Pesquisar

A ILHA DOS AMORES – I

Etiqueta

religion

Vaticaan publiceert boek over Inquisitie

Registo aqui este artigo fascinante, porque, referindo-se aos acontecimentos referidos nos anteriores artigos, perverte completamente a informação que neles  é dada, assim como as investigações que eles referem. Revelando um pouco de algo que nenhum português realiza: em 500 anos de luta protestante, e em 300 anos de poder mundial protestante, a luta por eles iniciada, pouco ou nada mudou. As vestimentas mudaram, claro. A guerra é mais secreta, mas é a mesma. Sendo muito mais secreta, será mais perigosa ainda.

Vaticaan publiceert boek over Inquisitie

Hilversum (Van onze redactie/ANP) 15 juni 2004 – Het Vaticaan heeft vandaag een boek gepubliceerd dat de titel De Inquisitie draagt. Volgens paus Johannes Paulus II geeft deze publicatie inzicht in de zonden van de Inquisitie, het vroegere instituut dat ketterij en hekserij bestreed.

Vergeving
Alvorens de wereld nogmaals voor deze zonden vergeving te vragen, zegt de paus, moeten de feiten duidelijk op een rij worden gezet. Hij schreef dat in een brief die tijdens de persconferentie vandaag door kardinaal Roger Etchegaray werd voorgelezen.

Symposium
De Inquisitie bevat de resultaten van een internationaal wetenschappelijk symposium dat in oktober 1998 in het Vaticaan werd gehouden. Het symposium werd georganiseerd door de historisch-theologische commissie van het Comité Jubeljaar 2000. Het voldeed aan de wens van de paus om kennis te verwerven in de omstandigheden waarin katholieken afweken van de weg van het Evangelie. Deze afwijking noemt Johannes Paulus “een tegengetuigenis en een schandaal”.

Ketters
De Inquisitie, in de 13e eeuw opgericht, was een soort rechtbank die belast was met de opsporing, het onderzoek en het straffen van ketters en andere lieden die van de katholieke leer afweken. Ze stond rechtstreeks onder het gezag van de paus. In katholieke landen als Spanje en Portugal werd de Inquisitie pas in de 19e eeuw opgeheven.

Tegen het duivels imago
De Nijmeegse historicus prof. dr. P. Raedts sprak zich in 1998, toen de paus een diepgaand historisch onderzoek naar de inquisitie had aangekondigd, uit tegen het duivelse beeld dat van de organisatie bestaat. In de Middeleeuwen heeft er volgens hem nooit een grote rk-organisatie met vertakkingen in alle Europese landen bestaan die bedoeld was om ketterij uit te roeien.

Volkswoede beteugelen
De pausen stelden wel commissies samen die in een bepaald gebied of ten aanzien van een bepaalde groep onderzoek naar ketterse opvattingen moesten doen. Die inquisitiecommissies hebben volkswoede tegen ketters vaak eerder beteugeld dan bevorderd “om een vorm van recht te scheppen waar tot dan toen wetteloosheid geheerst had”, aldus Raedts.

Spaanse Inquisitie
Tenslotte bracht de inquisitie geen mensen ter dood. De meeste beschuldigden kwamen er met een berisping of boete van af. Alleen in extreme gevallen droeg de inquisitie een veroordeelde aan de wereldlijke overheid over. Die paste dan wel de doodstraf toe. De inquisitie kon volgens Raedts alleen goed functioneren als de overheid meewerkte. Bij de Spaanse inquisitie was dat duidelijk het geval. De koningen gebruikten de inquisitie om eenheid te scheppen. Die kon daardoor uitgroeien tot een alom gevreesde organisatie die goed vergeleken kan worden met de geheime politie in totalitaire landen. De Spaanse variant heeft echter ten onrechte het hedendaagse beeld van de inquisitie gevormd, meent Raedts.

here

Anúncios

A Inquisição, por Thomas F. Madden

The Real Inquisition

Investigating the popular myth.

June 18, 2004, 10:26 a.m.

By Thomas F. Madden

When the sins of the Catholic Church are recited (as they so often are) the Inquisition figures prominently. People with no interest in European history know full well that it was led by brutal and fanatical churchmen who tortured, maimed, and killed those who dared question the authority of the Church. The word “Inquisition” is part of our modern vocabulary, describing both an institution and a period of time. Having one of your hearings referred to as an “Inquisition” is not a compliment for most senators.

