THE INQUISITION by Prof. P. T. Magan

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Jan 1, 1894

THE INQUISITION

By Prof. P. T. Magan

A REVIEW OF SUNDAY LEGISLATION IN CENTURY NINETEEN. NO. 6.

THE INQUISITION.

PAPAL ROME finds precedent for all her doctrines and practices in Holy Writ. I do not say that Holy Writ contains precedent for all or any of her doctrines and practices. I simply aver that she thinks she finds it there; but that is not saying that it is there. The Roman Catholic Church quotes the Bible in support of her theories; so did Satan in support of his. Matt. 4:1-11.

The Inquisition is one of the most diabolically gross abuses that ever disgraced humanity. Nevertheless, Rome is blasphemous enough to rest the authority of this infamous tribunal on the word of God.

According to a well-known Roman Catholic historian, God himself was the first Inquisitor General. In the death penalty announced to Adam and Eve,—"In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen. 2: 17),—precedent is found for inflicting capital punishment on heretics. Because our first parents were heretics, they had left the true faith. Again, the Lord turned them out of the Garden of Eden; this was the confiscation of the property of heretics. Thirdly, the Almighty made them "coats of skins, and clothed them." Gen. 3:21. This was the model of the san benito. The san benito were coarse woolen garments, in which the heretic was arrayed for the auto da fé, the name given to the ceremony accompanying the burning of the victims. These garments were brought close round the neck, and descended like a frock, down to the knees. They were of a yellow color, embroidered with a scarlet cross, and well garnished with figures of devils and flames of fire, which, typical of the heretic's destiny hereafter, served to make him more odious in the eyes of the superstitious multitude. In certain cases the garment was also adorned with the picture of the wearer, burning in flames, with several figures of dragons and devils in the act of fanning them.

Such is a papal exegesis of Gen. 2:3. I cite it thus fully that the people of the United States may know the origin of the religion which they possess, according to the finding of the Supreme Court.

Again I quote from Puighblanch:—

The defenders of the Inquisition, unmindful of the proofs just alleged, or, rather, without having fully weighed their merits, or examined the matter with due consideration, pretend to find in Jesus Christ and his apostles examples to authorize this rigor. Our divine Saviour, say they, with a scourge drove the traders from the temple who bought and sold therein. After his ascension to heaven he also appeared to Saul when persecuting the Christians, and struck him down from his horse, leaving him without sight.

So much for the divine (?) origin of the Inquisition, the religion of the American people, according to Justice Brewer. This is an example of the Roman Catholic method, if method it can be called, of interpreting Scripture. This is the way in which the most diabolical institution ever conceived of in the mind of man is warranted (?) by the word of God.

THE RISE OF THE INQUISITION.

The Inquisition has existed in principle ever since the fourth century, when Christianity became the established religion of the Roman Empire; but acts of intolerance do not seem to have flowed from any systematized plan of persecution until the papal authority had risen to a considerable height.

Inquisitorial missions were first sent out by Pope Innocent III., 1210-1215, against the Albigenses, who dwelt under the shadow of the lofty Pyrenees in Southern France. They were a most peaceable and polished people, and the only national crime of which they had ever been guilty was that of rejecting with shrinking horror the blasphemous doctrines and blood-curdling practices of the Roman Catholic Church, whose clergy were regarded with loathing and contempt. "Viler than a priest," "I would as soon be a priest," became proverbial expressions. "The Papacy had lost all authority with all classes, from the great feudal princes down to the cultivators of the soil." How beautiful their land, how elegant their manners, how advanced, for that barbarous age, their scientific research, how cruel their extermination, the pen of Lord Macaulay has perfectly delineated.

THE INQUISITION IN SPAIN.

In the year 1480, during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, the Holy Office was established in Spain. It was inaugurated for the benefit of the Jews, not primarily because they were heretics, but because they were wealthy, and Rome needed money. This is a serious charge, but, nevertheless, a true one, and I am prepared to sustain it.

These unfortunate members of the race of Israel were not only wealthy, but they had gradually risen in political eminence, until they were the incumbents of the highest civil offices. They made great advancement in various departments of letters. The schools of Cardova, Toledo, Barcelona, and Granada were crowded with students. It was the Jews and the Arabs who kept alive the flame of learning, during the mythological twilight of the Middle Ages. They frequently resided at the courts of Catholic princes, as ministers of finance, situations which they were eminently qualified to fill.

