The inquisition

[Manji2012]

I have the understanding that around 2000 years ago, Jesus walked the earth. Ever since, there were many Gospels on Jesus. Approximately 300 years after Jesus, the council of Nicaea and what not, the orthodoxy was formulated.

Apparently all the other texts that contradicted the orthodoxy, were destroyed, however, several were hidden and found at the Nag Hammadi library.

Since after that, inquisitions of several kind, have been done by the religious authorities, where they have tortured and executed people who believed, practiced, or thought any thing that did not fit with the orthodoxy.

Galileo was a scientist that said things like the world is round and the earth orbits the sun and here is my scientific evidence. The Roman inquisition, did not consider that acceptable. I do not know by what authority or scripture do they find justification to hold that position and then torture someone for not agreeing but they did.

Eventually, the Romans got Galileo and tortured him until Galileo took back what he said.

We now know today that Galileo was correct and the Roman Catholic Church was incorrect.

People then began to not like the corrupt Catholic Church and was considering going back to their own Pagan religions.

Now, where does Martin Luther come into this? Does he come into it afterwards? How come he was not tortured and killed for his disagreement of the Catholic church?

Was the inquisition about asking what did people believe and, if it was not the same of the people in power, those people were tortured or executed.

 

[bob x]

Luther was protected because a lot of powerful people agreed with him that it was time to put a stop to Rome's totalitarian power. But he was lucky to get away with his life a couple times. He was summoned before Cardinal Cajetan, and would not recant what he said, so it was secretly ordered that he be shipped to Rome the next morning for further "questioning", and it is doubtful he would have survived. But a friendly monk tipped him off and told him to flee quickly.
Then he was summoned by Emperor Charles to the "Diet" (a kind of weak "Parliament" that Germany had), under a safe-conduct, a legal pledge that he would not be arrested on his way there or on his way home. Now, a hundred years earlier Emperor Sigismund had summoned a radical preacher, John Huss, under safe-conduct (at that time, there were two rival Popes fighting for control of the church, and Huss taught that it was time to abolish the Papacy altogether, as the cause of all the problems); Sigismund had reneged on his word, arrested Huss and burned him alive. This had badly weakened the Emperor's authority, making his word not trustworthy, so Charles honored the safe-conduct and let Luther go home safely: mind you, Charles detested Luther and did sieze and burn many of his friends and allies. When Luther was almost home (at which point his immunity from arrest would expire), he was kidnapped by some friends in disguise, and kept hidden for years (it is thought that the local ruler, Frederick the Wise, was well aware of where Luther was; Frederick didn't totally agree with Luther, but was touchy of his own authority and didn't think the Church should be allowed to sieze one of his citizens).
Years later, there is a story that when Emperor Charles captured Luther's home town of Wittenberg during one of the great religious wars of the time, he went to Luther's grave to sit in deep thought. Some exuberant Spanish soldiers came up (besides being emperor of Germany, which meant real control in Austria/Hungary and Belgium/Netherlands along with name-only overlordship in the lands in between, Charles was king of Spain, and Spain controlled big chunks of Italy and the start of a colonial empire in Mexico and Peru). The soldiers said, "Now we can dig up the old heretic and burn his bones!" Charles was repulsed by the idea, and ordered that Luther's grave not be touched. A little later, weary to the bone of all his realms and all the wars, Charles retired to a monastery: saying "I would not wish all of these burdens on an enemy, let alone a kinsman", he divided his great empire, leaving Austria/Hungary and the "emperor" title to his brother, Belgium/Netherlands to his daughter, and the Spanish territories to his son.

 

[Manji2012]

Was the inquisition about asking what did people believe and, if it was not the same of the people in power, those people were tortured or executed.

 

[Thomas]

Sadly, such is the way of the world.

Luther himself endorsed the brutal repression of the 'Peasant's Revolt' when they tried to claim the freedoms they thought he had promised them.

Once he introduced schism, it replicated like a virus, and soon Luther was lamenting that he had been sidelined by a reformation he had never intended. Lutheranism is limited to Germany, some parts of Scandinavia and the US by immigration. The Protestant churches under Calvin et al threw out Luther's doctrines as well as the existing Catholic orders as they fought for ascendancy across Europe.

It is a fact that the Reformation succeeded best where the ruling monarchy was weakest — and the reformers exploited weakness with a vengence. After Henry VIII's death Edward, Mary and then Elizabeth were each in turn manipulated by parliament and the aristocracy, who between them created the myth of 'Bloody Mary' and the 'Virgin Queen' ... France ripped herself apart ...

The churches of the Reformation wasted no time in establishing their own inquisitions and burning suspected heretics. Welcome to life in the Middle Ages.

Today the spirit of the inquisition continues under the banner of 'regime change' in the arena of global politics.

Are you making a point, or just generally voicing the same old (largely inaccurate) anti-Catholic propaganda?

Thomas

 

[17th Angel]

Was the inquisition about asking what did people believe and, if it was not the same of the people in power, those people were tortured or executed.

It was a pre-Hitler thing.... Yet another group of people having a dig at the Jews....

 

[wil]

Are you making a point, or just generally voicing the same old (largely inaccurate) anti-Catholic propaganda?

Thomas

Now, now Thomas,

Propaganda? I know it gets old, but it is a cross Catholics have to bear. Had those then not been so incredibly cruel and efficient it would not be so.

Take the easy route out, simply point them to the Vatican webpage that explains the reasons behind what happened, the Pope and Catholic Churches involvement, the apologies, retributions and remunerations they've made to correct the wrongs.

 

[Thomas]

Propaganda?

I know, I know ... but a lot of it is propaganda ... yes.

I know it gets old, but it is a cross Catholics have to bear. Had those then not been so incredibly cruel and efficient it would not be so.

That's the point. How efficient, exactly?

The figures are usually grossly inflated — or people assume something of epic proportions — according to a quick glance at wiki:

"In the year 2000, Pope John Paul II called for an "Inquisition Symposium", and opened the Vatican to 30 external historicians. What they found discounted many exaggerated facts previously believed. It was learned that more women accused of witchcraft died in the Protestant countries than under the Inquisition. For example, the Inquisition burned 59 women in Spain, 36 in Italy and 4 in Portugal, while in Europe civil justice put to trial close to 100,000 women; 50,000 of them were burned, 25,000 in Germany, during the XVI century by the followers of Martin Luther... "

Perhaps not so cruel then?

Take the easy route out, simply point them to the Vatican webpage that explains the reasons behind what happened, the Pope and Catholic Churches involvement, the apologies, retributions and remunerations they've made to correct the wrongs.

Happily ... but as long as it's understood that your chances of survival by trial were way better under the Office of the Inquisition than secular or Protestant Europe ...

... or is blaming the Catholic Church the 'easy way out' by which everyone else salve's their conscience ...

Thomas

 

[17th Angel]

"In the year 2000, Pope John Paul II called for an "Inquisition Symposium", and opened the Vatican to 30 external historicians. What they found discounted many exaggerated facts previously believed. It was learned that more women accused of witchcraft died in the Protestant countries than under the Inquisition. For example, the Inquisition burned 59 women in Spain, 36 in Italy and 4 in Portugal, while in Europe civil justice put to trial close to 100,000 women; 50,000 of them were burned, 25,000 in Germany, during the XVI century by the followers of Martin Luther... "

Perhaps not so cruel then?

The hell you on about? If it said and was found..... that one woman was burned in spain... none in italy one in portugal.... a total of two... It would still be cruel and messed up.... If it was a total of one... It would still be messed up.... You have to be some sick s.o.b to dictate what people believe specially to burn a person alive..... It doesn't matter what the freak you compare it too... The fact remains people were burned to death... lol "not so cruel" lol....

