The Spanish Inquisition The inquisition or better to say the inquisitions of Europe arose out of the problem of certain heresies that were threatening the stability of Christendom. To use a modern comparison, heresy was the medieval terrorism, it was the enemy that struck at what united Christendom and needed to be addressed before it could spread. Was something that Christians inherited from Roman Law, a way to seek out and put an end to ideas or practices that threatened the stability of the empire and for Christians the eternal salvation of people. From Roman law was not often that execution or physical punishment be inflicted, but actions like denial to participation in sacraments, confiscation of property, imprisonment and exile were more common. MUST realize also how secular and church authorities work together but in different capacities, mainly was for church to determine if someone was guilty of heresy and wrong doing, and secular arm decided how punishment would be handed out. In France in the 12-13 th century, the Cathars, a strange dualist that believed were two gods, one good and one bad, the good god was spiritual, the bad god was material so goal of creation is to get rid of your material body to rise to spiritual bliss. You do this by the Cathar religious rite, first be baptized and ordained as one of the Perfect, and stay pure by having no sex, no meat and fasting. Many delayed becoming a Perfect till end of life. The Cathars hated organized religion as much as they hated the material world, rejected marriage and saw procreation as evil, rejected civil and church authorities, denied the humanity of Christ, rejected the Eucharist, purgatory, resurrection, motherhood and saw Pope and bishops as agents of Satan. The Cathari posed a major threat and was beginning to spread in southern France, region of Albi. Response was sending of newly founded Dominicans to bring them back to Christianity via preaching and catechesis. THE GOAL of the inquisitor is not destruction of the heretic but hopeful salvation of their soul for their good and good of all of Christendom! Few burnings at the stake and by and large able to rehabilitate people through preaching and teaching, those who refused eventually were conquered by a crusade in the region and the heresy fades away. MUST BE understood also that what was it that killed most Cathari- their practice of Endura, a quasi- compulsory force starvation that was mandated for many cathars who would not die as martyrs for their cause or sought a faster exist from the evil of the flesh to the bliss of the spirit, this among other barbaric practices was what the inquisition sought to root out and end. Gregory IX (1221-41) first to shape the inquisition with the help of the Dominicans and Franciscans who were the most effective preachers against heresy. To find out heretics and help bring them back to the faith and could use means such as threatening to impose ecclesiastical penalties, exile, etc if need be. Typical inquisition would start with a sermon where heretical ideas were presented that were said to be present in a region. People then given chance to confess wrong doing and accept various penalties for offences. Inquisition records from 1200-1300 show death penalties to be rarely employed (to those who refuse to admit guilt or relapsed into heresy). Bernard Guy- 930 cases (370 given pilgrimages, confinement or penance, 139 acquitted, 42 executed).
St Thomas Aquinas- recalls need for Church to always call for mercy, that an inquisition is always seeking to move someone to conversion and rehabilitation. Thus judgment not passed without investigation into crime, it is only the one who is obstinate that the Church gives up hope for conversion and out of concern for salvation of others and prevention of spread of heresy, excommunication first to exclude one from harming community and if need be execution by secular authorities. The big mistake/change that the papacy made was that it originally had control over all the inquisitions of Europe. But as the kings of France, Spain, etc became more powerful and interested in protecting their own interests above that of the continent, persuaded the Popes to give them control of the inquisition in their own lands, making them the sole authority of their actions, with but lip service to the Pope. Thus began the abuses...there was a Roman Inquisition that operated in papal lands and the city of Rome, but since these areas had little disruptions by Protestantism or other issues (such as the Galileo trial), was small in comparison to the inquisitions in France and above all in Spain which will be the focus of the remainder of this talk for its infamy. Spain is an example of the loss of the universal sense of the Church, where the church becomes more defined by the region that it resides in and when the temporal power assumes power in the name of the Universal Church but in the interests of its own state. Must realize the inquisition in Spain was not a papal inquisition. Pre- 1492: Though the Inquisition had existed in parts of Spain since the 1170s, its power and influence arises in the mid 1400 s. Spain had a large Jewish population and was at that time under Muslim domination, for much the history was civil and friendly between them (King