ntil the advent of Nazism in modern Germany, Europe knew no system of organized
terrorism to rival the 500-year reign of the Inquisition.
Historian Henry Charles Lea,1 recognized as
the leading expert on the medieval period, called the
Inquisition "a standing mockery of justice-perhaps the
most iniquitous that the arbitrary cruelty of man has ever
devised. . . . Fanatic zeal, arbitrary cruelty, and
insatiable cupidity rivaled each other in building up a
system unspeakably atrocious. It was a system which might
well seem the invention of demons."2(See Torture)
It was invented primarily to force public acceptance of a
church the public didn't want. According to a contemporary
aphorism, the church had not ten commandments but only
one: "Bring hither the money."3 St. Bernard
deplored the church's greed: "Whom can you show me among
the prelates who does not seek rather to empty the pockets
of his flock than to subdue their vices?"4
Bulgarian writers said the priests of Rome were given to
drunkenness and robbery, and "there is none to forbid
them." The local presbyter Cosmas5 didn't
deny it but only insisted that Christians must honor even
wicked priests.6 This was an accepted
doctrine. Peter von Pilichdorf7 said, "The
worst man, if he be a priest, is more worthy than the
holiest of layman."8
Priests were a privileged class, but their privileges were
more and more resented. In the 12th century, monasteries
made themselves into wine shops and gambling houses;
nunneries became private whore-houses for the clergy;
priests used a confessional to seduce female parishioners.
Episcopal collectors were depicted in popular stories as
the worst of all sinners.9 "The sale of
Church offices was constant and unblushing."
10 Even the pope observed that "those charged with
divine grace . . . participate in rapine and despoliation,
even in the shedding of blood."11
Pierre de Bruys12 was burned in 1126 for
declaring openly that "God is no more in the church than
in the market-place; the forms and ceremonies which to so
many folk replace true religion are utterly useless; the
Cross should not be prayed to. . . . The priests lie in
pretending that they made Christ's body and give it to the
people for their salvation."13 According to
William Tyndale,14 common folk said of
anything that went wrong, "the bishop has blessed it." If
the dinner burned, they said the bishop has put his foot
in it, "because the bishops burn who they list and
whosoever displeaseth them."15
Would-be reformers within the church were usually
silenced. Frère Raymond Jean was executed for
preaching against the church's abuses. He said bitterly,
"The enemies of the faith are among ourselves. The Church
which governs us is symbolled by the Great Whore of the
Apocalypse, who persecutes the poor and the ministers of
Christ."16
Nicholas de Clamanges, rector of the University of Paris,
declared in an open letter that the popes were ravishers,
not pastors, of their flocks: "The priesthood has become a
misery reduced to profaning its calling . . . Who do you
think can endure, among so many other abuses, your
mercenary appointments, your multiple sale of benefices,
your elevation of men without honesty or virtue to the
most eminent positions?"17 Pope Alexander VI
(Pope from 1492-1503), one of the men so described, was
credited with the cynical remark, "It is not God's wish
that a sinner should die, but that he should live-and
pay."18
A Franciscan splinter group, the Fraticelli,19 withdrew from their order, claiming the pope and
all his successors were tainted with the sin of simony
(the buying or selling of Spiritual things). Therefore the
church had been excommunicated by God, for ignoring
Christ's vow of poverty. They called the pope an
Antichrist.20 These heretics were soon
exterminated. One of their centers, the village of
Magnalata, was leveled by order of Pope Martin V (Pope
from 1417-31) and every resident slain.21
In 1325 Pope John XXII (Pope from 1316-34), issued the
bull Cum inter nonnullos, which "infallibly" declared it
was heresy to say Jesus and his apostles owned no
property. Inquisitors were ordered to prosecute those who
believed Jesus was a poor man. The group called Spiritual
Franciscans, who did so believe, were taught an immediate
lesson when the pope had of their number burned alive.22
The offenses of the Waldenses23 included many
"wrong" opinions. They said laymen and women had the right
to preach; masses, votive offerings, and prayers for the
dead were useless; purgatory did not exist; one could pray