 

[wil]

...more women accused of witchcraft died in the Protestant countries than under the Inquisition. For example, the Inquisition burned 59 women in Spain, 36 in Italy and 4 in Portugal

Your post implies are contending two things...say it ain't so...

a. when one evil is compared to another the lessor evil is somehow exonerated?? Sounds like American politics...or my kids..."she hit me more"

b. the inquisition killed less than 100 people?

me thinks this may contain truth...but not the whole truth and nothing but the truth...how many men died, how many were sent into hiding to avoid, how many fled the country, how many died in interrogation....surely they didn't do anything as heinous as water boarding.... (oh that was totally inappropriate)

I just wonder why the common response isn't...Yes, it was awful, and we are ashamed of how barbaric some of our past is...but we are trying to move forward, physically and spiritually....the constant defense and comparisons make just no sense to me.

 

[seattlegal]

Perhaps a reading of Ezekiel chapter 18 might be in order here, especially given the direction this thread is taking?

 

[LeoSalinas22]

all of man has messed up. there isn't no "who killed more or who killed less" situation. we are all going to be judged. and when that happens, lets not point the finger, that's just childish! lets be men about it and point the finger at ourselves. sean hombres! no sean maricones!

 

[bob x]

The reason Spain and Italy did not burn as many witches is because they preferred to burn heretics, secret Jews, and homosexuals. All the European societies were in a sick state of scapegoat-seeking and enjoyed the sadistic entertainment of public tortures at the time. The Catholic Church started it, to be sure, but none of the Protestants were rebelling against the Church for its cruelties, rather for its money-hunger and power-monopolization.

 

[17th Angel]

The reason Spain and Italy did not burn as many witches is because they preferred to burn heretics, secret Jews, and homosexuals. All the European societies were in a sick state of scapegoat-seeking and enjoyed the sadistic entertainment of public tortures at the time. The Catholic Church started it, to be sure, but none of the Protestants were rebelling against the Church for its cruelties, rather for its money-hunger and power-monopolization.

Not so cruel then....

 

[Thomas]

Steady on, all ... please remember my initial post began 'sadly, such is the way of the world' and I include the Roman Catholic Church in the world...

Your post implies are contending two things...say it ain't so...
a. when one evil is compared to another the lessor evil is somehow exonerated??

Not at all. We've admitted our part, and apologised, remember. It's over to you, now ...

'Let he who is without sin' seems to spring to mind.

b. the inquisition killed less than 100 people?

Probably more than that, the figure was for women, remember ... but still not close to the figures I've seen bandied about.

me thinks this may contain truth ... but not the whole truth and nothing but the truth

I know ... and if a lie is promulgated long enough, it becomes acceptable simply because so many people have heard it so many times ... ask why so many find it so difficult not to point the finger at Rome ... even when they have no real idea of any figures at all.

... how many men died, how many were sent into hiding to avoid, how many fled the country, how many died in interrogation ...

I don't know, but presumably we can operate on a similar scale with regard to those under Protestant/secular rule ...

Once again let me reiterate that I am aware of what happened, and am probably aware of things most people here are not aware of ... and I am not proud of it, and am willing to own up to it ...

... but not so people can sit back in self-delusion that their hands are clean in the affair. If people are going to trot out the same old tired propaganda, and draw wildly inaccurate and exagerated conclusions, then I am entitled to say 'that's not quite right'.

What frightens me most is that people are ever willing to condemn institutions ... yet institutions are only people acting together ... as long as we look at the splinter in the eye of our institutions, and ignore the plank in our own, then we're still in trouble...

... and there's nothing more insidious than the denial of history, and, so far, we've 'fessed up' as the saying goes, and continue to do so ... but we're not obliged to be condemned by those with blood on their own hands.

Nor, might I remind you, do I bang on about the number of Catholics killed for their faith ...

