expelled en masse?

georgieporgy

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Given that the Inquisition is almost universally associated with torture and murder, I think you probably want to expand on that quite a bit.

most people believe what they read in the newspapers!

Most people have not done any serious research on the various inquisitions which spanned a few centuries. There were indeed some "irregularities" as per this little snippet from wikipedia;

Although the Inquisition is often viewed as being directed against Jews, in actual fact it had no jurisdiction or authority over unconverted Jews, or Muslims. Only baptised Christians faced investigation; and of those called to appear before the Holy Office, most were released after their first hearing without further incident.
Accusations of excess regarding the Spanish Inquisition can be supported by reference to a papal bull by Pope Sixtus IV dating from early 1482 (before Torquemada's appointment as Grand Inquisitor), affirming that,
many true and faithful Christians, because of the testimony of enemies, rivals, slaves and other low people—and still less appropriate—without tests of any kind, have been locked up in secular prisons, tortured and condemned like relapsed heretics, deprived of their goods and properties, and given over to the secular arm to be executed, at great danger to their souls, giving a pernicious example and causing scandal to many.[

The Spanish inquisition in particular went on too long because it suited the spanish rulers at the time and the latter resisted the pope's attempts to bring it to a conclusion. Ignoring the pope is not a modern phenomenon it would seem.

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

Those guys did some excellent work. Unfortunately it went on too long and got corrupted so it had to be closed down.

During the very first year that the Spanish Inquisition operated (1480-1481) more than 300 Marranos were burned to death (a Marrano was a Jew who had nomninally converted to Christianity to avoid persecution but still secretly practiced Judaism).

So, Georgie, are you saying that burning those 300 people to death was 'excellent work'?

Now would be a good time to start it up again.

Do you think there are more Jews that need burnt?

Quo Vadis

Nothing to do with real Catholicism, it was a political inquisition, disguised as a religious one.

Callan57

georgieporgy wrote: »

only catholics were subjected to the authority of the inquisition. The idea was to root out the wolves dressed as sheep. Muslims and jews were not subject to it. But those who pretended to convert to christianity for their own nefarious reasons were subjected to it.

One slight error there it was those who were suspected ... it is by any stretch a very black mark on the history of Catholism ... and it was, of course, also used to settle personal scores! It was also a pointless exercise in that, as has been said in relation to Guantanamo, if you torture someone enough they will admit to anything.

Manach

It should also be put in the context of the wider European situation of Protestant Zealotry driving persecutions in Europe and the threat of a resurgence Islamic menace as per the Ottoman empire seeking to undo the Iberian re-conquest.

Callan57

Quo Vadis wrote: »

Nothing to do with real Catholicism, it was a political inquisition, disguised as a religious one.

The Catholic Church is and always was a political institution ... nothing to do with religion

MrPudding

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I would assume that Catholics (and probably some non-Catholics) would wish to imply such a thing. Does that come as a surprise to you?

That anyone could possibly think there is anything good or worthwhile about this organisation is a source of constant surprise to me.

MrP

Quo Vadis

Callan57 wrote: »

The Catholic Church is and always was a political institution ... nothing to do with religion

Perhaps you can present us with some proof of that assertion in Catholic Doctrine.

MrPudding wrote: »

That anyone could possibly think there is anything good or worthwhile about this organisation is a source of constant surprise to me. MrP

Shows you how little you know then.

Fanny Cradock

MrPudding wrote: »

That anyone could possibly think there is anything good or worthwhile about this organisation is a source of constant surprise to me.

MrP

So you honestly think there is not one good thing to come out of the RCC?

georgieporgy

PDN wrote: »

During the very first year that the Spanish Inquisition operated (1480-1481) more than 300 Marranos were burned to death (a Marrano was a Jew who had nomninally converted to Christianity to avoid persecution but still secretly practiced Judaism).

So, Georgie, are you saying that burning those 300 people to death was 'excellent work'?


Do you think there are more Jews that need burnt?

