What's the difference between the moral impications regarding the Catholic Inquisitions & the Islamic teachings on "Munafiqeen"/Hypocrites?

Hi,

My Muslim friend posted the following on my facebook page after posting that ISIS is no different than the KLU KLUX KLAN, both psuedo-religious group (not really Muslim or Christian). What’s the best way to defend the faith against such a comment?

But my main question is regarding the Catholic Inquisitions in comparison to the Islamic teachings on “Munafiqeen”/Hypocrites. Didn’t Catholics persecute and kill off those who pretended to be Catholic?

I am trying to debate my Muslim friend, but at the same time be fair in my judgment.

Thank you and God Bless You!
Brian

I explained MANY of these so called “Quran’s Verses of Violence” to you. I told you they are taken OUT OF CONTEXT.

I DONT have to time to do all that again. I will only explain the first 3 verses. Whats written after the these verses is complete nonsense.

///// "Quran (2:191-193) - “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing…
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)” /////

CONTEXT:

These verses came when Muslims had taken refuge in the city of Madina & were being attacked from their previous home city of Makkah (Mecca) which was a rich & powerful city.

So the Meccans integrated their own people in Madina as spies who were Idol Worshipers like Meccans but told the Prophet & his companions that they had converted to Islam. Those are called “Munafiqeen” or Hypocrites. Now Muslims were forbidden to kill other Muslims so they were totally confused.

THATS when these Quranic Verses came ! ! !

Do you disagree that the KLU CLUX CLAN and ISIS are pseudo-religious groups? I’m not sure why a Catholic would be obligated to “defend the faith against such a comment.” Catholicism is in no way denigrated by the statement.

The Catholic Church never forced people to convert or die. The Inquisition was aimed to control heritecs. Some excesses occurred in some local areas but few were put to death. And of course no one involved killed babies and the helpless and rape was not involved. Even the KKK, as bad and evil as it was, never engaged in the excessess of Isis. You and your friend should read about the Crusades.

Follow this like to read about the Crusades, newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm

Linus2nd

I’m not sure what version of history you’re reading, but… what you have stated does not sound accurate at all. The Catholic Church DID force people to convert or die. The Crusades DID involve the rape, torture, and murder of Muslim men, women, children and babies (and Christians! see “Constantinople”).

Can you give an example? Like, maybe name one person who the Catholic Church forced to convert or die? I think I can find dozens of examples where the Church forbade forced conversions: forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=11669217

The Crusades DID involve the rape, torture, and murder of Muslim men, women, children and babies (and Christians! see “Constantinople”).

I don’t think those actions were approved by the Church. I think there is good evidence that the Church forbade those actions. For example, Pope Innocent III condemned these actions when the Fourth Crusaders committed them: [The Crusaders] have committed…adultery, and fornication before the eyes of men. … Not satisfied with breaking open the imperial treasury and plundering the goods of princes and lesser men, they also laid their hands on the treasures of the churches and, what is more serious, on their very possessions.” “[The Greeks have] seen in the Latins only an example of perdition and the works of darkness, so that she now, and with reason, detests the Latins more than dogs.” (Letter 126) I have provided evidence that the Church forbade the actions you mentioned. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Tell your friend this. Whatever bad behaviors happen during either the crusades or the Spanish inquisition were not approved by the Catholic Church or even any Christian group. Killing, rape and forced conversion are not taught now or never by the Catholic church. While your friend is claiming the violent verses of the Koran were really self defense, Islam’s history is violent and has been spread by war. The crusades were actually a defensive war in that Christians that were making pilgrimages to the Holy land were being killed. The crusades were originally meant to keep the Holy Land safe and open. Likewise the crusades were started at the request of the patriach of constantinople for help in dealing with the ever encroaching Muslims. The spanish inquisition was done by the spanish government not by the Catholic church directly. One has to consider that back in the middle ages, freedom of speech and religion was not the polical standard. Once Spain finally freed itself from the Moors after nearly 600+ years of war, they started to worry about infiltration in the Church by non-Catholics. That doesn’t justify bad behavior again but the inquisition was done and handled by the Spanish government not the Pope.
Facebook arguments usually don’t build friendships and are usually a losing battle but if you want to answer him. While he may claim violent Koranic verse were really self-defense, these are the same verses used to spread the Islamic faith. You can’t have it both ways.

Well, that pales when one considers what happen when Mehmet invaded and took over constantinople later on. People took refuge in Hagia Sophia were all killed. Mehmet asked for the kings teenage sons so he could rape them. Such a nice guy. When he was refused, he killed a whole royal family. Then they desecrated Hagia Sophia and turned it into a Mosque and forced Christians to convert.

The sins of my enemy do not pardon the sins of my friends.

You provided evidence that the Church (during the FOURTH Crusade), said (AFTER THE FACT) that some people had gone too far. That wouldn’t have happened if the Catholic Church hadn’t called for military bodies to invade foreign countries and kill non-Christians. Did you notice that the snippet you quoted was condemning Christian-on-Christian violence, and nothing else?

Did you that know the Church offered indulgences to anyone who killed a Muslim “infidel”?

Efforts to whitewash the history of Catholic sins are… ill advised: nytimes.com/2007/05/24/world/americas/24pope.html?fta=y&_r=0

That is true, but I think the war they were called to fight was based on the Church’s criteria for a just war. And I don’t think it is wrong to wage such a war. Do you agree?