Alfonso X boasted of being king of 3 religions) (businesses operated side by side) and much opportunities open to Jews (farmers, herders, craftsmen, shopkeepers, doctors, Toldeo was centre where Jewish scholars produced Latin versions of Arabic and Jewish philosophers and works of Aristotle and they were the much resented tax collectors and financiers of the nobility, specialized in medicine), SHOULD also be noted was often very civil dialogue about religion and one another believes, so much so that Christians often held Jews and Muslims could got to heaven by practicing their faith (inquisition would take issue with this) so is wrong to say the society was inherently anti- Semitic or anti- Islamic, rather was mix of mutual respect and hostility. While lived side by side did live very separate existences in matters of religious obviously, festivals, etc, so while coexisted were three quite different cultures in one, recalling both Jew and Christians at this time still under Islamic governance. IN later 1400 s when Christians began to take over lands controlled by Muslims, often attempted harsh legislation to keep Christians separate from Jews and Muslims but what we find is largely ignored especially in rural settings and almost impossible to enforce in cities. Mandatory ghettos were largely ignored though often desirable as gave protection to the community. Persecutions before 1492: First major anti- Semitic attack was riots of 1391 when economic unrest lead to murder of both wealthy Christians and Jews, attacks of ghettos throughout Spain and first evidence of mass conversions to Christianity by Jews. Despite horror of these riots similar persecutions were sporadic and rebuked by church and government authorities. But after the Black Plague ravages
Europe, much animosity towards Jews as being alleged spreaders of the plague (an accusation that Pope Clement VI defended them against) and also resented as they acted as tax collectors for kings who demands taxes of their plague ridden subjects, and also a new awareness among Christians scholars of various Jewish books like the Talmud which they were concerned over due to its very minimal but still anti- Christian content, from this many rumours begin to spread about the Jews like ritual murder of children, using circumcised blood to make Passover bread (a charge rejected by Innocent IV). Despite formal condemnations from church officials (including from the Pope) against pogroms and to stop rumour mill, enters into popular opinion and used when convenient to persecute Jews. As Reconquista becomes more successful, so too does Christian hostility to Islam (James the Moorslayer appears) and also suspicion of Jewish neighbours who often seen as allies of Muslims and did not desire to see Spain become Christian in rule. What is found in general is many oppressive laws and sanctions being made against Jews but were by and large not enforced. First Inquisitions: Between 1450-90 inquisitions set up in various regions in Spain to address charges of heresy, notably of Jewish converts to Catholicism, many of which has renounced their new faith to return to former or resentment towards new converts who began to occupy better status and had more privileges that they once were denied while Jews or Muslims, other charged by inquisition was against Christians for superstitious practices or accusations of witchcraft, scandalize behaviour by clergy, incorrect doctrine among Christians, bigamy, immorality. Most significant development is united crowns of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille take inquisition under crown control and out of papal influence, they themselves are not believed to be particularly anti- Semitic as both had Jewish doctors and courtiers and enacted legislation to protect Jewish businesses and civil rights though often local legislation trumped royal decrees and dictated how Jews were treated, etc., but were adamant that they control inquisition and this will prove instrumental in how inquisition will unfold in Spain. Pope Sixtus IV for one was conscience of dangers of abuse against Jewish converts, he wrote: The inquisition has for some time been moved not by zeal for the faith and salvation of souls but by lust for wealth, and many true and faithful Christians, on testimony of their enemies haven without any legitimate proof been thrust into secular prisons, tortured and condemned as relapsed heretics, deprived of their goods and property and handed over to the secular arm to be executed, to the peril of souls, setting a pernicious example and causing disgust to many. Even heretics are entitled to a fair trial and simple justice! Sadly, Pope s pleas too late as Inquisition was firmly in hands of Spanish monarchs and while kept in contact with Pope would never surround control back to papal inquisitors, in fact history of Spanish inquisition was one of continual conflict with Rome and their inability to gain any control over the inquisition, appeals to Rome were intercepted by the Inquisition and replies from Rome were trumped by inquisition, claiming Rome had surrendered supreme jurisdiction to them when in fact they had not. Later in 1700 s all appeals to Rome were forbidden, in short Papacy had little if any power over what was taking place in Spain..