But in recent years the Inquisition has been subject to greater investigation. In preparation for the Jubilee in 2000, Pope John Paul II wanted to find out just what happened during the time of the Inquisition’s (the institution’s) existence. In 1998 the Vatican opened the archives of the Holy Office (the modern successor to the Inquisition) to a team of 30 scholars from around the world. Now at last the scholars have made their report, an 800-page tome that was unveiled at a press conference in Rome on Tuesday. Its most startling conclusion is that the Inquisition was not so bad after all. Torture was rare and only about 1 percent of those brought before the Spanish Inquisition were actually executed. As one headline read “Vatican Downsizes Inquisition.”

The amazed gasps and cynical sneers that have greeted this report are just further evidence of the lamentable gulf that exists between professional historians and the general public. The truth is that, although this report makes use of previously unavailable material, it merely echoes what numerous scholars have previously learned from other European archives. Among the best recent books on the subject are Edward Peters’s Inquisition (1988) and Henry Kamen’s The Spanish Inquisition (1997), but there are others. Simply put, historians have long known that the popular view of the Inquisition is a myth. So what is the truth?

To understand the Inquisition we have to remember that the Middle Ages were, well, medieval. We should not expect people in the past to view the world and their place in it the way we do today. (You try living through the Black Death and see how it changes your attitude.) For people who lived during those times, religion was not something one did just at church. It was science, philosophy, politics, identity, and hope for salvation. It was not a personal preference but an abiding and universal truth. Heresy, then, struck at the heart of that truth. It doomed the heretic, endangered those near him, and tore apart the fabric of community.

The Inquisition was not born out of desire to crush diversity or oppress people; it was rather an attempt to stop unjust executions. Yes, you read that correctly. Heresy was a crime against the state. Roman law in the Code of Justinian made it a capital offense. Rulers, whose authority was believed to come from God, had no patience for heretics. Neither did common people, who saw them as dangerous outsiders who would bring down divine wrath. When someone was accused of heresy in the early Middle Ages, they were brought to the local lord for judgment, just as if they had stolen a pig or damaged shrubbery (really, it was a serious crime in England). Yet in contrast to those crimes, it was not so easy to discern whether the accused was really a heretic. For starters, one needed some basic theological training — something most medieval lords sorely lacked. The result is that uncounted thousands across Europe were executed by secular authorities without fair trials or a competent assessment of the validity of the charge.

The Catholic Church’s response to this problem was the Inquisition, first instituted by Pope Lucius III in 1184. It was born out of a need to provide fair trials for accused heretics using laws of evidence and presided over by knowledgeable judges. From the perspective of secular authorities, heretics were traitors to God and the king and therefore deserved death. From the perspective of the Church, however, heretics were lost sheep who had strayed from the flock. As shepherds, the pope and bishops had a duty to bring them back into the fold, just as the Good Shepherd had commanded them. So, while medieval secular leaders were trying to safeguard their kingdoms, the Church was trying to save souls. The Inquisition provided a means for heretics to escape death and return to the community.

As this new report confirms, most people accused of heresy by the Inquisition were either acquitted or their sentences suspended. Those found guilty of grave error were allowed to confess their sin, do penance, and be restored to the Body of Christ. The underlying assumption of the Inquisition was that, like lost sheep, heretics had simply strayed. If, however, an inquisitor determined that a particular sheep had purposely left the flock, there was nothing more that could be done. Unrepentant or obstinate heretics were excommunicated and given over to secular authorities. Despite popular myth, the Inquisition did not burn heretics. It was the secular authorities that held heresy to be a capital offense, not the Church. The simple fact is that the medieval Inquisition saved uncounted thousands of innocent (and even not-so-innocent) people who would otherwise have been roasted by secular lords or mob rule.

During the 13th century the Inquisition became much more formalized in its methods and practices. Highly trained Dominicans answerable to the Pope took over the institution, creating courts that represented the best legal practices in Europe. As royal authority grew during the 14th century and beyond, control over the Inquisition slipped out of papal hands and into those of kings. Instead of one Inquisition there were now many. Despite the prospect of abuse, monarchs like those in Spain and France generally did their best to make certain that their inquisitions remained both efficient and merciful. During the 16th century, when the witch craze swept Europe, it was those areas with the best-developed inquisitions that stopped the hysteria in its tracks. In Spain and Italy, trained inquisitors investigated charges of witches’ sabbaths and baby roasting and found them to be baseless. Elsewhere, particularly in Germany, secular or religious courts burned witches by the thousands.

