The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition

[Catholica]

From: http://www.catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/the-myth-of-the-spanish-inquisition

The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition
Jon Sorensen
August 5, 2013

Many Catholics squirm at the very mention of the Spanish Inquisition, often times conceding to claims that it was the most brutal time in Church history. But was it really as brutal as it is often described?

If you have never seen the BBC documentary The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition, I highly recommend it. At a little over forty-five minutes, it summarizes the most recent scholarship about the "Black Legend," how it began, and why it persists.

Here are just a few of the more interesting points covered in the documentary:

• The "Black Legend" began as an anti-Spanish propaganda campaign that succeeded largely because of the invention of the printing press. The Inquisition was the prime target.
• Inquisitors were not fanatical priests as they are often portrayed. In fact, many of them were not priests at all, but legal experts trained in Spanish schools.
• Contrary to popular belief, torture was used very infrequently. It was used less by the Inquisition than it was in the tribunals of other countries throughout Europe at the time.
• Stories about cruel torture methods used by the Inquisitors and the terrible conditions in which prisoners were kept were completely falsified. The Inquisition actually had the best jails in Spain.
• Prisoners of secular courts would actually blaspheme so that they could be transferred to Inquisition prisons, and escape the maltreatment of the secular prisons.
• Persecuting witchcraft was a craze in Europe at the time, and secular courts were not tolerant of these kinds of offenses. The accused were often burned at the stake. The Inquisition, on the other hand, declared witchcraft a delusion. No one could be tried for it or burned at the stake.
• The Inquisition was virtually powerless in rural areas.
• In the entire 16th century, the Inquisition in Spain only executed about 50 people, which is contrary to the "Black Legend" which numbers the executions in the hundreds of thousands.
• Of all the Inquisitions together throughout Europe, scholars estimate that the number of people executed ranged somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 people. That averages, at most, about fourteen people per year throughout the entire continent over a period of 350 years.

The entire documentary is available on Youtube:

Timewatch: The Myth Of The Spanish Inquisition (BBC)

[AVZ]

From: http://www.catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/the-myth-of-the-spanish-inquisition

The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition
Jon Sorensen
August 5, 2013

Many Catholics squirm at the very mention of the Spanish Inquisition, often times conceding to claims that it was the most brutal time in Church history. But was it really as brutal as it is often described?

If you have never seen the BBC documentary The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition, I highly recommend it. At a little over forty-five minutes, it summarizes the most recent scholarship about the "Black Legend," how it began, and why it persists.

Here are just a few of the more interesting points covered in the documentary:

• The "Black Legend" began as an anti-Spanish propaganda campaign that succeeded largely because of the invention of the printing press. The Inquisition was the prime target.
• Inquisitors were not fanatical priests as they are often portrayed. In fact, many of them were not priests at all, but legal experts trained in Spanish schools.
• Contrary to popular belief, torture was used very infrequently. It was used less by the Inquisition than it was in the tribunals of other countries throughout Europe at the time.
• Stories about cruel torture methods used by the Inquisitors and the terrible conditions in which prisoners were kept were completely falsified. The Inquisition actually had the best jails in Spain.
• Prisoners of secular courts would actually blaspheme so that they could be transferred to Inquisition prisons, and escape the maltreatment of the secular prisons.
• Persecuting witchcraft was a craze in Europe at the time, and secular courts were not tolerant of these kinds of offenses. The accused were often burned at the stake. The Inquisition, on the other hand, declared witchcraft a delusion. No one could be tried for it or burned at the stake.
• The Inquisition was virtually powerless in rural areas.
• In the entire 16th century, the Inquisition in Spain only executed about 50 people, which is contrary to the "Black Legend" which numbers the executions in the hundreds of thousands.
• Of all the Inquisitions together throughout Europe, scholars estimate that the number of people executed ranged somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 people. That averages, at most, about fourteen people per year throughout the entire continent over a period of 350 years.

The entire documentary is available on Youtube:

Timewatch: The Myth Of The Spanish Inquisition (BBC)

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

[Catholica]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

[AVZ]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

[Catholica]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

The concept of inquisition was certainly by a papal decree.  I've never heard someone claim that they were not.  The Spanish inquisition itself was initiated by the King and Queen of Spain in response to that papal decree written long before.  The decree itself can be read about here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Abolendam.  This decree didn't start the inquisitions; those were started under Pope Gregory IX in 1234, but not by Pope Gregory himself.  Still Church authority was involved in carrying out the questioning of inquisitions, and sometimes even carrying out the sentences.

The problem is that when people hear the word inquisition and they revert back to a distorted view of the inquisitions.  Though it is a tragedy that anyone died, and it is disgraceful that anyone did by the hand's of God's Church, at best we can offer true history unlike that which has been popularly distorted and propagated.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

The deaths of any person at the hands of the Church was bad.  No question about it.  The "scandal" of Christ is that his Church is made up of sinners who do very bad, misguided things at times.  Christ knew that his Church would contain sinners and yet he founded it anyway.  Salvation is a messy business and yet he loves us that much.  It should be no surprise to any Christian that a Church made up of people would sin.  Our hearts are rightly scandalized by sin, especially those committed by priests because we believe that they somehow should be "better than that".  Often they are, but sometimes they are not.  We have to accept this messy reality, but rather than abandon the Church try to live by its teachings, to "do what they say but not (always) what they do", just as Christ instructed the Jewish people to obey the pharisees.  That is just how authority works in God's kingdom.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for bodily integrity

2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.91

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

91 Cf. DS 3722.

[DaveW]

Spain was not the only country to hold inquisitions. Other European countries had them right up to World War 1.

On Tisha B'Av (9th day of the month of Av) which corresponded this year with July 16, all the Jews were banished from the Iberian peninsula by the crowns of Spain and Portugal in the year 1492.  Some converted and became Catholics. Many others feigned conversion to the church to avoid expulsion. Some went into hiding.  It was the latter 2 groups the initial inquisition was intended to find.

Later that same year Columbus found the Americas and Spain started to colonize it.  Many of Jews in hiding (crypto) and those who had forced conversions (conversos) fled to Latin America to avoid execution.

I have a son in law from a Converso family.

[mclees8]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

The concept of inquisition was certainly by a papal decree.  I've never heard someone claim that they were not.  The Spanish inquisition itself was initiated by the King and Queen of Spain in response to that papal decree written long before.  The decree itself can be read about here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Abolendam.  This decree didn't start the inquisitions; those were started under Pope Gregory IX in 1234, but not by Pope Gregory himself.  Still Church authority was involved in carrying out the questioning of inquisitions, and sometimes even carrying out the sentences.

