Let’s put this into perspective.
A Catholic heretic found guilty during the age of the inquisition, would consider abortion of our day an abomination and an extrinsic evil, deserving of burning at the stake, with out a trial; when secular laws today support and finance LEGAL abortions.
The public sensitivities to each subject in each respective time period must be respected.
During the inquisition time, it was a moral discipline for a righteous practicing Catholic to administer corporal punishment to themselves, or one would willingly accept such a corporal punishment as a discipline, which you are falsely labeling “torture” compared to today’s standard.
Back to the heretic. Who Would willingly accept these forms of disciplines or “torture” to prove his/her innocence not only to his peers and faith but to the secular powers who were looking on. Again, these heretics were learned Catholics in a teaching or leading position.
What is interesting, upon the heretic agreeing to a corporal punishment or torture as on lookers from afar would call it, at the end, if found innocent?, the accused heretic would be given a Church discipline of repentance which may have been of minor corporal or prayer discipline after a confession.
In fact, many of the corporal punishments administered to well to do religious Catholics were more severe in practice and longevity than the supposed willingness Torture =corporal punishment that gave witness and testament to the heretic.
Is this method of discipline exercised during it’s day moral? Yes. Is it moral compared to today’s standard of faith disciplines No.
What is consistent by the Church, is that a discipline is offered and given to those who repent of their sins.
The corporal discipline is still in place, but the practice of corporal disciplines has changed through out the ages.
Personally, I still exercise corporal punishment to my person of my own free will upon my priest approval, after confessing a mortal sin, by self whipping my bare back 10 times and a fast to discipline my person to refrain myself from falling back into that mortal sin. Is this barbaric or self torture to today’s standard? Is it morally wrong or morally right?
During the inquisition, I don’t think the King would of allowed the Church to torture It’s citizens beyond the disciplines of practice by the religious, that were considered the “norm” of the day, during these times.
Consider, the heretic under the inquisition is still under the protection of the Church from secular powers. After the confessed heretic is excommunicated “the Inquisition” of the Church has ended all it’s powers over the heretic. When it is the secular powers who have the power to exercise capital punishment upon it’s own citizens when found guilty by a secular court.