We must remember that the inquisition in Spain was set up at the invitation of the secular rulers (Ferdinand and Isabella) for a theologically competent court to review the cases of those accused of heresy. Ferdinand and Isabella also desired to unite Spain and destroy the powerful grip exercised by the conquering Moors. Some people say there is no such thing as a bad Jew so I won't debate that topic lest the accusation of anti semetism rears its ugly head.
Any injustices resulting from the spanish inquisition such as those outlined and condemned by Pope Sixtus were just that, namely, injustices.

Now, the good stuff. The muslim invaders were driven out of Southern Europe , Spain remained solidly catholic and resisted the allurements of the protestant reformers, they sucessfully resisted the French tyrant Napoleon, and in the nineteenth century prevented the communists taking control, and kept the peninsula out of both world wars.

Many modern day readers' information about this period (the inquisition) can be sourced to the discredited freemason catholic priest Juan Antonio Llorente who was instrumental in bringing an end to the inquisition in Spain during the short period Napoleon held some power there. When Napoleon was kicked out, Llorente fled. He was the very type that the inquisition was set up to detect in the first place- an enemy within. The fremasons at the time viewed the spanish inquisition as their greatest enemy and finally managed to overcome it by their usual treacherous methods.

An inquisition in Ireland would be welcome to investigate ongoing heresy in the church now. And for those who missed it that inquisition was here and ended in April and made its report to the Pope and we are now awaiting further action. So far, prayer and penance has been recommended. No burnings as yet

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

We must remember that the inquisition in Spain was set up at the invitation of the secular rulers (Ferdinand and Isabella) for a theologically competent court to review the cases of those accused of heresy. Ferdinand and Isabella also desired to unite Spain and destroy the powerful grip exercised by the conquering Moors.

And how does burning Jews loosen the grip of 'the conquering Moors'?

Any injustices resulting from the spanish inquisition such as those outlined and condemned by Pope Sixtus were just that, namely, injustices.

What were condemned by Pope Sixtus were the cases where people who weren't really Jews were burned as Jews. So, what about the people who really were Jews and got burned? They weren't injustices then?

Now, the good stuff. The muslim invaders were driven out of Southern Europe , Spain remained solidly catholic and resisted the allurements of the protestant reformers, they sucessfully resisted the French tyrant Napoleon, and in the nineteenth century prevented the communists taking control, and kept the peninsula out of both world wars.

The Muslim invaders were not driven out by the Inquisition, but by a series of wars called the Reconquista (most of which were completed before the Inquisition).

I'm glad you feel 'resisting the allurements of the Protestant reformers' was worth burning a few thousand Jews.

As for keeping out of both world wars. You should bear in mind that Spain kept out of WWII because by then Franco had already enlisted the help of Mussolini and Hitler to bomb his own cities, overthrow a democratic government, and install his own fascist dictatorship.

Many modern day readers' information about this period (the inquisition) can be sourced to the discredited freemason catholic priest Juan Antonio Llorente who was instrumental in bringing an end to the inquisition in Spain during the short period Napoleon held some power there. When Napoleon was kicked out, Llorente fled. He was the very type that the inquisition was set up to detect in the first place- an enemy within. The fremasons at the time viewed the spanish inquisition as their greatest enemy and finally managed to overcome it by their usual treacherous methods.

So, the vast majority of historians have been duped by a masonic conspiracy into believing that the Inquisition tortured and killed thousands of Jews?

ISAW

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I would assume that Catholics (and probably some non-Catholics) would wish to imply such a thing. Does that come as a surprise to you?

I think the subject is cherry picking. The "Inquisition(S)" covered several centuries about 450 years. The worst of them being the Spanish and Portuguese versions. Indeed , I believe Napoleon ( whose army were involved in wars involving maybe 100 times greater deaths) discovered remnants of the Inquisition in his Iberian peninsular campaign.

Given that the Inquisition is almost universally associated with torture and murder, I think you probably want to expand on that quite a bit.

Galileo was not tortured or murdered by the Italian Inquisition.
the Inquisitions started as a reaction to heresy specifically Protestantism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revision_of_the_Inquisition

The two most significant and extensively-cited sources of this revised analysis of the historiography of the inquisitorial proceedings are Inquisition (1988) by Edward Peters [see below] and The Spanish Inquisition: An Historical Revision (1997) by Henry Kamen. These works focus on exposing and correcting what they argue are popular modern misconceptions about the inquisitions and historical misinterpretations of their activities.