The problem is that when people hear the word inquisition and they revert back to a distorted view of the inquisitions.  Though it is a tragedy that anyone died, and it is disgraceful that anyone did by the hand's of God's Church, at best we can offer true history unlike that which has been popularly distorted and propagated.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

The deaths of any person at the hands of the Church was bad.  No question about it.  The "scandal" of Christ is that his Church is made up of sinners who do very bad, misguided things at times.  Christ knew that his Church would contain sinners and yet he founded it anyway.  Salvation is a messy business and yet he loves us that much.  It should be no surprise to any Christian that a Church made up of people would sin.  Our hearts are rightly scandalized by sin, especially those committed by priests because we believe that they somehow should be "better than that".  Often they are, but sometimes they are not.  We have to accept this messy reality, but rather than abandon the Church try to live by its teachings, to "do what they say but not (always) what they do", just as Christ instructed the Jewish people to obey the pharisees.  That is just how authority works in God's kingdom.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for bodily integrity

2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.91

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

91 Cf. DS 3722.

It never fails to confound me how Catholics such as your self can say they are appalled at the things there church order has been guilty of and speak as its sad that sin is in the church. Know that they claim to be the authority of God upon the earth dismiss this and excuse that as mere  human failing. You always fail to see that even by biblical standards this church could not have been the church that Jesus founded nor would he endorse an church authority system to rule over the people and pass judgments on them like some moral and immoral government being entwined with he the corrupt secular legal system. 

What Jesus did on the cross was to set men free from sin and immorality to embrace eternal life in their personal lives. To witness to the world that Jesus is Lord of all and for three hundred years were the oppressed but when flattered by the emperors acceptance became the oppressors thinking they were Gods rule on the earth. When will intelligent men wake up and see this orders for the false church that it is.

[BlackSepulcher]

When the claim was first made to me that hundreds of thousands of people died in inquisitions, there was automatic bemusement- not only is it completely implausible, but people actually believe it?

*knocks around the thought of 6 million Jews dying in a Holocaust*
There were probably only a couple million at most.

Jews controlled the number to propel Judaic prophesy, just how Protestants used the Inquisitions to propel heresy. Extreme exaggerations for ulterior motives.


What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

[Catholica]

Spain was not the only country to hold inquisitions. Other European countries had them right up to World War 1.

It is true, there were three generally accepted "inquisitions".  I haven't heard that they were happening up to WWI, however.  But since that is off topic, I'd rather move on.

On Tisha B'Av (9th day of the month of Av) which corresponded this year with July 16, all the Jews were banished from the Iberian peninsula by the crowns of Spain and Portugal in the year 1492.  Some converted and became Catholics. Many others feigned conversion to the church to avoid expulsion. Some went into hiding.  It was the latter 2 groups the initial inquisition was intended to find.

The Catholic country of Spain rightly believed that heresy was a danger not only to the faith but to human culture.  The Jewish mind should not act as though they are a stranger to this.  One only read the Old Testament to testify that adherence to the Mosaic covenant was something that was to be zealously protected.  Compared to the cultures in the Old Testament, the Spanish Inquisition was extremely just.  People were given fair trials, with witnesses of which a person's own "enemies list" was used to filter some out.   This is better than people were treating in the Jewish culture of old. 

Later that same year Columbus found the Americas and Spain started to colonize it.  Many of Jews in hiding (crypto) and those who had forced conversions (conversos) fled to Latin America to avoid execution.

I have a son in law from a Converso family.

Conversos were not only those who were forced to convert, but also those who converted of their own accord, and also those who converted to subvert the law.  A converso is simply a Christian of Jewish origin and their descendants. 

In Spanish culture, Jews were treated rather well compared to other cultures.  During the period following the Reconquista, Christians aligned with Jews against the Muslims.  But there were problems that the Jews created under their own accord that provoked social uprising against them.  They charged exhorbitant amounts of usury.  They governed the slave trade.  They treated themselves as separate from all others.  The Christians in the country, as a mob action, not provoked by the Church, acted wrongly and treated the Jews harshly.  It is from this that forced conversions came about.  And this started in 1391, over a hundred years before the Spanish Inquisition.

In Aragon the king declared that forced conversions were unacceptable, and allowed conversos to return to their Jewish religion if they so wished.  For many reasons, some good but some not altogether moral, many converos chose to retain their converso identity.  And from that, conversos were not altogether trusted by Christians or Jews.

Because the conversos shared ethnicity with Our Lord, some of them became prideful of that fact.  Others were retaining Jewish practices.  Others accepted whole-heartedly the Catholic faith, while some became Judaizers.  Many of them also became anti-Jewish.

All of this upheaval led to violent conflicts between conversos and other religious groups.  Ferdinand, himself of converso blood, felt compelled to act to protect true conversos that had authentically converted to Christianity.  It was a cry from these authentic conversos for protection which the Spanish Inquisition came forth.

Jews who were not conversos at the time of the inquisition were not subject to the inquisition.  They were subject rather to the secular law which forbid them from taking part in commerce.  So any "Jews in hiding" leaving had nothing to do with the Spanish Inquisition.

Since I know that this issue is close to your heart, DaveW, I invite you to listen to this rather balanced historical presentation about the Spanish Inquisition.  That and I can't write everything here in this post.

http://www.instituteofcatholicculture.org/the-true-story-of-the-inquisition/

[Catholica]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

The concept of inquisition was certainly by a papal decree.  I've never heard someone claim that they were not.  The Spanish inquisition itself was initiated by the King and Queen of Spain in response to that papal decree written long before.  The decree itself can be read about here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Abolendam.  This decree didn't start the inquisitions; those were started under Pope Gregory IX in 1234, but not by Pope Gregory himself.  Still Church authority was involved in carrying out the questioning of inquisitions, and sometimes even carrying out the sentences.

The problem is that when people hear the word inquisition and they revert back to a distorted view of the inquisitions.  Though it is a tragedy that anyone died, and it is disgraceful that anyone did by the hand's of God's Church, at best we can offer true history unlike that which has been popularly distorted and propagated.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

The deaths of any person at the hands of the Church was bad.  No question about it.  The "scandal" of Christ is that his Church is made up of sinners who do very bad, misguided things at times.  Christ knew that his Church would contain sinners and yet he founded it anyway.  Salvation is a messy business and yet he loves us that much.  It should be no surprise to any Christian that a Church made up of people would sin.  Our hearts are rightly scandalized by sin, especially those committed by priests because we believe that they somehow should be "better than that".  Often they are, but sometimes they are not.  We have to accept this messy reality, but rather than abandon the Church try to live by its teachings, to "do what they say but not (always) what they do", just as Christ instructed the Jewish people to obey the pharisees.  That is just how authority works in God's kingdom.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for bodily integrity

2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.91

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

91 Cf. DS 3722.

It never fails to confound me how Catholics such as your self can say they are appalled at the things there church order has been guilty of and speak as its sad that sin is in the church. Know that they claim to be the authority of God upon the earth dismiss this and excuse that as mere  human failing. You always fail to see that even by biblical standards this church could not have been the church that Jesus founded nor would he endorse an church authority system to rule over the people and pass judgments on them like some moral and immoral government being entwined with he the corrupt secular legal system.