1492: Everything changes though in the year is 1492, for 800 years Christians have been seeking to reclaim Spain from Islam. In this year that Chris Columbus sails to New World, last Islamic stronghold of Granada is taken, Spain is now ruled by Christians under joint rule of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille, now one united kingdom. They respond in two big ways- expel all Jews from Spain (about 800000 Jews at that time, was a hard decision for king and queen as lost many taxes and skilled workers but were convinced had to happen to deal with interaction between Jews and converts that lead them to lapse back into practicing Judaism, THIS WAS prevailing belief, too much interaction between Jews and converts lead them to lapse, but if all were gone or became Catholic, issue would go away))! All those Jews in the country given a choice, convert to Catholicism and stay or leave. Reality is many Jews remain and are by and large left alone (most dwelt in the countryside as farmers, herder and craftsmen, few were wealthy town dwellers as is sometimes suggested, preferred small towns were relations with Christians more civil, much more hostile in urban centres)). So who leaves? Wealthy Jews helped get poorer ones out of Spain, those unable to afford to move often opted to be baptized or attempt to live in secret as Jews. Those who wanted to continue in old careers or have better standing in society would also convert, estimated half of all Jews convert so to stay in Spain, many other emigrate to Italy (welcomed by Borgia Pope Alexander VI to live in Rome), Palestine, North Africa and dreamed of Palestine though few make it. Many astonished at what Spain does, Sultan of Turkey noted he was amazed they would expel so much o their wealth and talent, many did not understand the mindset of Spain and its desire for a Catholic state. Muslims in country allowed to continue to practice faith as such a massive population. Inquisition post- 1492: continuing the issue that brought about the first inquisitional trials, had they fully converted in mind, body and soul or in secret still Jews/was there conversion authentic or for show? Under inquisitional law, a non- Catholic cannot be tried by the inquisition, but what happens is that many Jews and Muslims are baptized but in secret continue to practice Judaism or Islam, now you have a hidden heretic and someone who can be tried by inquisition. Sadly, soon becomes apparent that people accused others (often new convert accuses new convert) to inquisition not for their salvation or concern that they are secret heretics but for monetary gain, to financially ruin a competitor, to get back at an adulterous spouse, etc! Big problem too is the unwillingness of old Catholics to accept new converts from Judaism who saw them as Christians in name only or as financial competitors who could be brought down with the right accusations, so often in their intolerance make up charges to smear their names not motivated by piety or defence of the faith but ruin competition. Should not be underestimated how influential the new converts were, some poor farmers, others priests and bishops, doctors and courtiers, even the uncle of Torquemada was a convert, so they were an easy target for accusations as their rise in society was seen as an eventual takeover and ruin of Spain. Bishops frequently rebuked Old Catholics for racist attitude and called for acceptance of new converts, even papal decrees, but failed to change attitudes not even threat of excommunication.