Italian historian Andrea Del Col estimates that out of 62,000 cases judged by Inquisition in Italy after 1542 only 2% (ca. 1250) ended with death sentence
http://archivio.panorama.it/home/articolo/idA020001038812

Reformers presented “The Inquisition” as a unified, papal-dominated process that lasted from the thirteenth century through the seventeenth century. They created accounts of Protestant martyrs and a “hidden” Church, which produced extreme anti-Catholic attitudes (Peters 1988: 123). Additionally, European political resentment against Spain, which was the greatest power in Europe at the time, took focus on “The Inquisition.” This resentment and the resulting anti-“Inquisition” propaganda that was published came to a head during the revolt of the Netherlands against Spain (Peters 1988: 144).

Also cited as one of the most famous documents supporting the myth of “The Inquisition” is the Apologie of William of Orange, published in 1581 (Peters 1988: 153). Written by the French Huguenot Pierre Loyseleur de Villiers, the Apologie also narrated an horrific “Spanish Inquisition.” This document preserved and reinforced all of the anti-“Inquisition” propaganda generated at the beginning and throughout the Dutch revolt (Peters 1988: 153).

During this time, England, under the rule of the Protestant Queen Elizabeth I and threatened with military attacks from Spain, found a new surge of nationalism being fueled by anti-Catholic propaganda centered on a series of books and pamphlets that detailed the horror of the “Spanish Inquisition” (Peters 1988: 139-144)

“The Inquisition” was presented by French philosophes as the worst of any religious evil to ever come out of Europe (Peters 1988: 155-154). Additionally, writers, artists, and sculptors of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries used “The Inquisition” as one of their main inspirations, retaliating against “The Inquisition’s” suppression of creativity, literature, and art (Peters 1988: 189). These artistic images have arguably become some of the most long-lasting and effective perpetuators of “The Inquisition” myth.

hivizman

PDN wrote: »

So, the vast majority of historians have been duped by a masonic conspiracy into believing that the Inquisition tortured and killed thousands of Jews?

How many people were actually executed by the Spanish Inquisition? This question came up in a thread on the Islam forum back in January 2011, and I commented:

hivizman wrote: »

Henry Kamen in his book The Spanish Inquisition (first published in 1965, revised edition in 1998) . . . points out that the Inquisition was more active in the early years (between roughly 1480 and 1530) than in subsequent years. After reviewing the extant evidence, he concludes: "Taking into account all the tribunals of Spain up to about 1530, it is unlikely that more than 2,000 people were executed for heresy by the Inquisition." Although the Spanish Inquisition continued into the 19th century, Kamen suggests that the level and focus of activity varied considerably. In the early years, the main targets were "conversos", who were mainly Jews who had converted to Christianity. The "moriscos", Muslim converts to Christianity, were of less interest to the Inquisition until the second part of the 16th century. Kamen estimates that, even in the worst periods, around 2% of those punished by the Inquisition were actually executed, the remainder suffering imprisonment, loss of assets and a range of lesser punishments. Obviously, some of those who became subject to the Inquisition would have died in prison or during questioning, or as a consequence of impoverishment, or during flight from Spain, so the total of all the victims of the Spanish Inquisition is likely to be higher, but the estimate of 4,000 executed by the Inquisition seems to be of the right order of magnitude.

The Wikipedia article on the Spanish Inquisition supports this, but the article appears to draw heavily on Kamen, so it may not count as an independent source.

The Moorish conquest of the Iberian peninsula began in 711, and the last Moorish territory, Granada, was captured in 1492, so there was a Muslim presence in what is now Spain for nearly eight centuries.

MrPudding

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

So you honestly think there is not one good thing to come out of the RCC?