This is false thinking.  To demonstrate why:

That God established the Jewish nation is irrefutable.  Yet look at the sin they committed over the years.  It's sometimes appalling.  They became involved in politics too, having their own king and everythign.  Yet even still, Jesus instructed Jewish people to obey the Pharisees, "do as they say and not as they do".  The sin of the people of God doesn't take away their authority.

In addition, Peter denied our Lord three times.  All the apostles save one abandoned our Lord at the cross.  Peter sinned even yet again and Paul opposed him.   Did this mean that the apostles had no authority anymore?  Hardly!  But by your standard, it did. 

What kind of belief system can you adhere to where you claim that two letters from a man who demanded that Jesus "depart from him for he is a sinful man" are inspired by God and binding upon all Christians for all time everywhere, a person who denied Jesus three times?

What Jesus did on the cross was to set men free from sin and immorality to embrace eternal life in their personal lives. To witness to the world that Jesus is Lord of all and for three hundred years were the oppressed but when flattered by the emperors acceptance became the oppressors thinking they were Gods rule on the earth. When will intelligent men wake up and see this orders for the false church that it is.

I can't make heads or tails of this paragraph.  Maybe someone intelligent can translate for me?

[mclees8]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

The concept of inquisition was certainly by a papal decree.  I've never heard someone claim that they were not.  The Spanish inquisition itself was initiated by the King and Queen of Spain in response to that papal decree written long before.  The decree itself can be read about here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Abolendam.  This decree didn't start the inquisitions; those were started under Pope Gregory IX in 1234, but not by Pope Gregory himself.  Still Church authority was involved in carrying out the questioning of inquisitions, and sometimes even carrying out the sentences.

The problem is that when people hear the word inquisition and they revert back to a distorted view of the inquisitions.  Though it is a tragedy that anyone died, and it is disgraceful that anyone did by the hand's of God's Church, at best we can offer true history unlike that which has been popularly distorted and propagated.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

The deaths of any person at the hands of the Church was bad.  No question about it.  The "scandal" of Christ is that his Church is made up of sinners who do very bad, misguided things at times.  Christ knew that his Church would contain sinners and yet he founded it anyway.  Salvation is a messy business and yet he loves us that much.  It should be no surprise to any Christian that a Church made up of people would sin.  Our hearts are rightly scandalized by sin, especially those committed by priests because we believe that they somehow should be "better than that".  Often they are, but sometimes they are not.  We have to accept this messy reality, but rather than abandon the Church try to live by its teachings, to "do what they say but not (always) what they do", just as Christ instructed the Jewish people to obey the pharisees.  That is just how authority works in God's kingdom.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for bodily integrity

2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.91

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

91 Cf. DS 3722.

It never fails to confound me how Catholics such as your self can say they are appalled at the things there church order has been guilty of and speak as its sad that sin is in the church. Know that they claim to be the authority of God upon the earth dismiss this and excuse that as mere  human failing. You always fail to see that even by biblical standards this church could not have been the church that Jesus founded nor would he endorse an church authority system to rule over the people and pass judgments on them like some moral and immoral government being entwined with he the corrupt secular legal system.

This is false thinking.  To demonstrate why:

That God established the Jewish nation is irrefutable.  Yet look at the sin they committed over the years.  It's sometimes appalling.  They became involved in politics too, having their own king and everythign.  Yet even still, Jesus instructed Jewish people to obey the Pharisees, "do as they say and not as they do".  The sin of the people of God doesn't take away their authority.

In addition, Peter denied our Lord three times.  All the apostles save one abandoned our Lord at the cross.  Peter sinned even yet again and Paul opposed him.   Did this mean that the apostles had no authority anymore?  Hardly!  But by your standard, it did. 

What kind of belief system can you adhere to where you claim that two letters from a man who demanded that Jesus "depart from him for he is a sinful man" are inspired by God and binding upon all Christians for all time everywhere, a person who denied Jesus three times?

What Jesus did on the cross was to set men free from sin and immorality to embrace eternal life in their personal lives. To witness to the world that Jesus is Lord of all and for three hundred years were the oppressed but when flattered by the emperors acceptance became the oppressors thinking they were Gods rule on the earth. When will intelligent men wake up and see this orders for the false church that it is.

I can't make heads or tails of this paragraph.  Maybe someone intelligent can translate for me?

Actually it is your false thinking

I never said we didn't have to obey the authority as long as that authority is not wanting us to do things against God or deny our faith, yet Jesus had no problem making their mockery public.  John the Baptist did also.  He called them a brewed of vipers.   What the Pharisees did was they abused their authority yet called everyone else to tow the mark. Don't think this same kind of thing is not in the RCC. Did Jesus excuse their sin? I don't think so.  The command today is still the same. Except our righteousness exceeds the Pharisees you cannot enter the kingdom. What that means is without Christ you are not going to make it. Still there are some things that are conscious sins that should never once be of anyone who is an elder of the church.  One of the greatest sins is misrepresentation and misleading  the Lords church just as the Pharisees misrepresent  and abused their authority.
You site peter. Well this is really without understanding.  First you refer to two letters. I do not know what you are talking about.  I presume you talk of peter when Jesus first called him. You say he demanded Jesus to leave him because he was a sinful man.  I don't see the seen like that. After Jesus filled the boat with fish Peter new that Jesus was no ordinary man and perceived he was of God. He did not feel worthy to even be in his presence because he was sinful. Don't you know that Jesus new that. Still Jesus said follow me.   Peter was just like any of us yet he made Peter a mighty man of God. You cite Peters denial of knowing Jesus before he was put on the cross. None of the apostles knew the real ministry that they would called to yet. They were still in disbelief. Tell me when Jesus appeared to them on the seashore And Jesus convicted him with forgiveness saying feed my sheep do you think he was so weak after that and being then commissioned?  You cite again Peter being rebuked of Paul for thinking like jewish law. He may have been wrong but that was not sin but he needed to be corrected.

I am going to address my last statement separately and I will rephrase  it for you 

You bring all this to justify and make small the sins of the RCC. Things that should never be of the church of Jesus Christ much less to pass them off as human failings. Especially one that claims to be Christs vicar and sit as a judge of men 

[Catholica]

And?
What does the Spanish Inquisition have to do with the Catholic Church?

AVZ, the "Black Legend" as it is so-called, were false accusations of mass torture and mass murder leveled against the Catholic Church in Spain in the 16th century.  This myth has been proven false but is still believed by anti-Catholics, many secular people, and those who generally accept what they have heard from those sources (but have no ill will toward the Catholic Church).