It is the world who needs to learn a lesson from us, methinks, about owning up, and moving on....

Thomas

 

[17th Angel]

Steady on, all ... please remember my initial post began 'sadly, such is the way of the world' and I include the Roman Catholic Church in the world...

Sorry, seemed to me like you were attempting to compare other terrible actions that have previously happened in the bright past of humanity to make it seem "ok" what happened... :\ Or as you put yourself "not that cruel..." :\ Still a terrible act no matter what it was compared to, just wished to put that view out there for people to see ;\

 

[Thomas]

The Catholic Church started it, to be sure,

Yes indeed ... before the Catholic Church, the whole world lived in peace and harmony, one big happy family, doing needlepoint and admiring the flowers ...

 

[bob x]

Who said anything of the sort? You are as bad as the Muslims, thinking that pointing to evil in other people is an excuse for your own.
The Vatican has been a potent force for evil, and if it is not killing and torturing people anymore it is only because it has lost the political power to do so, a containment that cost much bloodshed. There is no good reason for its continuance.

 

[seattlegal]

Perhaps a reading of Ezekiel chapter 18 might be in order here, especially given the direction this thread is taking?

Yep, it's a review of it is really worth a look. It starts out:

A False Proverb Refuted

1 The word of the LORD came to me again, saying, 2 “What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying:


‘ The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
And the children’s teeth are set on edge’?

3 “As I live,” says the Lord GOD, “you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel.
​

...continues on with very logical arguments, and concludes thusly:

19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the guilt of the father?’ Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has kept all My statutes and observed them, he shall surely live. 20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
21 “But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; because of the righteousness which he has done, he shall live. 23 Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord GOD, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 “But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked man does, shall he live? All the righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; because of the unfaithfulness of which he is guilty and the sin which he has committed, because of them he shall die.
25 “Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ Hear now, O house of Israel, is it not My way which is fair, and your ways which are not fair? 26 When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and dies in it, it is because of the iniquity which he has done that he dies. 27 Again, when a wicked man turns away from the wickedness which he committed, and does what is lawful and right, he preserves himself alive. 28 Because he considers and turns away from all the transgressions which he committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 29 Yet the house of Israel says, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ O house of Israel, is it not My ways which are fair, and your ways which are not fair?
30 “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways,” says the Lord GOD. “Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin. 31 Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. For why should you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of one who dies,” says the Lord GOD. “Therefore turn and live!”

​

I would say this is a very good admonishment, that is quite relevant today...

 

[wil]

note: the banner was for a spanish inquisition torture device ringtone...

Odds are my history coincides with the history of the the catholic church...I don't know how to go back that far....

And I don't blame them for past indiscretions that are ages old...I do still fault them for not opening the vault to google or yahoo and coming clean and for playing musical chairs with priests, cardinals, bishops who should be tried in a court of law...something I should work on I suppose...

It is a pain when others are the inquisitors...

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

I know, I know ... (sigh) ... whatever we do, it will never be enough. Seems we are obliged to carry the burden of the fruit of the Fall — "It wasn't my fault!" (Adam blamed Eve, Eve blamed the serpent ... we've all been trying to shift the blame, ever since.)

How about we apologise to everyone, here and now, for everything that ever happened, ever?. Will it be accepted, I wonder?

+++

Did you see the news piece about the Vatican publishing its documents on the supression of the Knights Templar recently?

Nothing that was not in the public domain, but re-affirms the view of the Church that they were not an heretical order, nor given to secret, esoteric or occult practices ... but they were tremendously wealthy, and Philip the Fair of France wanted, and got, their assets ...

(Course, probably our fault for not going to war with France to protect them.)

Historians commenting on the release seemed more insistent on pointing out what a croc of doo-doo "The DVC" and "HB, HG" are, and what happens when 'historicity' is undertaken by those who see the chance tro make a fast buck at someone else's expense.

Thomas