to God without setting foot in a church; and a bad priest
should be forbidden to administer sacraments - "a
proposition which does no less than deny lasting grace to
the sacrament of Orders, and thus destroys the fundamental
privilege of the Church.&quiot; The Waldenses said priests who
demand money for administering communion are lower than
Judas, "for they sell for one denarius that body for which
he demanded thirty."24
Along with public disgust at the church's avarice, there
was a growing suspicion-sparked by Gnostic philosophies
from the east- that the church's myths of the garden of
Eden, the fall, original sin, heaven and hell, the virgin
birth, the meaning of salvation, and so on, were literally
untrue. Because people refused to believe the eucharistic
bread and wine were literally flesh and blood, the papacy
lost all of Bohemia, which after many wars and crusades
founded its separate Moravian church. Tenets of the Roman
church were widely questioned. Priests were forbidden to
"dispute concerning the faith against such astute
heretics" in public, lest they expose themselves to
ridicule.25 As Ernest Becker said, "This is
neurosis in a nutshell: the miscarriage of clumsy lies
about reality."26
Despite the church's efforts to keep the populace in
ignorance, even among the peasantry there were individuals
astute enough to recognize theology's clumsy lies. Even
the 12th-century passion for building cathedrals seems to
have represented a last-ditch effort to hold the wandering
attention of the people by giving them splendid temples of
the "Lady," to replace the Mother-shrines previously
destroyed. At length not even the Notre Dames sufficed.
The Church had to fall back on its traditional propensity
to maintain a reign of terror.27
Charles Guignebert says Christianity was "given to
warfare; exclusive, violently intolerant to the Jews
especially menacing; bristling with peremptory dogmas
which set reason at defiance; marked by complex elaborate
rites . . . kept up to the mark by a formidable army of
monks and kept in check by a quibbling troop of acute
theologians."28 The violence of the
Inquisition was its ultimate weapon.
Violence could be invoked under this system by nothing
more than ordinary living, just as the doctrine of
original sin was invoked by nothing more than being born.
Not only sexual impulses, which were always labeled
corrupt, but almost every other natural impulse was viewed
as evidence of anti-Christian perversity.29
Modern apologists say the Inquisition served some good
purposes, like helping secular courts bring criminals to
justice.30 Only a few decades ago, even
Catholic manuals mendaciously claimed the Inquisition was
a purely civil tribunal.31 Actually, the
Inquisition was uninterested in secular crimes, except
insofar as they could provide a basis for a charge of
heresy or witchcraft. The Inquisition was created to win
the war between the church and a disillusioned public.
C.G. Coulton says, "The so-called Ages of Faith were only
Ages of Acquiescence"; but even the acquiescence was
wearing thin.32
The power of the Inquisition was established and enlarged
by a series of papal bulls. Ad extirpanda of Pope Innocent
IV (1200? - 1254, Pope (1243 - 1254), issued May 15, 1252,
was "a terrible measure against heretics in Italy,
authorizing seizure of their goods, imprisonment, torture,
and, on conviction, death, all on minimal evidence."33
The Inquisition was the most elaborate extortion racket
ever devised, primarily developed for profit.34 After the arrest, the property of the accused was
instantly confiscated. Nothing seems to have been
returned. The popes publicly praised the rule of
confiscation as a prime weapon against heresy.35 Confiscation was the organization's raison
d'être; when the rule of confiscation was not
applied, "the business of defending the faith languished
lamentably." Affluent Italy made its inquisitors
incredibly rich in the 14th century. Within two years, the
inquisitor of Florence amassed "more than seven thousand
florins, an enormous sum."36 As the
inquisitor Heirich von Shultheis complacently wrote, "When
I have you tortured, and by the severe means afforded by
the law I bring you to confession, then I perform a work
pleasing in God's sight; and it profiteth me."37
Confiscation took place before conviction, because it was
taken for granted that no one escaped. "Officials
considered themselves safe in acting upon the presumption"
of guilt. Sometimes confiscation took place even before
confession. In 1300 a nobleman named Jean Baudier was