From what I understand, the Catholic Church has always distanciated herself from the Spanish inquisition claiming that this was not by Papal degree.
As such I do not understand why you feel the need to bring the matter up in a Catholic forum.

The concept of inquisition was certainly by a papal decree.  I've never heard someone claim that they were not.  The Spanish inquisition itself was initiated by the King and Queen of Spain in response to that papal decree written long before.  The decree itself can be read about here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Abolendam.  This decree didn't start the inquisitions; those were started under Pope Gregory IX in 1234, but not by Pope Gregory himself.  Still Church authority was involved in carrying out the questioning of inquisitions, and sometimes even carrying out the sentences.

The problem is that when people hear the word inquisition and they revert back to a distorted view of the inquisitions.  Though it is a tragedy that anyone died, and it is disgraceful that anyone did by the hand's of God's Church, at best we can offer true history unlike that which has been popularly distorted and propagated.

But then again, if you would to bring up this documentary as proof that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that bad...then you do indirectly also admit that the Catholic Church had something to do with it.
In that case the Church murdered people, irrelevant of their number.

The deaths of any person at the hands of the Church was bad.  No question about it.  The "scandal" of Christ is that his Church is made up of sinners who do very bad, misguided things at times.  Christ knew that his Church would contain sinners and yet he founded it anyway.  Salvation is a messy business and yet he loves us that much.  It should be no surprise to any Christian that a Church made up of people would sin.  Our hearts are rightly scandalized by sin, especially those committed by priests because we believe that they somehow should be "better than that".  Often they are, but sometimes they are not.  We have to accept this messy reality, but rather than abandon the Church try to live by its teachings, to "do what they say but not (always) what they do", just as Christ instructed the Jewish people to obey the pharisees.  That is just how authority works in God's kingdom.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Respect for bodily integrity

2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.91

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

91 Cf. DS 3722.

It never fails to confound me how Catholics such as your self can say they are appalled at the things there church order has been guilty of and speak as its sad that sin is in the church. Know that they claim to be the authority of God upon the earth dismiss this and excuse that as mere  human failing. You always fail to see that even by biblical standards this church could not have been the church that Jesus founded nor would he endorse an church authority system to rule over the people and pass judgments on them like some moral and immoral government being entwined with he the corrupt secular legal system.

This is false thinking.  To demonstrate why:

That God established the Jewish nation is irrefutable.  Yet look at the sin they committed over the years.  It's sometimes appalling.  They became involved in politics too, having their own king and everythign.  Yet even still, Jesus instructed Jewish people to obey the Pharisees, "do as they say and not as they do".  The sin of the people of God doesn't take away their authority.

In addition, Peter denied our Lord three times.  All the apostles save one abandoned our Lord at the cross.  Peter sinned even yet again and Paul opposed him.   Did this mean that the apostles had no authority anymore?  Hardly!  But by your standard, it did. 

What kind of belief system can you adhere to where you claim that two letters from a man who demanded that Jesus "depart from him for he is a sinful man" are inspired by God and binding upon all Christians for all time everywhere, a person who denied Jesus three times?

What Jesus did on the cross was to set men free from sin and immorality to embrace eternal life in their personal lives. To witness to the world that Jesus is Lord of all and for three hundred years were the oppressed but when flattered by the emperors acceptance became the oppressors thinking they were Gods rule on the earth. When will intelligent men wake up and see this orders for the false church that it is.

I can't make heads or tails of this paragraph.  Maybe someone intelligent can translate for me?

Actually it is your false thinking

I never said we didn't have to obey the authority as long as that authority is not wanting us to do things against God or deny our faith

I never said that you did.  So what is your justification for not submitting to the only Church authority established by God?  That some people in authority have sinned?  That they at times have entwined themselves in government?  Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom.  Keys are the sign of that authority.  Then after a statement about how all authority on heaven and Earth were given to him, he told the apostles to go and continue his mission and that he would be with them until the end.

yet Jesus had no problem making their mockery public.  John the Baptist did also.  He called them a brewed of vipers.   What the Pharisees did was they abused their authority yet called everyone else to tow the mark. Don't think this same kind of thing is not in the RCC. Did Jesus excuse their sin? I don't think so.  The command today is still the same.

No doubt that some in the hierarchy have sinned and when we are bringing up legitimate sins, we should follow the process of Matthew 18 to help correct them.  What I am saying is that these sins have not stripped them of their authority.

Except our righteousness exceeds the Pharisees you cannot enter the kingdom. What that means is without Christ you are not going to make it. Still there are some things that are conscious sins that should never once be of anyone who is an elder of the church.  One of the greatest sins is misrepresentation and misleading  the Lords church just as the Pharisees misrepresent  and abused their authority.

I agree that as individuals, no one is above these saying of Jesus.  But still the elders of the Church did sin then and still do sin.  And that doesn't end their authority.  Even a person who is in mortal sin still maintains that authority, for instance, to consecrate the Eucharist.  The effectiveness of the sacraments is because of Jesus and not the holiness of the priest.  Once God gave his Church authority and he will never take it away; it has been established.  And all sins can be forgiven as well.  Even someone who misleads the faithful can still repent.  He maintains authority the whole time, as long as the bishop has not revoked it (as authority flows from Christ through the bishops to the priests).

You site peter. Well this is really without understanding.  First you refer to two letters. I do not know what you are talking about.

I am talking about 1 Peter and 2 Peter.

I presume you talk of peter when Jesus first called him. You say he demanded Jesus to leave him because he was a sinful man.  I don't see the seen like that. After Jesus filled the boat with fish Peter new that Jesus was no ordinary man and perceived he was of God. He did not feel worthy to even be in his presence because he was sinful. Don't you know that Jesus new that. Still Jesus said follow me.   Peter was just like any of us yet he made Peter a mighty man of God. You cite Peters denial of knowing Jesus before he was put on the cross. None of the apostles knew the real ministry that they would called to yet. They were still in disbelief. Tell me when Jesus appeared to them on the seashore And Jesus convicted him with forgiveness saying feed my sheep do you think he was so weak after that and being then commissioned?  You cite again Peter being rebuked of Paul for thinking like jewish law. He may have been wrong but that was not sin but he needed to be corrected.

Peter sinned many times.  Even after receiving his command and ordination at the last supper (do this in memory of me), he still denied Jesus three times. And Peter was strong sometimes and weak others.  He certainly was sinning when Paul rebuked him.  Peter was not practicing what he was preaching and creating scandal, which is a sin.  Also, Judas sinned horribly even after receiving the ordination.  If you think that the apostles never sinned, you are deluding yourself.  Paul clearly stated "I do not do the things I want".  He still had a war of sin vs. flesh going on inside of him.

