The Inquisition(s)

1
Why I Don't Quote Bible Verses Very Much

Sometimes when bible verses are quoted as moral or spiritual support, with little or no additional context or insight, they come across as trite and unhelpful. In these cases they mean more to the person offering them than the person hearing them; the speaker thinks that by repeating the verses, they are somehow applying a spiritual balm. They may be, but they are often only applying it to themselves.

Those who respond to this type of gesture (which is usually quite sincere) are responding to their own emotions already connected to the verses. This is how hymns and prayers and paintings and statues work, and may work very well.

When the listener doesn't respond, he may be considered hardened. I am often that person, but I am not hardened at all. I simply respond in my own way in my own moment.

I think a lot of other people are that way, too, they're just too polite to say so.

A related old joke:
So there's this new inmate having lunch in jail for the first time. Across the prison cafeteria, an inmate stands up and says "42!" Everyone laughs. Another stands up and says "86!" Everyone laughs again.

The new inmate asks the guy next to him, "What's with the numbers?"

The other inmate says, "Well, we used to tell jokes at lunch time, but we got to know them all so well, we just now stand up and say the joke's number."

So the new inmate stands up and says, "44!"

No one laughs.

The new inmate sits down and asks the guy next to him, "Why didn't anyone laugh?"

The other inmate says,"'Well, some guys can tell a joke, some guys can't."

(That's a joke my dad told me years ago. I think I got most of it right. I've never told it or wrote it down until now.)

[2012-08-26]

2
The Inquisition(s)

I've learned a great deal about the Inquisition recently by listening to Prof Thomas Madden, Heaven or Heresy - A History of the Inquisition (Amazon >  )

There's a lot I could share[1], but the biggest takeaway for me on a metalevel is how we tend to package history in ways that suit us, and sometimes it's for convenience or profit.[2]

That's old news, and that's why I won't belabor it. Suffice it to say the Inquisition wasn't the popular image we have of it today, and if such things interest you, Prof Thomas Madden is a good place to start.

[2012-08-30]

[1]
For example...
• That there were a number of Inquisitions, the more (in)famous being the Spanish one.
• That most subjects of an inquisition were let off with a warning.
• That a corporal offense needed two eye-witnesses to be tried, and "full proof" was needed for execution; I've looked for an etymological tie between "full-proof" and "fool-proof," but cannot find one yet; will post one if I do.
• That the Church was not upset at Galileo because of his heliocentric science, but because he was also writing about theological matters and refused to stop. He was imprisoned, but not tortured, and due to friends in high places in Rome, his imprisonment was comfortable.
• That the office that prosecuted the Papal inquisitions exists to this day, and former Cardinal Ratzinberger, now Pope Benedict XVI, was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly the Holy Office of the Inquisition. Source >

[2]
In this case, for example, making scary movies about the Inquisitions; the more devious and corrupt you can make them, the more interesting you can make your movie.

Which is not to say the Inquisitions weren't a sad and regrettable snapshot of human depravity, but they weren't the Killing Fields or Auschwitz or Rwanda, either. See death tolls and learn more here >