arrested and first examined on January 20. He refused to
confess for a long time but finally was broken down by
torture and confessed on February 5. He was condemned on
March 7. However, his impounded property had been sold on
January 29, before the confession. Similarly, Guillem
Carrie was arrested at Carcassonne in 1284 but not
sentenced until 1319. Nevertheless, officials were
quarreling over his castle in 1301.38
Accused persons were expected to pay the expenses of their
own imprisonment, even of their own torture. This
continental custom was followed in Scotland where, for
example, torturers charged their victims 6 shillings and 8
pence for branding on the cheek. In England, accused
witches were sometimes acquitted; yet they were kept in
prison until they paid the expenses of their unlawful
imprisonment.39
Inquisition's prisoners had to pay for their own food
in prison. Without money they starved. Pope Gregory XI
(1329-78, Pope (1370-78) noted that too many were starving
to death before they could be brought to the stake, but it
seems not to have occurred to him to feed them on church
funds. Instead, he offered indulgences to all who would
donate food to the "many heretics and those defamed for
heresy, who in consequence of their poverty cannot be
sustained in prison unless the pious liberality of the
faithful shall assist them as a work of
charity." Thus the church bent its own rules,
which said anyone who helped a heretic was to be suspected
of heresy also. C.G. Coulton commented:
When an arrested heretic had unpaid debts, the judges simply canceled the debts on the ground
that no heretic could engage in legal transactions. Thus,
"creditors were shamelessly cheated." The entire financial
network of European society was strained by its religious
masters. "In addition to the misery inflicted by these
wholesale confiscations on the thousands of innocent and
helpless women and children thus stripped of everything. .
. . All safeguards were withdrawn from every transaction.
No creditor or purchaser could be sure of the orthodoxy of
him with whom he was dealing . . . The practice of
proceeding against the memory of the dead after an
interval virtually unlimited, rendered it impossible for
any man to feel secure in the possession of property,
whether it had descended in his family for generations, or
had been acquired within an ordinary lifetime."41
Property could be seized from the dead, whose bones might
be dug up from their graves and burned as post-mortem
heretics; then the property was taken away from legal
heirs.42 If a person knowing he was about to
be arrested tried to sell or give away his property, or to
commit suicide before the torturers got to him, his
property was seized, because a heretic was forbidden to
make any legal transaction, and a suicide could bequeath
property to no one; it was taken by the church. If the
accused fled the country, he was tried and convicted in
absentia. Families of the accused were left destitute, and
no one dared help them for fear of falling under
suspicion. The Inquisition established the law of property
seizure for suicides, which remained the rule in most
European countries and the British Isles until 1870.43
Inquisitors could also impose heavy fines. Sometimes it
was argued that fines were useless, since all the property
of the accused heretic disappeared in confiscation anyway;
but the inquisitors invented a class of unwitting
miscreants called "defenders," whose heresy might consist
only of a single thoughtless word overheard or spoken.
These could be fined for their oversight.44
The system of fines often developed into a protection
racket. Inquisitors could "exchange the punishment of the
body with the punishment of the purse," as Reginald Scot
(1538-1599) put it, and there were many who paid annual
fees to escape persecution.45
A person who opposed or impeded the inquisitors in any way
became at once excommunicate, and after a year in this
condition was "handed over without further ceremony to the
secular arm for burning, without trial and without
forgiveness." No one was acquitted. If a confession could
not be obtained-which was extremely rare, thanks to the
use of torture-the sentence was "not proven." Even then,
the prisoner could be kept indefinitely in prison in case
new evidence should arise, or fresh tortures prove
effective.46 Should a victim resist all
tortures and survive, which was virtually unheard of, he
still was not released. He could be sentenced to life
imprisonment for "obduracy."