I am going to address my last statement separately and I will rephrase  it for you 

You bring all this to justify and make small the sins of the RCC. Things that should never be of the church of Jesus Christ much less to pass them off as human failings. Especially one that claims to be Christs vicar and sit as a judge of men 

I bring all this to debunk the silly myths that "millions" were killed during the Spanish Inquisition.  I don't do it to make the sins of those who behaved sinfully ok.  There is no such thing as the "sins of the RCC".  There were sins of people within the RCC, true.  But saying they were "sins of the RCC" is as silly as saying the witchhunts were the "sins of the Protestants".  Sins are sins and they are done by individuals.  All sins committed by any members of the church, including the sins of yours and mine are human failings and should never be. 

And I'm not sure what you mean by "judge of men".  The pope is not the "judge of men".  Perhaps you have heard the pope say recently "who am I to judge?"  That is true.  "Judge not" means that we should never dismiss another person as one that is going to hell.  That doesn't mean we aren't able to judge (determine) whether another person is sinning. 

The Spanish Inquisition was to judge (determine) whether certain converts from Judaism had actually converted or were abusing the title "Christian" for personal gain.  If someone was striving to be Christian but merely had some doubts, the inquisition was simply like a confession for them.  Others were doing things they should not have done, pretending to be converted when they were just using it for social and personal economic gain and were creating scandal for the people who were truly converted.

[AVZ]

You know guys, it doesn't matter who did what.
Fact remains that in the name of God many horrendous crimes have been committed, Catholics and Protestants alike.
There is really no difference in committing crusades, slavery, genocide or holy jihad in name of a loving God.

As I am sure both Catholics and Protestants have parts of their history written in blood.
Blood of innocent people.

[BlackSepulcher]

As I am sure both Catholics and Protestants have parts of their history written in blood.
Blood of innocent people.

Christianity has written it's mark on this world.

But it's the most controversial mark the world has ever seen,and will ever see_

We are the rivals of the great atheists and deniers of the God of Abraham- we are the deniers of great evils, so let us embrace each other as Christians, Protestants and Catholics alike_

[DaveW]

*knocks around the thought of 6 million Jews dying in a Holocaust*
There were probably only a couple million at most.

Actually the 6 mill number is from nazi records.  they kept VERY detailed records on each Jew they arrested including all their belongings.  After the war, they found cashes of thousands of items like eye glasses that were numbered and linked back to their original owner.

6 million is solid.  It is also solid (again from nazi records) that another 6 million of catholics, homosexuals, communists and Gypsies (Roma) were killed as well.

[To Know is to Serve]

As I am sure both Catholics and Protestants have parts of their history written in blood.
Blood of innocent people.

Christianity has written it's mark on this world.

But it's the most controversial mark the world has ever seen,and will ever see_

We are the rivals of the great atheists and deniers of the God of Abraham- we are the deniers of great evils, so let us embrace each other as Christians, Protestants and Catholics alike_

The Members Of The Church Militant

The Church militant is composed of two classes of persons, the good and the bad, both professing the same faith
and partaking of the same Sacraments, yet differing in their manner of life and morality.

The good are those who are linked together not only by the profession of the same faith, and the participation of
the same Sacraments, but also by the spirit of grace and the bond of charity. Of these St. Paul says: The Lord
knoweth who are his. Who they are that compose this class we also may remotely conjecture, but we can by no
means pronounce with certainty. Hence Christ the Saviour does not speak of this portion of His Church when
He refers us to the Church and commands us to hear and to obey her. As this part of the Church is unknown,
how could we ascertain with certainty whose decision to recur to, whose authority to obey?

The Church, therefore, as the Scriptures and the writings of the Saints testify, includes within her fold the good
and the bad; and it was in this sense that St. Paul spoke of one body and one spirit. Thus understood, the Church
is known and is compared to a city built on a mountain, and visible from every side. As all must yield obedience
to her authority, it is necessary that she may-be known by all.

That the Church is composed of the good and the bad we learn from many parables contained in the Gospel.
Thus, the kingdom of heaven, that is, the Church militant, is compared to a net cast into the sea, to a field in
which tares were sown with the good grain, to a threshing floor on which the grain is mixed up with the chaff,
and also to ten virgins, some of whom were wise, and some foolish. And long before, we trace a figure and
resemblance of this Church in the ark of Noah, which contained not only clean, but also unclean animals.

But although the Catholic faith uniformly and truly teaches that the good and the bad belong to the Church, yet
the same faith declares that the condition of both is very different. The wicked are contained in the Church, as
the chaff is mingled with the grain on the threshing floor, or as dead members sometimes remain attached to a
living body.

[FireSword]

*knocks around the thought of 6 million Jews dying in a Holocaust*
There were probably only a couple million at most.

Actually the 6 mill number is from nazi records.  they kept VERY detailed records on each Jew they arrested including all their belongings.  After the war, they found cashes of thousands of items like eye glasses that were numbered and linked back to their original owner.

6 million is solid.  It is also solid (again from nazi records) that another 6 million of catholics, homosexuals, communists and Gypsies (Roma) were killed as well.

Why did you pick out homosexuals? What about the lame and the dumb?

How many Protestants were killed according to their figures?

[Amo]

Strange, how many seem to think historians coming on the seen longer and longer after the facts, know more than those who recorded the events as eye witnesses, or shortly after the actual events. Revisionist history has been proved over and over again, and is occurring more and more often. All accounts of history that are drastically changed over time should be subject to serious investigation. Oh yes, and of we can trust TV, via the BBC, to give us the real facts of accurate history. Not. All one needs is a producer, enough money, and an agenda to pass off whatever they wish as truth on the idiot box.

There are more and more people denying the Holocaust every day, this does not mean there is any validity to their claims. Just so everyone knows there are vastly different historical perspectives out there than that of the BBC's here are some other sources regarding the Spanish Inquisition.

ESTIMATES OF THE NUMBER KILLED BY THE PAPACY IN THE MIDDLE AGES AND LATER

David A. Plaisted
© 2006


CHAPTER 4.  The Spanish Inquisition

Now let us consider in particular the Spanish inquisition.  Quoting Schmucker, S.S.,

According to Llorente, this fearful tribunal [the inquisition] cost Spain alone 2,000,000 of lives, and the amount of torments suffered by these, and the other victims of papal persecution, was probably greater than that of all the generations that ever lived and died in God's appointed way, by natural death.

