So then it's your contention that such probing of a person is acceptable?
Granted, I'm not one that subscribes to the idea that the Inquisitors were Monsters, many were devoutly religious men who looked at what they were doing as noble and honorable.
However, that being said, while the Inquisitors were prohibited from causing permanent physical damage to get a penitant to confess their heresy, including time limits on torments, many instances of "crossing the line" did occur.
Also, let's not forget that one option an Inquisitor had was to simply turn a penitant over to the Secular Authorities, who, in an effort not to offend the Office of the Inquisition would almost certainly brutally torture and execute those in their charge.
Face it, the very act of relaxing an unrepentant Heretic directly violates the very notion of Free Will.
As for the idea that the general populous happily went along with the Inquisition, let's face facts, simply failing to attend an auto was enough to have a person brought before a Tribunal under a charge of suspision of Heresy.
Or worse, even questioning the Inquisition itself, in any manner, was considered a crime.
The right exists for authorities to punish criminals, whether in the ecclesiatical or secular realm. After the destuction of Christendom, the idea of temporal punishment for spiritual crimes became less common and is therefore viewed in modern times as barbaric, whereas the Inquisition saw it as an act of mercy to effect repentance when all other means had failed. The death of the soul through heresy (understanding the effects of mortal sin) is infinitely worse than the death of the body. "For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?"