When I see this question I can't help but be reminded of the old, "say what you want about Hitler, but at least the trains ran on time..."

georgieporgy wrote: »

An inquisition in Ireland would be welcome to investigate ongoing heresy in the church now. And for those who missed it that inquisition was here and ended in April and made its report to the Pope and we are now awaiting further action. So far, prayer and penance has been recommended. No burnings as yet

I would love to see an inquisition in Ireland. Oooh, now you have me all excited. Anything that will reduce that organisations grip on the country is to be welcomed.

MrP

georgieporgy

PDN wrote: »

And how does burning Jews loosen the grip of 'the conquering Moors'?

What were condemned by Pope Sixtus were the cases where people who weren't really Jews were burned as Jews. So, what about the people who really were Jews and got burned? They weren't injustices then?


The Muslim invaders were not driven out by the Inquisition, but by a series of wars called the Reconquista (most of which were completed before the Inquisition).

I'm glad you feel 'resisting the allurements of the Protestant reformers' was worth burning a few thousand Jews.

As for keeping out of both world wars. You should bear in mind that Spain kept out of WWII because by then Franco had already enlisted the help of Mussolini and Hitler to bomb his own cities, overthrow a democratic government, and install his own fascist dictatorship.


So, the vast majority of historians have been duped by a masonic conspiracy into believing that the Inquisition tortured and killed thousands of Jews?

300 Jews? Thousands of Jews. ????? I'm not getting dragged into a catholics killed jews argument lest the mods close the thread and move it to the catholic/protestant mega thread. I hate mega threads and never read them.

You and I have different religious beliefs PDN. So we have different sources and different views on life . You would see nothing wrong with the workings of freemasonry. (are you a freemason yourself?)
Catholics prefer catholic authors when studying history and my favourite for that period is the universally acknowledged expert William Thomas Walsh.http://www.catholicauthors.com/walsh.html
[SIZE=-1]"Through his research and writing, William Thomas Walsh established himself as a historian and absolute authority of 15th and 16th century Europe.[/SIZE]"

hivizman

georgieporgy wrote: »

Catholics prefer catholic authors when studying history and my favourite for that period is the universally acknowledged expert William Thomas Walsh.http://www.catholicauthors.com/walsh.html
"Through his research and writing, William Thomas Walsh established himself as a historian and absolute authority of 15th and 16th century Europe."

A rather more critical view of Walsh as a historian appears in his Wikipedia biography: "Walsh's work is written from an avowedly Catholic point of view. In some cases he has been accused of crossing the line between apology (for example, for the Inquisition or Isabella of Spain) and antisemitic prejudice."

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

300 Jews? Thousands of Jews. ?????

I don't know why all the question marks. More than 300 Jews were burned in the first year alone of the Spanish Inquisition. Over the following years, even going by the very lowest estimates, the figure ran into thousands.

I'm not getting dragged into a catholics killed jews argument lest the mods close the thread and move it to the catholic/protestant mega thread. I hate mega threads and never read them.

Too late. You got into that argument when you made the morally abhorrent claim that an organisation which burned over 300 Jews to death in its very first year did excellent work at first and that it unfortunately went on a bit too long.

There is no need to move anything to the Protestant/Catholic debate thread because this is nothing to do with Protestant/Catholic debates. This is a thread about an organisation (the Spanish Inquisition) which burnt people to death for being Jews. The Reformation hadn't yet started when the Inquisition began killing Jews.

You and I have different religious beliefs PDN. So we have different sources and different views on life . You would see nothing wrong with the workings of freemasonry. (are you a freemason yourself?)

No, I am not a freemason. I have no time for them whatsoever.

I agree that we have different views on life. I find it morally repulsive for anyone to kill someone else for their religious beliefs. I don't care who does it. I feel the same about Sunnis killing Shi'ites, the Elizabethan English killing Catholics, or the Spanish Inquisition killing Jews. It is wrong, wrong, wrong.

I can not understand those who praise an organisation which committed mass murder and then defend it by saying things like, "Ah, it was only a few thousands after all" or else try to create smokescreens to blame it all on misinformation by Jews, freemasons, communists, or any other set of scapegoats.