LlorenteL had access to the records of the Spanish Inquisition.  Overall, Llorente in his "A Critical History of the Inquisition of Spain," 1823, gave a much smaller figure.  He calculated that more than 300,000 suffered persecution in Spain, of whom 31,912 died in the flames.  Here are two passages from "The Reformation in Spain," 1824, by Thomas M'Crie, Thomas, p. 66 that also illustrate some of the discrepancies in such figures:

In the course of the first year in which it was erected, the inquisition of Seville, which then extended over Castile, committed two thousand persons alive to the flames, burnt as many in effigy, and condemned seventeen thousand to different penances.  According to a moderate computation, from the same date until 1517, the year in which Luther made his appearance, thirteen thousand persons were burnt alive, eight thousand seven hundred were burnt in effigy, and one hundred and sixty nine thousand seven hundred and twenty three were condemned to penances, making all in all one hundred and ninety one thousand four hundred and twenty three persons condemned by the several tribunals of Spain in the course of thirty six years.  There is reason for thinking that this estimate falls much below the truth.

According to Puigblanch, "Inquisition Unmasked," the number of reconciled and banished in Andalusia from 1480 to 1520 was a hundred thousand, while forty five thousand were burnt alive in the archbishopric of Seville.

Cecil Roth, Cecil in "History of the Marranos," page 143, cites Amadeo de los Rios, Amadeo as giving the figures of 28,540 burned alive, 16,520 burned in effigy, and 308,847 punished in other ways.  These figures are exclusively for Jews up to 1525, in less than half a century of existence, implying that the true figures are larger even than LlorenteL quoted.  Speaking of Llorente's figures, Roth says

... these huge figures are open to suspicion.  However, they are exceeded by the indications given by the intensely Catholic Amadeo de los Rios, Amadeo, usually most moderate in his views.

Wilder (page 86) presents the figures in a way that can explain some of the misunderstanding about the number killed.  Quoting Llorente, page 5,

The horrid conduct of this holy office weakened the power and diminished the population of Spain, by arresting the progress of the arts, sciences, industry, and commerce, and by compelling multitudes of families to abandon the kingdom, by instigating the expulsion of the Jews and the Moors, and by immolating on its flaming piles more than three hundred thousand victims.

Brownlee states

The number of victims of the Inquisition will never be known until the day of final retribution.  Various have been the numbers set down.  "Authors of undoubted credit," says Jones, "have affirmed, and without any exaggeration, that millions of persons have been ruined by this horrible court.  Many were banished from Spain, a million at a time.  From six to eight hundred thousand Jews were driven away from it at once; and all their property seized."  Jones' Church History ii page 98.

Then after citing Llorente's figures, he writes,

This number fixed on by this unusually accurate historian, is far below the truth.  It is generally admitted that under the first Inquisitor of Spain alone, namely, Torquemada, no less than 100,000 human beings suffered: under the above three classes, that is, they were burned; or they perished on the rack, or by it; or in exile; and perpetual confinement!

-- Brownlee, 1834, pp. 339-340.

In fact, quite a number perished in prison during the Inquisition, and these are omitted from the usual statistics, as mentioned in a web article:

It was with reason that the Serbian Orthodox Bishop, Dr. Nikolaj Velimirovic, so well known to the Anglo-Saxon world, compared what happened in Croatia, on such a large scale, with the darkest days of the Middle Ages. In an article published in 1954 by the ecclesiastical review Svecanik, the Bishop wrote: "The Spanish Inquisition is noted for its atrocities. The head inquisitor, named by the Pope, was the Dominican Monk Thomas de Torquemada, who is remembered with such sinister bitterness. During the eighteen year period of his mandate, 10,220 persons were burned at the stake while 114,401 (according to the historian Motley) perished from hunger and torture in their prisons, which meant 125,000 people within a period of eighteen years. This record is frightful enough, but the inquisition of the Serbian Orthodox was much more terrible, for 750,000 Serbs were killed in just four years."

This figure of 114,401 is apparently in error and according to Llorente should include all that were punished by any means by Torquemada during this eighteen year period, including life imprisonment.  There is also indirect evidence of the magnitude of the victims of the inquisition:

No secrets could be withheld from the inquisitors; hundreds of persons were often apprehended in one day, and in consequence of information resulting from their examinations under torture, thousands more were apprehended. Prisons, convents, even private houses, were crowded with victims; the cells of the inquisition were filled and emptied again and again; its torture chamber was a hell.

-- Romanism and the Reformation by H. Grattan Guinness, H. Grattan, lectures, London, England, 1887, lecture 4, page 101.

To make the subject personal, here is the testimony of one of the victims:

Before we let fall the curtain upon this awful subject, let us listen for a moment to some of the words of William Lithgow, William, a Scotsman, who suffered the tortures of the Inquisition in the time of James I. After telling of the diabolical treatment he received, which was very similar to that I have just described, he says, "Now mine eyes did begin to startle, my mouth to foam and froth, and my teeth to chatter like the dobbling of drumsticks. Oh, strange, inhuman, monster man-manglers! And notwithstanding of my shivering lips in this fiery passion, my vehement groaning, and blood springing from my arms, my broken sinews, yea, and my depending weight on flesh-cutting cords, yet they struck me on the face with cudgels to abate and cease the thundering noise of my wrestling voice. At last, being released from these pinnacles of pain, I was handfast set on the floor with this their ceaseless imploration: 'Confess, confess, confess in time, or thine inevitable torments ensue.' Where, finding nothing from me but still innocent, — Oh! I am innocent. O Jesus, the Lamb of God, have mercy on me, and strengthen me with patience to undergo this barbarous murder — '"
Enough! Here let the curtain drop. I should sicken you were I to pursue the subject further; it is too horrible, too damnable.

-- Romanism and the Reformation by H. Grattan Guinness, H. Grattan, lectures,  London, England, 1887, Lecture 4 pp. 103-104.

Lower estimates for the number of victims of the Inquisition also exist, as cited by a Roman Catholic on a discussion board:

The best estimate of the total number of executions under the Spanish Inquisition comes from the Encyclopedia Judaica (not a Catholic source) which estimates the number at around 7,000.  It should be remembered that the Inquisition was a court charged with hearing cases for all crimes committed on Church property or against the Church, clerics, or professed religious.  There were several capital crimes under the Inquisition's jurisdiction besides heresyheresy.  These included murder, rape, kidnapping, assault on a bishop, and others.  Might I recommend that you get Henry KamenKamen, Henry's recent book The Spanish Inquisition : A Historical Revision (N.B.- Kamen's estimate is that there were only 3,000 executions.) 

So there is considerable disagreement in the figures concerning the Spanish inquisition.  And such disagreements occur in the larger context, as well.  The figures are rapidly decreasing with time, and our memory of past persecutions is being lost.  Because records and memories are lost with the passage of time, in general the earliest records and those closest to the source are to be preferred.

Another quotation helps to explain some of the discrepancies.