Into 1500 s, most trails by Jewish converts occur and Later Protestantism will be big issue an issue but not major as has very little influence in Spain, were very successful at preventing protestant literature coming in from France as northern Spain most effected by protestant ideas, more often were foreigners caught in Spain trying to spread protestant ideas that were tried by inquisition, by and large did not have much impact on heavily catholic population. Also Spanish Catholics could be tried for heresy, immorality, reading forbidden books, breaking church laws like fasting, practicing magic, etc. This does not exclude priests, religious (St Theresa of Avila), and bishops! Later focus is more on Muslim converts to Catholicism and had similar trial as with Jewish converts as to authenticity of conversion, by 1700 s already starting to wane in power and influence and The office of the Inquisition in Spain ends in 1834 after its influence was greatly weakened after Napoleon conquered Spain to point where it was bankrupt and widely ignored and no longer feared by the people. Organization structure: Local tribunals established in a given community, usually where was large number of Jewish converts. Each tribunal followed prescribed procedures to be followed exactly, not to deviate, add or subtract from the instructions. A tribunal consisted of two inquisitors (one canon lawyer, one theologian), a legal adviser, a constable, a prosecutor and number of assistants, who were members of the laity known as familiars, who supported work of inquisition but also were troublemakers and hard to control has had both religious and monetary interest in inquisition, while clergy barred from financial gain for work, though majority of accusation not made by familiars but ordinary people. The Inquisition was not a successful financial enterprise (often charged that inquisition was a cash cow to make money for the Church), frequently struggled to keep inquisitions operating, made little from fines and confiscations as properties were returned in full minus what was used to provide for you while in custody. Main reason Inquisition also in financial constraints was high cost of bureaucracy/paying wages of those involved, made it difficult to keep running. Also did not own much property or invest in lands which were how one made any money in ecclesiastical world, so often could not operate as had no investments in property to keep them going. Typical trial: See a consistency in the Inquisition from the original manuals, inquisitions were threatened with sanctions and ecclesial penalties if deviated from the manuals, were to be scrupulously followed: Local Clergy would be instructed to preach about the arrival of the Inquisition (and cause fear in people) and made themselves available for confession and anyone who wished to admit wrong doing. When the Inquisitors would come to a town (should be noted they often resenting having to do so for its cost that rarely covered the costs of the travel and time spent), all would attend Mass, they would read out a list of accusations made, you had the chance for about 30-40 days to confess your guilt and be forgiven without serious penalties. This Edict of Grace period allowed people to come forward to confess to wrong doing before someone did it for you! VAST majority come forward at this time, were acquitted or reconciled, given fine or penance and allowed to go free. The community was also expected to band together to bring those guilty to the Inquisition, hence where many abuses take place as often motivation is to get revenge, ruin someone, acquire their wealth etc -
some ridiculous- a woman smiled at name of Mary, elderly man eating bacon on day of abstinence, urinating near a church wall, in a card game person said God helped to make his friends lose!. MAJOR Task of inquisitors were to filter truth from fabrication.all testimonies and denunciations carefully recorded and archived by inquisitors and then you were approached by inquisition with charges that were examined by theologians. If heresy present, you were arrested and put in custody and your property seized though family to be provided for and your funds used for your time in jail (from records we see that an inquisitional jail was much preferred to a royal or town prison, higher standard of hygiene and decent food, even wine and access to prisoners chapel, in 1629 we know a friar admitted to heresy just to be moved from secular jail to an inquisition one!!).if you were too poor to provide for self, then inquisition would do so for you, thus often the poor would admit to heresy to be feed and have place to stay! IF YOU WERE CHARGED then very likely heresy is present and inquisition needs to be understood as more penitential than judicial, would be encouraged many times to examine self and admit any wrong doing, to refuse or be stubbornly resistant was not in your favour. Not permitted to execute anyone, only secular courts could so if execution occurred was the government that did it not the Church. Use of torture to exact confessions- was this a medieval invention, unacceptable to the times? No, the use of torture has its origins in Roman law which Christians adopted as the basis for their systems of law. Was to be used but were guidelines to how much (too often ignored). Torture was also used by civil authorities, more often unregulated and without concern to rehabilitate people. Also used widely by Protestants. WAS an accepted part of judicial system in the Middle Ages, not solely used by Church. Torture usage: When trial began, were interrogated and have opportunity to defend yourself and provide witnesses, if suspicion of lying or refusing to confess