Also, the pope excommunicated the Crusaders as soon as they deviated from the Holy Land to invade Constantinople, and before they actually reached it. So the condemnation was not entirely after the fact.

Did you notice that the snippet you quoted was condemning Christian-on-Christian violence, and nothing else?

I don’t think that’s quite true. It condemns adultery and fornication as sins, for example. I don’t think there is any evidence that the pope thought fornication was sinful based on the religion of the person you committed it with. Do you agree?

Did you that know the Church offered indulgences to anyone who killed a Muslim “infidel”?

I don’t think your characterization is accurate because I think the indulgences only applied to the killing of troops. I think it’s reasonable in some way to support that, as long as the war meets the Church’s criteria for a just war. Do you agree?

the Pope has already condemned what happen and made an official apology to the Orthodox. It always amazes me when one of our own would rather beat up the Catholic church than look at the reality of Christians being wiped out in the middle east and by into the moral equivalence argument Op’s Muslim friend is making

as Giussani says, the question is not who is right, but how can one live.The endless recounting of the real and imagined sins of our ancestors…

Can you point out exactly what “moral equivalence argument” you think the OP’s Muslim friend is making?

Because he is COMPARING ISIS to THE KU KLUX KLAN and NOT the CATHOLIC CHURCH.*

I think you need to stop using the caps, that is the same as yelling. I am not sure what your beef is but Op in his opening comments did mention KKK as well as the crusades and inquisition. The point his Muslim friend was making is that KKK is like ISIS and Muslims did bad things but you Catholic Christians are the same in the crusades and Spanish inquisition. That is moral justification. The problem is that Christianity does not have anywhere in its teaching promote the use of violence to spread the faith. The Koran in a number of places does and it isn’t just isolated to a few kooks in the middle east. The KKK is an isolated group that sprung out of the civil war. While claiming on the surface to be Christian, burning crosses is not a Christian act at all. Their hatred of blacks , Jews and even Catholics is well known.

I apologize for my discourteous mode of emphasis. At least I got your attention.

I am not sure what your beef is but Op in his opening comments did mention KKK as well as the crusades and inquisition. The point his Muslim friend was making is that KKK is like ISIS and Muslims did bad things but you Catholic Christians are the same in the crusades and Spanish inquisition. That is moral justification.

I think you might benefit from looking a little closer at the Original Post. The crusades, specifically, were not mentioned.

The problem is that Christianity does not have anywhere in its teaching promote the use of violence to spread the faith. The Koran in a number of places does and it isn’t just isolated to a few kooks in the middle east.

Have you ever read the Old Testament? There are places in the Bible that do indeed promote the use of violence to spread the faith. A reasonable Christian would quickly point out that those statements don’t apply to modern-day Christianity, for reasons both historical and theological, though the Old Testament remains an important and necessary part of the Christian theological tradition.

Likewise, a reasonable Muslim would be quick to point out that the statements condoning violence in the Koran had a specific application and context, and do not grant universal permission to all Muslims to continue to spread Islam. Nevertheless, the Koran retains its central place within the Islamic traditions.

Are you with me so far?

The KKK is an isolated group that sprung out of the civil war. While claiming on the surface to be Christian, burning crosses is not a Christian act at all. Their hatred of blacks , Jews and even Catholics is well known.

Right. Good. Watch:

The KKK is an isolated group that sprung out of the civil war. While claiming on the surface to be Christian, burning crosses is not a Christian act at all. Their hatred of blacks , Jews and even Catholics is well known.

ISIS is an isolated group that sprung out of the SECOND IRAQ war. While claiming on the surface to be MUSLIM, RAPING AND MURDERING is not a MUSLIM act at all. Their hatred of blacks, Jews and even Catholics is well known.

The above parallel is the claim the OP’s Muslim friend is actually making: although ISIS claims to be Muslim, they are no more Muslim than the KKK is Christian.

That seems like a reasonable observation.

I thought that the Church approved the Inquisition. Are you saying that it did not? As far as the 4th Crusade was concerned, if the Catholic Church was against it, why did so much priceless stolen loot from Greek Orthodox Churches find its way into being displayed in Catholic Churches in the west even up to today?

First of all, I am not sure how your questions about splitting hairs over the crusades or Spanish inquisition really help Op’s original question which was about how to answer a Muslim on Facebook. It really is a sad day when those claiming to be Catholic side with people murdering Christians in the here and now. And the only thing people like you and some of the other posters is cough up old news of some bad things that may or may not have happen in the past. It should be more outrageous to see Christians wiped out in the here and now by those that follow Mohammed. More Christians have actually been killed in modern times mostly in Muslim countries than in the past 2000 years before. Yet that seems to be justified in your mind because of so called bad things that happen over 700 years ago during the crusades.

Isis is the latest group whose basis is the Muslim brotherhood whose goal is world wide domination under Sharia law. Now maybe you want to live under such a rule but as a Christian and and women, I don’t. Now maybe you think this is an isolated kook group like the KKK but it is not. Please start supporting our brothers and sisters in the faith and stop justifying murder and all the rest because of some supposes bad things that happen over 700+ years ago in the crusade.

No. I do not believe that these actions of ISIS are justified. I am for peace and for peaceful and diplomatic resolutions of these issues. I am opposed to war and the killing and raping of innocent civilians as is happening today and as happened in the 4th crusade.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.