The witch's or heretic's trial was a mockery. The accused
had no lawyer; Pope Boniface VIII (1235? -1303, Pope 1294
- 1303) directed that trials must be conducted "simply,
without the noise and form of lawyers."47
Evidence was accepted from witnesses who could not legally
testify in any other kind of trial, such as condemned
criminals, other heretics, and children, even as young as
the age of two. The inquisitor Jean Bodin (1529 - 1596)
"valued child witnesses because at their tender age they
could easily be persuaded or forced to inform."48 A witness who withdrew adverse testimony was
punished for perjury, but his testimony remained on the
record.49 Inquisitorial rules for a trial were as follows:
Officially, the rule was that torture could be applied only
once. But, by a semantic quibble, it could be "continued" any
number of times, even over a period of years, each pause
being considered a "suspension," not an end. There are
records of some victims tortured over fifty times.51 The Inquisition's handbook, Malleus Maleficarum,52 said the accused witch must be "often and
frequently exposed to torture. If after being fittingly
tortured she refuses to confess the truth, he [the
inquisitor] should have other engines of torture brought
before her, and tell her that she will have to endure these
if she does not confess. If then she is not induced by terror
to confess, the torture must be continued." If she remained
obdurate, "she is not to be altogether released, but must be
sent to the squalor of prison for a year, and be tortured,
and be examined very often, especially on the more Holy
Days."53
Another official rule was that the church did not shed
blood. Therefore, victims were handed over to the secular
arm (civil courts) for execution. This was called relaxing
or abandoning them. It was accompanied by a token plea for
mercy: "We cast you forth from this our ecclesiastical
Court, and leave you to be delivered to the secular arm.
But we earnestly pray that the said secular court may
temper its justice with mercy, that there be no bloodshed
or danger of death."54
This plea was the emptiest of formalities, designed only
to absolve the church of responsibility for bloodshed. In
fact, "to be delivered to the secular arm" was an
irrevocable death sentence, which the secular court was
compelled to carry out. To temper justice with "mercy"
meant permission to strangle the victim before she was
burned, but this was not often done.55
History was written to order by church historians who
claimed the church "took no part in the corporal
punishment of heretics." Ecclesiastical euphemism forced
on civil authorities a guilt that belonged at the church's
door. Magistrates were commanded to carry out the death
penalty by the dire threat of excommunication and
consequent arrest. "The remorseless logic of St. Thomas
Aquinas rendered it self-evident that the secular power
could not escape the duty of putting the heretic to death.
. . . [T]he only punishment recognized by the Church as
sufficient for heresy was burning alive. Even if the ruler
was excommunicated and incapable of legally performing any
other function, he was not relieved from the obligation of
this supreme duty, with which nothing was allowed to
interfere. . . . The fact is, the Church not only defined
the guilt and forced its punishment, but created the crime
itself."56
The fiction of the church's innocence was exposed by a
bull of Pope Leo X (1475 - 1521, pope from 1513 to 1521)
in 1521. The Senate of Venice had refused to sanction the
numerous executions ordered by the Inquisition. The Pope
wrote to his legate, "We declare and order you to exhort
and command the aforesaid Senate of Venice, their Doge and
his officials, to intervene no more in this kind of trial,
but promptly, without changing or inspecting the sentences
made by the ecclesiastical judges, to execute the
sentences which they are enjoined to carry out. And if
they neglect or refuse, you are to compel them with the
Church's censure and other appropriate legal measures.
From this order there is no appeal."57 A
directive published in 1599 said judges were bound under
pain of mortal sin to execute witches; anyone who objected
to the death sentence was suspected of complicity.58
Inquisitors "jealously guarded their records from all
outsiders."59 On one occasion, magistrates of
Brescia objected to burning a number of condemned witches
without having examined records of their trials. But the
inquisitors kept their records sequestered, and the pope
declared the magistrates' reluctance a scandal to the
faith. "He ordered the excommunication of the magistrates
if within six days they did not execute the convicts. . .
a decision which was held to give the secular courts six
days in which to carry out the sentence of condemnation."60
Even when kept hidden, records were often falsified.
Inquisitors had special terms for everything they did. For
example, torturers said their victims were "laughing" when
they contorted their faces with pain; or "sleeping" when
they fainted. Those who died under torture either
"committed suicide" or were slain by the devil. Having
confessed under torture, the accused was compelled to
repeat the confession outside the torture chamber, knowing
he would be returned thereto if he didn't obey;
nevertheless, this was recorded as a confession given
"freely and spontaneously, without the pressure of force
or fear," and court documents often claimed the accused
had confessed without torture. Sometimes confessions were
described as "voluntary" if they were obtained after the
first degree of torture - binding and racking.61 An episcopal scribe at Pamiers naively wrote that
a prisoner confessed of his own accord "after he was taken
down from the torture."62
Some victims were listed as "confessed without torture"
after exposure to only one instrument, a spiked iron press
that crushed the legs. Friedrich von Spee (1591 - 1635), a
Jesuit who acted as confessor for condemned witches and
developed some compassion for them, wrote of this
practice; "And they call that 'Confessed without torture'!