guilt, torture would then be applied (to get info, not as punishment, but noted less frequent usage than in secular courts and was a last resort, more often a person was given a look at the torture instruments which lead them to confess (conspectu tormentorum)). If you confessed under torture, it was stopped and then you had to confess again not under torture, very rare that ever had to use torture again, in fact was forbidden, were only to threat using torture again, but once was enough! WAS INFREQUENT as evidence from accusers was sufficient for a verdict to be reached in addition to your own testimony- for example in Real Ciudad inquisition trails from 1483-5, of 400 trials, only 2 were tortured or in Granada from 1573-7, 18 of 256 tortured, 7%....by 1800 s was totally forbidden under direction from Pope.COULD only be tortured in cases of heresy. Torture not carried about by monks or priests but professional executioners, a doctor was usually present and was monitored by representative of the local bishop. Basic rule is torture could not damage life or limb, not to draw blood or intentionally cause death (3 types- the pulley, pulled up by arms and weights put on feet, water- mouth held open with cloth and water poured down or the rack, tied to cords and stretched) THOSE SOUND very brutal but compared to the mutilations, feet burnings, disembowelling that occurred in secular courts like in England, were less severe in comparison. Outcome of Trial: Then a sentence is passed. If repent, 3 forms of outcome: 1) Acquitted (absolved meaning free of all guilt) or suspended may be retried at later point, 2) penance or reconciled and to be
penance meant do things like pilgrimage, pay fine, wear san benito (explain), more severe was reconciled were penalties like sentenced to galley ships, banishment, flogged, put in prison, house arrest. 3) burnt in person or effigy, for unrepentant or a lapsed heretic, one who was forgiven then goes back into heresy (though in time even this can be forgiven). VAST majority are reconciled to the faith! For example in Toldeo between 1486-7, 4300 reconciled. Also the overwhelming majority of those brought to inquisition never underwent a trial, would pay penalties and do penances and escape prisons time or trial. Also should be noted Inquisition often absolved people on grounds of insanity, crimes done while drunk or under duress, were not adverse to circumstances that would cause people to commit crimes with a lack of personal freedom. Should be noted the trial and execution of heretics not unique to Catholics- Luther encouraged German princes to seek out with the swords Anabaptists. Calvin authorized persecution of heretics in Geneva, Elizabeth I did for Jesuits and countless priests in England on charges of heresy, was common believe in Europe that death by fire was the proper punishment for a heretic. Also noted difference between ecclesial inquisition and secular court punishment was the inquisitors concern to understand the will and mind of the accused, to understand the soul, the motives, the culpability, leading to leniency as opposed to cold and calculated procedures of secular courts. The auto de fe: a public inquisition ceremony where punishments given and often executions. For kings of Spain was more a spectacle to show the power of the country than actually about punishing heretics. More often than not they did not actually burn people at the stake. More often than not they just burned effigies, straw men who represented the person who was suppose to be burned alive, because that person had got the heck outta dodge!!! Chief purpose was ceremonial and to showcase the orthodoxy and purity of Spanish Catholicism. In addition to burnings of people or effigies, also people would be robed in san bonitos which upon death would be hung up in local church to show others as warning to what you did/dishonour to your name, others would be released for having served jail terms or paid fines,. sadly, even if one was reconciled and forgiven after an auto de fe still carried stigma of having been punished by inquisition. Were very popular for common people, and often ended with fireworks, bull fighting and festival! Consisted of night before with procession of Green Cross to place where auto would be.. Then next morning was Mass and homily, breakfast for all (including those to be given punishments or executed) and then procession in of guilty who received their penances and were formally reconciled to the Church,. Often actually executions done outside city walls and out of public eye, other times were done for all to see but never the central purpose of the auto, that was reconciliation to the Church, not destruction of the heretic. THE RARITY of the costly events made them that much more popular! How many were burnt alive at the stake in Spain???? One thing the inquisitors did very well was kept very exact records of all their proceedings. They were kept in the national archives in Madrid and are readily available to scholars, they are not hidden at the Vatican or some dark church in Spain. Example of records from tribunals in Valencia from 1566-1609 of 3,075 people brought before inquisition: 44.2% given a penance, 40.2 reconciled to Church, 2.5 absolved as innocent, 9% suspended
