initial commit of ebook 26329HEADmain

1 files changed, 6480 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/26329-8.txt b/26329-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8845932
--- /dev/null
+++ b/26329-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,6480 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Inquisition, by E. Vacandard
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Inquisition
+       A Critical and Historical Study of the Coercive Power of the Church
+
+Author: E. Vacandard
+
+Translator: Bertrand Conway
+
+Release Date: August 16, 2008 [EBook #26329]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE INQUISITION ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David McClamrock
+
+
+
+
+
+THE INQUISITION
+
+A CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL STUDY OF THE COERCIVE POWER OF THE CHURCH
+
+BY E. VACANDARD
+
+TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND EDITION BY BERTRAND L. CONWAY, C.S.P.
+
+NEW EDITION
+
+LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. FOURTH AVENUE & 30TH STREET, NEW YORK
+LONDON, BOMBAY, CALCUTTA AND MADRAS 1915
+
+Nihil Obstat. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, S.T.D.
+
+Imprimatur. + JOHN M. FARLEY, D.D Archbishop of New York.
+
+NEW YORK, June 24, 1907.
+
+Copyright, 1907, by BERTRAND L. CONWAY
+
+All Rights Reserved
+
+First Edition, February, 1908 Registered, May, 1908 New and Cheaper
+Edition, September, 1915
+
+
+
+ NOTE TO THIS ELECTRONIC EDITION
+
+In the print edition of this book, footnote numbers began with 1 on
+each page, and the footnotes appeared at the bottom of each page. In
+this electronic edition, the footnotes have been re-numbered
+beginning with 1 for each paragraph, and they appear directly below
+the paragraph that refers to them. A very few ascertainable errors
+have been caught and corrected. All else is intended to correspond as
+closely as possible to the contents of the print edition.
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+THERE are very few Catholic apologists who feel inclined to boast of
+the annals of the Inquisition. The boldest of them defend this
+institution against the attacks of modern liberalism, as if they
+distrusted the force of their own arguments. Indeed they have hardly
+answered the first objection of their opponents, when they instantly
+endeavor to prove that the Protestant and Rationalistic critics of
+the Inquisition have themselves been guilty of heinous crimes. "Why,"
+they ask, "do you denounce our Inquisition, when you are responsible
+for Inquisitions of your own?"
+
+No good can be accomplished by such a false method of reasoning. It
+seems practically to admit that the cause of the Church cannot be
+defended. The accusation of wrongdoing made against the enemies they
+are trying to reduce to silence comes back with equal force against
+the friends they are trying to defend.
+
+It does not follow that because the Inquisition of Calvin and the
+French Revolutionists merits the reprobation of mankind, the
+Inquisition of the Catholic Church must needs escape all censure. On
+the contrary, the unfortunate comparison made between them naturally
+leads one to think that both deserve equal blame. To our mind, there
+is only one way of defending the attitude of the Catholic Church in
+the Middle Ages toward the Inquisition. We must examine and judge
+this institution objectively, from the standpoint of morality,
+justice, and religion, instead of comparing its excesses with the
+blameworthy actions of other tribunals.
+
+No historian worthy of the name has as yet undertaken to treat the
+Inquisition from this objective standpoint. In the seventeenth
+century, a scholarly priest, Jacques Marsollier, canon of the Uzès,
+published at Cologne (Paris), in 1693, a _Histoire de l'Inquisition
+et de son Origine_. But his work, as a critic has pointed out, is
+"not so much a history of the Inquisition, as a thesis written with a
+strong Gallican bias, which details with evident delight the
+cruelties of the Holy Office." The illustrations are taken from
+Philip Limborch's _Historia Inquisitionis_.[1]
+
+[1] Paul Fredericq, _Historiographie de l'Inquisition_, p. xiv.
+Introduction to the French translation of Lea's book on the
+Inquisition.
+
+Henry Charles Lea, already known by his other works on religious
+history, published in New York, in 1888, three large volumes entitled
+_A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages._ This work has
+received as a rule a most flattering reception at the hands of the
+European press, and has been translated into French.[1] One can say
+without exaggeration that it is "the most extensive, the most
+profound, and the most thorough history of the Inquisition that we
+possess."[2]
+
+[1] _Histoire de l'Inquisition au moyen âge_, Solomon Reinach. Paris,
+Fischbacher, 1900-1903.
+
+[2] Paul Fredericq, loc. cit., p. xxiv.
+
+It is far, however, from being the last word of historical criticism.
+And I am not speaking here of the changes in detail that may result
+from the discovery of new documents. We have plenty of material at
+hand to enable us to form an accurate notion of the institution
+itself. Lea's judgment, despite evident signs of intellectual
+honesty, is not to be trusted. Honest he may be, but impartial never.
+His pen too often gives way to his prejudices and his hatred of the
+Catholic Church. His critical judgment is sometimes gravely at
+fault.[1]
+
+[1] The reader may gather our estimate of this work from the various
+criticisms we will pass upon it in the course of this study.
+
+Tanon, the president of the Court of Cassation, has proved far more
+impartial in his _Histoire des Tribunaux de l'Inquisition en
+France._[1] This is evidently the work of a scholar, who possesses a
+very wide and accurate grasp of ecclesiastical legislation. He is
+deeply versed in the secrets of both the canon and the civil law.
+However, we must remember that his scope is limited. He has of set
+purpose omitted everything that happened outside of France. Besides
+he is more concerned with the legal than with the theological aspect
+of the Inquisition.
+
+[1] Paris, 1893.
+
+On the whole, the history of the Inquisition is still to be written.
+It is not our purpose to attempt it; our ambition is more modest. But
+we wish to picture this institution in its historical setting, to
+show how it originated, and especially to indicate its relation to
+the Church's notion of the coercive power prevalent in the Middle
+Ages. For, as Lea himself says: "The Inquisition was not an
+organization arbitrarily devised and imposed upon the judicial system
+of Christendom by the ambition or fanaticism of the Church. It was
+rather a natural--one may almost say an inevitable--evolution of the
+forces at work in the thirteenth century, and no one can rightly
+appreciate the process of its development and the results of its
+activity, without a somewhat minute consideration of the factors
+controlling the minds and souls of men during the ages which laid the
+foundation of modern civilization."[1]
+
+[1] Preface, p. iii.
+
+We must also go back further than the thirteenth century and
+ascertain how the coercive power which the Church finally confided to
+the Inquisition developed from the beginning. Such is the purpose of
+the present work. It is both a critical and an historical study. We
+intend to record first everything that relates to the suppression of
+heresy, from the origin of Christianity up to the Renaissance; then
+we will see whether the attitude of the Church toward heretics can
+not only be explained, but defended.
+
+We undertake this study in a spirit of absolute honesty and
+sincerity. The subject is undoubtedly a most delicate one. But no
+consideration whatever should prevent our studying it from every
+possible viewpoint. Cardinal Newman, in his Historical Sketches,
+speaks of "that endemic perennial fidget which possesses certain
+historians about giving scandal. Facts are omitted in great
+histories, or glosses are put upon memorable acts, because they are
+thought not edifying, whereas of all scandals such omissions, such
+glosses, are the greatest."[1]
+
+[1] Vol. ii, p. 231.
+
+A Catholic apologist fails in his duty to-day if he writes merely to
+edify the faithful. Granting that the history of the Inquisition will
+reveal things we never dreamed of, our prejudices must not prevent an
+honest facing of the facts. We ought to dread nothing more than the
+reproach that we are afraid of the truth. "We can understand," says
+Yves Le Querdec,[1] "why our forefathers did not wish to disturb
+men's minds by placing before them certain questions. I believe they
+were wrong, for all questions that can be presented will necessarily
+be presented some day or other. If they are not presented fairly by
+those who possess the true solution, or who honestly look for it,
+they will be by their enemies. For this reason we think that not only
+honesty but good policy require us to tell the world all the
+facts.... Everything has been said, or will be said some day.... What
+the friends of the Church will not mention will be spread broadcast
+by her enemies. And they will make such an outcry over their
+discovery, that their words will reach the most remote corners and
+penetrate the deafest ears. We ought not to be afraid to-day of the
+light of truth; but fear rather the darkness of lies and errors."
+
+[1] _Univers_, June 2, 1906.
+
+In a word, the best method of apologetics is to tell the whole truth.
+In our mind, apologetics and history are two sisters, with the same
+device: "_Ne quid falsi audeat, ne quid veri non audeat
+historia_."[1]
+
+[1] Cicero, De Oratore ii, 15.
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+PREFACE
+
+CHAPTER I FIRST PERIOD (I-IV CENTURIES): THE EPOCH OF THE
+PERSECUTIONS.
+
+The Teaching of St. Paul on the Suppression of Heretics The Teaching
+of Tertullian The Teaching of Origen The Teaching of St. Cyprian The
+Teaching of Lactantius Constantine, Bishop in Externals The Teaching
+of St. Hilary
+
+CHAPTER II SECOND PERIOD (FROM VALENTINIAN I TO THEODOSIUS II). THE
+CHURCH AND THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS AGAINST
+HERESY.
+
+Imperial Legislation against Heresy The Attitude of St. Augustine
+towards the Manicheans St. Augustine and Donatism The Church and the
+Priscillianists The Early Fathers and the Death Penalty
+
+CHAPTER III THIRD PERIOD (A.D. 1100-1250). THE REVIVAL OF THE
+MANICHEAN HERESIES.
+
+Adoptianism and Predestinationism The Manicheans in the West Peter of
+Bruys Henry of Lausanne Arnold of Brescia Éon de l'Étoile Views of
+this Epoch upon the Suppression of Heresy
+
+CHAPTER IV FOURTH PERIOD (FROM GRATIAN TO INNOCENT III). THE
+INFLUENCE OF THE CANON LAW, AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ROMAN LAW.
+
+Executions of Heretics The Death Penalty for Heretics Legislation of
+Popes Alexander III and Lucius III and Frederic Barbarossa against
+Heretics Legislation of Innocent III The First Canonists
+
+CHAPTER V THE CATHARAN OR ALBIGENSIAN HERESY: ITS ANTI-CATHOLIC AND
+ANTI-SOCIAL CHARACTER.
+
+The Origin of the Catharan Heresy Its Progress It Attacks the
+Hierarchy, Dogmas, and Worship of the Catholic Church It Undermines
+the Authority of the State The Hierarchy of the Cathari The
+_Convenenza_ The Initiation into the Sect Their Customs Their Horror
+of Marriage The _Endura_ or Suicide
+
+CHAPTER VI FIFTH PERIOD (GREGORY IX AND FREDERIC II). THE
+ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONASTIC INQUISITION.
+
+Louis VIII and Louis IX Legislation of Frederic II against Heretics
+Gregory IX Abandons Heretics to the Secular Arm The Establishment of
+the Inquisition
+
+CHAPTER VII SIXTH PERIOD. DEVELOPMENT OF THE INQUISITION. (INNOCENT
+IV AND THE USE OF TORTURE.)
+
+The Monastic and the Episcopal Inquisitions Experts to Aid the
+Inquisitors Ecclesiastical Penalties The Infliction of the Death
+Penalty The Introduction of Torture
+
+CHAPTER VIII THEOLOGIANS, CANONISTS AND CASUISTS.
+
+Heresy and Crimes Subject to the Inquisition The Procedure The Use of
+Torture Theologians Defend the Death Penalty for Heresy Canonists
+Defend the Use of the State The Church's Responsibility in Inflicting
+the Death Penalty
+
+CHAPTER IX THE INQUISITION IN OPERATION.
+
+Its Field of Action The Excessive Cruelty of Inquisitors The Penalty
+of Imprisonment The Number of Heretics Handed Over to the Secular Arm
+Confiscation The _auto-da-fé_
+
+CHAPTER X CRITICISM OF THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE INQUISITION.
+
+Development of the Theory on the Coercive Power of the Church
+Intolerance of the People Intolerance of Sovereigns The Church and
+Intolerance The Theologians and Intolerance Appeal to the Old
+Testament England and the Suppression of Heresy The Calvinists and
+the Suppression of Heresy Cruelty of the Criminal Code in the Middle
+Ages The Spirit of the Age Explains the Cruelty of the Inquisition
+Defects in the Procedure Abuses of Antecedent Imprisonment and
+Torture Heretics who were also Criminals Heresy Punished as Such
+Should the Death Penalty Be Inflicted upon Heretics? The
+Responsibility of the Church Abuses of the Penalties of Confiscation
+and Exile The Penitential Character of Imprisonment The Syllabus and
+the Coercive Power of the Church
+
+
+
+THE INQUISITION
+
+CHAPTER 1
+FIRST PERIOD
+I-IV CENTURY
+THE EPOCH OF THE PERSECUTIONS
+
+ST. PAUL was the first to pronounce a sentence of condemnation upon
+heretics. In his Epistle to Timothy, he writes: "Of whom is Hymeneus
+and Alexander, whom I have delivered up to Satan, that they may learn
+not to blaspheme."[1] The Apostle is evidently influenced in his
+action by the Gospel. The one-time Pharisee no longer dreams of
+punishing the guilty with the severity of the Mosaic Law. The death
+penalty of stoning, which apostates merited under the old
+dispensation,[2] has been changed into a purely spiritual penalty:
+excommunication.
+
+[1] 1) Tim. i. 20. Cf . Tit. iii. 10-11. "A man that is a heretic,
+after the first and second admonition, avoid, knowing that he, that
+is such an one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own
+judgment."
+
+[2] Deut. xiii. 6-9) ; xvii. 1-6.
+
+During the first three centuries, as long as the era of persecution
+lasted, the early Christians never thought of using any force save
+the force of argument to win back their dissident brethren. This is
+the meaning of that obscure passage in the _Adversus Gnosticos_ of
+Tertullian, in which he speaks of "driving heretics (i.e., by
+argument), to their duty, instead of trying to win them, for
+obstinacy must be conquered, not coaxed."[1] In this work he is
+trying to convince the Gnostics of their errors from various passages
+in the Old Testament. But he never invokes the death penalty against
+them. On the contrary, he declares that no practical Christian can be
+an executioner or jailer. He even goes so far as to deny the right of
+any disciple of Christ to serve in the army, at least as an officer,
+"because the duty of a military commander comprises the right to sit
+in judgment upon a man's life, to condemn, to put in chains, to
+imprison and to torture."[2]
+
+[1] _Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiace_, cap. ii, Migne, P.L., vol. 11,
+col. 125.
+
+[2] _De Idololatria_, cap. xvii, P.L., vol. i, col. 687.
+
+If a Christian has no right to use physical force, even in the name
+of the State, he is all the more bound not to use it against his
+dissenting brethren in the name of the Gospel, which is a law of
+gentleness. Tertullian was a Montanist when he wrote this. But
+although he wrote most bitterly against the Gnostics whom he
+detested, he always protested against the use of brute force in the
+matter of religion. "It is a fundamental human right," he says, "a
+privilege of nature, that every man should worship according to his
+convictions. It is assuredly no part of religion to compel religion.
+It must be embraced freely, and not forced."[1] These words prove
+that Tertullian was a strong advocate of absolute toleration.
+
+[1] _Liber ad Scapulam_, cap. ii, P.L., vol. i, col. 699
+
+Origen likewise never granted Christians the right to punish those
+who denied the Gospel. In answering Celsus, who had brought forward
+certain texts of the Old Testament that decreed the death penalty for
+apostasy, he says: "If we must refer briefly to the difference
+between the law given to the Jews of old by Moses, and the law laid
+down by Christ for Christians, we would state that it is impossible
+to harmonize the legislation of Moses, taken literally, with the
+calling of the Gentiles.... For Christians cannot slay their enemies,
+or condemn, as Moses commanded, the contemners of the law to be put
+to death by burning or stoning."[1]
+
+[1] _Contra Celsum_, lib. vii, cap. xxvi.
+
+St. Cyprian also repudiates in the name of the Gospel the laws of the
+Old Testament on this point. He writes as follows: "God commanded
+that those who did not obey his priests or hearken to his judges,[1]
+appointed for the time, should be slain. Then indeed they were slain
+with the sword, while the circumcision of the flesh was yet in force;
+but now that circumcision has begun to be of the spirit among God's
+faithful servants, the proud and contumacious are slain with the
+sword of the spirit by being cast out of the Church."[2]
+
+[1] Deut. xvii. 12.
+
+[2] Ep. lxii, _ad Pomponium_, n. 4, P.L., vol. iii. col. 371. Cf. _De
+unitate Ecclesiæ_, n. 17 seq.; _ibid.,_ col. 513 seq.
+
+The Bishop of Carthage, who was greatly troubled by stubborn
+schismatics, and men who violated every moral principle of the
+Gospel, felt that the greatest punishment he could inflict was
+excommunication.
+
+When Lactantius wrote his _Divinæ Institutiones_ in 308, he was too
+greatly impressed by the outrages of the pagan persecutions not to
+protest most strongly against the use of force in matters of
+conscience. He writes: "There is no justification for violence and
+injury, for religion cannot be imposed by force. It is a matter of
+the will, which must be influenced by words, not by blows.... Why
+then do they rage, and increase, instead of lessening, their folly?
+Torture and piety have nothing in common; there is no union possible
+between truth and violence, justice and cruelty.[1] ... For they (the
+persecutors) are aware that there is nothing among men more excellent
+than religion, and that it ought to be defended with all one's might.
+But as they are deceived in the matter of religion itself, so also
+are they in the manner of its defence. For religion is to be
+defended, not by putting to death, but by dying; not by cruelty but
+by patient endurance; not by crime but by faith.... If you wish to
+defend religion by bloodshed, by tortures and by crime, you no longer
+defend it, but pollute and profane it. For nothing is so much a
+matter of free will as religion."[2]
+
+[1] Cf. Pascal, _Lettre provinciale_, xii.
+
+[2] _Divin. Institut_., lib. v, cap. xx.
+
+An era of official toleration began a few years later, when
+Constantine published the Edict of Milan (313), which placed
+Christianity and Paganism on practically the same footing. But the
+Emperor did not always observe this law of toleration, whereby he
+hoped to restore the peace of the Empire. A convert to Christian
+views and policy, he thought it his duty to interfere in the
+doctrinal and ecclesiastical quarrels of the day; and he claimed the
+title and assumed the functions of a Bishop in externals. "You are
+Bishops," he said one day, addressing a number of them, "whose
+jurisdiction is within the Church; I also am a Bishop, ordained by
+God to oversee whatever is external to the church."[1] This
+assumption of power frequently worked positive harm to the Church,
+although Constantine always pretended to further her interests.
+
+[1] Eusebius, _Vita Constantini_, lib. iv, cap. xxiv.
+
+When Arianism began to make converts of the Christian emperors, they
+became very bitter toward the Catholic bishops. We are not at all
+astonished, therefore, that one of the victims of this new
+persecution, St. Hilary, of Poitiers, expressly repudiated and
+condemned this regime of violence. He also proclaimed, in the name of
+ecclesiastical tradition, the principle of religious toleration. He
+deplored the fact that men in his day believed that they could defend
+the rights of God and the Gospel of Jesus Christ by worldly intrigue.
+He writes: "I ask you Bishops to tell me, whose favor did the
+Apostles seek in preaching the Gospel, and on whose power did they
+rely to preach Jesus Christ? To-day, alas! while the power of the
+State enforces divine faith, men say that Christ is powerless. The
+Church threatens exile and imprisonment; she in whom men formerly
+believed while in exile and prison, now wishes to make men believe
+her by force.... She is now exiling the very priests who once spread
+her gospel. What a striking contrast between the Church of the past
+and the Church of to-day."[1]
+
+[1] _Liber contra Auxentium_, cap. iv.
+
+This protest is the outcry of a man who had suffered from the
+intolerance of the civil power, and who had learned by experience how
+even a Christian State may hamper the liberty of the Church, and
+hinder the true progress of the Gospel.
+
+To sum up: As late as the middle of the fourth century and even
+later, all the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers who discuss the
+question of toleration are opposed to the use of force. To a man they
+reject absolutely the death penalty, and enunciate that principle
+which was to prevail in the Church down the centuries, i.e.,
+_Ecclesia abhorret a sanguine_[1] (the Church has a horror of
+bloodshed); and they declare faith must be absolutely free, and
+conscience a domain wherein violence must never enter.[2]
+
+[1] _Canons of Hippolytus_, in the third or fourth century, no.
+74-75; Duchesne, _Les origines du culte chrétien_, 2e ed., p. 309;
+Lactantius, _Divin. Institut_., lib. vi, cap. xx.
+
+[2] Lactantius, _Divin. Institut_., lib. v, cap. xx.
+
+The stern laws of the Old Testament have been abolished by the New.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+SECOND PERIOD
+FROM VALENTINIAN I To THEODOSIUS II
+THE CHURCH AND THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS AGAINST
+HERESY
+
+CONSTANTINE considered himself a bishop in externals. His Christian
+successors inherited this title, and acted in accordance with it. One
+of them, Theodosius II, voiced their mind when he said that "the
+first duty of the imperial majesty was to protect the true religion,
+whose worship was intimately connected with the prosperity of human
+undertakings."[1]
+
+[1] Theodosii II, _Novellæ_, tit. iii. (438).
+
+This concept of the State implied the vigorous prosecution of heresy.
+We therefore see the Christian emperors severely punishing all those
+who denied the orthodox faith, or rather their own faith, which they
+considered, rightly or wrongly, the faith of the Church. From the
+reign of Valentinian I, and especially from the reign of Theodosius
+I, the laws against heretics continued to increase with surprising
+regularity. As many as sixty-eight were enacted in fifty-seven years.
+They punished every form of heresy, whether it merely differed from
+the orthodox faith in some minor detail, or whether it resulted in a
+social upheaval. The penalties differed in severity; i.e., exile,
+confiscation, the inability to transmit property. There were
+different degrees of exile; from Rome, from the cities, from the
+Empire. The legislators seemed to think that some sects would die out
+completely, if they were limited solely to country places. But the
+severer penalties, like the death penalty, were reserved for those
+heretics who were disturbers of the public peace, e.g., the
+Manicheans and the Donatists. The Manicheans, with their dualistic
+theories, and their condemnation of marriage and its consequences,
+were regarded as enemies of the State; a law of 428 treated them as
+criminals "who had reached the highest degree of rascality."
+
+The Donatists, who in Africa had incited the mob of Circumcelliones
+to destroy the Catholic churches, had thrown that part of the Empire
+into the utmost disorder. The State could not regard with
+indifference such an armed revolution. Several laws were passed,
+putting the Donatists on a par with the Manicheans, and in one
+instance both were declared guilty of the terrible crime of treason.
+But the death penalty was chiefly confined to certain sects of the
+Manichcans. This law did not affect private opinions (except in the
+case of the Encratites, the Saccophori, and the Hydroparastatæ), but
+only those who openly practiced this heretical cult. The State did
+not claim the right of entering the secret recesses of a man's
+conscience. This law is all the more worthy of remark, inasmuch as
+Diocletian had legislated more severely against the Manicheans in his
+Edict of 287: "We thus decree," he writes Julianus, "against those
+men, whose doctrines and whose magical arts you have made known to
+us: the leaders are to be burned with their books, their followers
+are to be put to death, or sent to the mines." In comparison with
+such a decree, the legislation of the Christian Emperors was rather
+moderate.
+
+It is somewhat difficult to ascertain how far these laws were
+enforced by the various Emperors. Besides, we are only concerned with
+the spirit which inspired them. The State considered itself the
+protector of the Church, and in this capacity placed its sword at the
+service of the orthodox faith. It is our purpose to find out what the
+churchman of the day thought of this attitude of the State.
+
+The religious troubles caused chiefly by three heresies, Manicheism,
+Donatism, and Priscillianism, gave them ample opportunity of
+expressing their opinions.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The Manicheans, driven from Rome and Milan, took refuge in Africa. It
+must be admitted that many of them by their depravity merited the
+full severity of the law. The initiated, or the elect, as they were
+called, gave themselves up to unspeakable crimes. A number of them on
+being arrested at Carthage confessed immoral practices that would not
+bear repetition, and this debauchery was not peculiar to a few wicked
+followers, but was merely the carrying out of the Manichean ritual,
+which other heretics likewise admitted.[1]
+
+[1] Augustine, _De hæresibus_, Hæres, 46.
+
+The Church in Africa was not at all severe in its general treatment
+of the sect. St. Augustine, especially, never called upon the civil
+power to suppress it. For he could not forget that he himself had for
+nine years (373-382), belonged to this sect, whose doctrines and
+practices he now denounced. He writes the Manicheans: "Let those who
+have never known the troubles of a mind in search of the truth
+proceed against you with vigor. It is impossible for me to do so,
+because for years I was cruelly tossed about by your false doctrines,
+which I advocated and defended to the best of my ability. I ought to
+bear with you now, as men bore with me when I blindly accepted your
+doctrines."[1] All he did was to hold public conferences with their
+leaders, whose arguments he had no difficulty in refuting.[2]
+
+[1] _Contra epistolam Manichæi quam vocant Fundamenti_, n. 2, 3.
+
+[2] Cf. Dom Leclerc, _L'Afrique Chrétienne_, Paris, 1904, vol. ii,
+pp. 113-122.
+
+The conversions obtained in this way were rather numerous, even if
+all were not equally sincere. All converts from the sect were
+required, like their successors, the Cathari of the Middle Ages, to
+denounce their brethren by name, under the threat of being refused
+the pardon which their formal retraction merited. This denunciation
+was what we would call to-day "a service for the public good." We,
+however, know of no case in which the Church made use of this
+information to punish the one who had been denounced.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Donatism (from Donatus, the Bishop of Casæ Nigræ in Numidia) for a
+time caused more trouble to the Church than Manicheism. It was more
+of a schism than a heresy. The election to the see of Carthage of the
+deacon Caecilian, who was accused of having handed over the
+Scriptures to the Roman officials during the persecution of
+Diocletian, was the occasion of the schism. Donatus and his followers
+wished this nomination annulled, while their opponents defended its
+validity. Accordingly, two councils were held to decide the question,
+one at Rome (313), the other at Arles (314). Both decided against the
+Donatists; they at once appealed to the Emperor, who confirmed the
+decrees of the two councils (316). The schismatics in their anger
+rose in rebellion, and a number of them known as Circumcelliones went
+about stirring the people to revolt. But neither Constantine nor his
+successors were inclined to allow armed rebellion to go unchallenged.
+The Donatists were punished to the full extent of the law. They had
+been the first, remarks St. Augustine, to invoke the aid of the
+secular arm. "They met with the same fate as the accusers of Daniel;
+the lions turned against them."[1]
+
+[1] _Ep._ clxxxv, n. 7.
+
+We need not linger over the details of this conflict, in which crimes
+were committed on both sides. The Donatists, bitterly prosecuted by
+the State, declared its action cruel and unjust. St. Optatus thus
+answers them: "Will you tell me that it is not lawful to defend the
+rights of God by the death penalty? ... If killing is an evil, the
+guilty ones are themselves the cause of it."[1] "It is impossible,"
+you say, "for the State to inflict the death penalty in the name of
+God,"--But was it not in God's name that Moses,[2] Phinees,[3] and
+Elias[4] put to death the worshippers of the golden calf, and the
+apostates of the Old Law?--"These times are altogether different,"
+you reply; "the New Law must not be confounded with the Old. Did not
+Christ forbid St. Peter to use the sword?"[5] Yes, undoubtedly, but
+Christ came to suffer, not to defend Himself.[6] The lot of
+Christians is different from that of Christ.
+
+[1] _De Schismate Donatistarum_, lib. iii. cap. vi.
+
+[2] Exod. xxxii. 28.
+
+[3] Numb. xxv. 7-9.
+
+[4] 3 Kings xviii. 40.
+
+[5] John xviii. 11.
+
+[6] _De Schismate Don_., cap. vii.
+
+It is in virtue, therefore, of the Old Law that St. Optatus defends
+the State's interference in religious questions, and its infliction
+of the death penalty upon heretics. This is evidently a different
+teaching from the doctrine of toleration held by the Fathers of the
+preceding age. But the other bishops of Africa did not share his
+views.
+
+In his dealings with the Donatists, St. Augustine was at first
+absolutely tolerant, as he had been with the Manicheans. He thought
+he could rely upon their good faith, and conquer their prejudices by
+an honest discussion. "We have no intention," he writes to a Donatist
+bishop, "of forcing men to enter our communion against their will. I
+am desirous that the State cease its bitter persecution, but you in
+turn ought to cease terrorizing us by your band of Circumcelliones. .
+. . Let us discuss our differences from the standpoint of reason and
+the sacred Scriptures."[1]
+
+[1] Ep. xxiii, n. 7.
+
+In one of his works, now lost, _Contra partem Donati_, he maintains
+that it is wrong for the State to force schismatics to come back to
+the Church.[1] At the most, he was ready to admit the justice of the
+law of Theodosius, which imposed a fine of ten gold pieces upon those
+schismatics who had committed open acts of violence. But no man was
+to be punished by the state for private heretical opinions.[2]
+
+[1] Retract. lib. II, cap. v.
+
+[2] Ep. clxxxv, n. 25.
+
+The imperial laws were carried out in some cities of North Africa,
+because many of St. Augustine's colleagues did not share his views.
+Many Donatists were brought back to the fold by these vigorous
+measures. St. Augustine, seeing that in some cases the use of force
+proved more beneficial than his policy of absolute toleration,
+changed his views, and formulated his theory of moderate persecution:
+_temperata severitas_.[1]
+
+[1] Ep. xciii, n. 10.
+
+Heretics and schismatics, he maintained, were to be regarded as sheep
+who had gone astray. It is the shepherd's duty to run after them, and
+bring them back to the fold by using, if occasion require it, the
+whip and the goad.[1] There is no need of using cruel tortures like
+the rack, the iron pincers, or sending them to the stake; flogging is
+sufficient. Besides his mode of punishment is not at all cruel, for
+it is used by schoolmasters, parents, and even by bishops while
+presiding as judges in their tribunals.[2]
+
+[1] Ep. clxxxv, n. 23.
+
+[2] Ep. cxxxxiii, n. 2.
+
+In his opinion, the severest penalty that ought to be inflicted upon
+the Donatists is exile for their bishops and priests, and fines for
+their followers. He strongly denounced the death penalty as contrary
+to Christian charity.[1]
+
+[1] Ep. clxxxv, n. 26; Ep. xciii, n. 10.
+
+Both the imperial officers and the Donatists themselves objected to
+this theory.
+
+The officers of the Emperor wished to apply the law in all its rigor,
+and to sentence the schismatics to death, when they deemed it proper.
+St. Augustine adjures them, in the name of "Christian and Catholic
+meekness,"[1] not to go to this extreme, no matter how great the
+crimes of the Donatists had been. "You have penalties enough," he
+writes, "exile, for instance, without torturing their bodies or
+putting them to death."[2]
+
+[1] Ep. clxxxv, n. 26; Ep. cxxxix, n. 2.
+
+[2] Ep. cxxxiii, n. 1.
+
+And when the proconsul Apringius quoted St. Paul to justify the use
+of the sword, St. Augustine replied: "The apostle has well said, 'for
+he beareth not the sword in vain.'[1] But we must carefully
+distinguish between temporal and spiritual affairs."[2] "Because it
+is just to inflict the death penalty for crimes against the common
+law, it does not follow that it is right to put heretics and
+schismatics to death." "Punish the guilty ones, but do not put them
+to death." "For," he writes another proconsul, "if you decide upon
+putting them to death, you will thereby prevent our denouncing them
+before your tribunal. They will then rise up against us with greater
+boldness. And if you tell us that we must either denounce them or
+risk death at their hands, we will not hesitate a moment, but will
+choose death ourselves."[3]
+
+[1] Rom. xiii. 4.
+
+[2] Ep. cxxxiv, n. 3.
+
+[3] Ep. c, n. 2; cf. Ep. cxxxix, n. 2.
+
+Despite these impassioned appeals for mercy, some Donatists were put
+to death. This prompted the schismatics everywhere to deny that the
+State had any right to inflict the death penalty or any other penalty
+upon them.[1]
+
+[1] _Contra Epistolam Parmeniani_, lib. i. cap. xvi.
+
+St. Augustine at once undertook to defend the rights of the State. He
+declared that the death penalty, which on principle he disapproved,
+might in some instances be lawfully inflicted. Did not the crimes of
+some of these rebellious schismatics merit the most extreme penalty
+of the law? "They kill the souls of men, and the State merely
+tortures their bodies; they cause eternal death, and then complain
+when the State makes them suffer temporal death."[1]
+
+[1] _In Joann. Tractat_. xi, cap. xv.
+
+But this is only an argument _ad hominem_. St. Augustine means to say
+that, even if the Donatists were put to death, they had no reason to
+complain. He does not admit, in fact, that they had been cruelly
+treated. The victims they allege are false martyrs or suicides.[1] He
+denounces those Catholics who, outside of cases of self-defense, had
+murdered their opponents.[2]
+
+[1] Ibid.
+
+[2] Ep. lxxxvii, n. 8.
+
+The State also has the perfect right to impose the lesser penalties
+of flogging, fines, and exile. "For he (the prince) beareth not the
+sword in vain," says the Apostle. "For he is God's minister; an
+avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."[1] It is not true
+to claim that St. Paul here meant merely the spiritual sword of
+excommunication.[2] The context proves clearly that he was speaking
+of the material sword. Schism and heresy are crimes which, like
+poisoning, are punishable by the State.[3] Princes must render an
+account to God for the way they govern. It is natural that they
+should desire the peace of the Church, their mother, who gave them
+spiritual life.[4]
+
+[1] Rom. xiii. 4; Augustine, _Contra litteras Petiliani_, lib. ii,
+cap. lxxxiii-lxxxiv; _Contra Epist. Parmeniani_, lib. i, cap. xvi.
+
+[2] _Contra Epist. Parmeniani_, ibid.
+
+[3] Ibid.
+
+[4] _In Joann. Tractatus_ xi, cap. xiv.
+
+The State, therefore, has the right to suppress heresy, because the
+public tranquillity is disturbed by religious dissensions.[1] Her
+intervention also works for the good of individuals. For, on the one
+hand, there are some sincere but timid souls who are prevented by
+their environment from abandoning their schism; they are encouraged
+to return to the fold by the civil power, which frees them from a
+most humiliating bondage.[2]
+
+[1] Ep. lxxxii, n. 8.
+
+[2] Ep. clxxxv, n. 13.
+
+On the other hand, there are many schismatics in good faith who would
+never attain the truth unless they were forced to enter into
+themselves and examine their false position. The civil power
+admonishes such souls to abandon their errors; it does not punish
+them for any crime.[1] The Church's rebellious children are not
+forced to believe, but are induced by a salutary fear to listen to
+the true doctrine.[2]
+
+[1] Ep. xciii, n. 10.
+
+[2] _Contra litteras Petiliani_, lib. ii. cap. lxxxiii; Ep. clxxxv,
+n. 21; Ep. xciii, n. 4.
+
+Conversions obtained in this way are none the less sincere.
+Undoubtedly, absolute toleration is best in theory, but in practice a
+certain amount of coercion is more helpful to souls. We must judge
+both methods by their fruits.
+
+In a word, St. Augustine was at first, by temperament, an advocate of
+absolute toleration, but later on experience led him to prefer a
+mitigated form of coercion. When his opponents objected--using words
+similar to those of St. Hilary and the early Fathers--that "the true
+Church suffered persecution, but did not persecute," he quoted Sara's
+persecution of Agar.[1] He was wrong to quote the Old Testament as
+his authority. But we ought at least be thankful that he did not cite
+other instances more incompatible with the charity of the Gospel. His
+instinctive Christian horror of the death penalty kept him from
+making this mistake.
+
+[1] Ep. clxxxv, n. 10.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Priscillianism brought out clearly the views current in the fourth
+century regarding the punishment due to heresy. Very little was known
+of Priscillian until lately; and despite the publication of several
+of his works in 1889, he still remains an enigmatical personality.[1]
+His erudition and critical spirit were, however, so remarkable, that
+an historian of weight declares that henceforth we must rank him with
+St. Jerome.[2] But his writings were, in all probability, far from
+orthodox. We can easily find in them traces of Gnosticism and
+Manicheism. He was accused of Manicheism although he anathematized
+Manes. He was likewise accused of magic. He denied the charge, and
+declared that every magician deserved death, according to Exodus:
+"Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live."[3] He little dreamt when he
+wrote these words that he was pronouncing his own death sentence.
+
+[1] On Priscillian and his work, cf. Dom Leclerc, _L'Espagne
+Chrétienne_, Paris, 1906, ch. iii; Friedrich Paret, _Priscillianus_,
+Würzburg, 1891; Kuenstle, _Antipriscilliana_, Freiburg, 1905.
+
+[2] Cf. Leclerc, p. 164.
+
+[3] Exod. xxii. 18.
+
+Although condemned by the council of Saragossa (380), he nevertheless
+became bishop of Abila. Later on, he went to Rome to plead his cause
+before Pope Damasus, but was refused a hearing. He next turned to St.
+Ambrose, who likewise would not hearken to his defense.[1] In 385 a
+council was assembled at Bordeaux to consider his case anew. He at
+once appealed to the Emperor, "so as not to be judged by the
+bishops," as Sulpicius Severus tells us, a fatal mistake which cost
+him his life.
+
+[1] Cf. Sulp. Sev. _Chronicon_, ii. P.L., vol. xx, col. 155-159;
+_Dialogi_, iii. 11-23, ibid., col. 217-219.
+
+He was then conducted to the Emperor at Treves, where he was tried
+before a secular court, bishops Idacius and Ithacius appearing as his
+accusers. St. Martin, who was in Treves at the time, was scandalized
+that a purely ecclesiastical matter should be tried before a secular
+judge. His biographer, Sulpicius Severus, tells us "that he kept
+urging Ithacius to withdraw his accusation." He also entreated
+Maximus not to shed the blood of these unfortunates, for the bishops
+could meet the difficulty by driving the heretics from the churches.
+He asserted that to make the State judge in a matter of doctrine was
+a cruel, unheard-of violation of the divine law.
+
+As long as St. Martin remained in Treves, the trial was put off, and
+before he left the city, he made Maximus promise not to shed the
+blood of Priscillian and his companions. But soon after St. Martin's
+departure, the Emperor, instigated by the relentless bishops Rufus
+and Magnus, forgot his promise of mercy, and entrusted the case to
+the prefect Evodius, a cruel and hard-hearted official. Priscillian
+appeared before him twice, _and was convicted of the crime of magic_.
+He was made to confess under torture that he had given himself up to
+magical arts, and that he had prayed naked before women in midnight
+assemblies. Evodius declared him guilty, and placed him under guard
+until the evidence had been presented to the Emperor. After reading
+the records of the trial, Maximus declared that Priscillian and his
+companions deserved death. Ithacius, perceiving how unpopular he
+would make himself with his fellow-bishops, if he continued to play
+the part of prosecutor in a capital case, withdrew. A new trial was
+therefore ordered. This subterfuge of the Bishop did not change
+matters at all, because by this time the case had been practically
+settled. Patricius, the imperial treasurer, presided at the second
+trial. On his findings, Priscillian and some of his followers were
+condemned to death. Others of the sect were exiled.
+
+This deplorable trial is often brought forward as an argument against
+the Church. It is important, therefore, for us to ascertain its
+precise character, and to discover who was to blame for it.
+
+The real cause of Priscillian's condemnation was the accusation of
+heresy made by a Catholic bishop. Technically, he was tried in the
+secular courts for the crime of magic, but the State could not
+condemn him to death on any other charge, once Ithacius had ceased to
+appear against him.
+
+It is right, therefore, to attribute Priscillian's death to the
+action of an individual bishop, but it is altogether unjust to hold
+the Church responsible.[1]
+
+[1] Bernays, _Ueber die Chronik des Sulp. Sev_., Berlin, 1861, p. 13,
+was the first to point out that Priscillian was condemned not for
+heresy, but for the crime of magic. This is the commonly received
+view to-day.
+
+In this way contemporary writers viewed the matter. The Christians of
+the fourth century were all but unanimous, says an historian,[1] in
+denouncing the penalty inflicted in this famous trial. Sulpicius
+Severus, despite his horror of the Priscillianists, repeats over and
+over again that their condemnation was a deplorable example; he even
+stigmatizes it as a crime. St. Ambrose speaks just as strongly.[2] We
+know how vehemently St. Martin disapproved of the attitude of
+Ithacius and the Emperor Maximus; he refused for a long time to hold
+communion with the bishops who had in any way taken part in the
+condemnation of Priscillian.[3] Even in Spain, where public opinion
+was so divided, Ithacius was everywhere denounced. At first some
+defended him on the plea of the public good, and on account of the
+high authority of those who judged the case. But after a time he
+became so generally hated that, despite his excuse that he merely
+followed the advice of others, he was driven from his bishopric.[4]
+This outburst of popular indignation proves conclusively that, if the
+Church did call upon the aid of the secular arm in religious
+questions, she did not authorize it to use the sword against
+heretics.
+
+[1] Puéch, _Journal des Savants_, May 1891, p. 250.
+
+[2] Cf. Gams, _Kirchengeschichte von Spanien_, vol. ii. p. 382.
+
+[3] Sulpicius Severus, _Dialogi_ iii, 11-13.
+
+[4] Sulp. Sev., _Chronicon_, loc. cit.
+
+The blood of Priscillian was the seed of Priscillianism. But his
+disciples certainly went further than their master; they became
+thoroughgoing Manicheans. This explains St. Jerome's[1] and St.
+Augustine's[2] strong denunciations of the Spanish heresy. The gross
+errors of the Priscillianists in the fifth century attracted in 447
+the attention of Pope St. Leo. He reproaches them for breaking the
+bonds of marriage, rejecting all idea of chastity, and contravening
+all rights, human and divine. He evidently held Priscillian
+responsible for all these teachings. That is why he rejoices in the
+fact that "the secular princes, horrified at this sacrilegious folly,
+executed the author of these errors with several of his followers."
+He even declares that this action of the State is helpful to the
+Church. He writes: "the Church, in the spirit of Christ, ought to
+denounce heretics, but should never put them to death; still the
+severe laws of Christian princes redound to her good, for some
+heretics, through fear of punishment, are won back to the true
+faith."[3] St. Leo in this passage is rather severe. "While he does
+not yet require the death penalty for heresy, he accepts it in the
+name of the public good. It is greatly to be feared that the
+churchmen of the future will go a great deal further."
+
+[1] _De Viris illustribus_, 121-123.
+
+[2] _De hæresibus_, cap. 70.
+
+[3] Ep. xv, _ad Turribium_, P.L., vol. liv, col. 679-680.
+
+The Church is endeavoring to state her position accurately on the
+suppression of heresy. She declares that nothing will justify her
+shedding of human blood. This is evident from the conduct and
+writings of St. Augustine, St. Martin, St. Ambrose, St. Leo
+(_cruentas refugit ultiones_), and Ithacius himself. But to what
+extent should she accept the aid of the civil power, when it
+undertakes to defend her teachings by force?
+
+Some writers, like St. Optatus of Mileve, and Priscillian, later on
+the victim of his own teaching, believed that the Christian State
+ought to use the sword against heretics guilty of crimes against the
+public welfare; and, strangely enough, they quote the Old Testament
+as their authority. Without giving his approval to this theory, St.
+Leo the Great did not condemn the practical application of it in the
+case of the Priscillianists. The Church, according to him, while
+assuming no responsibility for them, reaped the benefit of the
+rigorous measures taken by the State.
+
+But most of the Bishops absolutely condemned the infliction of the
+death penalty for heresy, even if the heresy was incidentally the
+cause of social disturbances. Such was the view of St. Augustine,[1]
+St. Martin, St. Ambrose, many Spanish bishops, and a bishop of Gaul
+named Theognitus;[2] in a word, of all who disapproved of the
+condemnation of Priscillian. As a rule, they protested in the name of
+Christian charity; they voiced the new spirit of the Gospel of
+Christ. At the other extremity of the Catholic world, St. John
+Chrysostom re-echoes their teaching. "To put a heretic to death," he
+says, "is an unpardonable crime."[3]
+
+[1] Ep. c., n. 1.
+
+[2] Cf. Sulpicius Severus, _Dialogi_, iii, 12, loc. cit., col. 218.
+
+[3] _Homilia_ xlvi,  in Matthæum, cap. 1.
+
+But in view of the advantage to the Church, either from the
+maintenance of the public peace, or from the conversion of
+individuals, the State may employ a certain amount of force against
+heretics.
+
+"God forbids us to put them to death," continues St. Chrysostom,
+"just as he forbade the servants to gather up the cockle,"[1] because
+he regards their conversion as possible; but he does not forbid us
+doing all in our power to prevent their public meetings, and their
+preaching of false doctrine. St. Augustine adds that they may be
+punished by fine and exile. To this extent the churchmen of the day
+accepted the aid of the secular arm. Nor were they content with
+merely accepting it. They declared that the State had not only the
+right to help the Church in suppressing heresy, but that she was in
+duty bound to do so. In the seventh century, St. Isidore of Seville
+discusses this question in practically this same terms as St.
+Augustine.[2]
+
+[1] Ibid., cap. ii.
+
+[2] We think it important to give Lea's resume of this period. It
+will show how a writer, although trying to be impartial, may distort
+the facts: "It was only sixty-two years after the slaughter of
+Priscillian and his followers had excited so much horror, that Leo I,
+when the heresy seemed to be reviving, in 447, not only justified the
+act, but declared that _if the followers of heresy so damnable were
+allowed to live_, there would be an end to human and divine law. The
+final step had been taken, and _the Church was definitely pledged to
+the suppression of heresy at whatever cost_. It is impossible not to
+attribute to ecclesiastical influence the successive Edicts by which,
+from the time of Theodosius the Great, persistence in heresy was
+punished by death. A powerful impulse to this development is to be
+found in the responsibility which grew upon the Church from its
+connection with the State. When it could influence the monarch and
+procure from him Edicts condemning heretics to exile, to the mines,
+_and even to death_, it felt that God had put into its hands powers
+to be exercised and not to be neglected" (vol. i, p. 215). If we read
+carefully the words of St. Leo (p. 27, note 1), we shall see that the
+Emperors are responsible for the words that Lea ascribes to the Pope.
+It is hard to understand how he can assert that the imperial Edicts
+decreeing the death penalty are due to ecclesiastical influence, when
+we notice that nearly all the churchmen of the day protested against
+such a penalty.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+THIRD PERIOD
+FROM 1100 TO 1250
+THE REVIVAL OF THE MANICHEAN HERESIES IN THE MIDDLE AGES
+
+FROM the sixth to the eleventh century, heretics, with the exception
+of certain Manichean sects, were hardly ever persecuted.[1] In the
+sixth century, for instance, the Arians lived side by side with the
+Catholics, under the protection of the State, in a great many Italian
+cities, especially in Ravenna and Pavia.[2]
+
+[1] In 556, Manicheans were put to death in Ravenna, in accordance
+with the laws of Justinian.
+
+[2] We may still visit at Ravenna the Arian and Catholic baptisteries
+of the sixth century. Cf. Gregorii Magni _Dialogi_, iii, cap. xxii,
+_Mon. Germ_., ibid., pp. 534-535.
+
+During the Carlovingian period, we come across a few heretics, but
+they gave little trouble.
+
+The _Adoptianism_ of Elipandus, Archbishop of Toledo, and Felix,
+Bishop of Urgel, was abandoned by its authors, after it had been
+condemned by Pope Adrian I, and several provincial councils.[1]
+
+[1] Einhard: _Annales_, ann. 792, in the _Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. 1, p.
+179.
+
+A more important heresy arose in the ninth century. Godescalcus, a
+monk of Orbais, in the diocese of Soissons, taught that Jesus Christ
+did not die for all men. His errors on predestination were condemned
+as heretical by the Council of Mainz (848); and Quierzy (849); and he
+himself was sentenced to be flogged and then imprisoned for life in
+the monastery of Hautvilliers.[1] But this punishment of flogging was
+a purely ecclesiastical penalty. Archbishop Hincmar, in ordering it,
+declared that he was acting in accordance with the rule of St.
+Benedict, and a canon of the Council of Agde.
+
+[1] "In nostra parochia ... monasteriali costudiæ mancipatus est."
+Hincmar's letter to Pope Nicholas I, _Hincmari Opera_, ed. Sirmond,
+Paris, 1645, vol. ii, p. 262.
+
+The imprisonment to which Godescalcus was subjected was likewise a
+monastic punishment. Practically, it did not imply much more than the
+confinement strictly required by the rules of his convent. It is
+interesting to note that imprisonment for crime is of purely
+ecclesiastical origin. The Roman law knew nothing of it. It was at
+first a penalty peculiar to monks and clerics, although later on
+laymen also were subjected to it.
+
+About the year 1000, the Manicheans, under various names, came from
+Bulgaria, and spread over western Europe.[1] We meet them about this
+time in Italy, Spain, France, and Germany. Public sentiment soon
+became bitter against them, and they became the victims of a general,
+though intermittent, persecution. Orléans, Arras, Cambrai, Châlons,
+Goslai, Liège, Soissons, Ravenna, Monteforte, Asti, and Toulouse
+became the field of their propaganda, and often the place of their
+execution. Several heretics like Peter of Bruys, Henry of Lausanne,
+Arnold of Brescia, and Éon de l'Étoile (Eudo de Stella), likewise
+troubled the Church, who to stop their bold propaganda used force
+herself, or permitted the State or the people to use it.
+
+[1] Cf. C. Schmidt, _Histoire et doctrine de la secte des Cathares_,
+vol. 1, pp. 16-54, 82.
+
+It was at Orleans in 1022 that Catholics for the first time during
+this period treated heretics with cruelty. An historian of the time
+assures us that this cruelty was due to both king and people: _regis
+jussu et universæ plebis consensu_.[1] King Robert, dreading the
+disastrous effects of heresy upon his kingdom, and the consequent
+loss of souls, sent thirteen of the principal clerics and laymen of
+the town to the stake. It has been pointed out that this penalty was
+something unheard-of at the time. "Robert was therefore the
+originator of the punishment which he decreed."[2] It might be said,
+however, that this penalty originated with the people, and that the
+king merely followed out the popular will.
+
+[1] Raoul Gleber, _Hist_., lib. iii, cap. viii, _Hist. des Gaules_,
+vol. x, p. 38. For other authorities consult Julien Havet, _L'hérésie
+et le bras séculier au moyen âge_, in his _OEuvres_, Paris, 1896,
+vol. ii, pp. 128-130.
+
+[2] Julien Havet, op. cit., pp. 128, 129.
+
+For, as an old chronicler tells us, this execution at Orleans, was
+not an isolated fact; in other places the populace hunted out
+heretics, and burned them outside the city walls.[1]
+
+[1] _Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres_, ed. Guérard,
+vol. i, p. 108 and seq.; cf. _Hist. des Gaules_, vol. x, p. 539.
+
+Several years later, the heretics who swarmed into the diocese of
+Châlons attracted the attention of the Bishop of the city, who was
+puzzled how to deal with them. He consulted Wazo, the Bishop of
+Liège, who tells us that the French were "infuriated" against
+heretics. These words would seem to prove that the heretics of the
+day were prosecuted more vigorously than the documents we possess go
+to show. It is probable that the Bishop of Châlons detested the
+"fury" of the persecutors. We will see later on the answer that Wazo
+sent him.
+
+During the Christmas holidays of 1051 and 1052, a number of
+Manicheans or Cathari, as they were called, were executed at Goslar,
+after they had refused to renounce their errors. Instead of being
+burned, as in France, "they were hanged."
+
+These heretics were executed by the orders of Henry III, and in his
+presence. But the chronicler of the event remarks that every one
+applauded the Emperor's action, because he had prevented the spread
+of the leprosy of heresy, and thus saved many souls.[1]
+
+[1] Heriman, Aug. _Chronicon_, ann. 1052, _Mon. Germ, SS_., vol. v.
+p. 130. Cf. Lamberti, _Annales_, 1053, ibid., p. 155.
+
+Twenty-five years later, in 1076 or 1077, a Catharan of the district
+of Cambrai appeared before the Bishop of Cambrai and his clerics, and
+was condemned as a heretic. The Bishop's officers and the crowd at
+once seized him, led him outside the city's gates, and while he knelt
+and calmly prayed, they burned him at the stake.[1]
+
+[1] Chronicon S. Andreæ Camerac, iii, 3, in the _Mon. Germ. SS_.,
+vol. vii, p. 540. We have a letter of Gregory VII in which he
+denounces the irregular character of this execution. Ibid., p. 540,
+n. 31.
+
+A little while before this the Archbishop of Ravenna accused a man
+named Vilgard of heresy, but what the result of the trial was, we
+cannot discover. But we do know that during this period other persons
+were prosecuted for heresy, and that they were beheaded or sent to
+the stake.
+
+At Monteforte near Asti, the Cathari had, about 1034, an important
+settlement. The Marquis Mainfroi, his brother, the Bishop of Asti,
+and several noblemen of the city, united to attack the castrum; they
+captured a number of heretics, and on their refusing to return to the
+orthodox faith, they sent them to the stake.
+
+Other followers of the sect were arrested by the officers of
+Eriberto, the Archbishop of Milan, who endeavored to win them back to
+the Catholic faith. Instead of being converted, they tried to spread
+their heresy throughout the city. The civil magistrates, realizing
+their corrupting influence, had a stake erected in the public square
+with a cross in front of it; and in spite of the Archbishop's
+protest, they required the heretics either to reverence the cross
+they had blasphemed, or to enter the flaming pile. Some were
+converted, but the majority of them, covering their faces with their
+hands, threw themselves into the flames, and were soon burned to
+ashes.
+
+Few details have come down to us concerning the fate of the
+Manicheans arrested at this time in Sardinia and in Spain;
+_exterminati sunt_, says a chronicler.[1]
+
+[1] "Exterminati sunt," says Raoul Glaber, _Hist_., lib. ii, cap.
+xii, _Hist. des Gaules_, vol. x, p. 23. _Exterminati_ may mean
+banished as well as put to death. The context, however, seems to
+refer to the death penalty.
+
+The Cathari of Toulouse were also arrested, and executed. A few years
+later, in 1114, the Bishop of Soissons arrested a number of heretics
+and cast them into prison until he could make up his mind how to deal
+with them. While he was absent at Beauvais, asking the advice of his
+fellow-bishops assembled there in council, the populace, fearing the
+weakness of the clergy, attacked the prison, dragged forth the
+heretics, and burned them at the stake. Guibert de Nogent does not
+blame them in the least. He simply calls attention to "the just zeal"
+shown on this occasion by "the people of God," to stop the spread of
+heresy.
+
+In 1144 the Bishop of Liège, Adalbero II, compelled a number of
+Cathari to confess their heresy; "he hoped," he said, "with the grace
+of God, to lead them to repent." But the populace, less
+kindly-hearted, rushed upon them, and proceeded to burn them at the
+stake; the Bishop had the greatest difficulty to save the majority of
+them. He then wrote to Pope Lucius II asking him what was the proper
+penalty for heresy.[1] We do not know what answer he received.
+
+[1] Letter of the church of Liège to Pope Lucius II, in Martène,
+_Amplissima collectio_, vol. i, col. 776-777.
+
+About the same time a similar dispute arose between the Archbishop
+and the people of Cologne regarding two or three heretics who had
+been arrested and condemned. The clergy asked them to return to the
+Church. But the people, "moved by an excess of zeal," says an
+historian of the time, seized them, and despite the Archbishop and
+his clerics led them to the stake. "And marvelous to relate,"
+continues the chronicler, "they suffered their tortures at the stake,
+not only with patience, but with joy."[2]
+
+[1] Letter of Evervin, provost of Steinfeld to St. Bernard, cap. ii,
+in _Bernardi Opera_, Migne, P.L., vol. clxxxii, col. 677.
+
+One of the most famous heretics of the twelfth century was Peter of
+Bruys. His hostility toward the clergy helped his propaganda in
+Gascony. To show his contempt for the Catholic religion, he burned a
+great number of crosses one Good Friday, and roasted meat in the
+flames. This angered the people against him. He was seized and burned
+at St. Giles about the year 1126.[1]
+
+Henry of Lausanne was his most illustrious disciple. We have told the
+story of his life elsewhere.[1] St. Bernard opposed him vigorously,
+and succeeded in driving him from the chief cities of Toulouse and
+the Albigeois, where he carried on his harmful propaganda. He was
+arrested a short time afterwards (1145 or 1146), and sentenced to
+life imprisonment, either in one of the prisons of the Archbishop, or
+in some monastery of Toulouse.
+
+[1] _Vie de Saint Bernard_, 1st edit., Paris, 1895, vol. ii, pp.
+218-233.
+
+Arnold of Brescia busied himself more with questions of discipline
+than with dogma; the only reforms he advocated were social
+reforms.[1] He taught that the clergy should not hold temporal
+possessions, and he endeavored to drive the papacy frown Rome. In
+this conflict, which involved the property of ecclesiastics and the
+temporal power of the Church, he was, although successful for a time,
+finally vanquished.[2] St. Bernard invoked the aid of the secular arm
+to rid France of him. Later on Pope Eugenius III excommunicated him.
+He was executed during the pontificate of Adrian IV, in 1155. He was
+arrested in the city of Rome after a riot which was quelled by the
+Emperor Frederic, now the ally of the Pope, and condemned to be
+strangled by the prefect of the city. His body was then burned, and
+his ashes thrown into the Tiber, "for fear," says a writer of the
+time, "the people would gather them up, and honor them as the ashes
+of a martyr."[3]
+
+[1] For details concerning Arnold of Brescia, cf. Vacandard, _Vie de
+Saint Bernard_, vol. ii, pp. 235-258, 465-469.
+
+[2] Otto Frising, _Gesta Friderici_, lib. ii. cap. xx. Cf. _Historia
+Pontificalis_, in the _Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. xx, p. 538.
+
+[3] Boso, _Vita Hadriani_, in Watterich, _Romanorum pontificum Vitæ_,
+vol. ii. pp. 326, 330.
+
+In 1148, the Council of Rheims judged the case of the famous Éon de
+l'Etoile (Eudo de Stella). This strange individual had acquired a
+reputation for sanctity while living a hermit's life. One day, struck
+by the words of the liturgy, _Per Eum qui venturus est judicare vivos
+et mortuos_, he conceived the idea that he was the Son of God. He
+made some converts among the lowest classes, who, not content with
+denying the faith, soon began to pillage the churches. Éon was
+arrested for causing these disturbances, and was brought before Pope
+Eugenius III, then presiding over the Council of Rheims. He was
+judged insane, and in all kindness was placed under the charge of
+Suger, the Abbot of St. Denis. He was confined to a monastery, where
+he died soon after.
+
+Strangely enough, some of his disciples persisted in believing in
+him; "they preferred to die rather than renounce their belief," says
+an historian of the time. They were handed over to the secular arm
+and perished at the stake. In decreeing this penalty, the civil power
+was undoubtedly influenced by the example of Robert the Pious.
+
+It is easy to determine the responsibility of the Church, i.e., her
+bishops and priests, in this series of executions (1020 to 1150). At
+Orleans, the populace and the king put the heretics to death; the
+historians of the time tell us plainly that the clergy merely
+declared the orthodox doctrine. It was the same at Goslar. At Asti,
+the Bishop's name appears with the names of the other nobles who had
+the Cathari executed, but it seems certain that he exercised no
+special authority in the case. At Milan, the civil magistrates
+themselves, against the Archbishop's protest, gave the heretics the
+choice between reverencing the cross, and the stake.
+
+At Soissons, the populace, feeling certain that the clergy would not
+resort to extreme measures, profited by the Bishop's absence to burn
+the heretics they detested. At Liège, the Bishop managed to save a
+few heretics from the violence of the angry mob. At Cologne, the
+Archbishop was not so successful; the people rose in their anger and
+burned the heretics before they could be tried. Peter of Bruys and
+the Manichean at Cambrai were both put to death by the people. Arnold
+of Brescia, deserted by fortune, fell a victim to his political
+adversaries; the prefect of Rome was responsible for his
+execution.[1]
+
+[1] The case of Arnold, however, is not so clear. The _Annales
+Augustani minores_ (_Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. x, p. 8) declare that the
+Pope hanged the rebel. Another anonymous writer (cf. Tanon, _Hist.
+des tribunaux de l'Inq. en France_, p. 456, n. 2) says with more
+probability, that Adrian merely degraded him. According to Otto of
+Freisingen (_Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. xx, p. 404), Arnold _principis
+examini reservatus est, ad ultimum a præfecto Urbis ligno adactus_.
+Finally, Geroch de Reichersberg tells us (_De investigatione
+Antichristi_, lib. i, cap. xiii, ed. Scheibelberger, 1875, pp. 88-89)
+that Arnold was taken from the ecclesiastical prison and put to death
+by the servants of the Roman prefect. In any case, politics rather
+than religion was the cause of his death.
+
+In a word, in all these executions, the Church either kept aloof, or
+plainly manifested her disapproval.
+
+During this period, we know of only one bishop, Théodwin of Liège,
+who called upon the secular arm to punish heretics. This is all the
+more remarkable because his predecessor, Wazo, and his successor,
+Adalbero II, both protested in word and deed against the cruelty of
+both sovereign and people.
+
+Wazo, his biographer tells us, strongly condemned the execution of
+heretics at Goslar, and, had he been there, would have acted as St.
+Martin of Tours in the case of Priscillian.[1] His reply to the
+letter of the Bishop of Châlons reveals his inmost thoughts on the
+subject. "To use the sword of the civil authority," he says, "against
+the Manicheans,[2] is contrary to the spirit of the Church, and the
+teaching of her Divine Founder. The Saviour ordered us to let the
+cockle grow with the good grain until the harvest time, lest in
+uprooting the cockle we uproot also the wheat with it.[3] Moreover,
+continues Wazo, those who are cockle to-day may be converted
+to-morrow, and be garnered in as wheat at the harvest time.
+Therefore, they should be allowed to live. The only penalty we should
+use against them is excommunication."[4]
+
+The Bishop of Liège, quoting this parable of Christ which St.
+Chrysostom had quoted before him, interprets it in a more liberal
+fashion than the Bishop of Constantinople. For he not only condemns
+the death penalty, but all recourse to the secular arm.
+
+[1] _Vita Vasonis_, cap. xxv, xxvi, Migne, P.L., vol. cxlii, col.
+753.
+
+[2] Ibid., col. 752.
+
+[3] Matt. xiii. 29-30.
+
+[4] _Vita Vasonis_, loc. cit., col. 753.
+
+Peter Cantor, one of the best minds of northern France in the twelfth
+century, also protested against the infliction of the death penalty
+for heresy, "Whether," he says, "the Cathari are proved guilty of
+heresy, or whether they freely admit their guilt, they ought not to
+be put to death, unless they attack the Church in armed rebellion."
+For the Apostle said, "A man that is a heretic, after the first and
+second admonition, avoid;" he did not say: "Kill him." "Imprison
+heretics if you will, but do not put them to death."[1]
+
+[1] _Verbum abbreviatum_, cap. lxxviii, Migne, P.L., vol. ccv, col.
+231.
+
+Geroch of Reichersberg, a famous German of the same period, a
+disciple and friend of St. Bernard, speaks in a similar strain of the
+execution of Arnold of Brescia. He was most anxious that the Church,
+and especially the Roman curia, should not be held responsible for
+his death. "The priesthood," he says, "ought to refrain from the
+shedding of blood." There is no doubt whatever that this heretic
+taught a wicked doctrine, but banishment, imprisonment, or some
+similar penalty would leave been ample punishment for his
+wrong-doing, without sentencing him to death.
+
+St. Bernard had also asked that Arnold be banished. The execution of
+heretics at Cologne gave him a chance to state his views on the
+suppression of heresy. The courage with which these fanatics met
+death rather disconcerted Evervin, the provost of Steinfeld, who
+wrote the Abbot of Clairvaux for an explanation.[1]
+
+[1] Evervin's letter in Migne, P.L., vol. clxxxii, col. 676 and seq.
+
+"Their courage," he replies, "arose from mere stubbornness; the devil
+inspired them with this constancy you speak of, just as he prompted
+Judas to hang himself. These heretics are not real but counterfeit
+martyrs (_perfidiæ martyres_). But while I may approve the zeal of
+the people for the faith, I cannot at all approve their excessive
+cruelty; for faith is a matter of persuasion, not of force: _fides
+suadenda est, non imponenda_."[1]
+
+[1] In Cantica, Sermo lxiv, n. 12.
+
+On principle, the Abbot of Clairvaux blames the bishops and even the
+secular princes, who through indifference or less worthy reasons fail
+to hunt for the foxes who are ravaging the vineyards of the Savior.
+But once the guilty ones have been discovered, he declares that only
+kindness should be used to win them back. "Let us capture them by
+arguments and not by force,"[1] i.e., let us first refute their
+errors, and if possible bring them back into the fold of the Catholic
+Church.
+
+[1] Ibid., n. 8.
+
+If they stubbornly refuse to be converted, let the bishop
+excommunicate them, to prevent their doing further injury; if
+occasion require it, let the civil power arrest them and put them in
+prison. Imprisonment is a severe enough penalty, because it prevents
+their dangerous propaganda:[1] _aut corrigendi sunt, ne pereant; aut,
+ne perimant, coercendi_.[2] St. Bernard was always faithful to his
+own teaching, as we learn from his mission in Languedoc.[3]
+
+[1] _De Consideratione_, lib. iii, cap. i, n. 3.
+
+[2] Ibid.; cf. Ep. 241 and 242. For more details, cf. Vacandard, _Vie
+de Saint Bernard_, vol. ii, pp. 211-216, 461-462.
+
+[3] Cf. Vacandard, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 217-234.
+
+Having ascertained the views of individual churchmen, we now turn to
+the councils of the period, and find them voicing the self-same
+teaching. In 1049, the Council held at Rheims by Pope Leo IX declared
+all heretics excommunicated, but said nothing of any temporal
+penalty, nor did it empower the secular princes to aid in the
+suppression of heresy.[1]
+
+[1] Cf. Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. ix, col. 1042.
+
+The Council of Toulouse in 1119, presided over by Calixtus II, and
+the General Council of the Lateran, in 1139, were a little more
+severe; they not only issued a solemn bull of excommunication against
+heretics, but ordered the civil power to prosecute them: _per
+potentates exteras coerceri præcipimus._[1] This order was,
+undoubtedly an answer to St. Bernard's request of Louis VII to banish
+Arnold from his kingdom. The only penalty referred to by both these
+councils was imprisonment.
+
+[1] Council of Toulouse, can. 3, Labbe, vol. x, col. 857; Council of
+Lateran, can. 23, ibid., col. 1008.
+
+The Council of Rheims in 1148, presided over by Eugenius III, did not
+even speak of this penalty, but simply forbade secular princes to
+give support or asylum to heretics.[1] We know, moreover, that at
+this council Éon de l'Etoile was merely sentenced to the seclusion of
+a monastery.
+
+[1] Can. 18, Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. x, col. 1113.
+
+In fact, the execution of heretics which occurred during the eleventh
+and twelfth centuries were due to the impulse of the moment. As an
+historian has remarked: "These heretics were not punished for a crime
+against the law; for there was no legal crime of heresy and no
+penalty prescribed. But the men of the day adopted what they
+considered a measure of public safety, to put an end to a public
+danger."[1]
+
+[1] Julien Havet, _L'hérésie et le bras seculier au moyen âge_, in
+his OEuvres, vol. ii, p. 134.
+
+Far from encouraging the people and the princes in their attitude,
+the Church through her bishops, teachers, and councils continued to
+declare that she had a horror of bloodshed: _A domo sacerdotis
+sanguinis questio remota sit_, writes Geroch of Reichersberg.[1]
+Peter Cantor also insists on the same idea. "Even if they are proved
+guilty by the judgment of God," he writes, "the Cathari ought not to
+be sentenced to death, because this sentence is in a way
+ecclesiastical, being made always in the presence of a priest. If
+then they are executed, the priest is responsible for their death,
+for he by whose authority a thing is done is responsible
+therefor."[2]
+
+[1] _De investigatione Antichristi_, lib. i, cap. xlii, 1oc. cit., pp.
+88, 89.
+
+[2] _Verbum abbreviatum_, cap. lxxviii, Migne, P.L., vol. ccv, col.
+231.
+
+Was excommunication to be the only penalty for heresy? Yes, answered
+Wazo, Leo IX, and the Council of Reims in the middle of the eleventh
+century. But later on the growth of the evil induced the churchmen of
+the time to call upon the aid of the civil power. They thought that
+the Church's excommunication required a temporal sanction. They
+therefore called upon the princes to banish heretics from their
+dominions, and to imprison those who refused to be converted. Such
+was the theory of the twelfth century.
+
+We must not forget, however, that the penalty of imprisonment, which
+was at first a monastic punishment, had two objects in view: to
+prevent heretics from spreading their doctrines, and to give them an
+opportunity of atoning for their sins. In the minds of the
+ecclesiastical judges, it possessed a penitential, almost a
+sacramental character. In a period when all Europe was Catholic, it
+could well supplant exile and banishment, which were the severest
+civil penalties after the death penalty.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+FOURTH PERIOD
+FROM GRATIAN TO INNOCENT III
+THE INFLUENCE OF THE CANON LAW, AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ROMAN LAW
+
+THE development of the Canon law and the revival of the Roman law
+could not but exercise a great influence upon the minds of princes
+and churchmen with regard to the suppression of heresy; in fact, they
+were the cause of a legislation of persecution, which was adopted by
+every country of Christendom.
+
+In the beginning of this period, which we date from Gratian,[1] the
+prosecution of heresy was still carried on, in a more or less
+irregular and arbitrary fashion, according to the caprice of the
+reigning sovereign, or the hasty violence of the populace. But from
+this time forward we shall see it carried on in the name of both the
+canon and the civil law: _secundum canonicas et legitimas
+sanctiones_, as a Council of Avignon puts it.[2]
+
+[1] The Decree of Gratian was written about 1140.
+
+[2] This council was held in 1209, d'Achery, _Spicilegium_, in-fol.,
+vol. i, p. 704, col. 1.
+
+In Germany and France, especially in northern France, the usual
+punishment was the stake. We need not say much of England, for heresy
+seems to have made but one visit there in 1166. In 1160, a German
+prince, whose name is unknown, had several Cathari beheaded. Others
+were burned at Cologne in 1163. The execution of the heretics
+condemned at Vezelai by the Abbot of Vezelai and several bishops,
+forms quite a dramatic picture.
+
+When the heretics had been condemned, the Abbot, addressing the
+crowd, said "My brethren, what punishment should be inflicted upon
+those who refuse to be converted?" All replied: "Burn them." "Burn
+them." Their wishes were carried out. Two abjured their heresy, and
+were pardoned, the other seven perished at the stake.[1]
+
+[1] _Hugo Pictav., _Historia Vezeliacensis monasterii, lib. iv, ad.
+finem, _Hist. des Gaules_, vol. xii, pp. 343-344.
+
+Philip, Count of Flanders, was particularly cruel in prosecuting
+heretics.[1] He had an able auxiliary also in the Archbishop of
+Rheims, Guillaume aux Blanches-Mains. The chronicle of Anchin tells
+us that they sent to the stake a great many nobles and people,
+clerics, knights, peasants, young girls, married women, and widows,
+whose property they confiscated and shared between them.[2] This
+occurred in 1183. Some years before, Archbishop Guillaume and his
+council had sent two heretical women to the stake.[3]
+
+[1] Raoul de Coggeshall, in _Rerum Britann. medii ævi Scriptores_,
+ed. Stevenson, p. 122.
+
+[2] Sigeberti, _Continuatio Aquicinctina_, ad. ann. 1183, in the
+_Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. vi, p. 421.
+
+[3] Raoul de Coggeshall, loc. cit.; _Hist. des Gaules_, vol. xviii,
+p. 92.
+
+Hugh, Bishop of Auxerre (1183-1206), prosecuted the neo-Manicheans
+with equal severity; he confiscated the property of some, banished
+others, and sent several to the stake.
+
+The reign of Philip Augustus was marked by many executions. Eight
+Cathari were sent to the stake at Troyes in 1200, one at Nevers in
+1201, and several others at Braisne-sur-Vesle in 1204. A most famous
+case was the condemnation of the followers of the heretic, Amaury de
+Beynes. "Priests, clerics, men and women belonging to the sect, were
+brought before a council at Paris; they were condemned and handed
+over to the secular court of King Philip." The king was absent at the
+time. On his return he had them all burned outside the walls of the
+city.
+
+In 1163 a council of Tours enacted a decree fixing the punishment of
+heresy. Of course it had in view chiefly the Cathari of Toulouse and
+Gascony: "If these wretches are captured," it says, "the Catholic
+princes are to imprison them and confiscate their property."[1]
+
+[1] Can. 4, Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. x, col. 1419.
+
+This canon was applied probably for the first time at Toulouse in
+1178. The Bishop began proceedings against several heretics, among
+them a rich noble named Pierre Mauran, who was summoned before his
+tribunal, and condemned to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. His
+property was confiscated, although later on when he professed
+repentance it was restored to him, on condition that he dismantle the
+towers of his castles, and pay the Count of Toulouse a fine of five
+hundred pounds of silver.
+
+In this meantime the Cathari increased with alarming rapidity
+throughout this region. Count Raymond V (1148-1194), wishing to
+strike terror into them, enacted a law which decreed the confiscation
+of their property, and death. The people of Toulouse quoted this law
+later on in a letter to King Pedro of Aragon to justify their sending
+heretics to the stake, and when the followers of Simon de Montfort
+arrived in southern France, in 1209, they followed the example of
+Count Raymond by sending heretics to the stake everywhere they went.
+
+The authenticity of this law has been questioned, on account of its
+unheard-of severity. But Pedro II, King of Aragon and Count of
+Barcelona, enacted a law in 1197 which was just as terrible. He
+banished the Waldenses and all other heretics from his dominions,
+ordering them to depart before Passion Sunday of the following year
+(March 23, 1198). After that day, every heretic found in the kingdom
+or the county was to be sent to the stake, and his property
+confiscated. It is worthy of remark, that in the king's mind the
+stake was merely a subsidiary penalty.
+
+In enacting this severe law, Pedro of Aragon declared that he was
+moved by zeal for the public welfare, and "had simply obeyed the
+canons of the Holy Roman Church." With the exception of the death
+penalty by the stake, his reference to the canon law is perfectly
+accurate. Pope Alexander III, who had been present at the Council of
+Tours in 1163, renewed, at the Lateran Council in 1179, the decrees
+already enacted against the heretics of central France. He considered
+the Cathari, the Brabançons, etc., disturbers of the public welfare,
+and therefore called upon the princes to protect by force of arms
+their Christian subjects against the outrages of these heretics. The
+princes were to imprison all heretics and confiscate their property.
+The Pope granted indulgences to all who carried on this pious work.
+
+In 1184, Pope Lucius III, in union with the Emperor Frederic
+Barbarossa, adopted at Verona still more vigorous measures. Heretics
+were to be excommunicated, and then handed over to the secular arm,
+which was to inflict upon them the punishment they deserved
+(_animadversio debita_).[1] The Emperor decreed the imperial ban
+against them.
+
+[1] Canon 27, inserted in the Decretals of Gregory IX, lib. v, tit.
+vii, _De Hæreticis_, cap. ix.
+
+This imperial ban was, as Ficker has pointed out, a very severe
+penalty in Italy; for it comprised banishment, the confiscation of
+the property, and the destruction of the houses of the condemned,
+public infamy, the inability to hold public office, etc. This is
+beyond question the penalty the King of Aragon alluded to in his
+enactment. The penalty of the stake which he added, although in
+conformity with the Roman law, was an innovation.
+
+The pontificate of Innocent III, which began in 1198, marks a pause
+in the development of the Church's penal legislation against heresy.
+Despite his prodigious activity, this Pope never dreamt of enacting
+new laws, but did his best to enforce the laws then in vogue, and to
+stimulate the zeal of both princes and magistrates in the suppression
+of heresy.
+
+Hardly had he ascended the pontifical throne when he sent legates to
+southern France, and wrote urgent letters full of apostolic zeal to
+the Archbishops of Auch and Aix, the Bishop of Narbonne, and the King
+of France. These letters, as well as his instructions to the legates,
+are similar in tone: "Use against heretics the spiritual sword of
+excommunication, and if this does not prove effective, use the
+material sword. The civil laws decree banishment and confiscation;
+see that they are carried out."[1]
+
+[1] Letters of Innocent III in Migne, P.L., vol. ccxiv-ccxvi.
+
+At this time the Cathari were living not only in the cities of
+Languedoc and Provence, but some had even entered the papal States,
+e.g., at Orvieto and Viterbo. The Pope himself went to these cities
+to combat the evil, and at once saw the necessity of enacting special
+laws against them. They may be read in his letters of March 25, 1199,
+and September 22, 1207, which form a special code for the use of the
+princes and the podestà. Heretics were to be branded with infamy;
+they were forbidden to be electors, to hold public office, to be
+members of the city councils, to appear in court or testify, to make
+a will or to receive an inheritance; if officials, all their acts
+were declared null and void; and finally their property was to be
+confiscated.
+
+"In the territories subject to our temporal jurisdiction," adds the
+Pope, "we declare their property confiscated; in other places we
+order the podestà and the secular princes to do the same, and we
+desire and command this law enforced under penalty of ecclesiastical
+censures."[1]
+
+[1] Letter of March 25, 1199, to the magistrates and people of
+Viterbo; constitution of September 23, 1207, Ep. x, 130.
+
+We are not at all surprised at such drastic measures, when we
+consider the agreement made by Lucius III with Frederic Barbarossa,
+at Verona. But we wish to call attention to the reasons that Innocent
+III adduced to justify his severity, on account of the serious
+consequences they entailed. "The civil law," says the Pope, "punishes
+traitors with confiscation of their property and death; it is only
+out of kindness that the lives of their children are spared. All the
+more then should we excommunicate and confiscate the property of
+those who are traitors to the faith of Jesus Christ; for it is an
+infinitely greater sin to offend the Divine Majesty than to attack
+the majesty of the sovereign."[1]
+
+[1] Letter of March 25, 1199, to the magistrates of Viterbo, Ep. ii,
+1.
+
+Whether this comparison be justified or not, it is certainly most
+striking. Later on Frederic II and others will quote it to justify
+their severity.
+
+The Lateran Council in 1215 made the laws of Innocent III canons of
+the universal Church; it declared all heretics excommunicated, and
+delivered them over to the State to receive due punishment. This
+_animadversio debita_ entailed banishment with all its consequences
+and confiscation. The council also legislated against the abettors of
+heresy, even if they were princes, and ordered the despoiling of all
+rulers who neglected to enforce the ecclesiastical law in their
+domains.[1]
+
+[1] Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. xi, col. 148-150; _Decretales_, cap.
+xiii, _De hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+In practice, Innocent III, although very severe towards obdurate
+heretics, was extremely kind to the ignorant and heretics in good
+faith. While he banished the Patarins from Viterbo,[1] and razed
+their houses to the ground, he at the same time protected, against
+the tyranny of an archpriest of Verona, a society of mystics, the
+Humiliati, whose orthodoxy was rather doubtful. When, after the
+massacre of the Albigenses, Pope Innocent was called upon to apply
+the canon law in the case of Raymond, Count of Toulouse, and to
+transfer the patrimony of his father to Simon de Montfort, he was the
+first to draw back from such injustice. Although a framer of severe
+laws against heresy, he was ready to grant dispensations, when
+occasion arose.
+
+[1] _Gesta Innocentii_, cap. cxxiii, Migne, P.L., vol. ccxiv, col.
+clxi.
+
+We must remember also that the laws he enacted were not at all
+excessive compared with the strict Roman law, or even with the
+practice then in vogue in France and Germany. It has been justly
+said: "The laws and letters of Innocent III never once mention the
+death penalty for heresy. He merely decrees against them banishment,
+and the confiscation of their property. When he speaks of having
+recourse to the secular arm, he means simply the force required to
+carry out the laws of banishment enacted by his penal code. This
+code, which seems so pitiless to us, was in reality at that time a
+great improvement in the treatment of heretics. For its special laws
+prevented the frequent outbreaks of popular vengeance, which punished
+not only confessed heretics, but also mere suspects."[1]
+
+[1] Luchaire, Innocent III, _et la croisade des Albigeois_, pp. 57,
+58. Julien Havet also says: "We must in justice say of Innocent III
+that, if he did bitterly prosecute heretics, and everywhere put them
+under the ban, he never demanded the infliction of the death penalty.
+Ficker has brought this out very clearly." _L'hérésie et le bras
+séculier_, p. 165, n. 3. For Ficker's view, cf. op. cit., pp.
+189-192.
+
+In fact, the development in the methods of suppressing heresy from
+the eleventh century, ends with Innocent III in a code that was far
+more kindly than the cruel customs in vogue at the time.
+
+The death penalty of the stake was common in France in the twelfth
+century, and in the beginning of the thirteenth. Most of the
+executions were due to the passions of the mob, although the Roman
+law was in part responsible. Anselm of Lucca and the author of the
+_Panormia_ (Ivo of Chartres?) had copied word for word the fifth law
+of the title _De Hæreticis_ of the Justinian code, under the rubric:
+_De edicto imperatorum in damnationem hæreticorum_.[1] This law which
+decreed the death penalty against the Manicheans, seemed strictly
+applicable to the Cathari, who were regarded at the time as the
+direct heirs of Manicheism. Gratian, in his Decree, maintained the
+views of St. Augustine on the penalties of heresy, viz., fine and
+banishment.[2] But some of his commentators, especially Rufinus,
+Johannes, Teutonicus, and an anonymous writer whose work is inserted
+in Huguccio's great _Summa_ of the Decree, declared that impenitent
+heretics might and even ought to be put to death.
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., pp. 453-454.
+
+[2] Decretum, 2 Pars, Causa xxiii, quest. 4, 6, 7.
+
+These different works appeared before the Lateran Council of 1215.[1]
+They are a good indication of the mind of the time. We may well ask
+whether the Archbishop of Rheims, the Count of Flanders, Philip
+Augustus, Raymond of Toulouse, and Pedro of Aragon, who authorized
+the use of the stake for heretics, did not think they were following
+the example of the first Christian emperors. We must, however, admit
+that there is no direct allusion to the early imperial legislation
+either in their acts or their writings. Probably they were more
+influenced by the customs of the time than by the written law.
+
+[1] The collection of Anselm of Lucca is prior to 1080. The
+_Panormia_ was written about the beginning of the twelfth century;
+the Decree about 1140; the three commentaries were written a little
+before 1215.
+
+As a matter of fact, Gratian, who with St. Augustine mentioned only
+fine and banishment as the penalties for heresy, was followed for
+some time. We learn from Benencasa's _Summa_ of the Decree that
+heretics were punished not by death, but by banishment and
+confiscation of their property.[1]
+
+[1] _Biblioth. Nation_., Ms. 3892, _Summa_ of Benencasa: 41, cap. 23,
+q. 4, _Non invenitur_.
+
+The Councils of Tours and Lateran also decreed confiscation, but for
+banishment they substituted imprisonment, a penalty unknown to the
+Roman law. The Council of Lateran appealed to the authority of St.
+Leo the Great, to compel Christian princes to prosecute heresy.[1]
+
+[1] Canon 27, Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. x, col. 1522; Leonis, Epist.
+xv, ad Turribium, Migne, _Pat. Lat_., vol. liv, col. 679-680.
+
+From the time of Lucius III, owing to the influence of the lawyers,
+the two penalties of banishment and confiscation prevailed. Innocent
+III extended them to the universal Church.
+
+This was undoubtedly a severer penal legislation than that of the
+preceding age. But, on the other hand, it was an effective barrier
+against the infliction of the death penalty, which had become so
+common in many parts of Christendom.
+
+Besides, during this period, the Church used vigorous measures only
+against obdurate heretics, who were also disturbers of the public
+peace.[1] They alone were handed over to the secular arm; if they
+abjured their heresy, they were at once pardoned, provided they
+freely accepted the penance imposed upon them.[2] This kind
+treatment, it was true, was not to last. It, however, deserves
+special notice, for the honor of those who preached and practiced it.
+
+[1] Innocent III merely condemned to prison in a monastery the
+heretical abbot of Nevers; cf. letter of June 19, 1199, to a cardinal
+and a bishop of Paris. Ep. ii, 99.
+
+[2] Cf. Canon 27 of the Lateran Council (1179), which we have quoted
+above, and which is inserted in the Decretals of Gregory x, cap. ix,
+_De hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+THE CATHARAN OR ALBIGENSIAN HERESY--ITS ANTI-CATHOLIC AND
+ANTI-SOCIAL CHARACTER
+
+WHILE Popes Alexander III, Lucius III, and Innocent III, were
+adopting such vigorous measures, the Catharan heresy by its rapid
+increase caused widespread alarm throughout Christendom. Let us
+endeavor to obtain some insight into its character, before we
+describe the Inquisition, which was destined to destroy it.
+
+The dominant heresy of the period was the Albigensian or Catharan
+heresy;[1] it was related to Oriental Manicheism[2] through the
+Paulicians and the Bogomiles, who professed a dualistic theory on the
+origin of the world.
+
+[1] The heretics called themselves "_Cathari_," or "_the Pure_." They
+wished thereby to denote especially their horror of all sexual
+relations, says the monk Egbert: _Sermones contra Catharos_, in
+Migne, P.L., cxcv, col. 13.
+
+[2] On the origin of the Manichean heresy, cf. Duchesne, _Histoire
+ancienne de l'Eglise_, pp. 555, 556.
+
+In the tenth century, the Empress Theodora, who detested the
+Paulicians, had one hundred thousand of them massacred; the Emperor
+Alexis Commenus (about 1118), persecuted the Bogomiles in like
+manner. Many, therefore, of both sects went to western Europe, where
+they finally settled, and began to spread.
+
+As early as 1167, they held a council at St. Felix de Caraman, near
+Toulouse, under the presidency of one of their leaders, Pope or
+perhaps only Bishop Niketas (Niquinta) of Constantinople. Other
+bishops of the sect were present: Mark, who had charge of all the
+churches of Lombardy, Tuscany, and the Marches of Treviso; Robert de
+Sperone, who governed a church in the north, and Sicard Cellerier,
+Bishop of the Church of Albi. They appointed Bernard Raymond, Bishop
+of Toulouse, Guiraud Mercier, Bishop of Carcassonne, and Raymond of
+Casalis, Bishop of Val d'Aran, in the diocese of Comminges. Such an
+organization certainly indicates the extraordinary development of the
+heresy about the middle of the twelfth century.
+
+About the year 1200 its progress was still more alarming. Bonacursus,
+a Catharan bishop converted to Catholicism, writes about 1190:
+"Behold the cities, towns and homes filled with these false
+prophets."[1] Cessarius, of Heisterbach, tells us that a few years
+later there were Cathari in about one thousand cities,[2] especially
+in Lombardy and Languedoc.
+
+[1] _Manifestatio hæresis Catharorum_, in Migne, P.L., vol. cciv col.
+778.
+
+[2] _Dialogi_, Antwerp, 1604, p. 289.
+
+There were at least seven to eight hundred of "the Perfected" in
+Languedoc alone; and to obtain approximately the total number of the
+sect, we must multiply this number by twenty or even more.[1]
+
+[1] This is Döllinger's estimate, _Beiträge_, vol. i, pp. 212, 213.
+
+Of course, perfect unity did not exist among the Cathari. The
+different names by which they were known clearly indicate certain
+differences of doctrine among them. Some, like the Cathari of Alba
+and Desenzano, taught with the Paulicians an absolute dualism,
+affirming that all things created came from two principles, the one
+essentially good, and the other essentially bad. Two other groups,
+the Concorrezenses and the Bagolenses, like the ancient Gnostics,
+held a modified form of dualism; they pretended that the evil spirit
+had so marred the Creator's work, that matter had become the
+instrument of evil in the world. Still they agreed with the
+pronounced dualists in nearly all their doctrines and observances;
+their few theoretical differences were scarcely appreciable in
+practice.[1]
+
+[1] On the Catharan doctrines, cf. Dõllinger's _Beiträge_.
+
+Still, contemporary writers called them by different names. In Italy
+they were confounded with the orthodox Patarins and Arnaldists of
+Milan; which explains the frequent use of the word Patareni in the
+constitutions of Frederic II, and other documents.
+
+The Arnaldists or Arnoldists and the Speronistæ, were the disciples
+of Arnold of Brescia, and the heretical Bishop Sperone. Although the
+chief center of the Cathari in France was Toulouse and not Albi, they
+were called _Albigeois_ (Albigenses), and _Tisserands_ (Texerants),
+because many were weavers by trade; _Arians_, because of their denial
+of Christ's divinity; _Paulicians_, which was corrupted into
+_Poplicani, Publicani, Piphes_ and _Piples_ (Flanders); _Bulgarians_
+(_Bulgari_), from their origin, which became in the mouths of the
+people of _Bugari, Bulgri_, and _Bugres_. In fact about 1200, nearly
+all the heretics of western Europe were considered Cathari.
+
+Catharism was chiefly a negative heresy; it denied the doctrines,
+hierarchy and worship of the Catholic Church, as well as the
+essential rights of the State.
+
+These neo-Manicheans denied that the Roman Church represented the
+Church of Christ. The Popes were not the successors of St. Peter, but
+rather the successors of Constantine. St. Peter never came to Rome.
+The relics which were venerated in the Constantinian basilica, were
+the bones of someone who died in the third century; they were not
+relics of the Prince of the Apostles. Constantine unfortunately
+sanctioned this fraud, by conferring upon the Roman pontiff an
+immense domain, together with the prestige that accompanies temporal
+authority.[1] How could anyone recognize under the insignia, the
+purple mantle, and the crown of the successors of St. Sylvester, a
+disciple of Jesus Christ? Christ had no place where to lay His head,
+whereas the Popes lived in a palace! Christ rebuked worldly dominion,
+while the Popes claimed it! What had the Roman curia with its thirst
+for riches and honors in common with the gospel of Christ? What were
+these archbishops, primates, cardinals, archdeacons, monks, canons,
+Dominicans, and Friars Minor but the Pharisees of old! The priests
+placed heavy burdens upon the faithful people, and they themselves
+did not touch them with the tips of their fingers; they received
+tithes from the fields and flocks; they ran after the heritage of
+widows; all practices which Christ condemned in the Pharisees.
+
+[1] The Middle Ages believed firmly in the donation of Constantine.
+It was, however questioned by Wetzel, a disciple of Arnold of
+Brescia, in 1152, in a letter to Frederic Barbarossa, Martène and
+Durand, _Veterum scriptorunt ... amplissima collectio_, Paris, 1724,
+vol. ii, col. 554-557.
+
+And yet, withal, they dared persecute humble souls who, by their pure
+life, tried to realize the perfect ideal proposed by Christ! These
+persecutors were not the true disciples of Jesus. The Roman Church
+was the woman of the apocalypse,[1] drunk with the blood of the
+Saints, and the Pope was Antichrist.
+
+[1] Apoc. vii, 3, 18.
+
+The sacraments of the Church were a mere figment of the imagination.
+The Cathari made one sacrament out of Baptism, Confirmation, Penance
+and Eucharist, which they called the _consolamentum_; they denied the
+real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, and they repudiated
+marriage.
+
+Baptism of water was to them an empty ceremony, as valueless as the
+baptism of John. Christ had undoubtedly said: "Unless a man be born
+again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom
+of God."[1] But the acts of the Apostles proved that baptism was a
+mere ceremony, for they declared that the Samaritans, although
+baptized, had not thereby received the Holy Spirit, by Whom alone the
+soul is purified from sin.[2]
+
+[1] John iii, 5.
+
+[2] Acts i. 5; viii. 14-17.
+
+The Catholic Church also erred greatly in teaching infant baptism. As
+their faculties were undeveloped, infants could not receive the Holy
+Spirit. The Cathari--at least to the middle of the thirteenth
+century--did not confer the _consolamentum_ upon newly born infants.
+According to them, the Church could only abandon these little ones to
+their unhappy destiny. If they died, they were either forever lost,
+or, as others taught, condemned to undergo successive incarnations,
+until they received the _consolamentum_, which classed them with "the
+Perfected."
+
+It was preposterous to imagine that Christ wished to change bread and
+wine into His Body in the Eucharist. The Cathari considered
+transubstantiation as the worst of abominations, since matter, in
+every form, was the work of the Evil Spirit. They interpreted the
+Gospel texts in a figurative sense: at "This is My Body," they said,
+simply means: "This represents My Body," thus anticipating the
+teaching of Carlstadt and Zwingli. They all agreed in denouncing
+Catholics for daring to claim that they really partook of the Body of
+Christ, as if Christ could enter a man's stomach, to say nothing
+worse; or as if Christ would expose Himself to be devoured by rats
+and mice.
+
+The Cathari, defying the real presence of Jesus Christ in the
+Eucharist, rejected the sacrifice of the Mass. God, according to
+them, repudiated all sacrifices. Did He not teach us through His
+prophet Osee: "I desire mercy and not sacrifice."[1]
+
+[1] Osee vi. 6.
+
+The Lord's Supper which the Apostles ate so often was something
+altogether different from the Roman Mass. They knew nothing of
+sacerdotal vestments, stone altars with shining candelabra, incense,
+hymns, and chantings. They did not worship in an immense building
+called a church--a word which should be applied exclusively to the
+assembly of the saints.
+
+The Cathari, in their hatred of Catholic piety, railed in the most
+abusive language against the veneration of images, and especially of
+the cross. The images and statues of the saints were to them nothing
+but idols, which ought to be destroyed. The cross on which Jesus died
+should be hated rather than reverenced. Some of them, moreover,
+denied that Jesus had been really crucified; they held that a demon
+died, or feigned to die in His stead. Even those who believed in the
+reality of the Saviour's crucifixion made this very belief a reason
+for condemning the veneration of the cross. What man is there, they
+said, who could see a loved one, for example a father, die upon a
+cross, and not feel ever after a deep hatred of this instrument of
+torture? The cross, therefore, should not be reverenced, but
+despised, insulted and spat upon. One of them even said: "I would
+gladly hew the cross to pieces with an axe, and throw it into the
+fire to make the pot boil."
+
+Not only were the Cathari hostile to the Church and her divine
+worship, but they were also in open revolt against the State, and its
+rights.
+
+The feudal society rested entirely upon the oath of fealty
+(_jusjurandum_), which was the bond of its strength and solidity.
+
+According to the Cathari, Christ taught that it was sinful to take an
+oath, and that the speech of every Christian should be yes, yes; no,
+no.[1] Nothing, therefore, could induce them to take an oath.
+
+[1] Matt. v. 37; James v. 12.
+
+The authority of the State, even when Christian, appeared to them, in
+certain respects, very doubtful. Had not Christ questioned Peter,
+saying: "What is thy opinion, Simon? The kings of the earth, of whom
+do they receive tribute or custody? of their own children, or of
+strangers?" Peter replied: "Of strangers." Jesus saith to him: "Then
+are the children free (of every obligation)."[1]
+
+[1] Matt. xvii. 24, 25.
+
+The Cathari quoted these words to justify their refusal of allegiance
+to princes. Were they not disciples of Christ, whom the truth had
+made free? Some of them not only disputed the lawfulness of taxation,
+but went so far as to condone stealing, provided the thief had done
+no injury to "Believers."[1]
+
+[1] Contrary to the Catholic teaching, the Cathari absolved those who
+stole from "non-believers," without obliging them to make
+restitution. Döllinger, _Beiträge_, vol. ii, pp. 248, 249, cf. pp.
+245, 246.
+
+Some of the Cathari admitted the authority of the State, but denied
+its right to inflict capital punishment. "It is not God's will," said
+Pierre Garsias, "that human justice condemn any one to death;" and
+when one of the Cathari became consul of Toulouse, he wrote to remind
+him of this absolute law. But the _Summa contra hæreticos_ asserts:
+"all the Catharan sects taught that the public prosecution of crime
+was unjust, and that no man had a right to administer justice;"[1] a
+teaching which denied the State's right to punish.
+
+[1] _Summa contra hæreticos_, ed. Douais, p. 133, Moneta, op. cit.,
+p. 513.
+
+The Cathari interpreted literally the words of Christ to Peter: "All
+that take the sword shall perish with the sword,"[1] and applied the
+commandment _Non occides_ absolutely. "In no instance," they said,
+"has one the right to kill another;"[2] neither the internal welfare
+of a country, nor its external interests can justify murder. War is
+never lawful. The soldier defending his country is just as much a
+murderer as the most common criminal. It was not any special aversion
+to the crusades, but their horror of war in general, that made the
+Cathari declare the preachers of the crusades murderers.
+
+[1] Matt. xxvi. 52.
+
+[2] Cf. Döllinger, _Beiträge_, vol. ii, p. 199.
+
+These anti-Catholic, anti-patriotic, and anti-social theories were
+only the negative side of Catharism. Let us now ascertain what they
+substituted for the Catholic doctrines they denied.
+
+Catharism, as we have already hinted, was a hodgepodge of pagan
+dualism and Gospel teaching, given to the world as a sort of reformed
+Christianity.
+
+Human souls, spirits fallen from heaven into a material body which is
+the work of the Evil Spirit, were subject on this earth to a
+probation, which was ended by Christ, or rather by the Holy Spirit.
+They were set free by the imposition of hands, the secret of which
+had been committed to the true Church by the disciples of Jesus.
+
+This Church had its rulers, the Bishops, and its members who are
+called "the Perfected," "the Consoled," and "the Believers."
+
+We need not dwell upon the episcopate of the Catharan hierarchy.
+Suffice it to say that the Bishop was always surrounded by three
+dignitaries, the _Filius Major_, the _Filius Minor_, and the Deacon.
+The Bishop had charge of the most important religious ceremonies: the
+imposition of hands for the initiation or _consolamentum_, the
+breaking of bread which replaced the Eucharist, and the liturgical
+prayers such as the recitation of the Lord's Prayer. When he was
+absent, the _Filius Major_, the _Filius Minor_, or the Deacon took
+his place. It was seldom, however, that these dignitaries traveled
+alone; the Bishop was always accompanied by his Deacon, who served as
+his _socius_.
+
+One joined the Church by promising (the _Convenenza_) to renounce the
+Catholic faith, and to receive the Catharan initiation (the
+_consolamentum_), at least at the hour of death. This was the first
+step on the road to perfection. Those who agreed to make it were
+called "the Believers." Their obligations were few. They were not
+bound to observe the severe Catharan fasts, which we will mention
+later on. They could live in the world like other mortals, and were
+even allowed to eat meat and to marry. Their chief duty was "to
+venerate" "the Perfected," each time they entered their presence.
+They genuflected, and prostrated themselves three times, saying each
+time as they rose, "Give us your blessing;" the third time they
+added: "Good Christians, give us God's blessing and yours; pray God
+that He preserve us from an evil death, and bring us to a good end!"
+The Perfected replied: "Receive God's blessing and ours; may God
+bless you, preserve you from an evil death, and bring you to a good
+end." If these heretics were asked why they made others venerate them
+in this manner, they replied that the Holy Spirit dwelling within
+them gave them the right to such homage. The Believers were always
+required to pay this extraordinary mark of respect. In fact it was a
+_sine qua non_ of their being admitted to the _Convenenza._
+
+The _Convenenza_ was not merely an external bond, uniting "the
+Believers" and "the Perfected," but it was also an earnest of eternal
+salvation. It assured the future destiny of "the Believers;" it gave
+them the right to receive the _consolamentum_ on their death-bed.
+This remitted all the sins of their life. Only one thing could
+deprive them of "this good end," viz., the absence of one of the
+Perfected, who alone could lay hands upon them.
+
+Those who died without the Catharan _consolamentum_ were either
+eternally lost, or condemned to begin life anew with another chance
+of becoming one of "the good men." These transmigrations of the soul
+were rather numerous. The human soul did not always pass directly
+from the body of a man into the body of another man. It occasionally
+entered into the bodies of animals, like the ox and the ass. The
+Cathari were wont to tell the story of "a good Christian," one of
+"the Perfected," who remembered, in a previous existence as a horse,
+having lost his shoe in a certain place between two stones, as he was
+running swiftly under his master's spur. When he became a man he was
+curious enough to hunt for it, and he found it, in the self-same
+spot. Such humiliating transmigrations were undoubtedly rather rare.
+A woman named Sybil, "a Believer" and later on one of "the
+Perfected," remembered having been a queen in a prior existence.
+
+What the _Convenenza_ promised, the Catharan initiation or
+_consolamentum_ gave; the first made "Believers," and predisposed
+souls to sanctity; the second made "the Perfected," and conferred
+sanctity with all its rights and prerogatives.
+
+The _consolamentum_ required a preparation which we may rightly
+compare with the catechumenate of the early Christians.
+
+This probation usually lasted one year. It consisted in an honest
+attempt to lead the life of "the Perfected," and chiefly in keeping
+their three "lents," abstaining from meat, milk-food and eggs. It was
+therefore called the time of abstinence (_abstinentia_). One of "the
+Perfected" was appointed by the Church to report upon the life of the
+postulant, who daily had to venerate his superior, according to the
+Catharan rite.
+
+After this probation, came the ceremony of "the delivery"
+(_traditio_) of the Lord's Prayer. A number of "the Perfected" were
+always present. The highest dignitary, the Bishop or "the Ancient,"
+made the candidate a lengthy speech, which has come down to us:
+
+"Understand," he said, "that when you appear before the Church of God
+you are in the presence of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,
+as the Scriptures prove," etc. Then, having repeated the Lord's
+Prayer to "the Believer" word for word, and having explained its
+meaning, he continued: "We deliver to you this holy prayer, that you
+may receive it from us, from God, and from the Church, that you may
+have the right to say it all your life, day and night, alone and in
+company, and that you may never eat or drink without first saying it.
+If you omit it, you must do penance." The Believer replied "I receive
+it from you and from the Church."[1]
+
+[1] Clédat, _Rituel Cathare_, pp. xi-xv.
+
+After these words came the _Abrenuntiatio_. At the Catholic baptism,
+the catechumen renounced Satan, with his works and pomps. According
+to the Catharan ritual, the Catholic Church was Satan.
+
+"The Perfected" said to the Believer: "Friend, if you wish to be one
+of us, you must renounce all the doctrines of the Church of Rome,"
+and he replied: "I do renounce them."
+
+--Do you renounce that cross made with chrism upon your breast, head,
+and shoulders?
+
+--I do renounce it.
+
+--Do you believe that the water of Baptism is efficacious for
+salvation?
+
+--No, I do not believe it.
+
+--Do you renounce the veil, which the priest placed upon your head,
+after you were baptized?
+
+--I do renounce it.[1]
+
+Again the Bishop addressed "the Believer" to impress upon him the new
+duties involved in his receiving the Holy Spirit. Those who were
+present prayed God to pardon the candidate's sins, and then venerated
+"the Perfected" (the ceremony of the _Parcia_). After the Bishop's
+prayer, "May God bless thee, make thee a good Christian, and grant
+thee a good end," the candidate made a solemn promise faithfully to
+fulfill the duties he had learned during his _probatio_. The words of
+his promise are to be found in Sacconi: "I promise to devote my life
+to God and to the Gospel, never to lie or swear, never to touch a
+woman, never to kill an animal, never to eat meat, eggs or milk-food;
+never to eat anything but fish and vegetables, never to do anything
+without first saying the Lord's Prayer, never to eat, travel, or pass
+the night without a _socius_. If I fall into the hands of my enemies
+or happen to be separated from my _socius_, I promise to spend three
+days without food or drink. I will never take off my clothes on
+retiring, nor will I deny my faith even when threatened with death."
+The ceremony of the _Parcia_ was then repeated.
+
+[1] Sacconi, _Summa de Catharis_, in Martens and Durand, _Thesaurus
+novus anecdotorum_, vol. v, p. 1776.
+
+Then, according to the ritual, "the Bishop takes the book (the New
+Testament), and places it upon the head of the candidate," while the
+other "good men" present impose hands upon him, saying: "Holy Father,
+accept this servant of yours in all righteousness, and send your
+grace and your Spirit upon him." The Holy Spirit was then supposed to
+descend, and the ceremony of the _consolamentum_ was finished; "the
+Believer" had become one of "the Perfected."
+
+However, before the assembly disposed, "the Perfected" proceeded to
+carry out two other ceremonies: the vesting and the kiss of peace.
+
+"While their worship was tolerated," writes an historian, "they gave
+their new brother a black garment; but in times of persecution they
+did not wear it, for fear of betraying themselves to the officials of
+the Inquisition. In the thirteenth century, in southern France, they
+were known by the linen or flaxen belt, which the men wore over their
+shirts, and the women wore _cordulam cinctam ad carnem nudam subtus
+mamillas_. They resembled the cord or scapular that the Catholic
+tertiaries wore to represent the habit of the monastic order to which
+they belonged. They were therefore called _hæretici vestiti_, which
+became a common term for 'the Perfected.'"
+
+[1] Jean Guiraud, _Le consolamentum ou initiation cathare_, loc.
+cit., p. 134.
+
+The last ceremony was the kiss of peace, which "the Perfected" gave
+their new brother, by kissing him twice (on the mouth), _bis in ore
+ex transverso_. He in turn kissed the one nearest him, who passed on
+the _pax_ to all present. If the recipient was a woman, the minister
+gave her the _pax_ by touching her shoulder with the book of the
+gospels, and his elbow with hers. She transmitted this symbolic kiss
+in the same manner to the one next to her, if he was a man. After a
+last fraternal embrace, they all congratulated the new brother, and
+the assembly dispersed.
+
+The promises made by this new member of "the Perfected" were not all
+equally hard to keep. As far as positive duties were concerned, there
+were but three: the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer, the
+breaking of bread, and the _Apparellamentum_.
+
+Only "the Perfected" were allowed to recite the Lord's Prayer. The
+Cathari explained the esoteric character of this prayer by that
+passage in the Apocalypse which speaks of the one hundred and
+forty-four thousand elect who follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth,
+and who sing a hymn which only virgins can sing.[1] This hymn was the
+Pater Noster. Married people, therefore, and consequently "the
+Believers," could not repeat it without profanation. But "the
+Perfected" were obliged to say it every day, especially before
+meals.[2]
+
+[1] Apoc. xiv. 1-4.
+
+[2] The Perfected had to live with a _socius_ who blessed his food,
+while he in turn had to bless the food of his companion. If he
+separated from his _socius_, he had to do without food and drink for
+three days. This frequently happened when they were arrested and cast
+into prison.
+
+They blessed the bread without making the sign of the cross.
+
+This "breaking of bread" replaced the Eucharist. They thought in this
+way to reproduce the Lord's Supper, while they repudiated all the
+ceremonies of the Catholic Mass. "The Believers" partook of this
+blessed bread when they sat at the table with "the Perfected," and
+they were wont to carry some of it home to eat from time to time.
+
+Some attributed to it a wonderful sanctifying power, and believed
+that if at their death none of "the Perfected" were present to
+administer the _consolamentum_, this "bread of the holy prayer" would
+itself ensure their salvation. They were therefore very anxious to
+keep some of it on hand; and we read of "the Believers" of Languedoc
+having some sent them from Lombardy, when they were no longer able to
+communicate with their persecuted brethren.
+
+It was usually distributed to all present during the
+_Apparellamentum_. This was the solemn monthly reunion of all the
+Cathari, "the Believers" and "the Perfected." All present confessed
+their sins, no matter how slight, although only a general confession
+was required. As a rule the Deacon addressed the assembly, which
+closed with the _Parcia_ and the kiss of peace: _osculantes sese
+invicem ex transverso_.
+
+There was nothing very hard in this; on the contrary, it was the
+consoling side of their life. But their rigorous laws of fasting and
+abstinence constituted a most severe form of mortification.
+
+"The Perfected" kept three Lents a year; the first from St. Brice's
+day (November 13) till Christmas; the second from Quinquagesima
+Sunday till Easter; the third from Pentecost to the feast of Saints
+Peter and Paul. They called the first and last weeks of these Lents
+the strict weeks (_septimana stricta_), because during them they
+fasted on bread and water every day, whereas the rest of the time
+they fasted only three days out of the seven. Besides these special
+penitential seasons, they observed the same rigorous fast three days
+a week all during the year, unless they were sick or were
+traveling.[1]
+
+[1] Bernard Gui, _Practica inquisitionis_, p. 239.
+
+These heretics were known everywhere by their fasting and abstinence.
+"They are good men," it was said, "who live holy lives, fasting three
+days a week and never eating meat."[1]
+
+[1] Douais, _Les manuscrits du château de Merville_, in the _Annales
+du Midi_, 1890, p. 185.
+
+They never ate, meat, in fact, and this law of abstinence extended,
+as we have seen, to eggs, cheese, and everything which was the result
+of animal propagation. They were allowed, however, to eat
+cold-blooded animals like fish, because of the strange idea they had
+of their method of propagation.
+
+One of the results, or rather one of the causes of their abstinence
+from meat, was the absolute respect they had for animal life in
+general. We have seen that they admitted metempsychosis. According to
+their belief, the body of an ox or an ass might be the dwelling place
+of a human soul. To kill these animals, therefore, was a crime
+equivalent to murder. "For that reason," says Bernard Gui, "they
+never kill an animal or a bird; for they believe that in animals and
+birds dwell the souls of men, who died without having been received
+into their sect by the imposition of hands."[1] This was also one of
+the signs by which they could be known as heretics. We read of them
+being condemned at Goslar and elsewhere for having refused to kill
+and eat a chicken.
+
+[1] _Practica inquisitionis_, p. 240.
+
+Their most extraordinary mortification was the law of chastity, as
+they understood and practiced it. They had a great horror of
+Christian marriage, and endeavored to defend their views by the
+Scriptures. Had not Christ said: "Whosoever shall look on a woman to
+lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his
+heart;"[1] i.e., was he not guilty of a crime? "The children of this
+world marry," He says again, "and are given in marriage; but they
+that shall be accounted worthy of that world and of the resurrection
+from the dead, shall neither be married, nor take wives."[2] "It is
+good," says St. Paul, "for a man not to touch a woman."[3]
+
+[1] Matt. v. 28.
+
+[2] Luke xx. 34, 35.
+
+[3] I Corinth. vii. 1, 7.
+
+The Cathari interpreted these texts literally, and when their
+opponents cited other texts of Scripture which plainly taught the
+sacred character of Christian marriage, they at once interpreted them
+in a spiritual or symbolic sense. The only legitimate marriage in
+their eyes was the union of the Bishop with the Church, or the union
+of the soul with the Holy Spirit by the ceremony of the
+_consolamentum_.
+
+They condemned absolutely all marital relations. That was the sin of
+Adam and Eve. Pierre Garsias taught at Toulouse that the forbidden
+fruit of the Garden of Eden was simply carnal pleasure.
+
+One of the purposes of marriage is the begetting of children. But the
+propagation of the human species is plainly the work of the Evil
+Spirit. A woman with child is a woman possessed of the devil. "Pray
+God," said one of "the Perfected" to the wife of a Toulouse lumber
+merchant, "pray God that He deliver you from the devil within you."
+The greatest evil that could befall a woman was to die _enceinte_;
+for being in the state of impurity and in the power of Satan, she
+could not be saved. We read of the Cathari saying this to Peirona de
+la Caustra: _quod si decederet prægnans non posset salvari_.
+
+Marriage, because it made such a condition possible, was absolutely
+condemned. Bernard Gui thus resumes the teaching of the Cathari on
+this point: "They condemn marriage absolutely; they maintain that it
+is a perpetual state of sin; they deny that a good God can institute
+it. They declare the marital relation as great a sin as incest with
+one's mother, daughter, or sister." And this is by no means a
+calumnious charge. The language which Bernard Gui attributes to these
+heretics was used by them on every possible occasion. They were
+unable to find words strong enough to express their contempt for
+marriage. "Marriage," they said, "is nothing but licentiousness;
+marriage is merely prostitution." In their extreme hatred, they even
+went so far as to prefer open licentiousness to it, saying:
+"Cohabitation with one's wife is a worse crime than adultery." One
+might be inclined to think that this was merely an extravagant
+outburst; but, on the contrary, they tried to defend this view by
+reason. Licentiousness, they argued, was a temporary thing, to which
+a man gave himself up only in secret; he might in time become ashamed
+of it, repent and renounce it entirely. The married state, on the
+contrary, caused no shame whatever; men never thought of renouncing
+it, because they did not dream of the wickedness it entailed: _quia
+magis publice et sine verecundia peccatum fiebat_.
+
+No one, therefore, was admitted to the _consolamentum_ unless he had
+renounced all marital relations. In this case, the woman "gave her
+husband to God, and to the good men." It often happened, too, that
+women, moved by the preaching of "the Perfected," condemned their
+unconverted husbands to an enforced celibacy. This was one of the
+results of the neo-Manichean teachings.
+
+Moreover, they carried their principles so far as to consider it a
+crime even to touch a woman.
+
+They forbade a man to sit next to a woman except in case of
+necessity. "If a woman touches you," said Pierre Autier, "you must
+fast three days on bread and water; and if you touch a woman, you
+must fast nine days on the same diet." At the ceremony of the
+_consolamentum_, the Bishop who imposed hands on the future sister
+took great care not to touch her, even with the end of his finger; to
+avoid doing so, he always covered the postulant with a veil.
+
+But in times of persecution, this over-scrupulous caution was
+calculated to attract public attention. "The Perfected" (men and
+women) lived together, pretending that they were married, so that
+they would not be known as heretics. It was their constant care,
+however, to avoid the slightest contact. This caused them at times
+great inconvenience. While traveling, they shared the same bed, the
+better to avoid suspicion. But they slept with their clothes on, and
+thus managed to follow out the letter of the law: _tamen induti quod
+unus alium in nuda carne non tangebat_.
+
+Many Catholics were fully persuaded that this pretended love of
+purity was merely a cloak to hide the grossest immorality. But while
+we may admit that many of "the Perfected" did actually violate their
+promise of absolute chastity, we must acknowledge that, as a general
+rule, they did resist temptation, and preferred death to what they
+considered impurity.
+
+Many who feared that they might give way in a moment of weakness to
+the temptations of a corrupt nature, sought relief in suicide, which
+was called the _endura_. There were two forms for the sick heretic,
+suffocation and fasting. The candidate for death was asked whether he
+desired to be a martyr or a confessor. If he chose to be a martyr,
+they placed a handkerchief or a pillow over his mouth, until he died
+of suffocation. If he preferred to be a confessor, he remained
+without food or drink, until he died of starvation.
+
+The Cathari believed that "the Believers," who asked for the
+_consolamentum_ during sickness, would not keep the laws of their new
+faith, if they happened to get well. Therefore, to safeguard them
+against apostasy, they were strongly urged to make their salvation
+certain by the _endura_. A manuscript of the Register of the
+Inquisition of Carcassonne, for instance, tells us of a Catharan
+minister who compelled a sick woman to undergo the _endura_, after he
+had conferred upon her the Holy Spirit. He forbade any one "to give
+her the least nourishment"... and as a matter of fact no food or
+drink was given her that night or the following day, lest perchance
+she might be deprived of the benefit of the _consolamentum_.
+
+One of "the Perfected," named Raymond Belhot, congratulated a mother
+whose daughter he had just "consoled," and ordered her not to give
+the sick girl anything to eat or drink until he returned, even though
+she requested it. "If she asks me for it," said the mother, "I will
+not have the heart to refuse her." "You must refuse her," said "the
+good man," "or else cause great injury to her soul." From that moment
+the girl neither ate nor drank; in fact she did not ask for any
+nourishment. She died the next Saturday.
+
+About the middle of the thirteenth century, when the Cathari began to
+give the consolamentum to infants, they were often cruel enough to
+make them undergo the _endura_. "One would think," says an historian
+of the time, "that the world had gone back to those hateful days when
+unnatural mothers sacrificed their children to Moloch."
+
+It sometimes happened that the parents of "the consoled" withstood
+more or less openly the cruelty of "the Perfected."
+
+When this happened, some of "the Perfected" remained in the house of
+the sick person, to see that their murderous prescriptions were
+obeyed to the letter. Or if this was impossible, they had "the
+consoled" taken to the house of some friend, where they could readily
+carry out their policy of starvation.
+
+But as a general rule the "heretics" submitted to the _endura_ of
+their own free will. Raymond Isaure tells us of a certain Guillaume
+Sabatier who began the _endura_ in a retired villa, immediately after
+his initiation; he starved himself to death in seven weeks. A woman
+named Gentilis died of the _endura_ in six or seven days. A woman of
+Coustaussa, who had separated from her husband, went to Saverdum to
+receive the _consolamentum_. She at once began the _endura_ at Ax,
+and died after an absolute fast of about twelve weeks. A certain
+woman named Montaliva submitted to the _endura_; during it "she ate
+nothing whatever, but drank some water; she died in six weeks."[1]
+This case gives us some idea of this terrible practice; we see that
+they were sometimes allowed to drink water, which explains the
+extraordinary duration of some of these suicidal fasts.
+
+[1] Ms. 609, of the library of Toulouse, fol. 28.
+
+Some of the Cathari committed suicide in other ways. A woman of
+Toulouse named Guillemette first began to subject herself to the
+_endura_ by frequent blood letting; then she tried to weaken herself
+more by taking long baths; finally she drank poison, and as death did
+not come quickly enough, she swallowed pounded glass to perforate her
+intestines.[1] Another woman opened her veins in the bath.2
+
+[1] Ms. 609, of Toulouse, fol. 33.
+
+[2] Ibid., fol. 70.
+
+Such methods of suicide were exceptional, although the _endura_
+itself was common, at least among the Cathari of Languedoc. "Every
+one," says a trustworthy historian, "who reads the acts of the
+tribunals of the Inquisition of Toulouse and Carcassonne must admit
+that the _endura_, voluntary or forced, put to death more victims
+than the stake or the Inquisition."
+
+Catharism, therefore, was a serious menace to the Church, to the
+State, and to society.
+
+Without being precisely a Christian heresy, its customs, its
+hierarchy, and above all its rites of initiation--which we have
+purposely explained in detail--gave it all the appearance of one. It
+was really an imitation and a caricature of Christianity. Some of its
+practices were borrowed from the primitive Christians, as some
+historians have proved.[1] That in itself would justify the Church in
+treating its followers as heretics.
+
+[1] Jean Guirard, _Le consolamentum ou initiation cathare_, in
+_Questions d'histoire_, p. 145 seq.
+
+Besides, the Church merely acted in self-defense. The Cathari tried
+their best to destroy her by attacking her doctrines, her hierarchy,
+and her apostolic character. If their false teachings had prevailed,
+disturbing as they did the minds of the people, the Church would have
+perished.
+
+The princes, who did not concern themselves with these heretics while
+they merely denied the teachings of the Church, at last found
+themselves attacked just as vigorously. The Catharan absolute
+rejection of the oath of fealty was calculated to break the bond that
+united subjects to their suzerain lords, and at one blow to destroy
+the whole edifice of feudalism. And even granting that the feudal
+system could cease to exist without dragging down in its fall all
+form of government, how could the State provide for the public
+welfare, if she did not possess the power to punish criminals, as the
+Cathari maintained?
+
+But the great unpardonable crime of Catharism was its attempt to
+destroy the future of humanity by its _endura_, and its abolition of
+marriage. It taught that the sooner life was destroyed the better.
+Suicide, instead of being considered a crime, was a means of
+perfection. To beget children was considered the height of
+immorality. To become one of "the Perfected," which was the only way
+of salvation, the husband must leave his wife, and the wife her
+husband. The family must cease to exist, and all men were urged to
+form a great religious community, vowed to the most rigorous
+chastity. If this ideal had been realized, the human race would have
+disappeared from the earth in a few years. Can any one imagine more
+immoral and more anti-social teaching?
+
+The Catholic Church has been accused of setting up a similar ideal.
+This is a gross calumny. For while Catharism made chastity a _sine
+qua non_ of salvation, and denounced marriage as something infamous
+and criminal, the Church merely counsels virginity to an élite body
+of men and women in whom she recognizes the marks of a special
+vocation, according to the teaching of the Savior, "He that can take,
+let him take it." _Qui potest capiare capiat_.[1] She endeavors at
+the same time to uphold the sacrament of marriage, declaring it a
+holy state, in which the majority of mankind is to work out its
+salvation.
+
+[1] Matt. xix. 11, 12.
+
+There is consequently no parity whatever between the two societies
+and their teachings. In bitterly prosecuting the Cathari, the Church
+truly acted for the public good. The State was bound to aid her by
+force, unless it wished to perish herself with all the social order.
+This explains and to a certain degree Justifies the combined action
+of Church and State in suppressing the Catharan heresy.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+FIFTH PERIOD
+GREGORY IX AND FREDERIC II
+THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONASTIC INQUISITION
+
+THE penal system codified by Innocent III was rather liberally
+interpreted in France and Italy. In order to make the French law
+agree with it, an oath was added to the coronation service from the
+time of Louis IX, whereby the King swore to exterminate, i.e., banish
+all heretics from his kingdom. We are inclined to interpret in this
+sense the laws of Louis VIII (1226) and Louis IX (April, 1228), for
+the south of France. The words referring to the punishment of
+heretics are a little vague: "Let them be punished," says Louis VIII,
+"with the punishment they deserve." "_Animadversione debita
+puniantur_. The other penalties specified are infamy and
+confiscation; in a word, all the consequences of banishment."[1]
+
+[1] _Ordonnances des roys de France_, vol. xii, pp. 319, 320.
+
+Louis IX re-enacted this law in the following terms: "We decree that
+our barons and magistrates ... do their duty in prosecuting
+heretics." "_De ipsis festinanter faciant quod debebunt_."[1] These
+words in themselves are not very clear, and, if we were to interpret
+them by the customs of a few years later, we might think that they
+referred to the death penalty, even the stake; but comparing them
+with similar expressions used by Lucius III and Innocent III, we see
+that they imply merely the penalty of banishment.
+
+[2] Ibid., vol. i, p. 51; Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. vii, col. 171.
+
+However, a canon of the Council of Toulouse in 1229 seems to make the
+meaning of these words clear, at least for the future. It decreed
+that all heretics and their abettors are to be brought to the nobles
+and the magistrates to receive due punishment, _ut animadversione
+debita puniantur_. But it adds that "heretics, who, _through fear of
+death_ or any other cause, except their own free will, return to the
+faith, are to be imprisoned by the bishop of the city to do penance,
+that they may not corrupt others;" the bishop is to provide for their
+needs out of the property confiscated.[1] The fear of death here
+seems to imply that the _animadversione debita_ meant the death
+penalty. That would prove the elasticity of the formula. At first it
+was a legal penalty which custom interpreted to mean banishment and
+confiscation; later on it meant chiefly the death penalty; and
+finally it meant solely the penalty of the stake. At any rate, this
+canon of the Council of Toulouse must be kept in mind; for we will
+soon see Pope Gregory IX quoting it.
+
+[1] D'Achery, _Spicilegium_, in-fol., vol. i, p. 711.
+
+In Italy, Frederic II promulgated on November 22, 1220, an imperial
+law which, in accordance with the pontifical decree of March 25,
+1199, and the Lateran Council of 1215, condemned heretics to every
+form of banishment, to perpetual infamy, together with the
+confiscation of their property, and the annulment of all their civil
+acts and powers. It is evident that the emperor was influenced by
+Innocent III, for, having declared that the children of heretics
+could not inherit their father's property, he adds a phrase borrowed
+from the papal decree of 1199, viz., "that to offend the divine
+majesty was a far greater crime than to offend the majesty of the
+emperor."[1]
+
+[1] _Monum. Germaniæ, Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, pp. 107-109.
+
+This at once put heresy on a par with treason, and consequently
+called for a severer punishment than the law actually decreed. We
+will soon see others draw the logical conclusion from the emperor's
+comparison, and enact the death penalty for heresy.
+
+The legates of Pope Honorius were empowered to introduce the
+canonical and imperial legislation into the statutes of the Italian
+cities, which hitherto had not been at all anxious to take any
+measures whatever against heretics. They succeeded in Bergamo,
+Piacenza, and Mantua in 1221; and in Brescia in 1225. In 1226, the
+emperor himself ordered the podestà of Pavia to banish all heretics
+from the city limits. About the year 1230, therefore, it was the
+generally accepted law throughout all Italy (recall what we have said
+above about Faenza, Florence, etc.) to banish all heretics,
+confiscate their property, and demolish their houses.
+
+Two years had hardly elapsed when, through the joint efforts of
+Frederic II and Gregory IX, the death penalty of the stake was
+substituted for banishment; Guala, a Dominican, seems to leave been
+the prime mover in bringing about this change.
+
+Frederic II, influenced by the jurists who were reviving the old
+Roman law, prolmulgated a law for Lombardy in 1224, which condemned
+heretics to the stake, or at least to have their tongues cut out.[1]
+This penalty of the stake was common--if not legal--in Germany. For
+instance, we read of the people of Strasburg burning about eighty
+heretics about the year 1212[2], and we could easily cite other
+similar executions.[3] The emperor, therefore, merely brought the use
+of the stake from Germany into Italy. Indeed it is very doubtful
+whether this law was in operation before 1230.
+
+[1] A Constitution sent to the Archbishop of Magdeburg, in the _Mon.
+Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, p. 126. [2] _Annales Marbacenses_,
+ad ann. 1215, in the _Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. xvii, p. 174. . [3] Cf.
+Julien Havet, op. cit., pp. 143, 144.
+
+But in that year, Guala, the Dominican, who had become Bishop of
+Brescia, used his authority to enact for his episcopal city the most
+severe laws against heresy. The podestà of the city had to swear that
+he would prosecute heretics as Manicheans and traitors, according to
+both the canon and the civil law, especially in view of Frederic's
+law of 1224. Innocent III's comparison between heretics and traitors,
+and between the Cathari and the Manicheans, now bore fruit. Traitors
+deserved the death penalty, while the old Roman law sent the
+Manicheans to the stake; accordingly Guala maintained that all
+heretics deserved the stake.
+
+Pope Gregory IX adopted this stern attitude, probably under the
+influence of the Bishop of Brescia, with whom he was in frequent
+correspondence.[1] The imperial law of 1224 was inscribed in 1230 or
+1231 upon the papal register, where it figures as number 103 of the
+fourth year of Gregory's pontificate. The Pope then tried to enforce
+it, beginning with the city of Rome. He enacted a law in February,
+1231, ordering, as the Council of Toulouse had done in 1229, heretics
+condemned by the Church to be handed over to the secular arm, to
+receive the punishment they deserved, _animadversio debita_. All who
+abjured and accepted a fitting penance were to be imprisoned for
+life, without prejudice to the other penalties for heresy, such as
+confiscation.[2]
+
+[1] Gregory IX was four years Pope before he enacted these new laws.
+
+[2] Cap. ii, _Mon. Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, p. 196.
+
+About the same time, Annibale, the Senator of Rome, established the
+new jurisprudence of the Church in the eternal city. Every year, on
+taking office, the Senator was to banish (_diffidare_) all heretics.
+All who refused to leave the city were, eight days after their
+condemnation, to receive the punishment they deserved. The penalty,
+_animadversio debita_, is not specified, as if every one knew what
+was meant.
+
+Inasmuch as reluctant heretics were imprisoned for life, it seems
+certain that the severer penalty reserved for obstinate heretics must
+have been the death penalty of the stake, for that was the mode of
+punishment decreed by the imperial law of 1224, which had just been
+copied on the registers of the papal chancery. But we are not left to
+mere conjecture. In February, 1231, a number of Patarins were
+arrested in Rome; those who refused to abjure were sent to the stake,
+while those who did abjure were sent to Monte Cassino and Cava to do
+penance. This case tells us instantly how we are to interpret the
+_animadversio debita_ of contemporary documents.
+
+Frederic II exercised an undeniable influence over Gregory IX, and
+the Pope in turn influenced the emperor. Gregory wrote denouncing the
+many heretics who swarmed throughout the kingdom of Sicily (the two
+Sicilies), especially in Naples and Aversa, urging him to prosecute
+them with vigor. Frederic obeyed. He was then preparing his Sicilian
+Code, which appeared at Amalfi in August, 1231. The first law,
+_Inconsutilem tunicam_, was against heretics. The emperor did not
+have to consult any one about the penalty to be decreed against
+heresy; he had merely to copy his own law, enacted in Lombardy in
+1224. This new law declared heresy a crime against society on a par
+with treason, and liable to the same penalty. And that the law might
+not be a dead letter for lack of accusers, the state officials were
+commanded to prosecute it just as they would any other crime. This
+was in reality the beginning of the Inquisition. All suspects were to
+be tried by an ecclesiastical tribunal, and if, being declared
+guilty, they refuse to abjure, they were to be burned in the presence
+of the people.[1]
+
+[1] _Constitut. Sicil_., i, 3, in Eymeric, _Directorium
+inquisitorum_, Appendix, p. 14.
+
+Once started on the road to severity, Frederic II did not stop. To
+aid Gregory IX in suppressing heresy, he enacted at Ravenna, in 1237,
+an imperial law condemning all heretics to death.[1] The kind of
+death was not indicated. But every one knew that the common German
+custom of burning heretics at the stake had now become the law. For
+by three previous laws, May 14, 1238, June 26, 1238, and February 22,
+1239, the emperor had declared that the Sicilian Code and the law of
+Ravenna were binding upon all his subjects; the law of June 26, 1238,
+merely promulgated these other laws throughout the kingdom of Arles
+and Vienne. Henceforth all uncertainty was at an end. The legal
+punishment for heretics throughout the empire was death at the stake.
+
+[1] _Mon. Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, pp. 196.
+
+Gregory IX did not wait for these laws to be enacted to carry out his
+intentions.
+
+As early as 1231 he tried to have the cities of Italy and Germany
+adopt the civil and canonical laws in vogue at Rome against heresy,
+and he was the first to inaugurate that particular method of
+prosecution, the permanent tribunal of the Inquisition.
+
+We possess some of the letters which he wrote in June, 1231, urging
+the bishops and archbishops to further his plans. He did not meet
+with much success, however, although the Dominicans and the Friars
+Minor did their best to help him. Still some cities like Milan,
+Verona, Piacenza and Vercelli adopted the measures of persecution
+which he proposed. At Milan, Peter of Verona, a Dominican, on
+September 15, 1233, had the laws of the Pope and the Senator of Rome
+inscribed in the city's statutes. The _animadversio debita_ was
+henceforth interpreted to mean the penalty of the stake. "In this
+year," writes a chronicler of the time, "the people of Milan began to
+burn heretics." In the month of July, sixty heretics were sent to the
+stake at Verona. The podestà of Piacenza sent to the Pope the
+heretics he had arrested. Vercelli, at the instance of the
+Franciscan, Henry of Milan, incorporated in 1233 into its statutes
+the law of the Senator of Rome and the imperial law of 1224; it,
+however, omitted in the last named law the clause which decreed the
+penalty of cutting out the tongue. In Germany, the Dominican, Conrad
+of Marburg, was particularly active, in virtue of his commission from
+Gregory IX. In accordance with the imperial law, we find him
+sentencing to the stake a great number of heretics.
+
+It may be admitted, however, that in his excessive zeal he even went
+beyond the desires of the sovereign pontiff. Gregory IX did not find
+everywhere so marked an eagerness to carry out his wishes. A number
+of the cities of Italy for a long time continued to punish obstinate
+heretics according to the penal code of Innocent III, i.e., by
+banishment and confiscation.
+
+That the penalty of the stake was used at this time in France is
+proved by the burning of one hundred and eighty-three Bulgarians or
+Bugres at Mont-Wimer in 1239 and by two important documents, the
+_Établissements de Saint Louis_ and the _Coutumes de Beauvaisis_.
+
+"As soon as the ecclesiastical judge has discovered, after due
+examination, that the suspect is a heretic, he must hand him over to
+the secular arm; and the secular judge must send him to the
+stake."[1] Beaumanoir says the same thing: "In such a case, the
+secular court must aid the Church; for when the Church condemns any
+one as a heretic, she is obliged to hand him over to the secular arm
+to be sent to the stake; for she herself cannot put any one to
+death."[2]
+
+[1] _Établissements de Saint Louis_, ch. cxxiii.
+
+[2] _Coutumes de Beauvaisis_, xi, 2; cf. xxx, 11, ed. Beugnot, vol.
+i, pp. 157, 413.
+
+It is a question whether this legislation is merely the codification
+of the custom introduced by popular uprisings against heresy and by
+certain royal decrees, or whether it owes its origin to the law of
+Frederic II which Gregory IX tried to enforce in France, as he had
+done in Germany and Italy. This second hypothesis is hardly probable.
+The tribunals of the Inquisition did not have to import into France
+the penalty of the stake; they found it already established in both
+central and northern France.
+
+In fact, Gregory IX urged everywhere the enforcement of the existing
+laws against heresy, and where none existed he introduced a very
+severe system of prosecution. He was the first, moreover, to
+establish an extraordinary and permanent tribunal for heresy
+trials--an institution which afterwards became known as the monastic
+Inquisition.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The prosecution and the punishment of heretics in every diocese was
+one of the chief duties of the bishops, the natural defenders of
+orthodoxy. While heresy appeared at occasional intervals, they had
+little or no difficulty in fulfilling their duty. But when the
+Cathari and the Patazins had sprung up everywhere, especially in
+southern Italy and France and northern Spain, the secrecy of their
+movements made the task of the bishop extremely hard and complicated.
+Rome soon perceived that they were not very zealous in prosecuting
+heresy. To put an end to this neglect, Lucius III, jointly with the
+Emperor Frederic Barbarossa and the bishops of his court, enacted a
+decretal at Verona in 1184, regulating the _episcopal inquisition_.
+
+All bishops and archbishops were commanded to visit personally once
+or twice a year, or to empower their archdeacons or other clerics to
+visit, every parish in which heresy was thought to exist. They were
+to compel two or three trustworthy men, or, if need be, all the
+inhabitants of the city, to swear that they would denounce every
+suspect who attended secret assemblies, or whose manner of living
+differed from that of the ordinary Catholic. After the bishop had
+questioned all who had been brought before his tribunal, he was
+empowered to punish them as he deemed fit, unless the accused
+succeeded in establishing their innocence. All who superstitiously
+refused to take the required oath (we have seen how the Cathari
+considered it criminal to take an oath) were to be condemned and
+punished as heretics, and if they refused to abjure they were handed
+over to the secular arm.[1] This was an attempt to recall the bishops
+to a sense of their duty. The Lateran Council of 1215 re-enacted the
+laws of Lucius III; and to ensure their enforcement it decreed that
+every bishop who neglected his duty should be deposed, and another
+consecrated in his place.[2] The Council of Narbonne in 1227 likewise
+ordered the bishop to appoint synodal witnesses (_testes synodales_)
+in every parish to prosecute heretics.[3] But all these decrees,
+although properly countersigned and placed in the archives, remained
+practically a dead letter. In the first place it was very difficult
+to obtain the synodal witnesses. And again, as a contemporary bishop,
+Lunas de Tuy, assures us, the bishops for the most part were not at
+all anxious to prosecute heresy. When reproached for their inaction
+they replied: "How can we condemn those who are neither convicted nor
+confessed?"[4]
+
+[1] Lucius III, Ep. clxxl, Migne, P.L., vol. cci, col. 1297 and seq.
+
+[2] The Bull _Excommunicamus_, Decretals, cap. xiii, in fine, _De
+hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+[3] Can. 14, Labbe, _Concilia_, vol. xi, pars i, col. 307, 308.
+
+[4] Lucas Tudensis, _De altera vita fideique controversiis adversus
+Albigensium errores_, cap. xix, in the _Bibliotheca Patrum_, 4 ed.
+vol. iv, col. 575-714. Lucas was Bishop of Tuy in Galicia, from 1239
+to 1249.
+
+The Popes, as the rulers of Christendom, tried to make up for the
+indifference of the bishops by sending their legates to hunt for the
+Cathari in their most hidden retreats. But they soon realized that
+this legatine inquisition was ineffective.[1]
+
+[1] Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 315 and seq.
+
+"Bishop and legate," writes Lea, "were alike unequal to the task of
+discovering those who carefully shrouded themselves under the cloak
+of the most orthodox observance; and when by chance a nest of
+heretics was brought to light, the learning and skill of the average
+Ordinary failed to elicit a confession from those who professed the
+most entire accord with the teachings of Rome. In the absence of
+overt acts, it was difficult to reach the secret thoughts of the
+sectary. Trained experts were needed whose sole business it should be
+to unearth the offenders, and extort a confession of their guilt."
+
+At an opportune moment, therefore, two mendicant orders, the
+Dominicans and the Franciscans, were instituted to meet the new needs
+of the Church. Both orders devoted themselves to preaching; the
+Dominicans were especially learned in the ecclesiastical sciences,
+i.e., canon law and theology.
+
+"The establishment of these orders," continues Lea, "seemed a
+providential interposition to supply the Church of Christ with what
+it most sorely needed. As the necessity grew apparent of special and
+permanent tribunals, devoted exclusively to the widespread sin of
+heresy, there was every reason why they should be wholly free from
+the local jealousies and enmities which might tend to the prejudice
+of the innocent, or the local favoritism which might connive at the
+escape of the guilty. If, in addition to this freedom from local
+partialities, the examiners and judges were men specially trained to
+the detection and conversion of the heretics; if also, they had by
+irrevocable vows renounced the world; if they could acquire no
+wealth, and were dead to the enticement of pleasure, every guarantee
+seemed to be afforded that their momentous duties would be fulfilled
+with the strictest justice--that while the purity of the faith would
+be protected, there would be no unnecessary oppression or cruelty or
+persecution dictated by private interests and personal revenge. Their
+unlimited popularity was also a warrant that they would receive far
+more efficient assistance in their arduous labors than could be
+expected by the bishops, whose position was generally that of
+antagonism to their flocks, and to the petty seigneurs and powerful
+barons whose aid was indispensable."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., pp. 318, 319.
+
+Gregory IX fully understood the help that the Dominicans and
+Franciscans could render him as agents of the Inquisition throughout
+Christendom.
+
+It is probable that, the Senator of Rome refers to them in his oath
+in 1231, when he speaks of the _Inquisitores datos ab Ecclesia_.[1]
+Frederic II, in his law of 1232, also mentions the _Inquisitores ab
+apostolica sede datos.[2] The Dominican Albéric traveled through
+Lombardy in November, 1232, with the title of _Inquisitor hereticæ
+pravitatis.[3] In 1231 a similar commission was entrusted to the
+Dominicans of Freisach and to the famous Conrad of Marburg. Finally,
+to quote but one more instance, Gregory IX, in 1233, wrote an
+eloquent letter to the bishops of southern France in which he said:
+"We, seeing you engrossed in the whirlwind of cares, and scarce able
+to breathe in the pressure of overwhelming anxieties, think it well
+to divide your burdens, that they may be more easily borne. We have
+therefore determined to send preaching friars against the heretics of
+France and the adjoining provinces, and we beg, warn, and exhort you,
+ordering you, as you reverence the Holy See, to receive them kindly,
+and to treat them well, giving them in this as in all else, favor,
+counsel, and aid, that they may fulfill their office."
+
+[1] Raynaldi, _Annales_, ad ann. 1231, sect. 16, 17.
+
+[2] Cap. iii, in the _Mon. Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, p. 196.
+
+[3] Potthast, _Regesta Roman. Pontif_., no. 904, 1.
+
+Their duties are outlined in a letter of Gregory IX to Conrad of
+Marburg, October 11, 1231: "When you arrive in a city, summon the
+bishops, clergy and people, and preach a solemn sermon on faith; then
+select certain men of good repute to help you in trying the heretics
+and suspects denounced before your tribunal. All who on examination
+are found guilty or suspected of heresy must promise to absolutely
+obey the commands of the Church; if they refuse, you must prosecute
+them, according to the statutes which we have recently promulgated."
+We have in these instructions all the procedure of the Inquisition:
+the time of grace; the call for witnesses and their testimony; the
+Interrogation of the Accused; the reconciliation of repentant
+heretics; the condemnation of obdurate heretics.
+
+Each detail of this procedure calls for a few words of explanation.
+
+The Inquisitor first summoned every heretic of the city to appear
+before him within a certain fixed time, which as a rule did not
+exceed thirty days. This period was called "the time of grace"
+(tempus gratiæ). The heretics who abjured during this period were
+treated with leniency. If secret heretics, they were dismissed with
+only a slight secret penance; if public heretics, they were exempted
+from the penalties of death and life imprisonment, and sentenced
+either to make a short pilgrimage, or to undergo one of the ordinary
+canonical penances.
+
+If the heretics failed to come forward of their own accord, they were
+to be denounced by the Catholic people. At first the number of
+witnesses required to make an accusation valid was not determined;
+later on two were declared necessary. In the beginning, the
+Inquisition could only accept the testimony of men and women of good
+repute; and the Church for a long time maintained that no one should
+be admitted as an accuser who was a heretic, was excommunicated, a
+homicide, a thief, a sorcerer, a diviner, or the bearer of false
+witness. But her hatred of heresy led her later on to set aside this
+law, when the faith was in question. As early as the twelfth century,
+Gratian had declared that the testimony of infamous and heretical
+witnesses might be accepted in trials for heresy.[1]
+
+[1] Pars ii, _Causa_ ii, quaest. vii, cap. xxii; _Causa_ vi, quaest.
+i, cap. xix.
+
+The edicts of Frederic II declared that heretics could not testify in
+the courts, but this disability was removed when they were called
+upon to testify against other suspects.[1] In the beginning, the
+Inquisitors were loath to accept such testimony. But in 1261
+Alexander IV assured them that it was lawful to do so.[2] Henceforth
+the testimony of a heretic was considered valid, although it was
+always left to the discretion of the Inquisition to reject it at
+will. This principle was finally incorporated into the canon law, and
+was enforced by constant practice. All legal exceptions were
+henceforth declared inoperative except that of moral enmity.[3]
+
+[1] _Historia diplomatica Frederici II_, vol. iv, pp. 299, 300.
+
+[2] Bull _Consuluit_, of January 23, 1261, in Eymeric, _Directorium
+inquisitorum_, Appendix, p. 40.
+
+[3] Eymeric, ibid., 3a pars, quæst. lxvii, pp. 606, 607. Pegna,
+ibid., pp. 607, 609, declares that great cruelty or even insulting
+words--e.g., to call a man _cornutus_ or a woman _meretrix_--might
+come under the head of enmity, and invalidate a man's testimony.
+
+Witnesses for the defence rarely presented themselves. Very seldom do
+we come across any mention of them. This is readily understood, for
+they would almost inevitably have been suspected as accomplices and
+abettors of heresy. For the same reason, the accused were practically
+denied the help of counsel. Innocent III had forbidden advocates and
+scriveners to lend aid or counsel to heretics and their abettors.[1]
+This prohibition, which in the mind of the Pope was intended only for
+defiant and acknowledged heretics, was gradually extended to every
+suspect who was striving to prove his innocence.[2]
+
+[1] Decretals, cap. xi, _De hæreticis_, lib.. v, tit. vii.
+
+[2] Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorum_, 3a pars, quaest. xxxix, p.
+565; cf. 446. Sometimes, however, the accused was granted counsel,
+but _juxta juris formam ac stylum et usum officii Inquisitionis_; cf.
+Vidal, _Le tribunal d'Inquisition_, in the _Annales de Saint Louis
+des Français_, vol. ix (1905), p. 299, note. Eymeric himself grants
+one (_Directorium_, pp. 451-453). But this lawyer was merely to
+persuade his client to confess his heresy; he was rather the lawyer
+of the court than of the accused. Vidal, op. cit., pp. 302, 303.
+Pegna, however, says (in Eymeric _Directorium_, 2a pars, ch. xi,
+Comm. 10) that in his time the accused was allowed counsel, if he
+were only suspected of heresy. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 400, 401.
+
+Heretics or suspects, therefore, denounced to the Inquisition
+generally found themselves without counsel before their judges.
+
+They personally had to answer the various charges of the indictment
+(_capitula_) made against them. It certainly would have been a great
+help to them, to have known 'the names of their accusers. But the
+fear--well-founded it was true[1]--that the accused or their friends
+would revenge themselves on their accusers, induced the Inquisitors
+to withhold the names of the witnesses.[2] The only way in which the
+prisoner could invalidate the testimony against him was to name all
+his mortal enemies. If his accusers happened to be among them, their
+testimony was thrown out of court.[3] But otherwise, he was obliged
+to prove the falsity of the accusations against him--a practically
+impossible undertaking. For if two witnesses, considered of good
+repute by the Inquisitor, agreed in accusing the prisoner, his fate
+was at once settled; whether he confessed or not, he was declared a
+heretic.
+
+[1] Guillem Pelhisse tells us that the Cathari sometimes killed those
+who had denounced their brethren. _Chronique_, ed. Douai, p. 90. A
+certain Arnold Dominici, who had denounced seven heretics, was killed
+at night in his bed by "the Believers." _Ibid._, pp. 98, 99.
+
+[2] Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a pars, q. 72. The law on this point
+varied from time to time. When Boniface VIII incorporated into the
+canon law the rule of withholding the names of witnesses, he
+expressly said that they might be produced, if there was no danger in
+doing so. Cap. 20, Sexto v, 2.
+
+[3] Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a pars, _De defensionibus reorum_, p.
+446 and seq.
+
+After the prisoner had been found guilty, he could choose one of two
+things; he could abjure his heresy and manifest his repentance by
+accepting the penance imposed by his judge, or he could obstinately
+persist either in his denial or profession of heresy, accepting
+resolutely all the consequences of such an attitude.
+
+If the heretic abjured he knelt before the Inquisitor as a penitent
+before his confessor. He had no reason to fear his judge. For,
+properly speaking, he did not inflict punishment.
+
+"The mission of the Inquisition," writes Lea, "was to save men's
+souls; to recall them to the way of salvation, and to assign salutary
+penance to those who sought it, like a father-confessor with his
+penitent. Its sentences, therefore, were not like those of an earthly
+judge, the retaliation of society on the wrongdoer, or deterrent
+examples to prevent the spread of crime; they were simply imposed for
+the benefit of the erring soul, to wash away its sin. The Inquisitors
+themselves habitually speak of their ministrations in this sense."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., p. 459.
+
+But "the sin of heresy was too grave to be expiated simply by
+contrition and amendment."[1] The Inquisitor, therefore, pointed out
+other means of expiation: "The penances customarily imposed by the
+Inquisition were comparatively few in number. They consisted,
+firstly, of pious observances--recitation of prayers, frequenting of
+churches, the discipline, fasting, pilgrimages, and fines nominally
+for pious uses,--such as a confessor might impose on his ordinary
+penitents." These were for offences of trifling import. "Next in
+grade are the _poenae confusibiles_,--the humiliating and degrading
+penances, of which the most important was the wearing of yellow
+crosses sewed upon the garments; and, finally, the severest
+punishment among those strictly within the competence of the Holy
+Office, the _murus_ or prison."[2]
+
+[1] Lea, ibid., p. 463.
+
+[2] Lea, ibid., p. 462.
+
+If the heretic refused to abjure, his obduracy put an end to the
+judge's leniency, and withdrew him at once from his jurisdiction.
+
+"The Inquisitor never condemned to death, but merely withdrew the
+protection of the Church from the hardened and impenitent sinner who
+afforded no hope of conversion, or from him who showed by relapse
+that there was no trust to be placed in his pretended repentance."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, ibid., p. 460.
+
+It was at this juncture that the State intervened. The ecclesiastical
+judge handed over the heretic to the secular arm, which simply
+enforced the legal penalty of the stake. However, the law allowed the
+heretic to abjure even at the foot of the stake; in that case his
+sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.
+
+It is hard to conceive of a greater responsibility than that of a
+mediæval Inquisitor. The life or death of the heretic was practically
+at his disposal. The Church, therefore, required him to possess in a
+pre-eminent degree the qualities of an impartial judge. Bernard Gui,
+the most experienced Inquisitor of his time (1308-1323), thus paints
+for us the portrait of the ideal Inquisitor: "He should be diligent
+and fervent in his zeal for religious truth, for the salvation of
+souls, and for the destruction of heresy. He should always be calm in
+times of trial and difficulty, and never give way to outbursts of
+anger or temper. He should be a brave man, ready to face death if
+necessary, but while never cowardly running from danger, he should
+never be foolhardy rushing into it. He should be unmoved by the
+entreaties or the bribes of those who appear before his tribunal;
+still he must not harden his heart to the point of refusing to delay
+or mitigate punishment, as circumstances may require from time to
+time.
+
+"In doubtful cases, he should be very careful not to believe too
+easily what may appear probable, and yet in reality is false; nor, on
+the other hand, should he stubbornly refuse to believe what may
+appear improbable, and yet is frequently true. He should zealously
+discuss and examine every case, so as to be sure to make a just
+decision.... Let the love of truth and mercy, the special qualities
+of every good judge, shine in his countenance, and let his sentences
+never be prompted by avarice or cruelty."[1]
+
+[1] _Practica Inquisitionis_, pars 6a, ed. Douais, 1886, pp. 231-233.
+
+This portrait corresponds to the idea that Gregory IX had of the true
+Inquisitor. In the instructions which he gave to the terrible Conrad
+of Marburg, October 21, 1223, he took good care to warn him to be
+prudent as well as zealous: "Punish if you will," he said, "the
+wicked and perverse, but see that no innocent person suffers a your
+hands:" _ut puniatur sic temeritas perversorum, quod innocentiæ
+puritas non lædatur_. Gregory IX cannot be accused of injustice, but
+he will ever be remembered as the Pope who established the
+Inquisition as a permanent tribunal, and did his utmost to enforce
+everywhere the death penalty for heresy.
+
+This Pope was, in certain respects, a very slave to the letter of the
+law. The protests of St. Augustine and many other early Fathers did
+not affect him in the least. In the beginning, while he was legate,
+he merely insisted upon the enforcement of the penal code of Innocent
+III, which did not decree any punishment severer than banishment, but
+he soon began to regard heresy as a crime similar to treason, and
+therefore subject to the same penalty, death. Certain ecclesiastics
+of his court with extremely logical minds, and rulers like Pedro II
+of Aragon and Frederic II, had reached the same conclusion, even
+before he did. Finally, in the fourth year of his pontificate, and
+undoubtedly after mature deliberation, he decided to compel the
+princes and the podestà to enforce the law condemning heretics to the
+stake.
+
+He did his utmost to bring this about. He did not forget, however,
+that the Church could not concern herself in sentences of death. In
+fact, his law of 1231 decrees that: "Heretics condemned by the Church
+are to be handed over to the secular courts to receive due punishment
+(_animadversio debita_)."[1] The emperor Frederic II had the same
+notion of the distinction between the two powers. His law of 1224
+points out carefully that heretics convicted by an ecclesiastical
+trial are to be burned in the name of the civil authority:
+_auctoritate nostra ignis judicio concremandus_.[2] The imperial law
+of 1232 likewise declares that heretics condemned by the Church are
+to be brought before a secular tribunal to receive the punishment
+they deserve.[3] This explains why Gregory IX did not believe that in
+handing over heretics to the secular arm he participated directly or
+indirectly in a death sentence.[4] The tribunals of the Inquisition
+which he established in no way modified this concept of
+ecclesiastical justice. The Papacy, the guardian of orthodoxy for the
+universal Church, simply found that the Dominicans and the
+Franciscans were more docile instruments than the episcopate for the
+suppresion of heresy. But whether the Inquisition was under the
+direction of the bishops or the monks, it could have been conducted
+on the same lines.
+
+[1] _Decretales_, cap. xv, _De Hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+[2] _Mon. Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, p. 126.
+
+[3] Ibid., p. 196.
+
+[4] Lea writes (op. cit., vol. i, p. 536, note): "Gregory IX had no
+scruple in asserting the duty of the Church to shed the blood of
+heretics." In a brief of 1234 to the Archbishop of Sens, he says:
+_Nec enim decuit Apostolicam Sedem, in oculis suis cum Madianita
+coeunte Judæo, manum suam a sanguine prohibere, ne si secus ageret
+non custodire populum Israel ... videretur_. Ripoll, i, 66. This is
+certainly a serious charge, but the citation he gives implies
+something altogether different. Lea has been deceived himself, and in
+turn has misled his readers, by a comparison which he mistook for a
+doctrinal document. The context, we think, clearly shows that the
+Pope was making a comparison between the Holy See and the Jewish
+leader Phinees, who had slain an Israelite and a harlot of Madian, in
+the very act of their crime (Num. xxv. 6, 7). That does not imply
+that the Church use the same weapons. Even if the comparison is not a
+very happy one, still we must not exaggerate its import. The Pope's
+letter did not even mention the execution of heretics. Ripoll,
+_Bullarium ord. FF. Prædicatorum_, vol. 1, p. 66.
+
+But, as a matter of fact, it unfortunately changed completely under
+the direction of the monks. The change effected by them in the
+ecclesiastical procedure resulted wholly to the detriment of the
+accused. The safeguards for their defense were in part done away
+with. A pretense was made to satisfy the demands of justice by
+requiring that the Inquisitors be prudent and impartial judges. But
+this made everything depend upon individuals, whereas the law itself
+should have been just and impartial. In this respect, the criminal
+procedure of the Inquisition is markedly inferior to the criminal
+procedure of the Middle Ages.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+SIXTH PERIOD
+DEVELOPMENT OF THE INQUISITION
+INNOCENT IV AND THE USE OF TORTURE
+
+The successors of Gregory IX were not long in perceiving certain
+defects in the system of the Inquisition. They tried their best to
+remedy them, although their efforts were not always directed with the
+view of mitigating its rigor. We will indicate briefly their various
+decrees pertaining to the tribunals, the penalties and the procedure
+of the Inquisition.
+
+In appointing the Dominicans and the Franciscans to suppress heresy,
+Gregory IX did not dream of abolishing the episcopal Inquisition.
+This was still occasionally carried on with its rival, whose
+procedure it finally adopted. Indeed no tribunal of the Inquisition
+could operate in a diocese without the permission of the Bishop, whom
+it was supposed to aid. But it was inevitable that the Inquisitors
+would in time encroach upon the episcopal authority, and relying upon
+their papal commission proceed to act as independent judges. This
+abuse frequently attracted the attention of the Popes, who, after
+some hesitation, finally settled the law on this point.
+
+"If previous orders requiring it" (episcopal concurrence), writes
+Lea, "had not been treated with contempt, Innocent IV would not have
+been obliged, in 1254, to reiterate the instructions that no
+condemnations to death or life imprisonment should be uttered without
+consulting the Bishops; and in 1255 he enjoined Bishop and Inquisitor
+to interpret in consultation any obscurities in the laws against
+heresy, and to administer the lighter penalties of deprivation of
+office and preferment. This recognition of episcopal jurisdiction was
+annulled by Alexander IV, who, after some vacillation, in 1257
+rendered the Inquisition independent by releasing it from the
+necessity of consulting with the Bishops even in cases of obstinate
+and confessed heretics, and this he repeated in 1260. Then there was
+a reaction. In 1262, Urban IV, in an elaborate code of instructions,
+formally revived the consultation in all cases involving the death
+penalty or perpetual imprisonment; and this was repeated by Clement
+IV in 1265. Either these instructions, however, were revoked in some
+subsequent enactment, or they soon fell into desuetude, for in 1273,
+Gregory X, after alluding to the action of Alexander IV in annulling
+consultation, proceeds to direct that Inquisitors in deciding upon
+sentences shall proceed in accordance with the counsel of the Bishops
+or their delegates, so that the episcopal authority might share in
+decisions of such moment."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., p. 335.
+
+This decretal remained henceforth the law. But as the Inquisitors at
+times seemed to act as if it did not exist, Boniface VIII and Clement
+IV strengthened it by declaring null and void all grave sentences in
+which the Bishop had not been consulted.[1] The consultation,
+however, between the Bishop and Inquisitor could be conducted through
+delegates. In insisting upon this, the Popes proved that they were
+anxious to give the sentences of the Inquisition every possible
+guarantee of perfect justice.
+
+[1] _Sexto_, lib. v, tit. ii, cap. 17, _Per hoc_; Clementin. lib v.
+tit. iii, cap. i, _Multorum querela_.
+
+Another way in which the Popes labored to render the sentences of the
+Inquisition just, was the institution of experts. As the questions
+which arose before the tribunals in matters of heresy were often very
+complex, "it was soon found requisite to associate with the
+Inquisitors in the rendering of sentences men versed in the civil and
+canon law, which had by this time become an intricate study,
+requiring the devotion of a lifetime. Accordingly they were empowered
+to call in experts to deliberate with them over the evidence, and
+advise with them on the sentence to be rendered."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i. p. 388.
+
+The official records of the sentences of the Inquisition frequently
+mention the presence of these experts, _periti_ and _boni viri_.
+Their number, which varied according to circumstances, was generally
+large. At a consultation called by the Inquisitors in January, 1329,
+at the Bishop's palace in Pamiers, there were thirty-five present,
+nine of whom were jurisconsults; and at another in September, 1329,
+there were fifty-one present, twenty of whom were civil lawyers.
+
+"At a comparatively early date, the practice was adopted of allowing
+a number of culprits to accumulate, whose fate was determined and
+announced in a solemn _Sermo_ or _auto-da-fé_. In the final shape
+which the assembly of counsellors assumed, we find it summoned to
+meet on Fridays, the _Sermo_ always taking place on Sundays. When the
+number of criminals was large, there was not much time for
+deliberation in special cases. The assessors were always to be
+jurists and Mendicant Friars, selected by the Inquisitor in such
+numbers as he saw fit. They were severally sworn on the Gospels to
+secrecy, and to give good and wise counsel, each one according to his
+conscience, and to the knowledge vouchsafed him by God. The
+Inquisitor then read over his summary of each case, sometimes
+withholding the name of the accused, and they voted the sentence,
+"Penance at the discretion of the Inquisitor"--"that person is to be
+imprisoned, or abandoned to the secular arm"--while the Gospels lay
+on the table to so that our judgment might come from the face of God,
+and our eyes might see justice."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 389.
+
+We have here the beginnings of our modern jury. As a rule, the
+Inquisitors followed the advice of their counsellors, save when they
+themselves favored a less severe sentence. The labor of these experts
+was considerable, and often lasted several days. "A brief summary of
+each case was submitted to them. Eymeric maintained that the whole
+case ought to be submitted to them; and that was undoubtedly the
+common practice. But Pegna, on the other hand, thought it was better
+to withhold from the assessors the names of both the witnesses and
+the prisoners. He declares that this was the common practice of the
+Inquisition, at least as far as the names were concerned. This was
+also the practice of the Inquisitors of southern France, as Bernard
+Gui tells us. The majority of the counsellors received a brief
+summary of the case, the names being withheld. Only a very few of
+them were deemed worthy to read the full text of all the
+interrogatories."[1]
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., p. 421.
+
+We can readily see how the _periti_ or _boni viri_, who were called
+upon to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused from evidence
+considered in the abstract, without any knowledge of the prisoners'
+names or motives, could easily make mistakes. In fact, they did not
+have data enough to enable them to decide a concrete case. For
+tribunals are to judge criminals and not crimes, just as physicians
+treat sick people and not diseases in the abstract. We know that the
+same disease calls for a different treatment in different
+individuals; in like manner a crime must be judged with due reference
+to the mentality of the one Who has committed it. The Inquisition did
+not seem to understand this.[1]
+
+[1] Even in our day the jury is bound to decide on the merits of the
+case submitted to it, without regarding the consequences of its
+verdict. The foreman reminds the jurymen in advance that "they will
+be false to their oath if, in giving their decision, they are biased
+by the consideration of the punishment their verdict will entail upon
+the prisoner."
+
+The assembly of experts, therefore, instituted by the Popes did not
+obtain the good results that were expected. But we must, at least, in
+justice admit that the Popes did their utmost to protect the
+tribunals of the Inquisition from the arbitrary action of individual
+judges, by requiring the Inquisitors to consult both the _boni viri_
+and the Bishops.
+
+Over the various penalties of the Inquisition, the Popes likewise
+exercised a supervision which was always just and at times most
+kindly.
+
+The greatest penalties which the Inquisition could inflict were life
+imprisonment, and abandonment of the prisoner to the secular arm. It
+is only with regard to the first of these penalties that we see the
+clemency of both Popes and Councils. Any one who considers the rough
+manners of this period, must admit that the Church did a great deal
+to mitigate the excessive cruelty of the medieval prisons.
+
+The Council of Toulouse, in 1229, decreed that repentant heretics
+"must be imprisoned, in such a way that they could not corrupt
+others." It also declared that the Bishop was to provide for the
+prisoners' needs out of their confiscated property. Such measures
+betoken an earnest desire to safeguard the health, and to a certain
+degree the liberty of the prisoners. In fact, the documents we
+possess prove that the condemned sometimes enjoyed a great deal of
+freedom, and were allowed to receive from their friends an additional
+supply of food, even when the prison fare was ample.
+
+But in many places the prisoners, even before their trial, were
+treated with great cruelty. "The papal orders were that they (the
+prisons) should be constructed of small, dark cells for solitary
+confinement, only taking care that the _enormis rigor_ of the
+incarceration should not extinguish life."[1] But this last provision
+was not always carried out. Too often the prisoners were confined in
+narrow cells full of disease, and totally unfit for human habitation.
+The Popes, learning this sad state of affairs, tried to remedy it.
+Clement V was particularly zealous in his attempts at prison
+reform.[2] That he succeeded in bettering, at least for a time, the
+lot of these unfortunates, in whom he interested himself, cannot be
+denied.[3]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 491.
+
+[2] He ordered that the prisons be kept in good condition, that they
+be looked after by both Bishop and Inquisitor, each of whom was to
+appoint a jailer who would keep the prison keys, that all provisions
+sent to the prisoners should be faithfully given them, etc. Cf.
+Decretal _Multorum querela_ in Eymeric, _Directorium_, p. 112.
+
+[3] His legates Pierre de la Chapelle and Béranger fr Frédol visited
+in April, 1306, the prisons of Carcassonne and Albi, changed the
+jailers, removed the irons from the prisoners, and made others leave
+the subterranean cells in which they had been confined. Douais,
+_Documents_, vol. ii, p. 304 seq. Cf. Compayré, Études historiques
+sur l'Albigeois, pp. 240-245.
+
+If the reforms he decreed were not all carried out, the blame must be
+laid to the door of those appointed to enforce them. History frees
+him from all responsibility.
+
+The part played by the Popes, the Councils, and the Inquisitors in
+the infliction of the death penalty does not appear in so favorable a
+light. While not directly participating in the death sentences, they
+were still very eager for the executions of the heretics they
+abandoned to the secular arm. This is well attested by both documents
+and facts.
+
+Lucius III, at the Council of Verona in 1184, ordered sovereigns to
+swear, in the presence of their Bishops, to execute fully and
+conscientiously the ecclesiastical and civil laws against heresy. If
+they refused or neglected to do this, they themselves were liable to
+excommunication and their rebellious cities to interdict.[1]
+
+[1] Decretal _Ad abolendam_, in the Decretals, cap. ix, _De
+Hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii. Cf. Sexto, lib. v, tit. ii, c. 2. _Ut
+Officium_; Council of Arles, 1254, can. iii; Council of Béziers,
+1246, can. ix.
+
+Innocent IV, in 1252, enacted a law still more severe, insisting on
+the infliction of the death penalty upon heretics. "When," he says,
+"heretics condemned by the Bishop, his Vicar, or the Inquisitors,
+have been abandoned to the secular arm, the podestà or ruler of the
+city must take charge of them at once, and within five days enforce
+the laws against them."[1]
+
+[1] Eymeric, _Directorium_, Appendix. p. 8.
+
+This law, or rather the bull _Ad Extirpanda_, which contains it, was
+to be inscribed in perpetuity in all the local statute books. Any
+attempt to modify it was a crime, which condemned the offender to
+perpetual infamy, and a fine enforced by the ban. Moreover, each
+podestà, at the beginning and end of his term, was required to have
+this bull read in all places designated by the Bishop and the
+Inquisitors, and to erase from the statute books all laws to the
+contrary.
+
+At the same time, Innocent IV issued instructions to the Inquisitors
+of upper Italy, urging them to have this bull and the edicts of
+Frederic II inserted in the statutes of the various cities.[1] And to
+prevent mistakes being made as to which imperial edicts he wished
+enforced, he repeated these instructions in 1254, and inserted in one
+of his bulls the cruel laws of Frederic II, viz., the edict of
+Ravenna, _Commissis nobis_, which decreed the death of obdurate
+heretics; and the Sicilian law, _Inconsutilem tunicam_, which
+expressly decreed that such heretics be sent to the stake.
+
+[1] Cf. the bulls _Cum adversus, Tunc potissime, Ex Commissis nobis_,
+etc., in Eymeric, ibid., pp. 9-12.
+
+These decrees remained the law as long as the Inquisition lasted. The
+bull _Ad Extirpanda_ was, however, slightly modified from time to
+time. "In 1265, Clement IV again went over it, carefully making some
+changes, principally in adding the word 'Inquisitors' in passages
+where Innocent had only designated the Bishops and Friars, thus,
+showing that the Inquisition had, during the interval, established
+itself as the recognized instrumentality in the prosecution of
+heresy, and the next year he repeated Innocent's emphatic order to
+the Inquisitors to enforce the insertion of his legislation and that
+of his predecessors upon the statute books everywhere, with the free
+use of excommunication and interdict."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 339.
+
+A little later, Nicholas IV, who during his short pontificate
+(1288-1292), greatly favored the Inquisition in its work, re-enacted
+the bulls of Innocent IV and Clement IV, and ordered the enforcement
+of the laws of Frederic II, lest, perchance, they might fall into
+desuetude.[1]
+
+[1] _Registers_, published by Langlois, no. 4253.
+
+It is therefore proved beyond question that the Church, in the person
+of the Popes, used every means at her disposal, especially
+excommunication, to compel the State to enforce the infliction of the
+death penalty upon heretics. This excommunication, moreover, was all
+the more dreaded, because, according to the canons, the one
+excommunicated, unless absolved front the censure, was regarded as a
+heretic himself within a year's time, and was liable therefore to the
+death penalty.[1] The princes of the day, therefore, had no other way
+of escaping this penalty, except by faithfully carrying out the
+sentence of the Church.
+
+[1] Alexander IV decreed this penalty against the contumacious.
+Sexto, _De Hæreticis_, cap. vii. Boniface VIII extended it to those
+princes and magistrates who did not enforce the sentences of the
+Inquisition. Sexto, _De Hæreticis_, cap. xviii in Eymeric, 2a pars,
+p. 110.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The Church is also responsible for having introduced torture into the
+proceedings of the Inquisition. This cruel practice was introduced by
+Innocent IV in 1252.
+
+Torture had left too terrible an impression upon the minds of the
+early Christians to permit of their employing it in their own
+tribunals. The barbarians who founded the commonwealths of Europe,
+with the exception of the Visigoths, knew nothing of this brutal
+method of extorting confessions. The only thing of the kind which
+they allowed was flogging, which, according to St. Augustine, was
+rather akin to the correction of children by their parents. Gratian,
+who recommends it in his _Decretum_,[1] lays it down as an "accepted
+rule of canon law that no confession is to be extorted by
+torture."[2] Besides, Nicholas I, in his instructions to the
+Bulgarians, had formally denounced the torturing of prisoners.[3] He
+advised that the testimony of three persons be required for
+conviction; if these could not be obtained, the prisoner's oath upon
+the Gospels was to be considered sufficient.
+
+[1] _Causa_ v, quæst. v, Illi qui, cap. iv.
+
+[2] _Causa_ xv, quæst, vi, cap. i.
+
+[3] _Responsa ad Consulta Bulgarorum_, cap. lxxxvi, Labbe,
+_Concilia_, vol. viii, col. 544.
+
+The ecclesiastical tribunals borrowed from Germany another method of
+proving crime, viz., the ordeals, or judgments of God.
+
+There was the duel, the ordeal of the cross, the ordeal of boiling
+water, the ordeal of fire, and the ordeal of cold water. They had a
+great vogue in nearly all the Latin countries, especially in Germany
+and France. But about the twelfth century they deservedly fell into
+great disfavor, until at last the Popes, particularly Innocent III,
+Honorius III, and Gregory IX, legislated them out of existence.[1]
+
+[1] _Decretals_, lib. v, tit. xxxv, cap. i-iii. Cf. Vacandard,
+_L'Église et les Ordalies_ in _Études de critique et d'histoire_, 3d
+ed., Paris, 1906, pp. 191-215.
+
+At the very moment the popes were condemning the ordeals, the revival
+of the Roman law throughout the West was introducing the customs of
+antiquity. It was then "that jurists began to feel the need of
+torture, and accustom themselves to the idea of its introduction."
+"The earliest instances with which I have met," writes Lea, "occur in
+the Veronese code of 1228, and the Sicilian constitutions of Frederic
+II in 1231, and in both of these the references to it show how
+sparingly and hesitatingly it was employed. Even Frederic, in his
+ruthless edicts, from 1220 to 1239, makes no allusion to it, but in
+accordance with the Verona decree of Lucius III, prescribes the
+recognized form of canonical purgation for the trial of all suspected
+heretics."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 421.
+
+The use of torture, as Tanon has pointed out, had perhaps never been
+altogether discontinued. Some ecclesiastical tribunals, at least in
+Paris, made use of it in extremely grave cases, at the close of the
+twelfth andd beginning of the thirteenth centuries.[1] But this was
+exceptional: in Italy, apparently, it had never been used.
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., pp. 362-373.
+
+Gregory IX ignored all references to torture made in the Veronese
+code, and the constitutions of Frederic II. But Innocent IV, feeling
+undoubtedly that it was a quick and effective method for detecting
+criminals, authorized the tribunals of the Inquisition to employ it.
+In his bull _Ad Extirpanda_, he says: "The podestà or ruler (of the
+city) is hereby ordered to force all captured heretics to confess and
+accuse their accomplices by torture which will not imperil life or
+injure limb, just as thieves and robbers are forced to accuse their
+accomplices, and to confess their crimes; for these heretics are true
+thieves, murderers of souls, and robbers of the sacraments of
+God."[1] The Pope here tries to defend the use of torture, by
+classing heretics with thieves and murderers. A mere comparison is
+his only argument.
+
+[1] Bull _Ad Extirpanda_, in Eymeric, _Directorium_, Appendix, p. 8.
+
+This law of Innocent IV was renewed and confirmed November 30, 1259,
+by Alexander IV,[1] and again on November 3, 1265, by Clement IV.[2]
+The restriction of Innocent III to use torture "which should not
+imperil life or injure limb" (_Cogere citra membri diminutionem et
+mortis periculum_), left a great deal to the discretion of the
+Inquisitors. Besides flogging, the other punishments inflicted upon
+those who refused to confess the crime of which they were accused
+were antecedent imprisonment, the rack, the _strappado_, and the
+burning coals.
+
+[1] Potthast, _Regesta_, no. 17714.
+
+[2] Ibid., no. 19433.
+
+When after the first interrogatory the prisoner denied what the
+Inquisitors believed to be very probable or certain, he was thrown
+into prison. The _durus carcer et arcta vita_ was deemed an excellent
+method of extorting confessions.
+
+"It was pointed out," says Lea, "that judicious restriction of diet
+not only reduced the body, but weakened the will, and rendered the
+prisoner less able to resist alternate threats of death and promises
+of mercy. Starvation, in fact, was reckoned one of the regular and
+most efficient methods to subdue unwilling witnesses and
+defendants."[1] This was the usual method employed in Languedoc. "It
+is the only method," writes Mgr. Douais,[2] "to to extort confessions
+mentioned either in the records of the notary of the Inquisition of
+Carcassonne[3] or in the sentences of Bernard Gui. It was also the
+practice of the Inquisitors across the Rhine."
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 421.
+
+[2] Douais, _Documents_, vol. i, p. ccxl.
+
+[3] Douais, _Documents_, vol. ii, p. 115 and seq.
+
+Still the use of torture, especially of the rack and the _strappado_,
+was not unknown in southern Europe, even before the promulgation of
+Innocent's bull _Ad Extirpanda_.
+
+The rack was a triangular frame, on which the prisoner was stretched
+and bound, so that he could not move. Cords were attached to his arms
+and legs, and then connected with a windlass, which, when turned,
+dislocated the joints of the wrists and ankles.
+
+The _strappado_ or vertical rack was no less painful. The prisoner
+with his hands tied behind his back was raised by a rope attached to
+a pulley and windlass to the top of a gallows, or to the ceiling of
+the torture chamber; he was then let fall with a jerk to within a few
+inches of the ground. This was repeated several times. The cruel
+torturers sometimes tied weights to the victim's feet to increase the
+shock of the fall.
+
+The punishment of burning, "although a very dangerous punishment," as
+an Inquisitor informs us, was occasionally used. We read of an
+official of Poitiers, who, following a Toulousain custom, tortured a
+sorceress by placing her feet on burning coals (_juxta carbones
+accensos_). This punishment is described by Marsollier in his
+_Histoire de l'Inquisition_. First a good fire was started; then the
+victim was stretched out on the ground, his feet manacled, and turned
+toward the flame. Grease, fat, or some other combustible substance
+was rubbed upon them, so that they were horribly burned. From time to
+time a screen was placed between the victim's feet and the brazier,
+that the Inquisitor might have an opportunity to resume his
+interrogatory.
+
+Such methods of torturing the accused were so detestable, that in the
+beginning the torturer was always a civil official, as we read in the
+bull of Innocent IV. The canons of the Church, moreover, prohibited
+all ecclesiastics from taking part in these tortures, so that the
+Inquisitor who, for whatever reason, accompanied the victim into the
+torture chamber, was thereby rendered irregular, and could not
+exercise his office again, until he had obtained the necessary
+dispensation. The tribunals complained of this cumbrous mode of
+administration, and declared that it hindered them from properly
+interrogating the accused. Every effort was made to have the
+prohibition against clerics being present in the torture chamber
+removed. Their object was at last obtained indirectly. On April 27,
+1260, Alexander IV authorized the Inquisitors and their associates to
+mutually grant all the needed dispensations for irregularities that
+might be incurred.[1] This permission was granted a second time by
+Urban IV, August 4, 1262;[2] it was practically an authorization to
+assist at the interrogatories at which torture was employed. From
+this time the Inquisitors did not scruple to appear in person in the
+torture chamber. The manuals of the Inquisition record this practice
+and approve it.[3]
+
+[1] Douais, _Documents_, vol. i, p. xxv, n. 3.
+
+[2] _Regesta_, no. 18390.
+
+[3] Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a pars, p. 481.
+
+Torture was not to be employed until the judge had been convinced
+that gentle means were of no avail.[1] Even in the torture chamber,
+while the prisoner was being stripped of his garments and was being
+bound, the Inquisitor kept urging him to confess his guilt. On his
+refusal, the _vexatio_ began with slight tortures. If these proved
+ineffectual, others were applied with gradually increased severity;
+at the very beginning, the victim was shown all the various
+instruments of torture, in order that the mere sight of them might
+terrify him into yielding.[2]
+
+[1] A grave suspicion against the prisoner was required before he
+could be tortured.
+
+[2] Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a pars, p. 481, col. 1.
+
+The Inquisitors realized so well that such forced confessions were
+valueless, that they required the prisoner to confirm them after he
+had left the torture chamber. The torture was not to exceed a half
+hour. "Usually," writes Lea, "the procedure appears to be that the
+torture was continued until the accuser signified his readiness to
+confess, when he was unbound and carried into another room where his
+confession was made. If, however, the confession was extracted during
+the torture, it was read over subsequently to the prisoner, and he
+was asked if it were true.... In any case, the record was carefully
+made that the confession was free and spontaneous, without the
+pressure of force or fear."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i. p. 427.
+
+"It is a noteworthy fact, however, that in the fragmentary documents
+of inquisitorial proceedings which have reached us, the references to
+torture are singularly few.... In the six hundred and thirty-six
+sentences borne upon the register of Toulouse from 1309 to 1323, the
+only allusion to torture is in the recital of the case of Calvarie,
+but there are numerous instances in which the information wrung from
+the convicts who had no hope of escape, could scarce have been
+procured in any other manner. Bernard Gui, who conducted the
+Inquisition of Toulouse during this period, has too emphatically
+expressed his sense of the utility of torture on both principals and
+witnesses for us to doubt his readiness in its employment."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., p. 424.
+
+Besides, the investigation which Clement V ordered into the
+iniquities of the Inquisition of Carcassonne, proves clearly that the
+accused were frequently subjected to torture.[1] That we rarely find
+reference to torture in the records of the Inquisition need not
+surprise us. For in the beginning, torture was inflicted by civil
+executioners outside of the tribunal of the Inquisition; and even
+later on, when the Inquisitors were allowed to take part in it, it
+was considered merely a means of making the prisoner declare his
+willingness to confess afterwards. A confession made under torture
+had no force in law; the second confession only was considered valid.
+That is why it alone, as a rule, is recorded.
+
+[1] Clement V required the consent of the Inquisitor and the local
+Bishop before a heretic could be tortured, _vel tormentis exponere
+illis_. Decretal _Multorum querela_, in Eymeric, _Directorium_, 2a
+pars, p. 112.
+
+But if the sufferings of the victims of the Inquisition were not
+deemed worthy of mention in the records, they were none the less real
+and severe. Imprudent or heartless judges were guilty of grave abuses
+in the use of torture. Rome, which had authorized it, at last
+intervened, not, we regret to say, to prohibit it altogether, but at
+least to reform the abuses which had been called to her attention.
+One reform of Clement V ordered the Inquisition never to use torture
+without the Bishop's consent, if he could be reached within eight
+days.[1]
+
+[1] Decretal, _Multorum querela_.
+
+"Bernard Gui emphatically remonstrated against this, as seriously
+crippling the efficiency of the Inquisition, and proposed to
+substitute for it the meaningless phrase that torture should only be
+used _with mature and careful deliberation_, but his suggestion was
+not heeded, and the Clementine regulations remained the law of the
+Church."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 424; Bernard Gui, _Practica_, ed.
+Douais, 4a pars, p. 188.
+
+The code of the Inquisition was now practically complete, for
+succeeding Popes made no change of any importance. The data before us
+prove that the Church forgot her early traditions of toleration, and
+borrowed from the Roman jurisprudence, revived by the legists, laws
+and practices which remind one of the cruelty of ancient paganism.
+But once this criminal code was adopted, she endeavored to mitigate
+the cruelty with which it was enforced. If this preoccupation is not
+always visible--and it is not in her condemnation of obdurate
+heretics--we must at least give her the credit of insisting that
+torture "should never imperil life or injure limb:" _Cogere citra
+membri diminutionem et mortis periculum_.
+
+We will now ask how the theologians and canonists interpreted this
+legislation, and how the tribunals of the Inquisition enforced it.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+THEOLOGIANS, CANONISTS, AND CASUISTS OF THE INQUISITION
+
+THE gravity of the crime of heresy was early recognized in the
+Church. Gratian discussed this question in a special chapter of his
+_Decretum._[1] Innocent III, Guala, the Dominican, and the Emperor
+Frederic II, as we have seen, looked upon heresy as treason against
+Almighty God, i.e., the most dreadful of crimes.
+
+[1] _Causa_ xxii, q. vii, cap. 16.
+
+The theologians, and even the civil authorities, did not concern
+themselves much with the evil effects of heresy upon the social
+order, but viewed it rather as an offense against God. Thus they made
+no distinction between those teachings which entailed injury on the
+family and on society, and those which merely denied certain revealed
+truths. Innocent III, in his constitution of September 23, 1207,
+legislated particularly against the Patarins, but he took care to
+point out that no heretic, no matter what the nature of his error
+might be, should be allowed to escape the full penalty of the law.[1]
+Frederic II spoke in similar terms in his Constitutions of 1220,
+1224, and 1232. This was the current teaching throughout the Middle
+Ages.
+
+[1] Ep. x, 130.
+
+But it is important to know what men then understood by the word
+heresy. We can ascertain this from the theologians and canonists,
+especially from St. Raymond of Pennafort and St. Thomas Aquinas. St.
+Raymond gives four meanings to the word heretic, but from the
+standpoint of the canon law he says: "A heretic is one who denies the
+faith."[1] St. Thomas Aquinas is more accurate. He declares that no
+one is truly a heretic unless he obstinately maintains his error,
+even after it has been pointed out to him by ecclesiastical
+authority. This is the teaching of St. Augustine.[2]
+
+[1] S. Raymundi, _Summa_, lib. i, cap. _De Hæreticis_, sect. i, Roman
+Edition, 1603, p. 39.
+
+[2] _Summa_, IIa, IIae, quæst. xi, Conclusio; cf. ibid., ad 3um,
+quotations from St. Augustine.
+
+But by degrees the word, taken at first in a strict sense, acquired a
+broader meaning. St. Raymond includes schism in the notion of heresy.
+"The only difference between these two crimes," he writes, "is the
+difference between genus and species;" every schism ends in heresy.
+And relying on the authority of St. Jerome, the rigorous canonist
+goes so far as to declare that schism is even a greater crime than
+heresy. He proves this by the fact that Core, Dathan, and Abiron,[1]
+who seceded from the chosen people, were punished by the most
+terrible of punishments. "From the enormity of the punishment, must
+we not argue the enormity of the crime?" St. Raymond therefore
+declares that the same punishment must be inflicted upon the heretic
+and the schismatic.[2]
+
+[1] Num. xvi. 31-33.
+
+[2] Loc. cit., lib. i, cap. _De Schismaticis_, pp. 45-47
+
+"The authors of the treatises on the Inquisition," writes Tanon,
+"classed as heretics all those who favored heresy, and all
+excommunicates who did not submit to the Church within a certain
+period. They declared that a man excommunicated for any cause
+whatever, who did not seek absolution within a year, incurred by this
+act of rebellion a light suspicion of heresy; that he could then be
+cited before the Inquisitor to answer not only for the crime which
+had caused his excommunication, but also for his orthodoxy. If he did
+not answer this second summons, he was at once considered
+excommunicated for heresy, and if he remained under this second
+excommunication for a year, he was liable to be condemned as a real
+heretic. The light suspicion caused by his first excommunication
+became in turn a vehement and then a violent suspicion which,
+together with his continued contumacy, constituted a full proof of
+heresy."[1]
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., pp. 235, 236.
+
+The theologians insisted greatly upon respect for ecclesiastical and
+especially Papal authority. Everything that tended to lessen this
+authority seemed to them a practical denial of the faith. The
+canonist Henry of Susa (Hostiensis + 1271), went so far as to say
+that "whoever contradicted or refused to accept the decretals of the
+Popes was a heretic."[1] Such disobedience was looked upon as a
+culpable disregard of the rights of the papacy, and consequently a
+form of heresy.
+
+[1] In Baluze-Mansi, _Miscellanea_, vol. ii. p. 275.
+
+Superstition was also classed under the heading of heresy. The
+canonist Zanchino Ugolini tells us that he was present at the
+condemnation of an immoral priest, who was punished by the
+Inquisitors not for his licentiousness, but because he said Mass
+every day in a state of sin, and urged in excuse that he considered
+himself pardoned by the mere fact of putting on the sacred
+vestments.[1]
+
+[1] _Tractat. de Hæret_., cap. ii.
+
+The Jews, as such, were never regarded as heretics. But the usury
+they so widely practiced evidenced an unorthodox doctrine on
+thievery, which made them liable to be suspected of heresy. Indeed,
+we find several Popes upbraiding them "for maintaining that usury is
+not a sin." Some Christians also fell into the same error, and
+thereby became subject to the Inquisition. Pope Martin V, in his bull
+of November 6, 1419., authorizes the Inquisitors to prosecute these
+usurers.[1]
+
+[1] Bull _Inter cætera_, sent to the Inquisitor Pons Feugeyron.
+
+Sorcery and magic were also put on a par with heresy. Pope Alexander
+IV had decided that divination and sorcery did not fall under the
+jurisdiction of the Inquisition, unless there was manifest heresy
+involved.[1] But casuists were not wanting to prove that heresy was
+involved in such cases. The belief in the witches' nightly rides
+through the air, led by Diana or Herodias of Palestine, was very
+widespread in the Middle Ages, and was held by some as late as the
+fifteenth century. The question whether the devil could carry off men
+and women was warmly debated by the theologians of the time. "A case
+adduced by Albertus Magnus, in a disputation on the subject before
+the Bishop of Paris, and recorded by Thomas of Cantimpré, in which
+the daughter of the Count of Schwalenberg was regularly carried away
+every night for several hours, gave immense satisfaction to the
+adherents of the new doctrine, and eventually an ample store of more
+modern instances was accumulated to confirm Satan in his enlarged
+privileges."[2] Satan, it seems, imprinted upon his clients an
+indelible mark, the _stigma diabolicum_.
+
+[1] Bull of December 9, 1257.
+
+[2] Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 497.
+
+"In 1458, the Inquisitor Nicholas Jaquerius remarked reasonably
+enough that even if the affair was an illusion, it was none the less
+heretical, as the followers of Diana and Herodias were necessarily
+heretics in their waking hours."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., pp. 497, 498.
+
+About 1250, the Inquisitor Bernard of Como taught categorically that
+the phenomena of witchcraft, especially the attendance at the
+witches' Sabbath, were not fanciful but real: "This is proved," he
+says, "from the fact that the Popes permitted witches to be burned at
+the stake; they would not have countenanced this, if these persons
+were not real heretics, and their crimes only imaginary, for the
+Church only punishes proved crimes."[1] Witchcraft was, therefore,
+amenable to the tribunals of the lnquisition.[2]
+
+[1] _Lucerna Inquisitorium_, Romæ, 1584, p. 144.
+
+[2] In a letter to one of the cardinals of the Holy Office, dated
+1643, witchcraft is classed with heresy. Douais, _Documents_, vol. i,
+p. ccliv. In practice, the heretical tendency of witchcraft was hard
+to determine. Each judge, therefore, as a rule, pronounced sentence
+according to his own judgment.
+
+While the casuists thus increased the number of crimes which the
+Inquisition could prosecute, on the other hand, they shortened the
+judicial procedure then in vogue.
+
+Following the Roman law, the Inquisition at first recognized three
+forms of action in criminal cases--_accusatio, denuntiatio_, and
+_inquisitio_. In the _accusatio_, the accuser formally inscribed
+himself as able to prove his accusation; if he failed to do so, he
+had to undergo the penalty which the prisoner would have incurred
+(_poena talionis_).[1] "From the very beginning, he was placed in the
+same position as the one he accused, even to the extent of sharing
+his imprisonment."[2] The _denuntiatio_ did not in any way bind the
+accuser; he merely handed in his testimony, and then ceased
+prosecuting the case; the judge at once proceeded to take action
+against the accused. In the _inquisitio_, there was no one either to
+accuse or denounce the criminal; the judge cited the suspected
+criminal before him and proceeded to try him. This was the most
+common method of procedure; from it the Inquisition received its
+name.[3]
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., p. 260, n. 4.
+
+[2] Tancrède, _Ordo judiciorum_, lib. ii.
+
+[3] On these three forms of action, cf. Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a
+pars, p. 413 et seq.
+
+The Inquisitorial procedure was therefore inspired by the Roman law.
+But in practice the _accusatio_, which gave the prisoner a chance to
+meet the charges against him, was soon abandoned. In fact the
+Inquisitors were always most anxious to set it aside. Urban IV
+enacted a decree, July 28, 1262, whereby they were allowed to proceed
+_simpliciter et de plano, absque advocatorum strepitu et figura_.[1]
+Bernard Gui insisted on this in his _Practica_.[2] Eymeric advised
+his associates, when an accuser appeared before them who was
+perfectly willing to accept the _poena talionis_ in case of failure,
+to urge the imprudent man to withdraw his demand. For he argued that
+the _accusatio_ might prove harmful to himself, and besides give too
+much room for trickery.[3] In other words, the Inquisitors wished to
+be perfectly untrammeled in their action.
+
+[1] Bull _Præ cunctis_ of July 28, 1262.
+
+[2] _Practica_, 4a pars. ed. Douais, p. 192.
+
+[3] _Directorium_, p. 414. col. 1.
+
+The secrecy of the Inquisition's procedure was one of the chief
+causes of complaint.
+
+But the Inquisition, dreadful as it was, did not lack defenders. Some
+of their arguments were most extravagant and far-fetched. "Paramo, in
+the quaint pedantry with which he ingeniously proves that God was the
+first Inquisitor, and the condemnation of Adam and Eve the first
+model of the Inquisitorial process, triumphantly points out that he
+judges them in secret, thus setting the example which the Inquisition
+is bound to follow, and avoiding the subtleties which the criminals
+would have raised in their defence, especially at the suggestion of
+the crafty serpent. That he called no witnesses is explained by the
+confession of the accused, and ample legal authority is cited to show
+that these confessions were sufficient to justify the conviction and
+punishment."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 406.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The subtlety of the casuists had full play when they came to discuss
+the torture of the prisoner who absolutely refused to confess.
+According to law, the torture could be inflicted but once, but this
+regulation was easily evaded. For it was lawful to subject the
+prisoner to all the various kinds of torture in succession; and if
+additional evidence were discovered, the torture could be repeated.
+When they desired, therefore, to repeat the torture, even after an
+interval of some days, they evaded the law by calling it technically
+not a "repetition" but a "continuance of the first torture:" _Ad
+continuandum tormenta, non ad iterandum_, as Eymeric styles it.[1]
+This quibbling of course gave full scope to the cruelty and the
+indiscreet zeal of the Inquisitors.
+
+[1] Eymeric, _Directorium_, 3a pars, p. 481, col. 2.
+
+But a new difficulty soon arose. Confessions extorted under torture,
+had, as we have seen, no legal value. Eymeric himself admitted that
+the results obtained in this way were very unreliable, and that the
+Inquisitors should realise this fact.
+
+If, on leaving the torture chamber, the prisoner reiterated his
+confession, the case was at once decided. But suppose, on the
+contrary, that the confession extorted under torture was afterwards
+retracted, what was to be done? The Inquisitors did not agree upon
+this point. Some of them, like Eymeric, held that in this case the
+prisoner was entitled to his freedom. Others, like the author of the
+_Sacro Arsenale_, held that "the torture should be repeated, in order
+that the prisoner might be forced to reiterate his first confession
+which had evidently compromised him." This seems to have been the
+traditional practice of the Italian tribunals.
+
+But the casuists did not stop here. They discovered "that Clement V
+had only spoken of torture in general, and had not specifically
+alluded to witnesses, whence they concluded that one of the most
+shocking abuses of the system, the torture of witnesses, was left to
+the sole discretion of the Inquisitor, and this became the accepted
+rule. It only required an additional step to show that after the
+accused had been convicted by evidence or had confessed as to
+himself, he became a witness as to the guilt of his friends, and thus
+could be arbitrarily (?) tortured to betray them."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 425.
+
+As a matter of course, the canonists and the theologians approved the
+severest penalties inflicted by the Inquisition. St. Raymond of
+Pennafort, however, who was one of the most favored counselors of
+Gregory IX, still upheld the criminal code of Innocent III. The
+severest penalties he defended were the excommunication of heretics
+and schismatics, their banishment and the confiscation of their
+property.[1] His _Summa_ was undoubtedly completed when the Dccretal
+of Gregory IX appeared, authorizing the Inquisitors to enforce the
+cruel laws of Frederic II.
+
+[1] Lea writes (op. cit., vol. i, p. 229, note) "Saint Raymond of
+Pennafort, the compiler of the decretals of Gregory I, who was the
+highest authority in his generation, lays it down as a principle of
+ecclesiastical law that the heretic is to be coerced by
+excommunication and confiscation, and if they fail, _by the extreme
+exercise of the secular power_. The man who was doubtful in faith was
+to be held a heretic, and so also was the schismatic who, while
+believing all the articles of religion, refused the obedience due to
+the Roman Church. All alike were to be forced into the Roman fold,
+and the fate of Core, Dathan and Abiron was invoked _for the
+destruction of the obstinate_." (_Summa_, lib. i. tit. v, 2, 4, 8;
+tit. vi, i.) This is a travesty of the mind, and words of Saint
+Raymond. He merely called attention to the lot of Core, Dathan and
+Abiron to show what a great crime schism was. He never asserted that
+heretics or schismatics, even when obdurate, ought to be "destroyed."
+_Summa_, lib. i, cap. _De Hæreticis_ and _De Schismaticis_.
+
+But St. Thomas, who wrote at a time when the Inquisition was in full
+operation, felt called upon to defend the infliction of the death
+penalty upon heretics and the relapsed. His words deserve careful
+consideration. He begins by answering the objections that might be
+brought from the Scriptures and the Fathers against his thesis. The
+first of these is the well-known passage of St. Matthew, in which our
+Saviour forbids the servants of the householder to gather up the
+cockle before the harvest time, lest they root up the wheat with
+it.[1] St. John Chrysostom, he says, "argues from this text that it
+is wrong to put heretics to death."[2] But according to St. Augustine
+the words of the Saviour: "Let the cockle grow until the harvest,"
+are explained at once by what follows: "lest perhaps gathering up the
+cockle, you root up the wheat also with it." When there is no danger
+of uprooting the wheat and no danger of schism, violent measures may
+be used:" _Cum metus iste non subest ... non dormiat severitas
+disciplinæ_."[3] We doubt very much whether such reasoning would have
+satisfied St. John Chrysostom, St. Theodore the Studite, or Bishop
+Wazo, who understood the Saviour's prohibition in a literal and an
+absolute sense.
+
+[1] Matt. xiii. 28-30.
+
+[2] _In Matthæum_, Homil. xlvi.
+
+[3] Augustine, _Contra epistol. Parmeniani_, lib. iii. cap. ii.
+
+But this passage does not reveal the whole mind of the Angelic
+doctor. It is more evident in his exegesis of Ezechiel xviii. 32,
+_Nolo mortem peccatoris_. "Assuredly," he writes, "none of us desires
+the death of a single heretic. But remember that the house of David
+could not obtain peace until Absalom was killed in the war he waged
+against his father. In like manner, the Catholic Church saves some of
+her children by the death of others, and consoles her sorrowing heart
+by reflecting that she is acting for the general good."[1]
+
+[1] St. Thomas, _Summa_, loc. cit., ad. 4m.
+
+If we are not mistaken, St. Thomas is here trying to prove, on the
+authority of St. Augustine, that it is sometimes lawful to put
+heretics to death.
+
+But it is only by garbling and distorting the context that St. Thomas
+makes the Bishop of Hippo advocate the very penalty which, as a
+matter of fact, he always denounced most strongly. In the passage
+quoted, St. Augustine was speaking of the benefit that ensues to the
+Church _from the suicide of heretics_, but he had no idea whatever of
+maintaining that the Church had the right to put to death her
+rebellious children.[1] St. Thomas misses the point entirely, and
+gives his readers a false idea of the teaching of St. Augustine.
+
+[1] Ep. clxxxv, ad _Bonifacium_, no. 32.
+
+Thinking, however, that he has satisfactorily answered all the
+objections against his thesis, he states it as follows: "Heretics who
+persist in their error after a second admonition ought not only to be
+excommunicated, but also abandoned to the secular arm to be put to
+death. For, he argues, it is much more wicked to corrupt the faith on
+which depends the life of the soul, than to debase the coinage which
+provides merely for temporal life; wherefore, if coiners and other
+malefactors are justly doomed to death, much more may heretics be
+justly slain once they are convicted. If, therefore, they persist in
+their error after two admonitions, the Church despairs of their
+conversion, and excommunicates them to ensure the salvation of others
+whom they might corrupt; she then abandons them to the secular arm
+that they may be put to death."[1]
+
+[1] _Summa_, IIa IIae, quæst. xi, art. 3.
+
+St. Thomas in this passage makes a mere comparison serve as an
+argument. He does not seem to realize that if his reasoning were
+valid, the Church could go a great deal further, and have the death
+penalty inflicted in many other cases.
+
+The fate of the relapsed heretic had varied from Lucius III to
+Alexander IV. The bull _Ad Abolendam_ decreed that converted heretics
+who relapsed into heresy were to be abandoned to the secular arm
+without trial.[1] But at the time this Decretal was published, the
+_Animadversio debita_ of the State entailed no severer penalty than
+banishment and confiscation. When this term, already fearful enough,
+came to mean the death penalty, the Inquisitors did not know whether
+to follow the ancient custom or to adopt the new interpretation. For
+a long time they followed the traditional custom. Bernard of Caux,
+who was undoubtedly a zealous Inquisitor, is a case in point. In his
+register of sentences from 1244 to 1248, we meet with sixty cases of
+relapse, not one of whom was punished by a penalty severer than
+imprisonment. But a little later on the strict interpretation of the
+_Animadversio debita_ began to prevail. In St. Thomas's time it meant
+the death penalty; and we find him citing the bull _Ad Abolendam_[2]
+as his authority for the infliction of the death penalty upon the
+relapsed, penitent or impenitent, in ignorance of the fact that this
+document originally had a totally different interpretation.
+
+[1] Decretals, in cap. ix, _De hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+[2] _Summa_, IIa IIae, quæst. ix, art. 4: _Sed contra_.
+
+His reasoning therefore rests on a false supposition. He advocates
+the death penalty for the relapsed in the name of Christian charity.
+For, he argues, charity has for its object the spiritual and temporal
+welfare of one's neighbor. His spiritual welfare is the salvation of
+his soul; his temporal welfare is life, and temporal advantages, such
+as riches, dignities, and the like. These temporal advantages are
+subordinate to the spiritual, and charity must prevent their
+endangering the eternal salvation of their possessor. Charity,
+therefore, to himself and to others, prompts us to deprive him of
+these temporal goods, if he makes a bad use of them. For if we
+allowed the relapsed heretic to live, we would undoubtedly endanger
+the salvation of others, either because he would corrupt the faithful
+whom he met, or because his escape from punishment would lead others
+to believe they could deny the faith with impunity. The inconstancy
+of the relapsed is, therefore, a sufficient reason why the Church,
+although she receives him to penance for his soul's salvation,
+refuses to free him from the death penalty.
+
+Such reasoning is not very convincing. Why would not the life
+imprisonment of the heretic safeguard the faithful as well as his
+death? Will you answer that this penalty is too trivial to prevent
+the faithful from falling into heresy? If that be so, why not at once
+condemn all heretics to death, even when repentant? That would
+terrorize the wavering ones all the more. But St. Thomas evidently
+was not thinking of the logical consequences of his reasoning. His
+one aim was to defend the criminal code in vogue at the time. That is
+his only excuse. For we must admit that rarely has his reasoning been
+so faulty and so weak as in his thesis upon the coercive power of the
+Church, and the punishment of heresy.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+St. Thomas defended the death penalty without indicating how it was
+to be inflicted. The commentators who followed him were more
+definite. The _Animadversio debita_, says Henry of Susa (Hostiensis +
+1271), in his commentary on the bull _Ad Abolendam_, is the penalty
+of the stake (_ignis crematio_). He defends this interpretation by
+quoting the words of Christ: "If any one abide not in me, he shall be
+cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him
+_and cast him into the fire_, and he burneth."[1] Jean d'Andre (+
+1348), whose commentary carried equal weight with Henry of Susa's
+throughout the Middle Ages, quotes the same text as authority for
+sending heretics to the stake.[2] According to this peculiar
+exegesis, the law and custom of the day merely sanctioned the law of
+Christ. To regard our Saviour as the precursor or rather the author
+of the criminal code of the Inquisition evidences, one must admit, a
+very peculiar temper of mind.
+
+[1] John, xv, 6; Hostiensis, on the decretal _Ad Abolendum_, cap. xi,
+in Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorum_, 2a pars, pp. 149, 150.
+
+[2] On the decretal _Ad Abolendum_, cap. xiv, in Eymeric, ibid., pp.
+170, 171.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The next step was to free the Church from all responsibility in the
+infliction of the death penalty--truly an extremely difficult
+undertaking.
+
+St. Thomas held, with many other theologians, that heretics condemned
+by the Inquisition should be abandoned to the secular arm, _judicio
+sæculari_. But he went further, and declared it the duty of the State
+to put such criminals to death.[1] The State, therefore, was to carry
+out this sentence at least indirectly in the name of the Church.
+
+[1]_Summa_, IIa, IIae, quæst. xi, art. 3.
+
+A contemporary of St. Thomas thus meets this difficulty: "The Pope
+does not execute any one," he says, "or order him to be put to death;
+heretics are executed by the law which the Pope tolerates; they
+practically cause their own death by committing crimes which merit
+death."[1] The heretic who received this answer to his objections
+must surely have found it very far-fetched. He could easily have
+replied that the Pope "not only allowed heretics to be put to death,
+but ordered this done under penalty of excommunication." And by this
+very fact he incurred all the odium of the death penalty.
+
+[1] _Disputatio inter catholicum et Paterinum hæreticum_, cap. xii,
+in Martène, _Thesaurus Anecdotorum_, vol. v. col. 1741.
+
+The casuists of the Inquisition, however, came to the rescue, and
+tried to defend the Church by another subterfuge. They denounced in
+so many words the death penalty and other similar punishments, while
+at the same time they insisted upon the State's enforcing them. The
+formula by which they dismissed an impenitent or a relapsed heretic
+was thus worded: "We dismiss you from our ecclesiastical forum, and
+abandon you to the secular arm. But we strongly beseech the secular
+court to mitigate its sentence in such a way as to avoid bloodshed or
+danger of death."[1] We regret to state, however, that the civil
+judges were not supposed to take these words literally. If they were
+at all inclined to do so, they would have been quickly called to a
+sense of their duty by being excommunicated. The clause inserted by
+the canonists was a mere legal fiction, which did not change matters
+a particle.
+
+[1] Eymeric, _Directorium Inquisitorum_, 3a pars, p. 515, col. 2.
+
+It is hard to understand why such a formula was used at all. Probably
+it was first used in other criminal cases in which abandonment to the
+secular arm did not imply the death penalty, and the Inquisition kept
+using it merely out of respect to tradition. It seemed to palliate
+the too flagrant contradiction which existed between ecclesiastical
+justice and the teaching of Christ, and it gave at least an external
+homage to the teaching of St. Augustine, and the first Fathers of the
+Church. Moreover, as it furnished a specious means of evading by the
+merest form of prohibition against clerics taking part in sentences
+involving the effusion of blood and death, aud the irregularity
+resulting therefrom, the Inquisitors used it to reassure their
+conscience.
+
+Finally, however, some Inquisitors, realizing the emptiness of this
+formula, dispensed with it altogether, and boldly assumed the full
+responsibility for their sentences. They deemed the rôle of the State
+so unimportant in the execration of heretics, that they did not even
+mention it. The Inquisition is the real judge; it lights the fires.
+"All whom we cause to be burned," says the famous Dominican Sprenger
+in his _Malleus Maleficarum_.[1] Although not intended as an accurate
+statement of fact,[2] it indicates pretty well the current idea
+regarding the share of the ecclesiastical tribunals in the punishment
+of heretics.
+
+[1] _Malleus maleficarum maleficas et earum hæresim framea
+conterens_, auct. Jacobo Sprengero, Lugduni, 1660, pars ii, quæst. i,
+cap. ii, p. 108, col. 2.
+
+[2] We must interpret in the same sense the decree of the Council of
+Constance pronouncing the penalty of the stake against the followers
+of John Huss, John Wyclif and Jerome of Prague. Session xxiv, no. 23,
+Harduin, _Concilia_, vol. viii, col. 896 et seq. The Council here
+indicates only the usual punishment for the relapsed, without really
+decreeing it.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+It is evident that the theologians and canonists were simply
+apologists for the Inquisition, and interpreters of its laws. As a
+rule, they tried, like St. Raymond Pennafort and St. Thomas, to
+defend the decrees of the Popes. We cannot say that they succeeded in
+their task. Some by their untimely zeal rather compromised the cause
+they endeavored to defend. Others, going counter to the canon law,
+drew conclusions from it that the Popes never dreamed of, and in this
+way made the procedure of the Inquisition, already severe enough,
+still more severe, especially in the use of torture.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+THE INQUISITION IN OPERATION
+
+We do not intend to relate every detail of the Inquisition's action.
+A brief outline, a sort of bird's-eye view, will suffice.
+
+Its field, although very extensive, did not comprise the whole of
+Christendom, nor even all the Latin countries. The Scandinavian
+kingdoms escaped it almost entirely; England experienced it only once
+in the case of the Templars; Castile and Portugal knew nothing of it
+before the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella. It was almost unknown in
+France--at least as an established institution--except in the South,
+in what was called the county of Toulouse, and later on in Languedoc.
+
+The Inquisition was in full operation in Aragon. The Cathari, it
+seems, were wont to travel frequently from Languedoc to Lombardy, so
+that upper Italy had from an early period its contingent of
+Inquisitors. Frederic II had it established in the two Sicilies and
+in many cities of Italy and Germany. Honorius IV (1285-1287)
+introduced it into Sardinia.[1] Its activity in Flanders and Bohemia
+in the fifteenth century was very considerable. These were the chief
+centers of its operations.
+
+[1] Potthast, no. 22307; _Registres d'Honorius IV_, published by
+Maurice Prou, 1888, no. 163.
+
+Some of the Inquisitors had an exalted idea of their office. We
+recall the ideal portrait of the perfect Inquisitor drawn by Bernard
+Gui and Eymeric. But, by an inevitable law of history, the reality
+never comes up to the ideal.
+
+We know the names of many Inquisitors, monks and bishops.[1] There
+are some whose memory is beyond reproach; in fact the Church honors
+them as saints, because they died for the faith.[2]
+
+[1] Mgr. Douais, _Documents_, vol. 1, pp. cxxix-ccix.
+
+[2] V.g., Peter of Verona, assassinated by heretics in 1252.
+
+But others fulfilled the duties of their office in a spirit of hatred
+and impatience, contrary both to natural justice and to Christian
+charity. Who can help denouncing, for instance, the outrageous
+conduct of Conrad of Marburg. Contemporary writers tell us that when
+heretics appeared before his tribunal, he granted them no delay, but
+at once required them to answer yes or no to the accusations against
+them. If they confessed their guilt, they were granted their lives,
+and thrown into prison; if they refused to confess, they were at once
+condemned and sent to the stake. Such summary justice strongly
+resembles injustice.
+
+But Robert the Dominican, known as Robert the Bougre, for he was a
+converted Patarin, surpassed even Conrad in cruelty. Among the
+exploits of this Inquisitor, special mention must be made of the
+executions at Montwimer in Champagne. The Bishop, Moranis, had
+allowed a large community of heretics to grow up about him. Robert
+determined to punish the town severely. In one week he managed to try
+all his prisoners. On May 29, 1239, about one hundred and eighty of
+them, with their bishop, were sent to the stake. Such summary
+proceedings caused complaints to be sent to Rome against this cruel
+Inquisitor. He was accused of confounding in his blind fanaticism the
+innocent with the guilty, and of working upon simple souls so as to
+increase the number of his victims. An investigation proved that
+these complaints were well founded. In fact, it revealed such
+outrages that Robert the Bougre was at first suspended from his
+office, and finally condemned to perpetual imprisonment.[1]
+
+[1] Aubri des Trois Fontaines, ad ann. 1239, _Mon. Germ., SS_., vol.
+xxiii, 944, 945.
+
+Other acts of the Inquisition were no less odious. In 1280 the
+Consuls of Carcassonne complained to the Pope, the King of France,
+and the episcopal vicars of the diocese of the cruelty and injustice
+of Jean Galand in the use of torture. He had inscribed on the walls
+of the Inquisition these words: _dominculas ad torquendum et
+cruciandum homines diversis generibus tormentorum_. Some prisoners
+had been tortured on the rack, and most of them were so cruelly
+treated that they lost the use of their arms and legs, ad became
+altogether helpless. Some even died in great agony of their torments.
+The complaint continues in this tone, and mentions five or six times
+the great cruelty of the tortures inflicted.
+
+Philip the Fair, who was noble-hearted occasionally, addressed a
+letter May 13, 1291, to the seneschal of Carcassonne in which he
+denounced the Inquisitors for their cruel torturing of innocent men,
+whereby the living and the dead were fraudulently convicted; and
+among other abuses he mentions particularly "tortures newly
+invented." Another letter of his (1301) addressed to Foulques de
+Saint-Georges, contained a similar denunciation.
+
+In a bull intended for Cardinals Taillefer de la Chappelle and
+Bérenger de Frédol, March 13, 1306, Clement V mentions the complaints
+of the citizens of Carcassonne, Albi, and Cordes, regarding the
+cruelty practiced in the prisons of the Inquisition. Several of these
+unfortunates "were so weakened by the rigors of their imprisonment,
+the lack of food, and the severity of their tortures (_sevitia
+tormentorum_), that they died."
+
+The facts in Savonarola's case are very hard to determine. The
+official account of his interrogatory declares that he was subjected
+to three and a half _tratti di fune_. This was a form of torture
+known as the _strappado_. The Signoria, in answer to the reproaches
+of Alexander VI at their tardiness, declared that they had to deal
+with a man of great endurance; that they had assiduously tortured him
+for many days with slender results.[1] Burchard, the papal
+prothonotary, states that he was put to the torture seven times. It
+made very little difference whether these tortures were inflicted
+_per modum continuationis_ or _per modum iterationis_, as the casuist
+of the Inquisition put it. At any rate, it was a crying abuse.[2]
+
+[1] Villari, _La storia di Girolamo Savonarola_, Firenze, 1887, vol.
+ii, p. 197.
+
+[2] H. Lucas, _Fra Girolamo Savonarola, a Biographical Study_.
+London, Sands, 1905.
+
+We may learn something of the brutality of the Inquisitors from the
+remorse felt by one of them. He had inflicted the torture of the
+burning coals upon a sorceress. The unfortunate woman died soon
+afterwards in prison as a result of her torments. The Inquisitor,
+knowing he had caused her death, wrote John XXII for dispensation
+from the irregularity he had thereby incurred.
+
+But the greatest excesses of the Inquisition were due to the
+political schemes of sovereigns. Such instances were by no means
+rare. Hardly had the Inquisition been established, when Frederic II
+tried to use it for political purposes. He was anxious to put the
+prosecution for heresy in the hands of his royal officers, rather
+than in the hands of the bishops and the monks. When, therefore, in
+1233, he boasted in a letter to Gregory IX that he had put to death a
+great number of heretics in his kingdom, the Pope answered that he
+was not at all deceived by this pretended zeal. He knew full well
+that the Emperor wished simply to get rid of his personal enemies,
+and that he had put to death many who were not heretics at all.
+
+The personal interests of Philip the Fair were chiefly responsible
+for the trial and condemnation of the Templars. Clement V himself and
+the ecclesiastical judges were both unfortunately guilty of truckling
+in the whole affair. But their unjust condemnation was due chiefly to
+the king's desire to confiscate their great possessions.[1]
+
+[1] The tribunals of the Inquisition were perhaps never more cruel
+than in the case of the Templars. At Paris, according to the
+testimony of Ponsard de Gisiac, thirty-six Templars perished under
+torture. At Sens, Jacques de Saciac said that twenty-five had died of
+torment and suffering. (Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 262.) The Grand
+Master, Jacques Molay, owed his life to the vigor of his
+constitution. Confessions extorted by such means were altogether
+valueless. Despite all his efforts, Philip the Fair never succeeded
+in obtaining a formal condemnation of the Order.
+
+Joan of Arc was also a victim demanded by the political interests of
+the day. If the Bishop of Beauvais, Pierre Cauchon, had not been such
+a bitter English partisan, it is very probable that the tribunal over
+which he presided would not have brought in the verdict of guilty,
+which sent her to the stake;[1] she would never have been considered
+a heretic at all, much less a relapsed one.
+
+[1] The greatest crime of the trial was the substitution, in the
+documents, of a different form of abjuration from the one Joan read
+near the church of Saint-Ouen.
+
+It would be easy to cite many instances of the same kind, especially
+in Spain. If there was any place in the world where the State
+interfered unjustly in the trials of the Inquisition, it was in the
+kingdom of Ferdinand and Isabella, the kingdom of Philip II.[1]
+
+[1] The complaints of various Popes prove this. Cf. Héféle, _Le
+Carinal Ximénes_, Paris, 1857, pp. 265-274. Langlois, _L'Inquisition
+d'après les travaux recents_, Paris, 1902, pp. 89-141; Bernaldez,
+_Historia de los Reyes: Cronicas de los reyes de Castilla, Fernandez
+y Isabel_, Madrid, 1878; Rodrigo, _Historia verdadera de la
+Inquisicion_, 3 vol., Madrid, 1876-1877.
+
+From all that has been said, we must not infer that the tribunals of
+the Inquisition were always guilty of cruelty and injustice; we ought
+simply to conclude that too frequently they were. Even one case of
+brutality and injustice deserves perpetual odium.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The severest penalties the Inquisition could inflict (apart from the
+minor penalties of pilgrimages, weariltg the crosses, etc.), were
+imprisonment, abandonment to the secular arm, and confiscation of
+property.
+
+"Imprisonment, according to the theory of the Inquisition, was not a
+punishment, but a means by which the penitent could obtain, on the
+bread of tribulation and the water of affliction, pardon from God for
+his sins, while at the same time he was closely supervised to see
+that he persevered in the right path, and was segregated from the
+rest of the flock, thus removing all danger of infection."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 484.
+
+Heretics who confessed their errors during the time of grace were
+imprisoned only for a short time; those who confessed under torture
+or under threat of death were imprisoned for life; this was the usual
+punishment for the relapsed during most of the thirteenth century. It
+was the only penalty that Bernard of Caux (1244-1248) inflicted upon
+them.
+
+ "There were two kinds of imprisonment," writes Lea, "the milder or
+_murus largus_, and the harsher, known as _murus strictus_, or
+_durus_, or _arctus_. All were on bread and water, and the
+confinement, according to rule, was solitary, each penitent in a
+separate cell, with no access allowed to him, to prevent his being
+corrupted, or corrupting others; but this could not be strictly
+enforced, and about 1306 Geoffroi d'Ablis stigmatizes as an abuse the
+visits of clergy and the laity of both sexes, permitted to
+prisoners."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 486, 487.
+
+As far back as 1282, Jean Galand had forbidden the jailer of the
+prison of Carcassonne to eat or take recreation with the prisoners,
+or to allow them to take recreation, or to keep servants.
+
+Husband and wife, however, were allowed access to each other if
+either or both were imprisoned; and late in the fourteenth century
+Eymeric declared that zealous Catholics might be admitted to visit
+prisoners, but not women and simple folk who might be perverted, for
+converted prisoners, he added, were very liable to relapse, and to
+infect others, and usually died at the stake.[1]
+
+[1] Eymeric, _Directorium_, p. 507.
+
+"In the milder form, or _murus largus_, the prisoners apparently
+were, if well behaved, allowed to take exercise in the corridors,
+where sometimes they had opportunities of converse with each other,
+and with the outside world. This privilege was ordered to be given to
+the aged and infirm by the cardinals who investigated the prison of
+Carcassonne, and took measures to alleviate its rigors. In the
+harsher confinement, or _murus strictus_, the prisoner was thrust
+into the smallest, darkest, and most noisome of cells, with chains on
+his feet,--in some cases chained to the wall. This penance was
+inflicted on those whose offences had been conspicuous, or who had
+perjured themselves by making incomplete confessions, the matter
+being wholly at the discretion of the Inquisitor. I have met with one
+case, in 1328, of aggravated false-witness, condemned to the _murus
+strictissimus_, with chains on both hands and feet. When the culprits
+were members of a religious order, to avoid scandal, the proceedings
+were usually held in private, and the imprisonment would be ordered
+to take place in a convent of their own order. As these buildings,
+however, were unprovided with cells for the punishment of offenders,
+this was probably of no great advantage to the victim. In the case of
+Jeanne, widow of B. de la Tour, a nun of Lespinasse, in 1216, who had
+committed acts of both Catharan and Waldensian heresy, and had
+prevaricated in her confession, the sentence was confinement in a
+separate cell in her own convent, where no one was to enter or see
+her, her food being pushed in through an opening left for the
+purpose--in fact, the living tomb known as the _in pace_."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i. p. 487.
+
+In these wretched prisons the diet was most meager. But "while the
+penance prescribed was a diet of bread and water, the Inquisition,
+with unwonted kindness, did not object to its prisoners receiving
+from their friends contributions of food, wine, money, and garments,
+and among its documents are such frequent allusions to this that it
+may be regarded as an established custom."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 491.
+
+The number of prisoners, even with a life sentence, was rather
+considerable. The collections of sentences that we possess give us
+precise information on this point.
+
+We have, for instance, the register of Bernard of Caux, the
+Inquisitor of Toulouse for the years 1244-1246. Out of fifty-two of
+his sentences, twenty-seven heretics were sentenced to life
+imprisonment. We must not forget also that several of them contain
+condemnations of many individuals; the second, for instance,
+condemned thirty-three persons, twelve of whom were to be imprisoned
+for life; the fourth condemned eighteen persons to life imprisonment.
+On the other hand, the register does not record one case of
+abandonment to the secular arm, even for relapse into heresy.[1]
+
+[1] Douais, _Documents_, vol. 1, pp. cclx-cclxi; vol. ii. pp. i-89.
+
+Bernard must be considered a severe Inquisitor. The register of the
+notary of Carcassonne, published by Mgr. Douais, contains for the
+years 1249-1255 two hundred and seventy-eight articles. But
+imprisonment very rarely figured among the penances inflicted. The
+usual penalty was enforced service in the Holy Land, _passagium,
+transitus ultramarinus_.[1]
+
+[1] Douais, _Documents_, vol. 1, pp. cclxvii-cclxxxiv; vol. ii. pp.
+115, 243.
+
+Bernard Gui, Inquisitor at Toulouse for seventeen years (1308-1325),
+was called upon to condemn nine hundred and thirty heretics, of whom
+two were guilty of false witness, eighty-nine were dead, and forty
+were fugitives. In the eighteen _Sermones_ or _Autos-da-fé_ in which
+he rendered the sentences we possess today, he condemned three
+hundred and seven to prison, i.e., about one-third of all the
+heretics brought before his tribunal.[1]
+
+[1] Douais, _Documents_, vol. 1, pp. ccv, cf. Appendix B. Note that
+the register records 930 condemnations. Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p.
+550.
+
+The tribunal of the Inquisition of Pamiers in the Sermones of
+1318-1324, held ninety-eight heresy trials. The records declare that
+two were acquitted; and say nothing of the penalty inflicted upon
+twenty-one others who were tried. The most common penalty was life
+imprisonment. In the Sermo of March 8, thirteen heretics were
+sentenced to prison, eight of whom were set at liberty on July 4,
+1322; these latter were condemned to wear single or double crosses.
+Six out of ten, tried on August 2, 1321, were sentenced for life to
+the German prison. On June 19, 1323, six out of ten tried were
+condemned to prison (_murus strictus_); on August 12, 1324, ten out
+of eleven tried were condemned for life to the strict prison: _ad
+strictum muri Carcassonne inquisitionis carcerem in vinculis ferreis
+ac in pane et aqua_. We gather from these statistics that the
+Inquisition of Pamiers inflicted the penalty of life imprisonment as
+often as, if not more than, the Inquisition of Toulouse.
+
+We have seen above that the penalty of imprisonment was sometimes
+mitigated and even commuted. Life imprisonment was sometimes commuted
+into temporary imprisonment, and both into pilgrimages or wearing the
+cross. Twenty, imprisoned by the Inquisition of Pamiers, were set at
+liberty on condition that they wore the cross. This clemency was not
+peculiar to the Inquisition of Pamiers. In 1328, by a single
+sentence, twenty-three prisoners of Carcassonne were set at liberty,
+and other slight penances substituted.
+
+In Bernard Gui's register of sentences we read of one hundred and
+nineteen cases of release from prison with the obligation to wear the
+cross, and, of this number, fifty-one were subsequently released from
+even the minor penalty. Prisoners were sometimes set at liberty on
+account of sickness, e.g., women with child, or to provide for their
+families.
+
+"In 1246 we find Bernard dc Caux, in sentencing Bernard Sabbatier, a
+relapsed heretic, to perpetual imprisonment, adding that as the
+culprit's father is a good Catholic, and old and sick, the son may
+remain with him, and support him as long as he lives, meanwhile
+wearing the crosses."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, 486.
+
+Assuredly this penalty of imprisonment was terrible, but while we may
+denounce some Inquisitors for having made its suffering more intense
+out of malice or indifference, we must also admit that others
+sometimes mitigated its severity.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The condemnation of obstinate heretics, and later on, of the
+relapsed, permitted no exercise of clemency. How many heretics were
+abandoned to the secular arm, and thus sent to the stake, is
+impossible to determine. However, we have some interesting statistics
+of the more important tribunals on this point. The portion of the
+register of Bernard de Caux which relates to impenitent heretics has
+been lost, but we have the sentences of the Inquisition of Pamiers
+(1318-1324), and of Toulouse (1308-1323). In nine _Sermones_ or
+_Autos-da-fé_[1] of the tribunal of Pamiers, condemning sixty-four
+persons, only five heretics were abandoned to the secular arm.
+
+[1] The _Sermo generalis_ after which the sentences were solemnly
+pronounced by the Inquisitors was called in Spain _auto-da-fé_.
+
+Bernard Gui presided over eighteen _autos-da-fé_, and condemned nine
+hundred and thirty heretics; and yet he abandoned only forty-two to
+the secular arm.[1] These Inquisitors were far more lenient than
+Robert the Bougre. Taking all in all, the Inquisition in its
+operation denoted a real progress in the treatment of criminals; for
+it not only put an end to the summary vengeance of the mob, but it
+diminished considerably the number of those sentenced to death.[2]
+
+[1] Cf. the sentences of Bernard Gui in Douais, _Documents_, vol. i,
+p. ccv, and Appendix B.
+
+[2] Even while the Inquisition was in full operation, the heretics
+who managed to escape the ecclesiastical tribunals had no reason to
+congratulate themselves. For we read that Raymond VII, Count of
+Toulouse in 1248, caused eighty heretics to be burned at Berlaiges,
+near Agen, after they had confessed in his presence, without giving
+them the opportunity of recanting.
+
+We notice at Pamiers that only one out of thirteen, while at Toulouse
+but one in twenty-two, was sentenced to death. Although terrible
+enough, these figures are far different from the exaggerated
+statistics imagined by the fertile brains of ignorant controversialists.[1]
+
+[1] Of course we do not here refer to honest historians like Langlois
+who estimates that one heretic out of every ten was abandoned to the
+secular arm (op. cit., p. 106). Dom Brial erroneously states in his
+preface to vol. xix of the _Recueil des Historiens des Gautes_ (p.
+xxiii) that Bernard Gui burned 637 heretics. This figure represented
+the number of heretics then known to be _condemned_, but only 40 of
+these were abandoned to the secular arm. The exact number is 42 out
+of 930. Cf. Douais, _Documents_, vol. i, p. ccv, and Appendix B.
+
+It is true that many writers are haunted by the cruelty of the
+Spanish or German tribunals which sent to the stake a great number of
+victims, i.e., _conversos_ and witches.
+
+From the very beginning, the Spanish Inquisition acted with the
+utmost severity. "Twelve hundred _conversos_, penitents, obdurate and
+relapsed heretics were present at the _auto-da-fé_ in Toledo, March,
+1487; and, according to the most conservative estimate, Torquemada
+sent to the stake about two thousand heretics"[1] in twelve years.
+
+[1] Langlois, _L'Inquisition d'après des tableaux récents_, 1902, pp.
+105, 106. This number, without being certain, is asserted by
+contemporaries, Pulga and Marinco Siculo. Cf. Héféle, _Le Cardinal
+Ximénes_, Paris, 1856, pp. 290, 291. Another contemporary,
+Bernaldes, speaks of over 700 burned from 1481-1488; cf. Gams,
+_Kirchengeschichte von Spanien_, vol. iii, 2, p. 69.
+
+"During this same period," says a contemporary historian, "fifteen
+thousand heretics did penance, and were reconciled to the Church."[1]
+That makes a total of seventeen thousand trials. We can thus
+understand how Torquemada, although grossly calumniated, came to be
+identified with this period, during which so many thousands of
+_conversos_ appeared before the Spanish tribunals.
+
+[1] Pulgar, in Héféle, op. cit., p. 291.
+
+The zeal of the Inquisitors seemed to abate after a time.[1] Perhaps
+they thought it better to keep the Jews and the Mussulmans in the
+Church by kindness. But kindness failed just as force had failed.
+After one hundred years, the number of obdurate _conversos_ was as
+great as ever. Several ardent advocates of force advised the
+authorities to send them all to the stake. But the State determined
+to drive the Moriscos from Spain, as it had banished the Jews in
+1492. Accordingly in September, 1609, a law was passed decreeing the
+banishment, under penalty of death, of all Moriscos, men, women, and
+children. Five hundred thousand persons, about one sixteenth of the
+postulation were thus banished from Spain, and forced to seek refuge
+on the coasts of Barbary. "Behold," writes Brother Bléda, "the most
+glorious event in Spain since the times of the Apostles; religious
+unity is now secured; an era of prosperity is certainly about to
+dawn."[2] This era of prosperity so proudly announced by the
+Dominican zealot never came. This extreme measure, which pleased him
+so greatly, in reality weakened Spain, by depriving her of hundreds
+of thousands of her subjects.
+
+[1] "The Inquisition of Valencia condemned one hundred and twelve
+_conversos_ in 1538 (of whom fourteen were sent to the stake); at the
+_auto-da-fé_ of Seville, September 24, 1559, three were burned, and
+eight were reconciled and sentenced to life imprisonment; on June 6,
+1585, the Inquisitors of Saragossa in their account to Philip II
+speak of having reconciled sixty-three, and of having sent five to
+the stake." Langlois, op. cit., p. 106.
+
+[2] Cf. Bléda, _Defensio fidei in causa neophytorum sive Moriscorum
+regni Valentini totiusque Hispaniæ,_, Valencia, 1610.
+
+The witchcraft fever which spread over Europe in the fifteenth and
+sixteenth centuries stimulated to an extraordinary degree the zeal of
+the Inquisitors. The bull of Innocent VIII, _Summis Desiderantes_,
+December 5, 1484, made matters worse. The Pope admitted that men and
+women could have immoral relations with demon, and that sorcerers by
+their magical incantations could injure the harvests, the vineyards,
+the orchards and the fields.[1]
+
+[1] _Bullarium_, vol. v, p. 296 and seq., and Pegna's _Bullarium_ in
+Eymeric, _Directorium Inquisit_., p. 83.
+
+He also complained of the folly of those ecclesiastics and laymen who
+opposed the Inquisition in its prosecution of heretical sorcerers,
+and concluded by conferring additional powers upon the Dominican
+Inquisitors, Institoris and Sprenger, the author of the famous
+_Malleus Maleficarum_.
+
+Innocent VIII assuredly had no intention of committing the Church to
+a belief in the phenomena he mentioned in his bull, but his personal
+opinion did leave an influence upon the canonists and Inquisitors of
+his day; this is clear from the trials for witchcraft held during
+this period.[1] It is impossible to estimate the number of sorcerers
+condemned. Louis of Paramo triumphantly declared that in a century
+and a half the Holy Office sent to the stake over thirty thousand.[2]
+Of course we must take such round numbers with a grain of salt, as
+they always are greatly exaggerated. But the fact remains that the
+condemnations for sorcery were so numerous as to stagger belief. The
+Papacy itself recognized the injustice of its agents. For in 1637
+instructions were issued stigmatizing the conduct of the Inquisitors
+on account of their arbitrary and unjust prosecution of sorcerers;
+they were accused of extorting from them by cruel tortures
+confessions that were valueless, and of abandoning them to the
+secular arm without sufficient cause.[1]
+
+[1] Pignatelli, _Consultationes novissimæ canonicæ, Venetiis_, 2 in
+fol., vol. i, p. 505, _Consultatio_ 123.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Confiscation, though not so severe a penalty as the stake, bore very
+heavily upon the victims of the Inquisition. The Roman laws classed
+the crime of heresy with treason, and visited it with a principal
+penalty, death, and a secondary penalty, confiscation. They decreed
+that all heretics, without exception, forfeited their property the
+very day they wavered in the faith. Actual confiscation of goods did
+not take place in the case of those penitents who had deserved no
+severer punishment than temporary imrisonment. Bernard Gui answered
+those who objected to this ruling, by showing that, as a matter of
+fact, there was no real pecuniary loss involved. For, he argued:
+"Secondary penances are inflicted only upon those heretics who
+denounce their accomplices. But, by this denunciation, they ensure
+this discovery and arrest of the guilty ones, who, without their aid,
+would have escaped punishment; the goods of these heretics are at
+once confiscated, which is certainly a positive gain."[1] Actual
+confiscation took place in the case of all obdurate and relapsed
+heretics abandoned to the secular arm, with all penitents condemned
+to perpetual imprisonment, and with all suspects who had managed to
+escape the Inquisition, either by flight or by death. The heretic who
+died peacefully in bed before the Inquisition could lay hands upon
+him was considered contumacious, and treated as such; his remains
+were exhumed, and his property confiscated. This last fact accounts
+for the incredible frequency of prosecutions against the dead. Of the
+six hundred and thirty-six cases tried by Bernard Gui, eighty-eight
+were posthumous. As a general rule, the confiscation of the heretic's
+property, which so frequently resulted from the trials of the
+Inquisition, had a great deal to do with the interest they aroused.
+We do not say that the Holy Office systematically increased the
+number of its condemnations merely to increase its pecuniary profits.
+But abuses of this kind were inevitable. We know they existed,
+because the Popes denounced them strongly, although they were too
+rare to deserve more than a passing mention. But would the
+ecclesiastical and lay princes who, in varying proportions, shared
+with the Holy Office in these confiscations, and who in some
+countries appropriated them all, have accorded to the Inquisition
+that continual good-will and help which was the condition of its
+prosperity, without what Lea calls "the stimulant of pillage?" We may
+very well doubt it.... That is why, in point of fact, their zeal for
+the faith languished whenever pecuniary gain was not forthcoming. "In
+our days," writes the Inquisitor Eymeric rather gloomily, "there are
+no more rich heretics, so that princes, not seeing much money in
+prospect, will not put themselves to any expense; it is a pity that
+so salutary an institution as ours should be so uncertain of its
+future."[2]
+
+[1] _Practica_,m 3 pars, p. 185.
+
+[2] Langlois, op. cit., pp. 75-78.
+
+Most historians have said little or nothing about the money side of
+the Inquisition. Lea was the first to give it the attention it
+deserved. He writes "In addition to the misery inflicted by these
+wholesale confiscations on the thousands of innocent and helpless
+women and children thus stripped of everything, it would be almost
+impossible to exaggerate the evil which they entailed upon all
+classes in the business of daily life."[1] There was indeed very
+little security in business, for the contracts of a hidden heretic
+were essentially null and void, and could be rescinded as soon as his
+guilt was discovered, either during his lifetime or after his death.
+In view of such a penal code, we can understand why Lea should write:
+"While the horrors of the crowded dungeon can scarce be exaggerated,
+yet more effective for evil and more widely exasperating was the
+sleepless watchfulness which was ever on the alert to plunder the
+rich and to wrench from the poor the hard-earned gains on which a
+family depended for support."[2]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., p. 522.
+
+[2] Lea, op. cit., p. 480.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+This summary of the acts of the Inquisition is at best but a brief
+and very imperfect outline. But a more complete study would not
+afford us any deeper insight into its operation.
+
+Human passions are responsible for the many abuses of the
+Inquisition. The civil power in heresy trials was far from being
+partial to the accused. On the contrary, it would seem that the more
+pressure the State brought to bear upon the ecclesiastical tribunals,
+the more arbitrary their procedure became.
+
+We do not deny that the zeal of the Inquisitors was at times
+excessive, especially in the use of torture. But some of their
+cruelty may be explained by their sincere desire for the salvation of
+the heretic. They regarded the confession of the suspects as the
+beginning of their conversion. They therefore believed any means used
+for that purpose justified. They thought that an Inquisitor had done
+something praiseworthy, when, even at the cost of cruel torments, he
+freed a heretic from his heresy. He was sorry indeed to be obliged to
+use force; but that was not altogether his fault, but the fault of
+the laws which he had to enforce.
+
+Most men regard the _auto-da-fé_ as the worst horror of the
+Inquisition. It is hardly ever pictured without burning flames and
+ferocious looking executioners. But an _auto-da-fé_ did not
+necessarily call for either stake or executioner. It was simply a
+solemn "Sermon," which the heretics about to be condemned had to
+attend.[1] The death penalty was not always inflicted at these
+solemnities, which were intended to impress the imagination of the
+people. Seven out of eighteen _autos-da-fé_ presided over by the
+famous Inquisitor, Bernard Gui, decreed no severer penalty than
+imprisonment.
+
+[1] On these "Sermons," cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 425-431.
+
+We have seen, moreover, that in many places, even in Spain, at a
+certain period, the number of heretics condemned to death was rather
+small. Even Lea, whom no one can accuse of any great partiality for
+the Church is forced to state: "The stake consumed comparatively few
+victims."[1]
+
+[1] Op. cit., vol. i, p. 480.
+
+In fact, imprisonment and confiscation were as a rule the severest
+penalties inflicted.
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+A CRITICISM OF THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE INQUISITION
+
+SUCH was the development for over one thousand years (200-1300) of
+the theory of Catholic writers on the coercive power of the Church in
+the treatment of heresy. It began with the principle of absolute
+toleration; it ended with the stake.
+
+During the era of the persecutions, the Church, who was suffering
+herself from pagan intolerance, merely excommunicated heretics, and
+tried to win them back to the orthodox faith by the kindness and the
+force of argument. But when the emperors became Christians, they, in
+memory of the days when they were "_Pontifices maximi_," at once
+endeavored to regulate worship and doctrine, at least externally.
+Unfortunately, certain sects, hated like the Manicheans, or
+revolutionary in character like the Donatists, prompted the enactment
+of cruel laws for their suppression. St. Optatus approved these
+measures, and Pope St. Leo had not the courage to disavow them.
+Still, most of the early Fathers, St. John Chrysostom, St. Martin,
+St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and many others,[1] protested strongly in
+the name of Christian charity against the infliction of the death
+penalty upon heretics. St. Augustine, who formed the mind of his age,
+at first favored the theory of absolute toleration. But afterwards,
+perceiving that certain good results followed from what he called "a
+salutary fear," he modified his views. He then maintained that the
+State could and ought to punish by fine, confiscation, or even exile,
+her rebellious children, in order to make them repent. This may be
+called his theory of moderate persecution.
+
+[1] Lea (op. cit., vol. i, pp. 214, 215) says that St. Jerome was an
+advocate of force. "Rigor in fact," argues St. Jerome, "is the most
+genuine mercy, since temporal punishment may avert eternal
+perdition." Here St. Jerome merely says that God punishes in time
+that he may no punish in eternity. But he by no means "argues" that
+this punishment should be in the hands of either Church or State.
+_Commentar_., in Naum, i, 9, P. L., vol. xxv, col. 1238.
+
+The revival of the Manichean heresy in the eleventh century took the
+Christian princes and people by surprise, unaccustomed as they were
+to the legislation of the first Christian emperors. Still the
+heretics did not fare any better on that account. For the people rose
+up against them, and burned them at the stake. The Bishops and the
+Fathers of the Church at once protested against this lynching of
+heretics. Some, like Wazo of Liège, represented the party of absolute
+toleration, while others, under the leadership of St. Bernard,
+advocated the theory of St. Augustine. Soon after, churchmen began to
+decree the penalty of imprisonment for heresy--a penalty unknown to
+the Roman law, and regarded in the beginning more as a penance than a
+legal punishment. It originated in the cloister, gradually made its
+way into the tribunals of the Bishop, and finally into the tribunals
+of the State.
+
+Canon law, helped greatly by the revival of the imperial code,
+introduced in the twelfth century definite laws for the suppression,
+of heresy. This régime lasted from 1150 till 1215, from Gratian to
+Innocent III. Heresy, the greatest sin against God, was classed with
+treason, and visited with the same penalty. The penalty was
+banishment with all its consequences; i.e., the destruction of the
+houses of heretics, and the confiscation of their property. Still,
+because of the horror which the Church had always professed for the
+effusion of blood, she did not as yet inflict the death penalty which
+the State decreed for treason. Innocent III did not wish to go beyond
+the limits set by St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, and St.
+Bernard.
+
+But later Popes and princes went further. They began by decreeing
+death as a secondary penalty, in case heretics rebelled against the
+law of banishment. But when the Emperor Frederic had revived the
+legislation of his Christian predecessors of the fourth, fifth, and
+sixth centuries,[1] and had made the popular custom of burning
+heretics a law of the empire, the Papacy could not resist the current
+of his example. The Popes at once ordered the new legislation
+vigorously enforced everywhere, especially in Lombardy. This was
+simply the logical carrying out of the comparison made by Innocent
+III between heresy and treason, and was due chiefly to two Popes:
+Gregory IX who established the Inquisition under the Dominicans and
+the Franciscans, and Innocent IV who authorized the Inquisitors to
+use torture.