Catholics prefer catholic authors when studying history and my favourite for that period is the universally acknowledged expert William Thomas Walsh.http://www.catholicauthors.com/walsh.html
"Through his research and writing, William Thomas Walsh established himself as a historian and absolute authority of 15th and 16th century Europe."

I cannot imagine anything more depressingly stupid than choosing to limit oneself to reading historians who share one's own religious beliefs. Surely we should be interested in knowing the truth? And truth is more likely to be gained when we listen to those of other traditions as well, thereby reaching more balanced views on history.

Fanny Cradock

MrPudding wrote: »

When I see this question I can't help but be reminded of the old, "say what you want about Hitler, but at least the trains ran on time..."

Right...

georgieporgy

hivizman wrote: »

A rather more critical view of Walsh as a historian appears in his Wikipedia biography: "Walsh's work is written from an avowedly Catholic point of view. In some cases he has been accused of crossing the line between apology (for example, for the Inquisition or Isabella of Spain) and antisemitic prejudice."

That's wikipedia for you. Scholarship at its best.

Fanny Cradock

I see this tactic used often. Dismiss something because it is on Wikipedia rather than engage with the finer points of the argument.

Wikipedia isn't inherently full of crap.

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

That's wikipedia for you. Scholarship at its best.

wikipedia is far from perfect. But at least it makes an attempt to be balanced - as opposed to sticking to sources that share one's existing viewpoints. Maybe not scholarship at its best, but certainly better scholarship than you get by relying on propaganda.

Bullseye1

Their is no defence of the SI.

Yahew

The inquisition is largely a protestant myth. Randomly pick a week in the 20th century, or the 19th, and more people died unjustly than in the inquisition across 300 years. The Spanish, quite rightly, dismiss it as a "black legend" - the fact that English people know more about the Spanish Inquisition than the penal laws tells us about how history is manufactured by the winners, and the Anglo Saxons.

I can not understand those who praise an organisation which committed mass murder and then defend it by saying things like, "Ah, it was only a few thousands after all" or else try to create smokescreens to blame it all on misinformation by Jews, freemasons, communists, or any other set of scapegoats.

But if it was only thousands, and English Protestantism killed far more people, then why is the Spanish Inquisition so well known in English Speaking countries and the penal laws, the anti-Catholic pograms etc. so less known.

inquisitions are a side show in world history. The number of people killed , as a percentage of the population of Spain relative to the number of people killed by Cromwell in Ireland is trivial. Statistically irrelevant.

Yahew

From wikipedia

As with all European tribunals of the time, torture was employed.[63] The Spanish inquisition, however, engaged in it far less often than other courts.[64] Modern scholars have determined that torture was used in only two percent of the cases, for no more than 15 minutes, and in only one percent of the cases was it used a second time, never more than that.[65]

and

García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700 — about 2% — the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, very probably this total should be raised keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that the total would be between 3,000 and 5,000 executed.

PDN

Yahew wrote: »

The inquisition is largely a protestant myth. Randomly pick a week in the 20th century, or the 19th, and more people died unjustly than in the inquisition across 300 years. The Spanish, quite rightly, dismiss it as a "black legend" - the fact that English people know more about the Spanish Inquisition than the penal laws tells us about how history is manufactured by the winners, and the Anglo Saxons.



But if it was only thousands, and English Protestantism killed far more people, then why is the Spanish Inquisition so well known in English Speaking countries and the penal laws, the anti-Catholic pograms etc. so less known.

inquisitions are a side show in world history. The number of people killed , as a percentage of the population of Spain relative to the number of people killed by Cromwell in Ireland is trivial. Statistically irrelevant.

Historians are agreed that the Spanish inquisition burned thousands of Jews for no other reason than that they practiced the Jewish religion. That is not a Protestant myth, or a freemasonry myth.

If anybody came on this forum and said that Cromwell and the Penal Laws did excellent work at first, and that we need them back today, then I would feel similar pity as I feel for anyone saying the same about the Spanish Inquisition.

Yahew

So 3,000 people killed in 140 years. 9,000 less than the 5 year total of the Mau Mau rebellion.


