Replies

Yes I know all countries do not do this.

The post I originally responded too was talking about the Inquisition.
I specifically wrote that Spain collected it on all agricultural goods including livestock for the Roman Catholic Church.
Spain did this until about 10 years after the Inquisition.

I later wrote than SOME European countries still collect for their churches from members of those churches and automatically remove a certain percentage from paychecks.
Some does not mean all .

I meant it to emphasise that:
1. This tithing was followed by Protestant as well as Catholic governments across Europe
2. This still IS followed by Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Austria, etc. i.e. mainly those who still follow it now are Protestant in name countries,
3. The diezmo was introduced in Aragon and Catalonia when they were frontier states (Marches) on the frontier between the CArolingian Empire and the Moors.
4. This was used to construct Churches and feed clergy (pretty important for the Reconquista)
5. In practice, the diezmo did not always retain its original purpose of subsidizing the Church. Feudal lords who were patrons of a monastery or church would gain the benefit of the tithe, or they might outright by the right to the tithe from the Church, becoming, effectively, tax farmers.
6. the diezmo was not always exactly ten percent. The actual amount differed in different places and times. Nor was it extended to all products of agriculture and husbandry, which led to market distortions as farmers shifted to whatever was not taxed.
7. In the Middle Ages, monarchs managed to participate in the benefit of the diezmo.(Joseph Pérez, Isabel y Fernando: los Reyes Católicos, Second Edition, Editorial NEREA, 1997, ISBN 8489569126. p. 83–84.) Ferdinand III of Castile proposed to Pope Innocent IV the possibility that the royal treasury would receive the third of the diezmo destined for the construction of churches, in order to pay the costs of the siege of Seville.[Enrique Ossorio Crespo, op. cit. mentions this, but incorrectly refers to Innocent VIII, an obvious chronological impossibility. Joseph Pérez, op. cit., mentions Innocent IV and confirms the date, but does not mention the context of the siege. ] A share of two ninths was granted in 1247 (Joseph Pérez, Isabel y Fernando: los Reyes Católicos, Second Edition, Editorial NEREA, 1997, ISBN 8489569126. p. 83–84.) Seville was captured in 1248.[Diego Ortiz de Zúñiga, Antonio María Espinosa y Carzel, Volume 5, Imprenta Real, 1796, p. 254] Once this first participation was agreed to, the royal share came and went for some years.(Joseph Pérez, Isabel y Fernando: los Reyes Católicos, Second Edition, Editorial NEREA, 1997, ISBN 8489569126. p. 83–84.) Beginning in 1340, a portion of the diezmo was repeatedly assigned to the State, under the designation of tercias reales ("royal thirds").[Joseph Pérez, Isabel y Fernando: los Reyes Católicos, Second Edition, Editorial NEREA, 1997, ISBN 8489569126. p. 83–84] This became permanent in 1494
6. Your statement "This is why they forced the country to become..." is wrong as Spain was conquered BACK from the Muslims. There was no forced conversion of Protestants as there were no Protestants during the years of the deizmo. Unless of course, you consider it ok for the Spanish muslims to remain followers of Islam and not moriscos.
7. The reason for the conversion (forced or otherwise) of Muslims (Moriscos) was because the enemy was the Muslim moors and any co-religionists were considered potential spies or worse -- wouldn't you agree with their paranoia?