What kind of insight can those have who lack all
understanding of such pains? How can outstandingly learned
men judge and discriminate when they cannot understand the
language, the specialists' jargon, of the inquisitors?" In
his Cautio Criminalis, von Spee wrote:
Another unusual churchman, Bernard Delicieux, was
excommunicated, arrested, tortured, and burned alive for
expressing the opinion that St. Peter and St. Paul, if tried
by the Inquisition's methods, would certainly be convicted of
heresy.64 Inquisitors were placed entirely above
the law by Pope Innocent IV (1200?-1254, pope 1243-1254) in
his bull of 1252, Ad extirpanda.65 Every
ruler and citizen must assist them on pain of
excommunication. Resistance could place the whole community
under interdict, or force payment of heavy fines. Any
individual fined by the Inquisition could be held in prison
until he paid, or died. Torture was officially sanctioned in
1257 and remained a legal recourse of the church for five and
a half centuries until it was abolished by Pope Pius VII
(1742 - 1823, pope 1800 - 1823) in 1816.66
The victims in those five and a half centuries were
literally countless. Official burnings were only a
beginning. There were also the disrupted, starving
families; unrecorded suicides; unofficial lynchings;
hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, who died
unnoticed in the papal crusades against heretical groups.
There were late-Renaissance witch hunts in Protestant
countries, which had no formal connection with the
Inquisition but certainly took their impetus from it. The
chronicler of Trèves, Germany, reported that in the
year 1586, the entire female population of two villages
was wiped out by the inquisitors, except for only two
women left alive.67 Two other villages were
destroyed completely and erased from the map.68 A hundred and thirty-three persons were burned in
a single day at Quedlinburg in 1589, out of a town of
12,000. Henri Boguet (circa 1550 - 1619) said Germany in
1590 was &quiot;almost entirely occupied with building fires
(for witches); and Switzerland has been compelled to wipe
out many of her villages on their account. Travelers in
Lorraine may see thousands and thousands of the stakes to
which witches are bound."69
In 1524, one thousand witches died at Como.70
Strasbourg burned five thousand in a period of 20 years.71 The Senate of Savoy condemned 800 witches
at one time. Paramé stated that Over thirty
thousand were executed in the 15th century.72
Nicholas Remy (circa 1530 - 1612) said he personally
sentenced 800 witches in 15 years and in one year alone
forced sixteen witches to suicide. A bishop of Bamberg
claimed 600 witches in 10 years; a bishop of Nancy, 800 in
16 years; a bishop of Wurtzburg, 1900 in 5 years. Five
hundred were executed within three months at Geneva and
400 in a single day at Toulouse. The city of Trèves
burned 7,000 witches. The Lutheran prelate Benedict
Carpzov, who claimed to have read the Bible 53 times,
sentenced 20,000 devil-worshippers. Even relatively
permissive England killed 30,000 witches between 1542 and
1736. The slaughter went on throughout Christian Europe
for nearly five centuries.73
Mass burnings on the Iberian peninsula were known as
autos-de-fé(acts of faith). They were held once a
month on the average, usually on a Sunday or holiday so
all could attend; to stay away was thought suspicious.