Hartman: 10,527 Mau-Mau, 2360 pro-British Africans, 95 Europeans and 29 Asians killed. TOTAL: 13,011

georgieporgy

PDN wrote: »

I don't know why all the question marks. More than 300 Jews were burned in the first year alone of the Spanish Inquisition. Over the following years, even going by the very lowest estimates, the figure ran into thousands.

sorry about the excess use of ?s
to my knowledge the inquisition did not burn/kill jews. Nor did it involve them in their tribunals. They were looking for heretics masquarading as catholic. some jews may have done this indeed. the inquisition offered them the opportunity to be truthful. I think the Spanish worried about heretics acquiring positions of influence like becoming the Queen's confessor where they could do untold damage.

Too late. You got into that argument when you made the morally abhorrent claim that an organisation which burned over 300 Jews to death in its very first year did excellent work at first and that it unfortunately went on a bit too long.
my claim was that the inquisition did some excellent work and I listed those accomplishments in a later post. I did not applaud killing Jews and I too would abhor that. Tribunals often get out of hand . This is true in Spain as well as Ireland

There is no need to move anything to the Protestant/Catholic debate thread because this is nothing to do with Protestant/Catholic debates. This is a thread about an organisation (the Spanish Inquisition) which burnt people to death for being Jews. The Reformation hadn't yet started when the Inquisition began killing Jews.
it's the present day differences in interpretting history I was referring to.

No, I am not a freemason. I have no time for them whatsoever. good

I agree that we have different views on life. I find it morally repulsive for anyone to kill someone else for their religious beliefs. me too I don't care who does it. I feel the same about Sunnis killing Shi'ites, the Elizabethan English killing Catholics, or the Spanish Inquisition killing Jews. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. agreed

I can not understand those who praise an organisation which committed mass murder and then defend it by saying things like, "Ah, it was only a few thousands after all" or else try to create smokescreens to blame it all on misinformation by Jews, freemasons, communists, or any other set of scapegoats.
not quite what i said though. if different sources say different things we have to try to figure out the facts.

I cannot imagine anything more depressingly stupid than choosing to limit oneself to reading historians who share one's own religious beliefs. Surely we should be interested in knowing the truth? And truth is more likely to be gained when we listen to those of other traditions as well, thereby reaching more balanced views on history.I agree totally. You will love Walsh. And don't worry about me, i've read the opposing sources also. That's how I know about them.

my replies are in blue. I haven't figured out how to break up quotes and answer them neatly. Can I just add I realise it is politically incorrect to say something nice about the spanish inquisition.

Yahew

PDN wrote: »

Historians are agreed that the Spanish inquisition burned thousands of Jews for no other reason than that they practiced the Jewish religion. That is not a Protestant myth, or a freemasonry myth.

If anybody came on this forum and said that Cromwell and the Penal Laws did excellent work at first, and that we need them back today, then I would feel similar pity as I feel for anyone saying the same about the Spanish Inquisition.

The records I see say 100. I am not defending the guy who said it did excellent work - however, I am saying it is clearly, given what else has happened in the last thousand years - a slight bit over-emphasised. It was of it's time.

This is no comparison with this minor regional event and, say, the British destruction of Scottish and Irish culture. Why do the deaths of hundreds of Jews matter more than the Cromwellian expulsion of 90% of Irish people from their indigenous land and the subsequent decline in the Irish population by 30-40%, i,e hundreds of thousands.

My claim that it is over-estimated by Protestant societies is clearly the truth.

georgieporgy

PDN wrote: »

Historians are agreed that the Spanish inquisition burned thousands of Jews for no other reason than that they practiced the Jewish religion. That is not a Protestant myth, or a freemasonry myth.

If anybody came on this forum and said that Cromwell and the Penal Laws did excellent work at first, and that we need them back today, then I would feel similar pity as I feel for anyone saying the same about the Spanish Inquisition.

Just to clarify for readers, The Office of Inquisition still exists but has been renamed and is now known as The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Cardinal Ratzinger was its head prior to his election to the papacy.

They do the same work now.

im invisible

georgieporgy wrote: »

Just to clarify for readers, The Office of Inquisition still exists but has been renamed and is now known as The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Cardinal Ratzinger was its head prior to his election to the papacy.