And Walter M. Montano, Walter M., writing in Christian Heritage, says:

'Spain has had a long history of intolerance. The number of victims sacrificed by the Inquisition in Spain almost exceeds credulity. Yet it has been shown by Llorente, who carefully examined the records of the Tribunal, and whose statements are drawn from the most authoritative sources, that 105,285 victims fell under the inquisitor-general Torquemada; 51,167 under Cisneros; and 14,952 fell under Diego Perez. It is further reckoned that 31,912 were burned alive! Half that number, 15,659 suffered the punishment of the statute, and 291,450 were sent to penitentiaries. Half a million families were destroyed by the Inquisition, and it cost Spain two million children!'

-- INTOLERANCE—BIGOTRY— PERSECUTION by Loraine Boettner, Loraine D.D. (taken from his book "Roman Catholicism" first published 1962), Chapter 18.

This quotation explains where Schmucker, S.'s figure of two million comes from, though it is still unclear what it means.  The figure of 15,659 (which perhaps should be 17,659) represents those who were killed before being burnt.  Many were also expelled from Spain; this could explain the figure of two million.  Roth in "The Spanish Inquisition," page 251, discussing those who were expelled from Spain, says

The number of the exiles has been estimated variously between 300,000 and 3,000,000.  It probably lies much nearer to the first of these figures.

He also refers to the exiles as "her children," possibly explaining Schmucker, S.'s statement and Montano's statement about Spain losing 2 million children.  Some of the exiles had to leave their children behind to be raised as Roman Catholics, which can explain the comment about destroying half a million families.  Also,

The whole number of Jews expelled from Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella is variously computed at from 160,000 to 800,000 souls; a discrepancy sufficiently indicating the paucity of authentic data.  Most modern writers, with the usual predilection for startling results, have assumed the latter estimate; and LlorenteL has made it the basis of some important calculations in his History of the Inquisition.  A view of all the circumstances will lead us without much hesitation to adopt the most moderate computation.  This, moreover, is placed beyond reasonable doubt by the direct testimony of Bernaldez.  He reports that a Jewish rabbi, one of the exiles, subsequently returned to Spain where he was baptized by him.  This person estimated the whole number of his unbaptized countrymen, at the publication of the edict, at thirty-six thousand families.  Another Jewish authority, quoted by the curate, reckoned them at thirty-five thousand.  This, assuming an average of four and a half to a family, gives the sum total of about 160,000 individuals. ...

We need look no further for the principle of action, in this case, than the spirit of religious bigotry which led to a similar expulsion of the Jews from England, France, and other parts of Europe, as well as from Portugal, under circumstances of peculiar atrocity, a few years later. ...

[footnote] The Portuguese government caused all children of fourteen years of age, or under, to be taken from their parents and retained in the country, as fit subjects for a Christian education.  The distress occasioned by this cruel provision may be well imagined.  Many of the unhappy parents murdered their children to defeat the ordinance; and many laid violent hands on themselves.

-- Williams, Henry Smith, Historian's History of the World, vol. X. pp. 159-160.

Commenting on Llorente's methods of calculation, Jean Dumont, Jean in his book L'Eglise au Risque de l'Histoire (Limoge: Criterion, 1985) states

Professor Gerard Dufour, Gerard shows that the impressive numbers of Llorente which are almost universally accepted are "not at all convincing." They are in no way a reasonable statistic, but only the naive imposture of purely conjectural numbers established on the basis of insupportable fragility and exaggeration. How did Llorente arrive at his figures? The answer is quite simple. Totally ignorant of the number of victims of the Inquisition, he fabricated them from conjectural accounts available to him with regard to the tribunal of Seville during the first years of its activity, numbers provided by the early chroniclers and historians and a lost inscription.  As Mariana, one of the ancient historians, pointed out, Llorente did not take note of the fact that these numbers were only rumors. Moreover, carried away by his passions, Llorente quoted inexactly and exaggerated greatly in his additions. For, as Gerard Dufour, Gerard noted, among the 2,000 victims mentioned by Mariana were included some added up by Llorente, and the 700 mentioned by Bernaldez, the anti-Semitic chronicler who moreover had inflated the number to satisfy the needs of his cause. Llorente did not take all these facts into account.

Having thus taken "entirely erroneous numbers," and these only from Seville during the early years, Llorente tranquilly multiplied them by the total number of Inquisitorial tribunals and by the number of years they functioned.

But as he arrived by means of this method of blind multiplication of inflated figures at a total figure that was so enormous as to be absolutely unbelievable, he reduced them on a completely arbitrary basis by 50% in general, and by 90% for the first year after each tribunal was established because they would not have had sufficient time to pronounce sentence on anyone during the first year.

Dumont is a non-Catholic professor of history at the Sorbonne in Paris and argues for very low figures.  But at least from his explanation it is clear that Llorente made use not only of the records of the Inquisition but also oral accounts, which he considered as reliable.  Perhaps Llorente did not believe that the written records of the inquisition were complete.  Also, Llorente himself says that he divided the number by 50% "to avoid all exaggeration, though it was in general much more considerable."  Dumont also cites unfavorably various other estimates of the number killed, including that during the term of Torquemada 100,000 were decimated by fire in five years, from La Grande Encyclopedie, Inventaire Raisonne des Sciences, des Lettres et des Arts, par une Societe de Savants et de Gens de Lettres / sous la direction de MM. BerthelotBerthelot, M.M., Hartwig Derenbourg [etc.].  Paris: H. Lamirault, 1886-1902.  This echoes the figure of 100,000 from Brownlee, but with a different meaning.

Another problem with interpreting such figures is that of language.  Wilder's figure of 68 million apparently includes those who were not killed, but persecuted and lived.  If a writer says that there were 68 million "victims" of the Papacy then it could be misunderstood that they were all killed.  Obviously the sources from the early 1800's interpret the figure of 68 million as those who were killed.  The same problem occurs with Schmucker, S.S.'s statement about Llorente; Schmucker, S.S. says that Llorente asserted 2 million were killed in the Spanish inquisition.  Other sources claim that Llorente asserted 300,000 were killed (which was probably due to a translation or copying error as explained by Dumont).  However, Llorente himself gives a smaller number that were killed, and a large number that were punished but not killed.  It is not clear whether these disagreements result from a misunderstanding of the text or whether Llorente's history has been modified in some way.  The latter seems unlikely because M'Crie refers to Llorente's figures at a very early date.

[BlackSepulcher]

*knocks around the thought of 6 million Jews dying in a Holocaust*
There were probably only a couple million at most.

Actually the 6 mill number is from nazi records.  they kept VERY detailed records on each Jew they arrested including all their belongings.  After the war, they found cashes of thousands of items like eye glasses that were numbered and linked back to their original owner.

6 million is solid.  It is also solid (again from nazi records) that another 6 million of catholics, homosexuals, communists and Gypsies (Roma) were killed as well.

If you believe God works prophesy through Jews today, then sure- the number is not coincidental. You can't believe it without being a heretic to them: a number of Jews go asunder and reach Heaven in the name of a messiah we believe has already come.