Compared to other medieval secular courts, the Inquisition was positively enlightened. Why then are people in general and the press in particular so surprised to discover that the Inquisition did not barbecue people by the millions? First of all, when most people think of the Inquisition today what they are really thinking of is the Spanish Inquisition. No, not even that is correct. They are thinking of the myth of the Spanish Inquisition. Amazingly, before 1530 the Spanish Inquisition was widely hailed as the best run, most humane court in Europe. There are actually records of convicts in Spain purposely blaspheming so that they could be transferred to the prisons of the Spanish Inquisition. After 1530, however, the Spanish Inquisition began to turn its attention to the new heresy of Lutheranism. It was the Protestant Reformation and the rivalries it spawned that would give birth to the myth.

By the mid 16th century, Spain was the wealthiest and most powerful country in Europe. Europe’s Protestant areas, including the Netherlands, northern Germany, and England, may not have been as militarily mighty, but they did have a potent new weapon: the printing press. Although the Spanish defeated Protestants on the battlefield, they would lose the propaganda war. These were the years when the famous “Black Legend” of Spain was forged. Innumerable books and pamphlets poured from northern presses accusing the Spanish Empire of inhuman depravity and horrible atrocities in the New World. Opulent Spain was cast as a place of darkness, ignorance, and evil.

Protestant propaganda that took aim at the Spanish Inquisition drew liberally from the Black Legend. But it had other sources as well. From the beginning of the Reformation, Protestants had difficulty explaining the 15-century gap between Christ’s institution of His Church and the founding of the Protestant churches. Catholics naturally pointed out this problem, accusing Protestants of having created a new church separate from that of Christ. Protestants countered that their church was the one created by Christ, but that it had been forced underground by the Catholic Church. Thus, just as the Roman Empire had persecuted Christians, so its successor, the Roman Catholic Church, continued to persecute them throughout the Middle Ages. Inconveniently, there were no Protestants in the Middle Ages, yet Protestant authors found them there anyway in the guise of various medieval heretics. In this light, the medieval Inquisition was nothing more than an attempt to crush the hidden, true church. The Spanish Inquisition, still active and extremely efficient at keeping Protestants out of Spain, was for Protestant writers merely the latest version of this persecution. Mix liberally with the Black Legend and you have everything you need to produce tract after tract about the hideous and cruel Spanish Inquisition. And so they did.

In time, Spain’s empire would fade away. Wealth and power shifted to the north, in particular to France and England. By the late 17th century new ideas of religious tolerance were bubbling across the coffeehouses and salons of Europe. Inquisitions, both Catholic and Protestant, withered. The Spanish stubbornly held on to theirs, and for that they were ridiculed. French philosophes like Voltaire saw in Spain a model of the Middle Ages: weak, barbaric, superstitious. The Spanish Inquisition, already established as a bloodthirsty tool of religious persecution, was derided by Enlightenment thinkers as a brutal weapon of intolerance and ignorance. A new, fictional Spanish Inquisition had been constructed, designed by the enemies of Spain and the Catholic Church.

Now a bit more of the real Inquisition has come back into view. The question remains, will anyone take notice?

— Thomas F. Madden is professor and chair of the department of history at Saint Louis University in St. Louis, Missouri. He is the author most recently of Enrico Dandolo and the Rise of Venice and editor of the forthcoming Crusades: The Illustrated History.

Propaganda Nórdica e Inquisição em Espanha

Ler:     The Truth About the Spanish Inquisition
By Thomas F. Madden

…The ability of Muslims, Christians, and Jews to live together, called convivencia by the Spanish, was a rarity in the Middle Ages. Indeed, Spain was the most diverse and tolerant place in medieval Europe. England expelled all of its Jews in 1290. France did the same in 1306. Yet in Spain Jews thrived at every level of society.

