Muslim vs. Christian faith

DEar followers of this post. I received an email from an email friend here in Topeka KS regarding my latest post. I have taken the liberty to copy his email to this latest post called Muslim faith. Feel free to join us on the Internet.

Here's my friend's email post:

Myron,
You are correct about the Muslim faith being anti-Christ. The Moslem has no problem accepting Jesus as an exceptional prophet and they accept the virgin birth and even allude to the immaculate conception of Our Lady Mary. Yet they emphatically deny the deity of Our Lord. We Catholics characterize Islam as a heresy formed from Mohammed's study of Judaism and Catholicism. I intend to eventually put together a blog about this.
Now about your claim that the Catholic Church persecuted the Protestants in Spain in the inquisition. You are of course the victim of anti-Catholic revisionists. First notice the name did you ever notice that people call it the "SPANISH" Inquisition? Think! Could that be because it was Spanish? Hmmm! It was. The Catholic Church had no part in the Inquisition of any prisoners that were not Catholic. The church did not run the "SPANISH" Inquisition. It was begun at the behest of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella.
The country had been a confederation of states on the Iberian peninsula that had among it several Visigoth princes that were heretics. Now let me explain. I cannot remember which heresy this was but I assure you that Martin Luther himself would have held it to be at least marginally Christian if not anti-Christian. Remember how he maligned the Anabaptists? When the Visigoth heretics took over parts of North Africa they killed Priests and tried to force the Catholic faithful to abandon their faith by threat of injury and death. This is recorded historical fact. Even St Augustine of Hippo spoke of the cruelty of these heretics.
These Visigoth princes in Spain joined forces with the moors in a conspiracy that included a majority of the Jewish leaders too. Unfortunately some Catholics saw a way to satisfy their greed for wealth and power and joined with the other traitors. The promise was made to turn the south of the Iberian peninsula into a new Jerusalem and the traitors would be part of the ruling class of the new elite and very rich.
The invasion in 711 AD of the Islamic Moorish forces into the Iberian peninsula started almost a century of bloody persecution of the Catholic inhabitants and warfare between the Catholic princes of Iberia and the Moors. The Islamic forces even made it far enough north to invade France (then Gaul) before they were turned back by King Charles Martell and sent scurrying back into Iberia. The only state of Iberia that never fell to the Moors was Galicia. During the warfare Priests were slaughtered in hideous manners and Nun were defiled and killed in equally hideous fashion by both Moor and traitor. Churches were vandalized or destroyed.
When King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella married and combined Castile and Seville and some smaller states into Spain they had the strength to finally defeat the Moorish invaders.
When they did, their first thought was to protect their beloved subjects from more bloodshed. They petitioned the Pope and received the right to begin an Inquisition to find those who were not Catholic and either turn them out of Spain or execute them. It of course was done with all the brutality of the day. A nation that had just come out of 800 years of warfare and atrocities can be very brutal. But no more than some others of the day. The function of the Catholic office of inquisition in Spain was to oversee the treatment of Catholic prisoners and to see to the administration of justice for Catholics. They set up their own prisons and presided over the Inquisition of their own. The prisons were more humane than the state prisons and the laws of evidence more strict. In fact Torquemada the chief inquisitor for the Church actually acquitted more people than were found guilty and false accusers were subject to hard punishment. Even then the court was Spanish and not Catholic and the court issued judgment and executed punishment. That was not the purview of the Churches Holy Office. Nor was it the purview of The Holy Office to oversee the trials of non Catholics. So the Catholic Church had no power over how the non Catholics were tried or punished.
When you consider the facts it actually makes sense in a way to ensure that all occupants of your kingdom are not followers of the very religions that you just fought for 800 years. The numbers of catholics that were killed, maimed and tortured because of the treason of the Jewish and heretic populations of Spain were vastly greater than the numbers of people tried and executed in the Spanish Inquisition. The myths surrounding the Spanish Inquisition are like the myths surrounding Good Queen Bess (Elizabeth I) and Bloody Mary (Mary Queen of Scotts). The true numbers show that Queen Elizabeth was responsible for killing and persecuting far more people who were not Anglican than Queen Mary killed over religion. In fact Queen Mary had many supporters who were not Catholic at least as many as Queen Elizabeth had who were Catholic. Please do not give ear to those who are anti Catholic revisionists. I know it is a popular pastime to calumniate the Catholic Church among some groups and even to question whether we are even Christian. Don't engage in it. It doesn't sound intelligent.
Be well,
Ipsa Conteret,
Herb Seel

--- On Sun, 2/28/10, myron holter wrote:


From: myron holter
Subject: Muslim FAITH
To: "myownfaith2 newsgroup"
Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 7:07 AM


CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE BLOGGER

Myron D. Holter
5112 SW 33rd ST
Topeka KS 66614

(785)-272-4986

www.myownfaith2.com (web)


Sally & I visited the Central Park Christian Church last night.

Please pray for the Muslim followers to turn to Jesus.

Here's a blog post fyi ..


http://mynsal.blogspot.com/2010/02/muslim-religion.html

Comments

  1. Greetings Herb!

    The "Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition" established in 1478 by the Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile merely replaced the previous inquisitions which were under direct papal control - for example, the Episcopal Inquisition [1184 - 1230{s} AD] and the Papal Inquisition [1230{s} AD])? And were there no succeeding inquisitions - for example, the Roman Inquisition begun by Pope Sixtus V in 1588 with the appointment of The Congregation of the Holy See and ending in 1858 with the kidnapping of the Jewish boy, Edgardo Mortara (to be raised as a Catholic by Pope Pius IX), in Bologna (and not to mention the Portugese Inquisition [1497 - 1821 AD] and the Malta Inquistion [1561 - 1798 AD])?

    Do you then count the Italian historian, Andrea Del Cole (who in analyzing the approximately 62,000 inquisition cases in Italy after 1542 AD, found that approximately 2% ended with the death sentence), as one of your revisionists? And, perhaps, Joy L Oakley, who transcribed and indexed the original two volumes of the Portugese "Lists of the Portugese Inquisition" (published in 2008 by the Jewish Historical Society of England)?

    How does Jorge Agustín Nicolás Ruiz de Santayana y Borrás' "Law of Repetitive Consequences" read, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"?

    Over and out for now . . .

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment