VATICAN CITY, Nov. 9 (ZENIT).- “The great weakness of the Inquisition consists in having wanted to defend the truth by violent means.” This is the concise judgment of Father Georges Cottier, theologian of the Papal Household and organizer of the international Symposium on the Inquisition, held in the last days of October at the Vatican.
“The history of the Inquisition is not the history of the Church,” Father Cottier declares exclusively to Zenit. “The Church is holy and always bears fruits of holiness. But by this I do not mean that the Church is composed only of holy men, but rather that she produces fruits of holiness in every generation, also in our own time. The Inquisition was an ecclesiastical and temporal institution that certainly had great defects, with their consequent negative effects, but this is not the path of the Church. The Church, as the bride and body of Christ, must enjoy all our confidence and, when she does penance, as John Paul II indicates in the apostolic letter “Tertio Millennio Adveniente”, she is carrying out an act of loyalty and courage that gives us new strength to face the present and the future.”
–Zenit: What new elements emerged at the Symposium?
–Georges Cottier: We cannot speak of real novelties, partly because the historians present have been working on this subject for many years. The meeting served for us to learn from one another.
There was much discussion about the interpretation of certain concrete facts. For example, it was noted that there is no clarity in the counting of the number of victims of the Inquisition, much less in its interpretation. Our information still has many points that must continue to be investigated. Many archives were destroyed, others have not been sufficiently studied, and the archive of the Holy Office has only just been opened. Nevertheless, despite the difficulties, we reached consensus on truly important points.
–Zenit: A certain historiography depicts the Inquisition with the colors of torture and the heat of the stakes. By contrast, some Christian experts defend the usefulness these tribunals had. What do you think?
–Georges Cottier: The interpretation of the facts that concern the history of the Inquisition is highly controversial. Historical analysis must take into account the context in which the events took place. Some of the procedures attributed to the Inquisition, for example, were the same as those used by civil courts. Even the trial procedure was the same. Many trials ended with the recognition of the accused person’s innocence, and the punishment for those convicted was not always capital execution. The percentage of death sentences was lower than is normally thought. But this is a problem of principle. Even if only a few people had been unjustly sentenced to death, the problem remains. Quantitative comparisons disgust me, because they do not confront the real problem.
As regards the interpretation of the Inquisition, this is a more theological than historical problem, although it is true that the historical argument must be studied more deeply, since one cannot speak of this tribunal without knowing the truth of the facts. From the theological point of view, some lines of reflection have been identified. Father Juan Miguel Garrigues insisted that the Inquisition, in its doctrinal roots, is a problem that already arises with Saint Augustine in his dispute against the Donatists. Even then Augustine asked help from the secular arm, for at that time the empire had officially become Christian. This means that the Inquisition cannot be understood without the historical idea of Christendom, which is a form of civil and political society in which all members are committed to the profession of the Christian faith. In the Inquisition we find the defense of the faith as protection of the Church and also as a cultural element that unites the people. For example, the history of the Spanish Inquisition cannot be understood outside this logic. Only when one makes an effort to think as the people of that time reasoned is it possible to understand why so many excellent people of great faith did not experience the questions raised by this institution.
It is true that genocides have occurred in our century, but this does not mean that we can analyze the Inquisition without remorse.
–Zenit: The modern age likes to label itself the “age of rights” and, for that reason, severely criticizes the Inquisition. How is it possible to analyze with today’s eyes what happened in past history?
–Georges Cottier: Today we live in a pluralist society in which the distinction between temporal and spiritual power is much clearer than in the past, and this represents a great change. From this consideration, a theological reflection must be made. The Christian moral conscience is refined as history advances. I am not saying that Christians are better today than before, for perhaps there are more sinners now than in the past—God alone knows. But, as the Second Vatican Council and the letter “Tertio Millennio Adveniente” have sanctioned, “truth is defended with the weapons of truth,” and this represents an enormous progress for Christian conscience.
It is enough to think, for example, of the current debate on the death penalty. At the beginning of this century, the death penalty was something commonly accepted; now, by contrast, its practice causes real problems for the conscience of Christians. This shows that more rigorous demands can arise in Christian conscience. In this way, one can understand how certain acts that were not perceived as a moral evil in one era are seen today as unacceptable.
But I would like to add that modern reality is paradoxical. Today we see many people criticize the violent practices of the Inquisition and fight against the death penalty, while at the same time we witness the liberalization of abortion and euthanasia. In this way, we observe that the progress of conscience is not linear: steps forward can be taken in one field and steps backward in another. If, moreover, we are witnesses to how some totalitarian systems, in the name of “Reason of State,” have not hesitated to commit massacres and mass torture, then we will understand the complexity of history. Man is called to holiness, but he is a sinner, and sin forms part of history.
–Zenit: Tomás de Torquemada is described as a cruel and torturing inquisitor. But was he really so? What do you answer to the fact that some inquisitors were canonized?
–Georges Cottier: There are saintly inquisitors, for they lived perfect charity without participating in the moral evils of these practices. The severe character of the Roman Inquisition under the government of Pope Pius V is known, for example. Moreover, the repressive structure of the Inquisition must not be confused with the figure of some inquisitors, whose task consisted in identifying heretics and converting them. The saints live the evangelical life; even those who accepted the Inquisition lived according to this path. One of them was, for example, Saint Peter Martyr of Verona, who is remembered in the calendar. It must be kept in mind that, at that time, the incompatibility of certain practices with the spread of the Gospel was not perceived. Violence has always opened the doors to dark periods, especially when civil power took into its own hands the question of repressing heretics.
As for Torquemada, it must be said that he was very rigorous, but the pursuit of rigor can at times create problems. The obstinate zeal for pursuing the rigor of virtue could have something inhuman about it. It is enough to think, for example, of a hard man such as Calvin. We must rehabilitate moderation, which forms part of the virtue of prudence in the struggle against vice. Sometimes rigor can be exaggerated, becoming a kind of zeal that ceases to be evangelical. I do not believe Torquemada was a sadist. Perhaps serious cases did occur, especially when he used torture to obtain a confession.
–Zenit: What is your opinion about the usefulness of the results obtained at the symposium?
–Georges Cottier: The first objective is to prepare a dossier for the Holy Father. The Jubilee is an act of joy, a joy born of God’s forgiveness.
We must also ask forgiveness for some sins committed in history. But there is a risk of asking forgiveness for facts that never existed. The Pope speaks of the purification of memory. This means that we must purify our image of the past from the errors promoted by propaganda. The horrifying idea of the Inquisition spread among public opinion is certainly exaggerated. For this reason, we decided to listen to the historians so that they might tell us exactly what the Inquisition was. The request for forgiveness must be formulated on the basis of the most exact information possible. This was the fundamental objective of the Symposium, and we are pleased with the results achieved.
–Zenit: To what extent can these results be an encouragement or a brake for ecumenical and interreligious dialogue?
–Georges Cottier: I believe they can be an authentic encouragement, provided that it is an authentic dialogue. The Church is not afraid of the truth and, considering that there can be no dialogue without two interlocutors, we must hope that the other party will show the same willingness. This is the first condition of dialogue. For this reason, the investigation of historical truth should help all parties interested in dialogue. The Inquisition was instituted by Catholics, but the death penalty was applied by many other systems and confessions. In any case, I am convinced that our willingness to discover the truth will be of help to ecumenical dialogue.
Author: Georges Cottier, organizer of the recent Vatican Symposium.
Source: ZENIT, November 9, 1998.