By the mid-15th century, a whole new converso culture was flowering in Spain—Jewish in ethnicity and culture, but Catholic in religion. Conversos, whether new converts themselves or the descendants of converts, took enormous pride in that culture. Some even asserted that they were better than the “Old Christians,” since as Jews they were related by blood to Christ Himself. When the converso bishop of Burgos, Alonso de Cartagena, prayed the Hail Mary, he would say with pride, “Holy Mary, Mother of God and my blood relative, pray for us sinners…”

The vast majority of conversos were good Catholics who simply took pride in their Jewish heritage. Surprisingly, many modern authors—indeed, many Jewish authors—have embraced these anti-Semitic fantasies. It is common today to hear that the conversos really were secret Jews, struggling to keep their faith hidden under the tyranny of Catholicism. Even the American Heritage Dictionary describes “converso” as “a Spanish or Portuguese Jew who converted outwardly to Christianity in the late Middle Ages so as to avoid persecution or expulsion, though often continuing to practice Judaism in secret.” This is simply false.

Those who get their history from Mel Brooks’s History of the World, Part I will perhaps be surprised to learn that all of those Jews enduring various tortures in the dungeons of the Spanish Inquisition are nothing more than a product of Brooks’s fertile imagination. Spain’s Jews had nothing to fear from the Spanish Inquisition.

…After the reforms, the Spanish Inquisition had very few critics. Staffed by well-educated legal professionals, it was one of the most efficient and compassionate judicial bodies in Europe. No major court in Europe executed fewer people than the Spanish Inquisition. This was a time, after all, when damaging shrubs in a public garden in London carried the death penalty. Across Europe, executions were everyday events. But not so with the Spanish Inquisition. In its 350-year lifespan only about 4,000 people were put to the stake. Compare that with the witch-hunts that raged across the rest of Catholic and Protestant Europe, in which 60,000 people, mostly women, were roasted. Spain was spared this hysteria precisely because the Spanish Inquisition stopped it at the border. When the first accusations of witchcraft surfaced in northern Spain, the Inquisition sent its people to investigate. These trained legal scholars found no believable evidence for witches’ Sabbaths, black magic, or baby roasting. It was also noted that those confessing to witchcraft had a curious inability to fly through keyholes. While Europeans were throwing women onto bonfires with abandon, the Spanish Inquisition slammed the door shut on this insanity. (For the record, the Roman Inquisition also kept the witch craze from infecting Italy.)

What about the dark dungeons and torture chambers? The Spanish Inquisition had jails, of course. But they were neither especially dark nor dungeon-like. Indeed, as far as prisons go, they were widely considered to be the best in Europe. There were even instances of criminals in Spain purposely blaspheming so as to be transferred to the Inquisition’s prisons. Like all courts in Europe, the Spanish Inquisition used torture. But it did so much less often than other courts. Modern researchers have discovered that the Spanish Inquisition applied torture in only 2 percent of its cases. Each instance of torture was limited to a maximum of 15 minutes. In only 1 percent of the cases was torture applied twice and never for a third time.

The inescapable conclusion is that, by the standards of its time, the Spanish Inquisition was positively enlightened. That was the assessment of most Europeans until 1530. It was then that the Spanish Inquisition turned its attention away from the conversos and toward the new Protestant Reformation. The people of Spain and their monarchs were determined that Protestantism would not infiltrate their country as it had Germany and France. The Inquisition’s methods did not change. Executions and torture remained rare. But its new target would forever change its image.

By the mid–16th century, Spain was the wealthiest and most powerful country in Europe…. Less wealthy and less powerful were Europe’s Protestant areas, including the Netherlands, northern Germany, and England. But they did have a potent new weapon: the printing press. Although the Spanish defeated Protestants on the battlefield, they would lose the propaganda war. These were the years when the famous “Black Legend” of Spain was forged. Innumerable books and pamphlets poured from northern presses accusing the Spanish Empire of inhuman depravity and horrible atrocities in the New World. Opulent Spain was cast as a place of darkness, ignorance, and evil. Although modern scholars have long ago discarded the Black Legend, it still remains very much alive today.

Protestant propaganda that took aim at the Spanish Inquisition drew liberally from the Black Legend. But it had other sources as well. From the beginning of the Reformation, Protestants had difficulty explaining the 15-century gap between Christ’s institution of His Church and the founding of the Protestant churches. Catholics naturally pointed out this problem, accusing Protestants of having created a new church separate from that of Christ. Protestants countered that their church was the one created by Christ but that it had been forced underground by the Catholic Church. …In this light, the medieval Inquisition was nothing more than an attempt to crush the hidden, true church. The Spanish Inquisition, still active and extremely efficient at keeping Protestants out of Spain, was for Protestant writers merely the latest version of this persecution. Mix liberally with the Black Legend, and you have everything you need to produce tract after tract about the hideous and cruel Spanish Inquisition. And so they did.