But royal patronage proved incompetent to save them from the bloody hand of Rome, when their "flourishing fortunes had risen to a

sufficient height" to excite her envy. I quote from Prescott:—

Stories were circulated of their contempt for the Catholic worship, their desecration of its most holy symbols, and of their crucifixion, or other sacrifice, of Christian children, at the celebration of their own passover. . . . At length toward the close of the fourteenth century the fanatical populace, stimulated in many instances by the no less fanatical clergy, and perhaps encouraged by the numerous class of debtors to the Jews, who found this a convenient mode of settling their accounts, made a fierce assault on this unfortunate people in Castile and Aragon, breaking into their houses, violating their most private sanctuaries, scattering their costly collections and furniture, and consigning the wretched proprietors to indiscriminate massacre, without regard to sex or age.

On account of this barbarous treatment many of the Spanish Jews feigned conversion to Christianity. Such was their spiritual condition when Ferdinand and Isabella assumed the reins of government. During their reign complaints against Jewish heresy became more and more frequent, and the throne was repeatedly beset with petitions to devise some means for its extirpation. The words of the Curate of Los Palacios, who lived at this time, throw considerable light on "the real as well as pretended motives of the subsequent persecution":—

This accursed race were either unwilling to bring their children to be baptized, or, if they did, they washed away the stain on returning home. They dressed their stews and other dishes with oil, instead of lard; abstained from pork; kept the passover; ate meat in Lent; and sent oil to replenish the lamps in their synagogues, with many other abominable ceremonies of their religion. . . . They were an exceeding politic and ambitious people, engrossing the most lucrative municipal offices.

No wonder Prescott remarks, after quoting the above:—

It is easy to discern in this medley of credulity and superstition the secret envy entertained by the Castilians of the superior skill and industry of their Hebrew brethren, and of the superior riches which these qualities secured to them; and it is impossible not to suspect that the zeal of the most orthodox was considerably sharpened by worldly motives. . . . FERDINAND LISTENED WITH COMPLACENCY TO A SCHEME WHICH PROMISED AN AMPLE SOURCE OF REVENUE IN THE CONFISCATIONS IT INVOLVED.

To Isabella's honor be it spoken, frequent importunities on the part of the clergy were necessary before she yielded her consent to having the Inquisition established in her dominions. But she at last gave way, "Sixtus the Fourth, who at that time filled the pontifical chair, easily discerning the sources of wealth and influence which this measure [the establishment of the Inquisition in Spain] opened to the court of Rome, readily complied with the petitions of the sovereigns, and expedited a bull, bearing date November 1, 1478, authorizing them to appoint two or three ecclesiastics, Inquisitors for the detection and suppression of heresy throughout their dominions."

Ferdinand and Isabella issued a decree expelling from Spain every Jew who refused to deny his faith, so that the soil of Spain might be no longer polluted by the presence of unbelievers. To make them Christians, or, failing in that, to exterminate them, was the business of the Inquisition.

Of course many of the Jews declared, when the terrible words which constituted the form of arrest, "DELIVER YOURSELF UP A PRISONER TO THE INQUISITION!" were whispered in their ear, that they were not Jews but Catholics. It then became necessary to prove that they were Jews. Here are some of the points by which the charge of Judaism was established against them:—

It was considered good evidence of the fact if the prisoner wore better clothes or cleaner linen on the Jewish Sabbath than on any other day of the week; if he had no fire in his house the preceding evening; if he sat at table with Jews, or ate the meat of animals slaughtered by their hands, or drank a certain beverage held in much estimation by them; if he washed a corpse in warm water, or when dying turned his face to the wall; or, finally, if he gave Hebrew names to his children, a provision most whimsically cruel, since, by a law of Henry the second, he was prohibited under severe penalties from giving them Christian names. He must have found it difficult to extricate himself from the horns of this dilemma. Such are a few of the circumstances, some of them purely accidental in their nature, others the result of early habit, which might well have continued after a sincere conversion to Christianity, and all of them trivial, on which capital accusations were to be alleged, and even satisfactorily established.

I give this quotation from Llorente, as he is a writer most competent to unveil the hidden mysteries of the Inquisition. He was secretary to that tribunal in Madrid from 1790-1792. He devoted several years to a thorough investigation of the records of the tribunals, as well as of other original documents contained in their archives.

And all of this wickedness, according to the finding of the Supreme Court, is the religion of the American people. I do not agree with the learned judge in his application of his "historical citations," but Rome does, and she will, as surely as the sun rises and sets, seek to enforce her dogmas by means of the Inquisition, upon those of the American people who disagree with her and the Supreme Court. And woe be to the rich among the American people, for she will confiscate their property to her own coffers; even although they may accept her dogmas, they will not be safe. Her history shows clearly that the more you give her, the more she wants. You may accept her creeds and dogmas, you may profess Catholicism; but just as certainly as you do, she will drain your purse of all its wealth, and she will tax you as individuals and as a nation till bankruptcy, personal and national, stares you in the face. I say this advisedly, because all history confirms it. If not, I ask her, "Why was it that those German princes, inveterate enemies of Luther and the reformed doctrines, arose at the Diet of Worms, in 1521, and declaimed against her?" And there were such speeches, and here is one, made before that august assembly by Duke George of Saxony, a man who hated Luther from the depth of his soul:—

The Diet must not forget its grievances against the court of Rome. . . . The annats, which the emperor granted for the good of Christianity, now exacted as a due; the Roman courtiers daily inventing new regulations to monopolize, sell, and lease the ecclesiastical benefices; a multitude of transgressions connived at; rich transgressors undeservedly tolerated, while those who have no money to purchase impunity are punished without mercy; . . . stalls for the sale of indulgences set up in every street and public place of our cities; . . . companies purchasing at Rome the right to hold such markets, and then buying permission of their bishop to display their wares, and squeezing and draining the pockets of the poor to obtain money. . . . All shame has been put aside, and their only object is money, money, money.

Duke George of Saxony was a Roman Catholic; so were all the men who composed the Diet of Worms. Roman Catholicism was the religion of the country; it was their own creed. But they saw it meant

NATIONAL RUIN.

And we desire that every American should see that also,—that the Papacy as the religion of America means spiritual ruin to the individual who accepts it, and national ruin to the government that indorses it.

I have shown how it was in Germany, and here is a record of the crisis in England:—

When England began to resist the Papacy, it began to grow in power and wealth. Loosening its neck from the yoke of Rome, it lifted up its head proudly among the nations. [Pope] Innocent III., crowning a series of usurpations by the submission of King John—an act of baseness that stands alone in the annals of England—had sustained himself master of the kingdom. But the great pontiff was bidden, somewhat gruffly, stand off. The Northern nobles, who knew little about theology but cared a great deal for independence, would be masters in their own isle, and they let the haughty wearer of the tiara know this when they framed the Magna Charta. . . .

This was the moment chosen by [Pope] Urban V. to advance his insolent demand. . . . The king [Edward III.] . . . was in no mood for repairing to Rome, as Urban commanded, and paying down a thousand marks for permission to wear the crown which he was so well able to defend with his sword. Edward assembled his parliament in 1366, and, laying the pope's letter before it, bade it take counsel and say what answer should be returned. . . . They assembled again on the morrow—prelates, lords, and commons.

Several barons spoke against the papal extortions and usurpations. Then arose one, who, following in the line of other speakers, said:—

"The pope . . . calls himself the servant of the servants of God. Very well; he can claim recompense only for service done. But where are the services which he renders to this land? Does he minister to us in spirituals? Does he help us in temporals? Does he not rather greedily drain our treasuries, and often for the benefit of our enemies? I give my voice against this tribute."

"On what grounds was this tribute originally demanded?" asked another. "Was it not for absolving King John, and relieving the kingdom from interdict? But to bestow spiritual benefits for money is sheer simony; it is a piece of ecclesiastical swindling. Let the lords spiritual and temporal wash their hands of a transaction so disgraceful. But if it is as feudal superior of the kingdom that the pope demands this tribute, why ask a thousand marks? why not ask the throne, the soil, the people of England? If his title is good for a thousand marks, it is good for a great deal more. The pope, on the same principle, may declare the throne vacant, and fill it with whomsoever he pleases." . . . "Let us," said the last speaker, "go at once to the root of this matter. King John had no right to gift away the kingdom of England without the consent of the nation. That consent was never given."

Let all true Americans, aye, and all true Christians, say amen. For well would it be for this people if they would "go to the root of this matter," and say with a mighty shout that the Supreme Court "had no right to gift away" the United States "without the consent of the nation." And well would it be for them if they would add, as did that gallant knight of England, "We hold the bargain null and void from the beginning."

I give these quotations at length so that all may see what the statesmen of the two greatest countries of the Old World have seen to be the inevitable result of papal domination, i.e., NATIONAL RUIN. They threw off the Roman yoke, and their lives were prolonged. Rome

is a cruel foe, and to be dreaded; but ten thousand times more so is she a cruel mistress, and as such to be resisted. Every country that she has ever ruled, she has ruined, ruined in things temporal and ruined in things spiritual. Will you indorse her domination, as purchased by the Supreme Court, with the ruin it involves? or will you repudiate it, by standing under the blood-stained banner of Jesus, awaiting the reward he is so soon to bring?