Sometimes the spectators were invited to participate, as
in the diversion genially known as "shaving the new
Christians." This meant setting fire to the hair or beards
of those waiting their turn at the stake.74
Wholesale burnings in Germany are suggested by the
observation of a visitor to Wolfenbuttel in 1590: there
were so many stakes to burn the witches that the place of
execution resembled a small forest. The executioner of
Neisse in Silesia invented an oven in which he roasted to
death forty-two women and young girls in one year. Within
nine years he had roasted over a thousand persons,
including children two to four years old.75
Inquisitors were empowered to absolve each other, their
officers, torturers, and executioners, of blood guilt for
their victims' deaths, whether in the prison, in the
torture chamber, or at the stake.76
They also forced the condemned witches to recite: "I free
all men, especially the ministers and magistrates, of the
guilt of my blood; I take it wholly upon myself, my blood
be upon my own head." Some witches even were made to
repudiate the more impossible confessions extorted by
torture, as a suicidal device: "Through the temptation of
the devil I made up that confession on purpose to destroy
my own life, being weary of it, and choosing rather to die
than live." These abject recitations preceded the trip to
the stake, for it was common practice to silence witches
on their way to execution, either by wooden gags, or by
cutting out their tongues, to prevent communication with
the crowd.77
Inquisitors didn't want to give witches a chance to reveal
that they had been raped in prison, the usual practice of
torturers and their assistants during preliminary
"stripping"78 By the curious morality of the
day, outrage could be excited by sexual &qiot;irregularities"
although spectacles of hideous torment were received
without serious objection. The people of Toulouse gathered
evidence against an inquisitor named Foulques de
Saint-George to prove he arrested women for the sole
purpose of abusing them sexually.79
Apparently this was considered worse than torturing them.
Some records hint that executioners could indulge their
lusts as long as they were circumspect. The day in 1589 at
Quedlinburg, 133 witches were burned and four inexplicably
disappeared. "Four beautiful girls were spared by the
executioner, who gave out that the devil had spirited them
away."80 They were never seen again. One can
well imagine who this "devil" was and what happened to the
poor girls before they were finally murdered.
It can hardly be doubted that a major driving force of all
witch hunts was sadistic sexual perversion. Torturers
liked to attack women's breasts and genitals with pincers,
pliers, and red-hot irons. Under the Inquisition's rules,
little girls were prosecuted and tortured for witchcraft a
year earlier than little boys - at 9½, as opposed
to IO½ for boys. Witch hunting generally was
directed against the female sex, and the abject
helplessness of imprisoned and tortured women invariably
encouraged sexual abuse along with every other kind of
abuse. Late in the 14th century it became a rule that
prisoners in solitary confinement (usually women) could be
visited in their cells by "zealous Catholics" (always men;
female visitors were not allowed).81
One inquisitorial judge, Dietrich Flade , experienced a
revulsion for his lifework and dared to say openly that
the confessions wrung from his victims were false, due
only to their agony. His archbishop had Flade arrested and
put on the rack himself until he admitted having sold his
soul to Satan; then he was burned.82
Another who ran into trouble for speaking too freely was
Peter the Precentor of Paris, who said the Inquisition
blackmailed rich people and falsely accused and arrested
"certain honest matrons" who "refused to consent to the
lasciviousness of priests."83 Civil
magistrates who criticized the Inquisition often found
themselves in its dungeons. When the governor of Albi
defended his people against the inquisitors in 1306,
letters were forged and "discovered" in church records to
remove him from office on the ground that his grandfather
was a convicted heretic.84
Predictably, inquisitors often went in fear of their own
lives, appearing in public with escorts of armed guards.
Some were attended by small armies of toughs whose
disruptive behavior was absolved by their masters, so they
could literally get away with murder, robbery, and rape;
they were "above the law."85 Many inquisitors
wore armor under their habits and tested all their food
for poison. Torquemada's chief protégé Pedro
Arbués was assassinated by relatives of some of his
victims in a church in Aragon as he left his guards and
went alone to the altar to receive the sacrament. During
the 19th century, Pedro Arbués was canonized as a
saint by Pope Pius IX (1792 - 1878, Pope 1846 - 78).86
Another inquisitor-saint was Peter Martyr (Piero da
Verona), whose case has never been adequately explained.
He was so zealous in Lombardy as to embarrass even the
church; apparently it was decided that he would be more
useful dead than alive. In 1252 he was assassinated, and
within a year he was canonized - the fastest creation of a
saint on record. His killers were captured but not
prosecuted. One of them later became an inquisitor
himself. Another entered the Dominican order, died in old
age, and was canonized as St. Acerinus; his portrait
appeared in a stall of Peter Martyif's own chuich in 1505.
A third conspirator was arrested and imprisoned by the
Inquisition 43 years after the murder, possibly because he
was beginning to talk too much.87
Another curious case was that of the heretic who nearly
became a saint, Armanno Pongilupo, a high-ranking official
of the Catharan sect at Ferrara in the 13th century.
Pretending devout Catholicism, Pongilupo secretly gave aid
to imprisoned heretics. He played the part of piety so
well that after his death, altars and images were
dedicated to him; he received a magnificent tomb in the
cathedral; stories were told of his miraculous cures of
the sick, the lame, and the blind. Ferrara's citizens
demanded his canonization, but the church refused,
ordering that his remains be exhumed and burned for his
heresy. Ferrara would not comply. The cathedral was placed
under interdict and its chapter was excommunicated.
Arguments about Pongilupo dragged on for 33 years.
Finally, the inquisitor Guido da Vincenza ended the matter
by having Pongilupo's bones burned, his altars destroyed,
and his heirs deprived of their property-which naturally
reverted to the church. Guido was rewarded with the
episcopate of Ferrera.88
The Inquisition was not organized to administer justice;
it was organized to enrich the church and silence its
critics. Henry Charles Lea says, "All the safeguards which
human experience had shown to be necessary in judicial
proceedings of the most trivial character were
deliberately cast aside in these cases, where life and
reputation and property through three generations were
involved. Every doubtful point was decided 'in favor of
the faith' . . . Had the proceedings been public, there
might have been some check upon this hideous system, but
the Inquisition shrouded itself in the awful mystery of
secrecy until after sentence had been awarded and it was
ready to impress the multitude with the fearful
solemnities of the auto da fé"89
The Inquisition remained active until 1834, especially in
Central and South America, where "heathen" natives were
tortured and burned for crimes against the true faith,
such as not believing in it.90 Mayan scribes
in Central America wrote: "Before the coming of the
Spaniards, there was no robbery or violence. The Spanish
invasion was the beginning of tribute, the beginning of
church dues, the beginning of strife."91
Catholic fathers of the mission of San Francisco burned
many Indian "witches" before the tribes were sufficiently
subdued to accept God's word.92 Henry Charles
Lea said, "An inquisitor seems to have been regarded as a
necessary portion of the missionary outfit."93
Even in the present century, Catholic authorities have
tried to present the Inquisition in an undeservedly
flattering light. Cardinal Lepicier, expressly supported
by Pope Pius X, declared the church's reign of terror was
right, just because the church did it. "The naked fact
that the Church, other own authority, has tried heretics
and condemned them to be delivered to death, shows that
she truly has the right of killing . . . [W]ho dares to
say that the Church has erred in a matter so grave as
this?"94
In fact, many have dared to say so. Charles Godfrey Leland
wrote: "When people believe, or make believe, in a thing
so very much as to torture like devils and put to death
hundreds of thousands of fellow-beings, mostly helpless
and poor old women, not to mention many children, it
becomes a matter of very serious import to all humanity to
determine once for all whether the system or code
according to which this was done was absolutely right for
ever, or not."95 Anthropologist Jules Henry
said, "Organized religion, which likes to fancy itself the
mother of compassion, long ago lost its right to that
claim by its organized support of organized cruelty."96 C.G. Coulton said of the Inquisition,
"History affords few plainer examples of the demoralizing
effects of absolute power upon fairly ordinary men."97 And Vetter pointed out that the system that
created such horrors may still be dangerous:
In both Islam and Christendom the naive believers have
overlong periods been taught that it was their duty to
slaughter the unbeliever, or whoever refused to accept
their particular version of divine guidance. They have not
had a change of heart; they have just been shorn of the
powers for mischief.98
It is unsettling to realize that such powers for mischief
could yet be revived. The edicts that established the
Inquisition have never been repealed. They are "officially
still part of the Catholic faith, and were used as
justification for certain practices as recently as 1969." 99
Julian Huxley deplored the "pestilent doctrine on which
all the churches have insisted, that honest disbelief in
their more or less astonishing creeds is a moral offense .
. . deserving and involving the same future retribution as
murder and robbery." In his opinion, the worst visions of
hell would seem pale beside a comprehensive vision of
Christianity's gory history.100 Such history
should be remembered, on the old principle that those who
cannot remember their history are condemned to repeat it.
References and Notes: