Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.
Who didn't in that era? Feudal lords determined everybody's religion throughout most of history. Is there something especially evil about the western practice that makes it stand out?
Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?
Not many 'standing armies' in the modern sense in western Europe then; too expensive. Armies weren't 'Catholic' armies, they were feudal armies.
Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.
Given the Renaissance began in Italy, this is a strange claim. As for western culture, I doubt the alternatives would have matched what did develop if da evul Xians hadn't dominated. In fact I'm certain it wouldn't have. Western culture certainly surpasses the rest of the world's, and that's with the rest of the world having a long head start
You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.
Pot, kettle, black.
I will give the fact that Catholicism influenced the rise of much of the science philosophy and art from the fall of Rome even up to now.
But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.
By the time of the Industrial Age, the Catholic church had to take care of whom they excommunicated! Inquisitions were akin to political suicide.
In fact, when the fascist came to power in Central Europe, most of the church leaders were probably scared shitless on how to deal with them.
I think the problem for most when reading the history is the belief that the Catholic Church had unlimited power and could order the various fuedal kingdoms around like puppets. This isn't the case; they could rarely even influence who could be made Bishops in many of these fiefs, much less even control who got parish churches; the Feudal Lords made the appointments, usually family members or family members of political allies. Once that notion gets tossed aside as not representative of the actual case, the relative chaos and seeming 'contradictions' become more 'sensible'. As for the various Inquisitions, the Spanish one had obvious political reasons, they were still very much under Islamic threats and feared a 'fifth column' made up of former Muslims and Jews, the latter having mostly sided with both Persians and Muslims for most of the preceding centuries and not to be trusted. The Roman Inquisition was the Church's doctrinal Inquisition, different altogether, and almost never put anybody to death, despite all the propaganda and hand wringing; the Cathar purge had put a bad taste in the mouths of many of the Church's scholars, and it was roundly condemned internally. The Portuguese Inquisition had pretty much the same motivations of the Spanish Inquisition; these were ordered by feudal lords, for personal concerns of their national security.
The Catholic Church's main problems came with it developing into a feudal power, and thus having to become involved in the politics of the era. Wealthy people had adopted the habit of leaving lands to the Church, and over the centuries this began to amount to a significant asset, and therefore a target for opportunists.
But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.
What were they opposed to, specifically?