till more evidence found 2.1% burned in effigy, 2% burnt at stake. Actual burnings in the thousands, not millions as often described in some fantastic anti- inquisition literary such as the fundamentalist The Mystery of Babylon Revealed that 95 million killed by Spanish Inquisition in a Europe that never had anywhere near that population! Based on archival evidence, estimates of 3000-5000 but of those did not always distinguish between if burnt alive or in effigy (most also occurred in between 1480-92 when Inquisition still relatively new). This is a lot but to put in perspective the state of Texas has executed more people than the 356 years of the Spanish Inquisition. The Black Legend- Spanish or continental Protestants escaping Spain brought with them embellished stories of the Inquisition, some become a staple of protestant attacks on Catholicism, especially Spain where Protestantism could obtain no foot hold. The printing press, the main source of propaganda for the Protestant Reformers as early as the 1560 s began to produce horrors stories of the Inquisition, interestingly not talking about the persecution of Jewish converts to Catholicism but rather imagined stories of Protestants being burnt at the stake which records show us to have been very few. Making the inquisition primarily into the Church s means to end Protestantism. Predicted the Inquisition as the eventually destruction of Protestantism if the Spanish ever took England or other Protestant nations and presented them as the destroyer of civil liberty on the continent. Knew very clearly the power of martyrs for their cause, Inquisition provided the means to create martyrs for the Protestant cause and was open numerous occasions seen as the agency of the Antichrist! An example is John Motley s history of the Dutch Republic from the 1850 s were he describes the tortures of the inquisition, naked bodies stretched till sinew and bones were bruised and broke, fire put under people s heels, a table of knives used to cut people open, a doll when embraced stabbed you with knives, monks in all black robs laughing hysterically as they tortured people, etc... Many European states, including Catholic ones like Italian city states, catholic Netherlands as well as Holland England and other enemies of Spain also worked to slander the Inquisitions name, when it is known that Protestants Netherlands were executing more heretics than Spain and the winner for the most heretics burning went to Presbyterian Scotland, while the Torture methods of Elizabethan England were known for following torture devices (pit below the Tower, a cell where you sat crouched in a ball, the rack, the scavenger s daughter (an iron ring that folded you together), chains and the iron gauntlet around the head) for disembowelling and quartering both puritans and Catholics in England as means of execution, the long and short of it begin that execution and torture was by no means exclusive to the Inquisition but employed with rigour across Europe and notably without the meticulous manuals of the Inquisition which acquitted or reconciled the majority and executed few. Further legends are added during Enlightenment period when the first world history began to be written and base their sources on largely protestant sources and not the actual documents of the inquisition, still in Spain. The enlightenment thinkers who were disgusted by the intolerance of the Inquisition failed to study its methods, documents and intentions in a critical light. Add into that Romantic Gothic literature and its infatuation with the mysterious, sinister and macabre and in the Inquisition they found the perfect setting for a horror story and notably fond of depicting the
Inquisition as blood thirsty there favour victim being the nude virgin being tortured by blood thirsty monks, Also via the art of those like Goya, known for being very anti- catholic, depicted the inquisition in a way that was exaggerated and emotionally charged, has left a lasting impression., During Napoleon s invasion of Spain, has access to the archives yet are twisted to serve political propaganda of Napoleon s defamation of Spain but for first time people have access to the meticulous records of the Inquisitions, though sadly much was lost as either moved to France, sold or taken for personal gain. The first critical history of the Inquisition was by Juan Antonio Llorente in 1817 who had access to the documents provided by Napoleon, his work is a change in understanding the Inquisition based on actual records and not stories or paintings. Followed by Henry Charles Lea s work in the early 1900 s, much of the myths around the Inquisition that began in 1500 s began to be revealed. Has only been in recent times (past 30 years) as the documents are examined, free of bias, that we have an even better appreciation of what took place during the Spanish inquisition, neither excusing or exaggerating what took place but seeking to understand the mindset of the people how the inquisition changed in who it pursued over time, the methods used, the motivations of the Church and State, to give us a fuller picture of what happened: Questions like- who were the inquisitors, how did the Church deal with dissent and heresy in those times, how did the trials unfold, Who were the persecuted, dealing with both transcripts in Latin and local languages, economic considerations, etc. Kierkegaard: what is true is what I recognize as being true, this was not the mindset of the medieval world, it was theocentric, what was true was what Christendom, both church and state united, deemed to be true, religious pluralism is not present and was not tolerated, an attack on the faith was an attack of the foundation of what made the world tick, could not linger and had to be addressed and wrong righted. Contrast this with a time that praises religious pluralism, freedom of expression, tolerance and at times relativism of truth. The challenge of trying to understand Inquisition in the midst of these two world views, both with their truths and errors. Somewhere in the midst of it we can see what the inquisition was and how to live with its legacy.