They do the same work now.

nobody expected THAT

PDN

Yahew wrote: »

This is no comparison with this minor regional event and, say, the British destruction of Scottish and Irish culture. Why do the deaths of hundreds of Jews matter more than the Cromwellian expulsion of 90% of Irish people from their indigenous land and the subsequent decline in the Irish population by 30-40%, i,e hundreds of thousands.

Nobody said they mattered more. We addressed the topic of this thread, which was about the Spanish Inquisition, not Cromwell.

If you want to start a thread discussing Cromwell, and if it discusses the aspects of Cromwell's history that are relevant to the Christianity Forum, then you are free to do so.

Yahew

Ok, sure. Then the Spanish Inquisition was a dark spot on the history of the Catholic Church ( and the Spanish State). That is going to leave very little room for debate, unless the reasons why this particular event are historically emphasised more than others are debated

Bad times. Shouldn't kill people for their beliefs, even if you do so with more due process than other European courts at the time, and even if you leave 98% of people unharmed unlike most other European courts at the time.

No debate on that, so unsubscribe.

ISAW

PDN wrote: »

Historians are agreed that the Spanish inquisition burned thousands of Jews for no other reason than that they practiced the Jewish religion. That is not a Protestant myth, or a freemasonry myth.

If anybody came on this forum and said that Cromwell and the Penal Laws did excellent work at first, and that we need them back today, then I would feel similar pity as I feel for anyone saying the same about the Spanish Inquisition.

The Jews were converts to christianity who secretly were still jews. That isn't justifying it it is just saying the Spanish one in particular had a penchant for focusing on the Jews who had pretended to be Catholics ( maybe because Spain had almost no Protestants.

Plenty of people look upon Cromwell as a great man who founded modern democracy.
Here is a bizzare site filled with the "cromwell" myth which I have been involved in for well let us say a long time.
http://www.maydaymystery.org/mayday/
the four central figures being Luther Cromwell Gustavus Adolphus ( of 30 years war fame ) and Calvin. One might detect a Protestant bias but Ill leave that for another thread.

Anyway the point is Cromwell is also a myth like the Spanish Inquisition.

ISAW

Yahew wrote: »

Ok, sure. Then the Spanish Inquisition was a dark spot on the history of the Catholic Church ( and the Spanish State). That is going to leave very little room for debate, unless the reasons why this particular event are historically emphasised more than others are debated

Bad times. Shouldn't kill people for their beliefs, even if you do so with more due process than other European courts at the time, and even if you leave 98% of people unharmed unlike most other European courts at the time.

No debate on that, so unsubscribe.

Actually on a related note -witch-hunting. I don't want to turn this into a Catholic/ Protestant thread I think something like four people were killed in "Catholic" Ireland. In the Protestant Eastern Europe the Protestant New England and England itself quite a few
"witches" were executed - similar numbers to the Spanish Inquisition over a much smaller period but again it is over emphasized.

We still do it by the way. But nowadays we call them "fundamentalists" or "Islamist" or "non combatants" or even "sub prime"

ISAW

im invisible wrote: »

nobody expected THAT

I thought it was widely known
although "Holy Office" is used more then CDF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_for_the_Doctrine_of_the_Faith

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_14071997_en.html

Mentions the Inquisition in the first sentence and the "holy Office" in the second paragraph.

The Curia is organisied into "dicasteries" which are similar to "ministries" in other governments.

Quo Vadis

PDN wrote: »

wikipedia is far from perfect. But at least it makes an attempt to be balanced - as opposed to sticking to sources that share one's existing viewpoints. Maybe not scholarship at its best, but certainly better scholarship than you get by relying on propaganda.

+ 1, the wiki sources can at least be checked out, and by nature it ends up having to take the middle ground. Its not an authority, but it can be a handy starting point sometimes. If anything its become too detailed and bloated. I often find when people complain about others quoting wiki, its because they have no other argument. Hardly wiki's fault.