 The Spanish Inquisition, already established as a bloodthirsty tool of religious persecution, was derided by Enlightenment thinkers as a brutal weapon of intolerance and ignorance. A new, fictional Spanish Inquisition had been constructed, designed by the enemies of Spain and the Catholic Church.

…. Thus far, the fruits of that research have made one thing abundantly clear—the myth of the Spanish Inquisition has nothing at all to do with the real thing.

Thomas F. Madden is associate professor and chairman of the Department of History at Saint Louis University. He is the author of numerous works…

Liberdade

Porque me tornei rebelde:

A liberdade não é uma concessão do príncipe ou da revolução, é uma conquista do homem revoltado contra a servidão voluntária. Ler em Sobre o tempo que passa

Mas servidão a quem, a quê?

Basta que não tenhamos medo, conforme o projecto de Étienne la Boétie: ”n’ayez pas peur, na servitude volontaire o grande ou pequeno tirano apenas têm o poder que se lhe dá, um poder que vem da volonté de servir das multidões que ficam fascinadas e seduzidas por um só”.

Mas essa fascinação e sedução, é a maior benção: O que tem é que tornar-se Fascinação e Sedução, pelo Eterno…

 

Andrea Mantegna, “Camera degli Sposi”

Aliás, todos os que se tornaram servidores do Eterno, foram radicalmente rebeldes. Rebeldes até contra si próprios. Rebeldes, contra a prisão do príncipe deste Mundo, que é acima de tudo o príncipe da Mentira.

Ele nunca funciona pelo mal visivel. No entanto gastamos nosso tempo reagindo contra esses sintomas. Ele está sempre escondido. Ele nunca assusta, ele seduz. Ele não é pavoroso. Ele aparenta ser maravilhoso. Ele não é feio. Ele aparenta ser belo. Ele não afasta. Ele atrai a si os que estão perto de realizar algo especialmente Bom, criando situações de forma genial e complexa, para que esse Bem não possa acontecer. Ele subrreticiamente cerca e enche de obstáculos o caminho que leva à Liberdade.

É por ele que o caminho para o Monte Abiegno é tão penoso, difícil e raro. É por ele que é preciso tanto Amor para que alguns lá possam chegar…

Católicos e protestantes

Queridos amigos

É com muita emoção que hoje tenho uma comunicação linda a fazer. Não consigo, não posso explicar todas as razões porque é tão bonita, mas é.

Encontrei isto num blog americano:

The Protestant and Orthodox worlds responded rabidly to the seeming red meat thrown our way this week by the Bishop of Rome. In essence, the statement really said nothing new, i.e. there is one church, the Roman Catholic church, and that the rest of us are Christians but not churches because we lack apostolic succession and other permanent elements of the one Church. It’s just a restatement of Catholic doctrine by the Catholic Church…big deal.

The Catholic Catechism tells us that “All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church” and that’s all I need to know.

I love Pope Benedict and I believe that the Church is one. Whether you realize it or not, ALL the baptized are in one body. That means Benedict is your Bishop and mine, and so are all other rightfully ordained Bishops. It’s not “their problem” because we are all one. There are barriers to this oneness, but they will be worked out over time by the Holy Spirit. I am fine with being considered a separated brother by Catholics, we have much in common.

Turning to Pope Benedict, here is a look at his endorsement of the Latin Mass from First Things. I love the Latin Mass. I’ve only been part of it once, but it was very moving. Kudos to him for allowing the ancient practice of the church to flourish. And look at this interesting statement that he made at the start of his Papacy about the Magisterium of the Church and the infallibility of the Pope:

This power of teaching frightens many people in and outside the Church. They wonder whether freedom of conscience is threatened or whether it is a presumption opposed to freedom of thought. It is not like this. The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.

Benedict sees his role as binding himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word – period. That’s a pretty cool statement, almost Protestant in emphasis. Of course we disagree about what God’s Word says, but I probably disagree more with Baptists than with him, and it will get worked out. I don’t want to hear about idolatry from people who put the flag of our secular Empire proudly on the stage of their church and don’t think twice about it.

Esta atitude assumida de amizade, e de alegria acompanhando a concepção de sermos todos cristãos, todos de Cristo, da parte de um protestante, é linda – raramente me cruzei com ela.

Do

A Living Text, em

Did Christ establish one church?

Site no WordPress.com.

EM CIMA ↑