*It fulfills a LATTER DAY Judaic prophesy*. The last time I checked, Jesus was the central figure of God, not Judaic heresy.

It's a bit ironic, really. The only people who really defend the Jews on that headcount are Christians themselves. Even Muslims will call it false for the *falsehood* that it is.

Take into account the number *6 million*. I'll give you a hint, it's SIX MILLION.

It didn't happen

It's physically impossible. It's politically incorrect to reveal that truth, though, it's on you to be willing to accept it.

[Jimmy]

It's a bit ironic, really. The only people who really defend the Jews on that headcount are Christians themselves. Even Muslims will call it false for the *falsehood* that it is.

Shoot, some Muslims deny the Holocaust even existed, so what does it matter that some Muslims might call it a falsehood? 

[BlackSepulcher]

It's a bit ironic, really. The only people who really defend the Jews on that headcount are Christians themselves. Even Muslims will call it false for the *falsehood* that it is.

Shoot, some Muslims deny the Holocaust even existed, so what does it matter that some Muslims might call it a falsehood?

Anybody who is honest cannot commit to a notion that 6 million Jews died after researching the evidence.

It's almost maddening, actually- there are extremely clear and unavoidable evidences that make the number completely implausible, but the redundant sorcery of our society somehow keeps the falsehood an assumed truth.

Can one say that the Holocaust happened, but only a third of the assumed amount of Jews actually died? It seems like no, unfortunately, those such as myself are forced from one end to the other, as if it must be 6 million or zero.

This in itself is tell-tale to an underlying bias not fully compliant to reason. It is an object of political correctness, or perhaps enforced virtues of liberal guilt. As in we should take the Jews word for it, rewarding victimization, while the number simultaneously pertains to heretical prophesy that mocks our religion.
There is something very wrong there.

[FireSword]

There were 3 million living in Poland alone and only about 500,000 survived.

[BlackSepulcher]

There were 3 million living in Poland alone and only about 500,000 survived.

Right, because the claim just makes that true.

If it were really that easy, there wouldn't be so much controversy.

[Catholica]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

[AVZ]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

Perhaps the prophecy was true? I mean, it wouldn't be the first prophecy ex the Jewish history that we hold for true.

Anyway, those who dispute the holocaust and give some form of acknowledgement to the kabbalistic prophesy agree that the number starts with a 6.
The next number that starts with a 6 downwards from 6,000,000 is 600,000

Well, I can tell you one thing....there were definitely more than 600,000 Jews that were killed.

[Catholica]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

Perhaps the prophecy was true? I mean, it wouldn't be the first prophecy ex the Jewish history that we hold for true.

Anyway, those who dispute the holocaust and give some form of acknowledgement to the kabbalistic prophesy agree that the number starts with a 6.
The next number that starts with a 6 downwards from 6,000,000 is 600,000

Well, I can tell you one thing....there were definitely more than 600,000 Jews that were killed.

But if there weren't 600,000 killed (say, for example, in a different event) then there were "definitely more than 60,000 killed".
But if there weren't 60,000 killed (in yet another hypothetical event),  then there were "definitely more than 6,000 killed".
Rinse and repeat.  600.  60. 6. 

That argument doesn't really hold, AVZ.

[AVZ]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

Perhaps the prophecy was true? I mean, it wouldn't be the first prophecy ex the Jewish history that we hold for true.

Anyway, those who dispute the holocaust and give some form of acknowledgement to the kabbalistic prophesy agree that the number starts with a 6.
The next number that starts with a 6 downwards from 6,000,000 is 600,000

Well, I can tell you one thing....there were definitely more than 600,000 Jews that were killed.

But if there weren't 600,000 killed (say, for example, in a different event) then there were "definitely more than 60,000 killed".
But if there weren't 60,000 killed (in yet another hypothetical event),  then there were "definitely more than 6,000 killed".
Rinse and repeat.  600.  60. 6. 

That argument doesn't really hold, AVZ.

Well, the Yad Vashem Institute at the moment holds 4 million names of Jews that perished, and expect this to reach 5 million not too long from now.
These are names taken from verifiable records.
They have sped up their research due to the increased Holocaust denial by the surrounding Muslim countries.

If indeed 5 million names are going to be on record, I would have no doubt that the actual number could well be in the 6 million range.

[BlackSepulcher]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

Perhaps the prophecy was true? I mean, it wouldn't be the first prophecy ex the Jewish history that we hold for true.

Anyway, those who dispute the holocaust and give some form of acknowledgement to the kabbalistic prophesy agree that the number starts with a 6.
The next number that starts with a 6 downwards from 6,000,000 is 600,000

Well, I can tell you one thing....there were definitely more than 600,000 Jews that were killed.

As far as I know, the number is specifically 6 million.
*Six million Jews will die and then Israel will reform*- not the exact words but that is the gist of it, I believe.

And it in fact did reform shortly after, but the Jews seemed to have forced that prophecy. If one doesn't call it prophesy, then one is wedged between two notions: that it is a supreme coincidence, or that it was simply forced after the fact to appear as a prophetical happening.

It seems to me like when they had regained Israel, they revisited the Holocaust, building the number to 6 million.

[FireSword]

I don't think that BlackSepulcher is denying the holocaust.  I think that he is simply calling into question the seemingly precise number of 6 million, because it apparently fulfills a kabbalistic prophecy.

There is some question as to exactly how many Jews died, at least according to curious research that I did following this post.  It seems that the number could be anywhere between 4.2 and 6.2 million Jews killed.  And not all of them were burned in concentration camps (which would be necessary to fulfill the prophecy, apparently) but rather possibly half died from living conditions in ghettos and from just plain open-air shootings.

But perhaps I am misreading BlackSepulcher's comments.  He can clarify for himself.

Perhaps the prophecy was true? I mean, it wouldn't be the first prophecy ex the Jewish history that we hold for true.

Anyway, those who dispute the holocaust and give some form of acknowledgement to the kabbalistic prophesy agree that the number starts with a 6.
The next number that starts with a 6 downwards from 6,000,000 is 600,000

Well, I can tell you one thing....there were definitely more than 600,000 Jews that were killed.

As far as I know, the number is specifically 6 million.
*Six million Jews will die and then Israel will reform*- not the exact words but that is the gist of it, I believe.

And it in fact did reform shortly after, but the Jews seemed to have forced that prophecy. If one doesn't call it prophesy, then one is wedged between two notions: that it is a supreme coincidence, or that it was simply forced after the fact to appear as a prophetical happening.

It seems to me like when they had regained Israel, they revisited the Holocaust, building the number to 6 million.

I never heard of that prophecy, I doubt most Jews did either.

Learning Hebrew was quite recent as well, and once they started learning, it was not welcomed in various countries.