Donatello

It is most interesting to note that the atheistic French Revolution killed more people in weeks than a whole century of the Inquisition. It is important that we do not let secularists/atheists to conveniently forget their own past whilst using some of the actions of people in the past to attempt to discredit the Church.

It is also important to remember that Protestants burned witches. Both Henry VIII killed and tortured thousands of people, including Catholic priests. and Elizabeth I has a similar poor track record.

Much of the black history about the Inquisitions is exaggerated and overplayed by anti-Catholics, such as the children of the 'Enlightenment'. Anyhow, it's a bit hypocritical of anti-Catholics to criticise the Inquisition, a tool of the state, when they themselves kill millions of tiny children in the womb without remorse every single day.

hivizman

Donatello wrote: »

Much of the black history about the Inquisitions is exaggerated and overplayed by anti-Catholics, such as the children of the 'Enlightenment'.

If the Spanish Inquisition is judged only in terms of the number of people executed, then I agree that its "black history" has been exaggerated. One of the most extensive studies of the workings of the Spanish Inquisition was carried out by Jaime Contreras and Gustav Henningsen: "Forty-four Thousand Cases of the Spanish Inquisition (1540-1700): Analysis of a Historical Data Bank." [In The Inquisition in Early Modern Europe: Studies on Sources and Methods, edited by G. Henningsen and J. Tedeschi, in association with C. Amiel, pp. 100-129. DeKalb, Ill.: Northern Illinois University Press, 1986.] These researchers studied trial summaries sent from throughout Spain to the Supreme Inquisitorial Council, over a period of 160 years. They found that there were periods of heavy activity up to around 1590, but thereafter the Inquisition became less active. Following the annexation of Portugal in 1580, there were many trials of converted Portuguese Jews, while Moriscos were pursued actively in Aragon, Valencia and Granada in the first decade of the 17th century. However, about 60% of those tried by the Inquisition were "Old Catholics" who were resistant to the changes to the Roman Catholic Church following the Council of Trent. Contreras and Henningsen found that, out of around 44,000 trial summaries that they investigated, only 826 (about 1.8%) led to executions.

However, the existence and presence of the Spanish Inquisition would have had an impact on economic and social activities in Spain, and in particular on the spread of ideas. One of the functions of the Inquisition was to act as censor of printed material, and the fear of the Inquisition would have had a seriously inhibiting effect on freedom of thought. One can therefore understand why the leaders of the Enlightenment regarded the Spanish Inquisition as an undesirable organisation.

gigino

hivizman wrote: »

However, the existence and presence of the Spanish Inquisition would have had an impact on economic and social activities in Spain, and in particular on the spread of ideas.

You could say that. The Inquisition was purely and uniquely a Catholic institution; it was founded far the express purpose of exterminating every human being in Europe who differed from Roman Catholic beliefs and practices. It spread out from France, Milan, Geneva, Aragon, and Sardinia to Poland (14th century) and then to Bohemia and Rome (1543). It was not abolished in Spain until 1820. Widespread horiffic torture and intimidation generally does have an impact on a population, yes.

Quo Vadis

gigino wrote: »

You could say that. The Inquisition was purely and uniquely a Catholic institution; it was founded far the express purpose of exterminating every human being in Europe who differed from Roman Catholic beliefs and practices. It spread out from France, Milan, Geneva, Aragon, and Sardinia to Poland (14th century) and then to Bohemia and Rome (1543). It was not abolished in Spain until 1820. Widespread horiffic torture and intimidation generally does have an impact on a population, yes.

im invisible

ISAW wrote: »

im invisible wrote: »

nobody expected THAT

I thought it was widely known...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAn7baRbhx4

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

You could say that. The Inquisition was purely and uniquely a Catholic institution; it was founded far the express purpose of exterminating every human being in Europe who differed from Roman Catholic beliefs and practices. It spread out from France, Milan, Geneva, Aragon, and Sardinia to Poland (14th century) and then to Bohemia and Rome (1543). It was not abolished in Spain until 1820. Widespread horiffic torture and intimidation generally does have an impact on a population, yes.

Who could say that?
YOU?
Based on what?
A cut and paste from a net search?