+
+[1] Cf. the law of Arcadius of 395 (_Cod. Theodos_., xvi, v. 28).
+
+The theologians and casuists soon began to defend the procedure of
+the Inquisition. They seemed absolutely unaffected, in theory at
+least, by the most cruel torments. With them the preservation of the
+orthodox faith was paramount, and superior to all sentiment. In the
+name of Christian charity, St. Thomas, the great light of the
+thirteenth century, taught that relapsed heretics, even when
+repentant, ought to be put to death without mercy.
+
+How are we to explain this development of the doctrine of the Church
+on the suppression of heresy, and granting that a plausible
+explanation may be given, how are we to justify it?
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Intolerance is natural to man. If, as a matter of fact, men are not
+always intolerant in practice, it is only because they are prevented
+by conditions born of reason and wisdom. Respect for the opinion of
+others supposes a temper of mind which takes years to acquire. It is
+a questions whether the average man is capable of it. Intolerance
+regarding religious doctrines especially, with the cruelty that
+usually accompanies it, has practically been the law of history. From
+this viewpoint, the temper of mind of the mediæval Christians
+differed little from that of the pagans of the empire. A Roman of the
+second or third century considered blasphemy against the gods a crime
+that deserved the greatest torments; a Christian of the eleventh
+century felt the same toward the apostates and enemies of the
+Catholic faith. This is clearly seen from the treatment accorded the
+first Manicheans who came from Bulgaria, and gained some adherents at
+Orléans, Montwimer, Soissons, Liège, and Goslar. At once there was a
+popular uprising against them, which evidenced what may be called the
+instinctive intolerance of the people. The civil authorities of the
+day shared this hatred, and proved it either by sending heretics to
+the stake themselves, or allowing the people to do so. As Lea has
+said "The practice of burning the heretic alive was thus not the
+creation of positive law, but arose generally and spontaneously, and
+its adoption by the legislator was only the recognition of a popular
+custom."[1] Besides, the sovereign could not brook riotous men who
+disturbed the established order of his dominions. He was well aware
+that public tranquillity depended chiefly upon religious principles,
+which ensured that moral unity desired by every ruler. Pagan
+antiquity had dreamed of this unity, and its philosophers,
+interpreting its mind, showed themselves just as intolerant as the
+theologians of the Middle Ages.
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 222.
+
+"Plato," writes Gaston Boissier, "in his ideal Republic, denies
+toleration to the impious, i.e., to those who did not accept the
+State religion. Even if they remained quiet and peaceful, and carried
+on no propaganda, they seemed to him dangerous by the bad example
+they gave. He condemned them to be shut up in a house where they
+might learn wisdom (_sophronisteria_)--by this pleasant euphemism he
+meant a prison--and for five years they were to listen to a discourse
+every day. The impious who caused disturbance and tried to corrupt
+others were to be imprisoned for life in a terrible dungeon, and
+after death were to be denied burial."[1] Apart from the stake, was
+not this the Inquisition to the life? In countries where religion and
+patriotism went hand in hand, we can readily conceive this
+intolerance. Sovereigns were naturally inclined to believe that those
+who interfered with the public worship unsettled the State, and their
+conviction became all the stronger when the State received from
+heaven a sort of special investiture. This was the case with the
+Christian empire. Constantine, towards the end of his career, thought
+himself ordained by God, "a bishop in externals,"[1] and his
+successors strove to keep intact the deposit of faith. "The first
+care of the imperial majesty," said one of them, "is to protect the
+true religion, for with its worship is connected the prosperity of
+human undertakings."[2] Thus some of their laws were passed in view
+of strengthening the canon law. They mounted guard about the Church,
+with sword in hand, ready to use it in her defence.
+
+[1] Eusebius, _Vita Constantini_, lib. iv, cap. xxiv.
+
+[2] Theodosius II, _Novellæ_, tit. iii (438).
+
+The Middle Ages inherited these views. Religious unity was then
+attained throughout Europe. Any attempt to break it was an attack at
+once upon the Church and the Empire. "The enemies of the Cross of
+Christ and those who deny the Christian faith," says Pedro II, of
+Aragon, "are also our enemies, and the public enemies of our kingdom;
+they must be treated as such."[1] It was in virtue of the same
+principle that Frederic II punished heretics as criminals according
+to the common law; _ut crimina publica_. He speaks of the
+"Ecclesiastical peace" as of old the emperors spoke of the "Roman
+peace." As Emperor, he considered it his duty "to preserve and to
+maintain it," and woe betide the one who dared disturb it. Feeling
+himself invested with both human and divine authority, he enacted the
+severest laws possible against heresy. What therefore might have
+remained merely a threatening theory became a terrible reality. The
+laws of 1224, 1231, 1238, and 1239 prove that both princes and people
+considered the stake a fitting penalty for heresy.
+
+[3] Law of 1197, in De Marca, _Marca Hispanica_, col. 1384.
+
+It would leave been very surprising if the Church, menaced as she was
+by an ever-increasing flood of heresy, had not accepted the State's
+eager offer of protection. She had always professed a horror for
+bloodshed. But as long as she was not acting directly, and the State
+undertook to shed in its own name the blood of wicked men, she began
+to consider solely the benefits that would accrue to her from the
+enforcement of the civil laws. Besides, by classing heresy with
+treason, she herself had laid down the premises of the State's
+logical conclusion, the death penalty. The Church, therefore, could
+hardly call in question the justice of the imperial laws, without in
+a measure going against the principles she herself had advocated.
+
+Church and State, therefore, continually influenced one the other.
+The theology upheld by the Church reacted on the State and caused it
+to adopt violent measures, while the State in turn compelled the
+Church to approve its use of force, although such an attitude was
+opposed to the spirit of early Christianity.
+
+The theologians and the canonists put the finishing touches to the
+situation. Influenced by what was happening around them, their one
+aim was to defend the laws of their day. This is clearly seen, if we
+compare the _Summa_ of St. Raymond of Pennafort with the _Summa_ of
+St. Thomas Aquinas. When St. Raymond wrote his work, the Church still
+followed the criminal code of Popes Lucius III and Innocent III; she
+had as yet no notion of inflicting the death penalty for heresy. But
+in St. Thomas's time, the Inquisition had been enforcing for some
+years the draconian laws of Frederic II. The Angelic Doctor,
+therefore, made no attempt to defend the obsolete code of Innocent
+III, but endeavored to show that the imperial laws, then authorized
+by the Church, were conformable to the strictest justice. His one
+argument was to make comparisons, more or less happy, between heresy
+and crimes against the common law.
+
+At a period when no one considered a doctrine solidly proved unless
+authorities could be quoted in its support, these comparisons were
+not enough. So the theologians taxed their ingenuity to find
+quotations, not from the Fathers, which would have been difficult,
+but from the Scriptures, which seemed favorable to the ideas then in
+vogue. St. Optatus had tried to do this as early as the fifth
+century,[1] despite the antecedent protests of Origen, Cyprian,
+Lactantius and Hilary. Following his example, the churchmen of the
+Middle Ages reminded their hearers that according to the Sacred
+Scriptures, "Jehovah was a God delighting in the extermination of his
+enemies." They read how Saul, the chosen king of Israel, had been
+divinely punished for sparing Agag of Amalek; how the prophet Samuel
+had hewn him to pieces; how the wholesale slaughter of the
+unbelieving Canaanites had been ruthlessly commanded and enforced;
+how Elijah had been commended for slaying four hundred and fifty
+priests of Baal; and they could not conceive how mercy to those who
+rejected the true faith could be aught but disobedience to God. Had
+not Almighty God said, "If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy
+daughter or thy wife, that is in thy bosom, or thy friend, whom thou
+lovest as thy own soul, would persuade thee secretly, saying: 'Let us
+go and serve strange gods, which thou knowest not, nor thy fathers'
+... consent not to him, hear him not, neither let thy eye spare him
+to pity or conceal him, but thou shalt presently put him to death.
+Let thy hand be first upon him, and afterwards the hands of all the
+people."[2]
+
+[1] _De Schismate Donatistarum_, p. iii, cap. vii.
+
+[2] Deut. xiii. 6-9; cf. xvii. 1-6.
+
+Such a teaching might appear, at first sight; hard to reconcile with
+the law of gentleness which Jesus preached to the world. But the
+theologians quoted Christ's words: "Do not think that I am come to
+destroy the law; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill,"[1] and
+other texts of the Gospels to prove the perfect agreement between the
+Old and the New Law in the matter of penalties. They even went so far
+as to assert that St. John[2] spoke of the penalty of fire to be
+inflicted upon heretics.
+
+[1] Matt. v. 17.
+
+[2] John xv. 6.
+
+This strange method of exegesis was not peculiar to the founders and
+the defenders of the tribunals of the Inquisition. England, which
+knew nothing of the Inquisition, save for the trial of the Templars,
+was just as cruel to heretics as Gregory IX or Frederic II.
+
+"The statute of May 25, 1382, directs the king to issue to his
+sheriffs commissions to arrest Wyclif's traveling preachers, and
+aiders and abettors of heresy, and hold them till they justify
+themselves _selon reson et la ley de seinte esglise_. After the
+burning of Sawtré by a royal warrant confirmed by Parliament in 1400,
+the statute '_de hæreticis comburendis_' for the first time inflicted
+in England the death penalty as a settled punishment for heresy....
+It forbade the dissemination of heretical opinions and books,
+empowered the bishops to seize all offenders and hold them in prison
+until they should purge themselves or abjure, and ordered the bishops
+to proceed against them within three months after arrest. For minor
+offences, the bishops were empowered to imprison during pleasure and
+fine at discretion, the fine inuring to the royal exchequer. For
+obstinate heresy or relapse, involving under the canon law
+abandonment to the secular arm, the bishops and their commissioners
+were the sole judges, and on their delivery of such convicts, the
+sheriff of the county, or the mayor and bailiffs of the nearest town,
+were obliged to burn them before the people on an eminence. Henry V
+followed this up, and the statute of 1414 established throughout the
+kingdom a sort of mixed secular and ecclesiastical Inquisition for
+which the English system of grand inquests gave special facilities.
+Under this legislation, burning for heresy became a not unfamiliar
+sight for English eyes, and Lollardy was readily suppressed. In 1533,
+Henry VIII repealed the statute of 1400, while retaining those of
+1382 and 1414, and also the penalty of burning alive for contumacious
+heresy and relapse, and the dangerous admixture of politics and
+religion rendered the stake a favorite instrument of statecraft. One
+of the earliest measures of the reign of Edward VI was the repeal of
+this law, as well as those of 1382 and 1414, together with all the
+atrocious legislation of the Six Articles. With the reaction under
+Philip and Mary, came a revival of the sharp laws against heresy.
+Scarce had the Spanish marriage been concluded when an obedient
+Parliament re-enacted the legislation of 1382, 1400, and 1414, which
+afforded ample machinery for the numerous burnings which followed.
+The earliest act of the first Parliament of Elizabeth was the repeal
+of the legislation of Philip and Mary, and of the old statutes which
+it had revived; but the writ _de hæretico comburendo_ had become an
+integral part of English law, and survived, until the desire of
+Charles II for Catholic toleration caused him, in 1676, to procure
+its abrogation, and the restraint of the ecclesiastical courts in
+cases of atheism, blasphemy, heresy, and schism, and other damnable
+doctrines and opinions 'to the ecclesiastical remedies of
+excommunication, deprivations, degradation, and other ecclesiastical
+censures, not extending to death."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i. pp. 352-354.
+
+These ideas of intolerance were so fixed in the public mind at the
+close of the Middle Ages, that even those who protested against the
+procedure of the Inquisition thought that in principle it was just.
+Farel wrote to Calvin, September 8, 1533: "Some people do not wish us
+to prosecute heretics. But because the Pope condemns the faithful
+(i.e., the Huguenots) for the crime of heresy, and because unjust
+judges punish the innocent, it is absurd to conclude that we must not
+put heretics to death, in order to strengthen the faithful. I myself
+have often said that I was ready to suffer death, if I ever taught
+anything contrary to sound doctrine, and that I would deserve the
+most frightful torments, if I tried to rob any one of the true faith
+in Christ. I cannot, therefore, lay down a different law to
+others."[1]
+
+[1] _OEuvres complètes de Calvin_, Brunswick, 1863-1909, vol. xiv, p.
+612.
+
+Calvin held the same views. His inquisitorial spirit was manifest in
+his bitter prosecution and condemnation of the Spaniard Michael
+Servetus.[1] When any one found fault with him he answered: "The
+executioners of the Pope taught that their foolish inventions were
+doctrines of Christ, and were excessively cruel, while I have always
+judged heretics in all kindness and in the fear of God; I merely put
+to death a confessed heretic."[2] Michael Servetus assuredly did not
+gain much by the substitution of Calvin for the Inquisition.
+
+[1] Servetus was condemned October 26, 1553, to be burned alive, and
+was executed the next day. As early as 1545, Calvin had written: "If
+he (Servetus) comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart
+alive, as long as I have authority in this city: _Vivum exire numquam
+patiar_. _OEuvres complètes_, vol. xii, p. 283." Calvin, however,
+wished the death penalty of fire to be commuted into some other kind
+of death.
+
+[2] To justify this execution, Calvin published his _Defensio
+orthodoxæ fidei de sacra Trinitate, contra prodigiosos errores
+Michaelis Serveti Hispani, ubi ostenditur hæreticos jure gladii
+coercendos esse_, Geneva, 1554.
+
+Bullinger of Zurich, speaking of the death of Servetus, thus wrote
+Lelius Socinus: "If, Lelius, you cannot now admit the right of a
+magistrate to punish heretics, you will undoubtedly admit it some
+day. St. Augustine himself at first deemed it wicked to use violence
+towards heretics, and tried to win them back by the mere word of God.
+But finally, learning wisdom by experience, he began to use force
+with good effect. In the beginning the Lutherans did not believe that
+heretics ought to be punished; but after the excesses of the
+Anabaptists, they declared that the magistrate ought not merely to
+reprimand the unruly, but to punish them severely as an example to
+thousands."
+
+Theodore of Beza, who had seen several of his co-religionists burned
+in France for their faith, likewise wrote in 1554, in Calvinistic
+Geneva: "What crime can be greater or more heinous than heresy, which
+sets at nought the word of God and all ecclesiastic discipline?
+Christian magistrates, do your duty to God, Who has put the sword
+into your hands for the honor of His majesty; strike valiantly these
+monsters in the guise of men." Theodore of Beza considered the error
+of those who demanded freedom of conscience "worse than the tyranny
+of the Pope. It is better to have a tyrant, no matter how cruel he
+may be, than to let everyone do as he pleases." He maintained that
+the sword of the civil authority should punish not only heretics, but
+also those who wished heresy to go unpunished.[1] In brief, before
+the Renaissance there were very few who taught with Huss[2] that a
+heretics ought not to be abandoned to the secular arm to be put to
+death.[3]
+
+[1] _De hæreticis a civili magistratu puniendis_, Geneva, 1554;
+translated into French by Colladon in 1559.
+
+[2] In his treatise _De Ecclesia_. This was the eighteenth article of
+the heresies attributed to him.
+
+[3] In general, the Protestant leaders of the day were glad of the
+execution of Servetus. Melancthon wrote to Bullinger: "I am
+astonished that some persons denounce the severity that was so justly
+used in that case." Among those who did denounce it was Nicolas
+Zurkinden of Berne. Cf. his letter in the _OEuvres complètes de
+Calvin_, vol. xv, p. 19. Sébastien Castellio published in March,
+1554, his _Traité des hérétiques, a savoir s'il faut les persécuter_,
+the oldest and one of the most eloquent pamphlets against
+intolerance. Cf. F. Buisson, op. cit., ch. xi. This is the pamphlet
+that Theodore of Beza tried to refute. Castellio then attacked Calvin
+directly in a new work, _Contra libellum Calvini in quo ostendere
+conatur hæreticos jure gladii coercendos esse_, which was not
+published until 1612, in Holland.
+
+Such severity, nay, such cruelty, shown to what we would call "a
+crime of opinion," is hard for men of our day to understand. "To
+comprehend it," says Lea, "we must picture to ourselves a stage of
+civilization in many respects wholly unlike our own. Passions were
+fiercer, convictions stronger, virtues and vices more exaggerated,
+than in our colder and self-contained time. The age, moreover, was a
+cruel one.... We have only to look upon the atrocities of the
+criminal law of the Middle Ages to see how pitiless men were in their
+dealings with one another. The wheel, the caldron of burning oil,
+burning alive, tearing apart with wild horses, were the ordinary
+expedients by which the criminal jurist sought to deter men from
+crime by frightful examples which would make a profound impression on
+a not over-sensitive population."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 234, 235.
+
+When we consider this rigorous civil criminal code, we need not
+wonder that heretics, who were considered the worst possible
+criminals, were sent to the stake.
+
+This explains why intelligent men, animated by the purest zeal for
+good, proved so hard and unbending, and used without mercy the most
+cruel tortures, when they thought that the faith or the salvation of
+souls was at stake. "With such men," says Lea,--and he mentions among
+others Innocent III and St. Louis,--"it was not hope of gain, or lust
+of blood or pride of opinion, or wanton exercise of power, but sense
+of duty, and they but represented what was universal public opinion
+from the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries."[1]
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 234.
+
+It was, therefore, the spirit of the times, the _Zeitgeist_, as we
+would call it to-day, that was responsible for the rigorous measures
+formerly used by both Church and State in the suppression of heresy.
+The other reasons we have mentioned are only subsidiary. This is the
+one reason that satisfactorily explains both the theories and the
+facts.
+
+But an explanation is something far different from a defence of an
+institution. To explain is to show the relation of cause to effect;
+to defend is to show that the effect corresponds to an ideal of
+justice. Even if we grant that the procedure of the Inquisition did
+correspond to a certain ideal of justice, that ideal is certainly not
+ours to-day. Let us go into this question more thoroughly.
+
+It is obvious that we must strongly denounce all the abuses of the
+Inquisition that were due to the sins of individuals, no matter what
+their source. No one, for instance, would dream of defending Cauchon,
+the iniquitous judge of Joan of Arc, or other cruel Inquisitors who,
+like him, used their authority to punish unjustly suspects brought
+before their tribunal. From this standpoint, it is probable that many
+of the sentences of the Inquisition need revision.
+
+But can we rightly consider this institution "a sublime spectacle of
+social perfection," and "a model of justice?"[1]
+
+[1] The _Civiltà Cattolica_, 1853, vol. i. p. 595 seq.
+
+To call the Inquisition a model of justice is a manifest
+exaggeration, as every fair student of its history must admit.
+
+The Inquisitorial procedure was, in itself, inferior to the
+_accusatio_, in which the accuser assumed the burden of publicly
+proving his charges. That it was difficult to observe this method of
+procedure in heresy trials can readily be understood; for the _poena
+talionis_ awaiting the accuser who failed to substantiate his charges
+was calculated to cool the ardor of many Catholics, who otherwise
+would have been eager to prosecute heretics. But we must grant that
+the _accusatio_ in criminal law allowed a greater chance for justice
+to be done than the _inquisitio_. Besides, if the ecclesiastical
+_inquisitio_ had proceeded like the civil _inquisitio_, the
+possibility of judicial errors might have been far less. "In the
+_inquisitio_ of the civil law, the secrecy for which the Inquisition
+has been justly criticized, did not exist; the suspect was cited, and
+a copy of the _capitula_ or _articuli_ containing the charges was
+given to him. When questioned, he could either confess or deny these
+charges. The names of the witnesses who were to appear against him,
+and a copy of their testimony, were also supplied, so that he could
+carry on his defence either by objecting to the character of his
+accusers, or the tenor of their charges. Women, minors aged fourteen,
+serfs, enemies of the prisoner, criminals, excommunicates, heretics,
+and those branded with infamy were not allowed to testify. All
+testimony was received in writing. The prisoner and his lawyers then
+appeared before the judge to rebut the evidence and the charges."[1]
+
+[1] Tanon, op. cit., pp. 287, 288.
+
+In the ecclesiastical procedure, on the contrary, the names of the
+witnesses were withheld, save in very exceptional cases; any one
+could testify, even if he were a heretic; the prisoner had the right
+to reject all whom he considered his mortal enemies, but even then he
+had to guess at their names in order to invalidate their testimony;
+he was not allowed a lawyer, but had to defend himself in secret.
+Only the most prejudiced minds can consider such a procedure the
+ideal of justice. On the contrary, it is unjust in every detail
+wherein it differs from the _inquisitio_ of the civil law.
+
+Certain reasons may be adduced to explain the attitude of the Popes,
+who wished to make the procedure of the Inquisition as secret and as
+comprehensive as possible. They were well aware of the danger that
+witnesses would incur, if their names were indiscreetly revealed.
+They knew that the publicity of the pleadings would certainly hinder
+the efficiency of heresy trials. But such considerations do not
+change the character of the institution itself; the Inquisition in
+leaving too great a margin to the arbitrary conduct of individual
+judges, at once fell below the standard of strict justice.
+
+All that can and ought to be said in the defence and to the honor of
+the Roman pontiffs is that they endeavored to remedy the abuses of
+the Inquisition. With this in view, Innocent IV and Alexander IV
+obliged the Inquisitors to consult a number of _boni viri_ and
+_periti_; Clement V forbade them to render any grave decision without
+first consulting the bishops, the natural judges of the faith;[1] and
+Boniface VIII recommended them to reveal the names of the witnesses
+to the prisoners if they thought that this revelation would not be
+prejudicial to any one.[2] In a word, they wished the laws of justice
+to be scrupulously observed, and at times mitigated.[3] But, examined
+in detail, these laws were far from being perfect.
+
+[1] Clementinæ, _De Hæreticis_, Decretal _Multorum Querela_, cap. i,
+sect. i.
+
+[2] Sexto, _De Hæreticis_, cap. xx; cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 391.
+
+[3] Döllinger is very unjust when he says: "From 1200 to 1500 there
+is a long uninterrupted series of papal decrees on the Inquisition;
+these decrees increase continually in severity and cruelty." _La
+Papauté_, p. 102. Tanon (op. cit, p. 138) writes more impartially:
+"Clement V, instead of increasing the powers of the Holy Office,
+tried rather to suppress its abuses."
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Antecedent imprisonment and torture, which played so important a part
+in the procedure of the Inquisition, were undoubtedly very barbarous
+methods of judicial prosecution. Antecedent imprisonment may be
+justified in certain cases; but the manner in which the Inquisitors
+conceived it was far from just. No one would dare defend to-day the
+punishment known as the _carcer durus_, whereby the Inquisitors tried
+to extort confessions from their prisoners. They rendered it,
+moreover, all the more odious by arbitrarily prolonging its horrors
+and its cruelty.
+
+It is harder still to reconcile the use of torture with any idea of
+justice. If the Inquisitors had stopped at flogging, which according
+to St. Augustine was administered at home, in school, and even in the
+episcopal tribunals of the early ages, and is mentioned by the
+Council of Agde, in 506, and the Benedictine rule, no one would have
+been greatly scandalized. We might perhaps have considered this
+domestic and paternal custom a little severe, but perfectly
+consistent with the ideas men then had of goodness. But the rack, the
+_strappado_, and the stake were peculiarly inhuman inventions.[1]
+When the pagans used them against the Christians of the first
+centuries, all agreed in stigmatizing them as the extreme of
+barbarism, or as inventions of the devil. Their character did not
+change when the Inquisition began to use them against heretics. To
+our shame we are forced to admit that, notwithstanding Innocent IV's
+appeal for moderation,[2] the brutality of the ecclesiastical
+tribunals was often on a par with the tribunals of the pagan
+persecutors. Pope Nicholas I thus denounced the use of torture as a
+means of judical inquiry: "Such proceedings," he says, "are contrary
+to the law of God and of man, for a confession ought to be
+spontaneous, not forced; it ought to be free, and not the result of
+violence. A prisoner may endure all the torments you inflict upon him
+without confessing anything. Is not that a disgrace to the judge, and
+an evident proof of his inhumanity! If, on the contrary, a prisoner,
+under stress of torture, acknowledges himself guilty of a crime he
+never committed, is not the one who forced him to lie, guilty of a
+heinous crime?"[3]
+
+[1] This was the view of St. Augustine, Ep. cxxxiii, 2.
+
+[2] Bull _Ad Extirpanda_, in Eymeric, _Directorium inquisitorum_,
+Appendix, p. 8.
+
+[3] _Responsa ad consulta Bulgarorum_, cap. lxxxvi; Labbe,
+_Concilia_, vol. viii, col. 544.
+
+The penalties which the tribunals of the Inquisition inflicted upon
+heretics are harder to judge. Let us observe, first of all, that the
+majority of the heretics abandoned to the secular arm merited the
+most severe punishment for their crimes. It would surely have been
+unjust for criminals against the common law to escape punishment
+under cover of their religious belief. Crimes committed in the name
+of religion are always crimes, and the man who has his property
+stolen or is assaulted cares little whether he has to deal with a
+religious fanatic or an ordinary criminal. In such instances, the
+State is not defending a particular dogmatic teaching, but her own
+most vital interests. Heretics, therefore, who were criminals against
+the civil law were justly punished. An anti-social sect like the
+Cathari, which shrouded itself in mystery and perverted the people so
+generally, by the very fact of its existence and propaganda called
+for the vengeance of society and the sword of the State.
+
+"However much," says Lea, "we may deprecate the means used for its
+suppression, and commiserate those who suffered for conscience' sake,
+we cannot but admit that the cause of orthodoxy was in this case the
+cause of progress and civilization. Had Catharism become dominant, or
+even had it been allowed to exist on equal terms, its influence could
+not have failed to prove disastrous. Its asceticism with regard to
+commerce between the sexes, if strictly enforced, could only have led
+to the extinction of the race.... Its condemnation of the visible
+universe, and of matter in general as the work of Satan rendered
+sinful all striving after material improvement, and the conscientious
+belief in such a creed could only lead man back, in time, to his
+original condition of savagism. It was not only a revolt against the
+Church, but a renunciation of man's domination over nature."[1] Its
+growth had to be arrested at any price. Society, in proceeding
+against it without mercy, was only defending herself against the
+working of an essentially destructive force. It was a struggle for
+existence.
+
+We must, therefore, deduct from the number of those who are commonly
+styled the victims of ecclesiastical intolerance, the majority of the
+heretics executed by the State; for nearly all that were imprisoned
+or sent to the stake, especially in northern Italy and southern
+France, were Cathari.[1]
+
+[1] Jean Guiraud has proved that the Waldenses, Fraticelli, Hussites,
+Lollards, etc., attacked society, which acted in self-defense when
+she put them to death. _La répression de l'hérésie au moyen âge_, in
+the _Questions d'histoire et d'archéologie Chrétienne_, p. 24 and
+seq.
+
+This important observation has so impressed certain historians, that
+they have been led to think the Inquisition dealt only with criminals
+of this sort. "History," says Rodrigo, "has preserved the record of
+the outrages committed by the heretics of Bulgaria, the Gnostics, and
+the Manicheans; the death sentence was inflicted only upon criminals
+who confessed their murders, robberies, and acts of violence. The
+Albigenses were treated with kindness. The Catholic Church deplores
+all acts of vengeance, however strong the provocation given by these
+factious mobs."[1]
+
+[1] _Historia verdadera de la Inquisición_, Madrid, 1876, vol. i, p.
+176, 177.
+
+Such a defence of the Inquisition is not borne out by the facts. It
+is true, of course, that in the Middle Ages there was hardly a heresy
+which had not some connection with an anti-social sect. For this
+reason any one who denied a dogma of the faith was at once suspected,
+rightly or wrongly, or being an anarchist. But, as a matter of fact,
+the Inquisition did not condemn merely those heresies which caused
+social upheaval, but all heresies as such: "We decree," says Frederic
+II, "that the crime of heresy, no matter what the name of the sect,
+be classed as a public crime.... and that every one who denies the
+Catholic faith, even in one article, shall be liable to the law; _si
+inventi fuerint a fide catholica saltem in articulo deviare_."[1] This
+was also the view of the theologians and the canonists. St. Thomas
+Aquinas, for instance, who speaks for the whole _schola_, did not
+make any distinction between the Catharan heresy and any other purely
+speculative heresy; he put them all on one level; every obdurate or
+relapsed heretic deserved death.[2] The Inquisitors were so fully
+persuaded of this truth that they prosecuted heretics whose heresy
+was not discovered until ten or twenty years after their death, when
+surely they were no longer able to cause any injury to society.[3]
+
+[1] Constitution _Inconsutilem tunicam_.
+
+[2] _Summa_ IIa, IIae, q. x, art. 8; q. xi, art. 3 and 4.
+
+[3] Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 407-412.
+
+We need not wonder at these views and practices, for they were fully
+in accord with the notion of justice current at the time. The rulers
+in Church and State felt it their duty not only to defend the social
+order, but to safeguard the interests of God in the world. They
+deemed themselves in all sincerity the representatives of divine
+authority here below. God's interests were their interests; it was
+their duty, therefore, to punish all crimes against His law. Heresy,
+therefore, a purely theological crime, became amenable to their
+tribunal. In punishing it, they believed that they were merely
+fulfilling one of the duties of their office. We have now to examine
+and judge the penalties indicted upon heresy as such.
+
+The first in order of importance was the death penalty of the stake,
+inflicted upon all obdurate and relapsed heretics.
+
+Relapsed heretics, when repentant, did not at first incur the death
+penalty. Imprisonment was considered an adequate punishment, for it
+gave them a chance to expiate their fault. The death penalty
+inflicted later on placed the judges in a false position. On the one
+hand, by granting absolution and giving communion to the prisoner,
+they professed to believe in the sincerity of his repentance and
+conversion, and yet by sending him to the stake for fear of a
+relapse, they acted contrary to their convictions. To condemn a man
+to death who was considered worthy of receiving the Holy Eucharist,
+on the plea that he might one day commit the sin of heresy again,
+appears to us a crying injustice.
+
+But should even unrepentant heretics be put to death? No, taught St.
+Augustine, and most of the early Fathers, who invoked in favor of the
+guilty ones the higher law of "charity and Christian gentleness."
+Their doctrine certainly accorded perfectly with our Saviour's
+teaching, in the parable of the cockle and the good grain. As Wazo,
+Bishop of Liège said: "May not those who are to-day cockle become
+wheat to-morrow?"[1] But in decreeing the death of these sinners, the
+Inquisitors at once did away with the possibility of their
+conversion. Certainly this was not in accordance with Christian
+charity. Such severity can only be defended by the authority of the
+Old Law, whose severity, according to the early Fathers, had been
+abolished by the law of Christ.[2]
+
+[1] _Vita Vasonis_, cap. xxv, in Migne, P.L., vol. cxlii, col. 753.
+
+[2] St. Optatus (_De Schismate Donatistarum_, lib. iii, cap. vi and
+vii) was one of the first of the Fathers to quote the Old Testament
+as his authority for the infliction of the death penalty upon
+heretics. But in this he was not followed either by his
+contemporaries or his immediate successors. Before him, Origen and
+St. Cyprian had protested against this appeal to the Mosaic law.
+
+Advocates of the death penalty, like Frederic II and St. Thomas,
+tried to defend their view by arguments from reason. Criminals guilty
+of treason, and counterfeiters are condemned to death. Therefore,
+heretics who are traitors and falsifiers merit the same penalty. But
+a comparison of this kind is not necessarily a valid argument. The
+criminals in question were a grave menace to the social order. But we
+cannot say as much for each and every heresy in itself. It was unjust
+to place a crime against society and a sin against God on an equal
+footing. Such reasoning would prove that all sins were crimes of
+treason against God, and therefore merited death.[1] Is not a
+sacrilegious communion the worst possible insult to the divine
+majesty? Must we argue, therefore, that every unworthy communicant,
+if unrepentant, must be sent to the stake?
+
+[1] Mgr. Bonomelli, Bishop of Cremona, writes: "In the Middle Ages,
+they reasoned thus: If rebellion against the prince deserves death,
+_a fortiori_ does rebellion against God. Singular logic! It is not
+very hard to put one's finger upon the utter absurdity of such
+reasoning. For every sinner is a rebel against God's law. It follows
+then that we ought to condemn all men to death, beginning with the
+kings and the legislators;" quoted by Morlais in the _Revue du Clergé
+Français_, August 1, 1905, p. 457.
+
+It is evident, therefore, that neither reason, Christian tradition
+nor the New Testament call for the infliction of the death penalty
+upon heretics. The interpretation of St. John xv. 6: _Si quis in me
+non manserit, in ignem mittent et ardet_, made by the medieval
+canonists, is not worth discussing. It was an abuse of the
+accommodated sense which bordered upon the ridiculous, although its
+consequences were terrible.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+Modern apologists have clearly recognized this. For that reason they
+have tried their best to show that the execution of heretics was
+solely the work of the civil power, and that the Church was in no way
+responsible. "When we argue about the Inquisition," says Joseph de
+Maistre, "let us separate and distinguish very carefully the rôle of
+the Church and the rôle of the State. All that is terrible and cruel
+about this tribunal, especially its death penalty, is due to the
+State; that was its business, and it alone must be held to an
+accounting. All the clemency, on the contrary, which plays so large a
+part in the tribunal of the Inquisition must be ascribed to the
+Church, which interfered in its punishments only to suppress and
+mitigate them."[1] "The Church," says another grave historian, "took
+no part in the corporal punishment of heretics. Those executed were
+simply punished for their crimes, and were condemned by judges acting
+under the royal seal."[2] "This," says Lea, "is a typical instance in
+which history is written to order.... It is altogether a modern
+perversion of history to assume, as apologists do, that the request
+for mercy was sincere, and that the secular magistrate and not the
+Inquisition was responsible for the death of the heretic. We can
+imagine the smile of amused surprise with which Gregory IX and
+Gregory XI would have listened to the dialectics with which Count
+Joseph de Maistre proves that it is an error to suppose, and much
+more to assert, that a Catholic priest can in any manner be
+instrumental in compassing the death of a fellow creature."[3]
+
+[1] _Lettres à un gentilhomme russe sur l'Inquisition espagnole_, ed.
+1864, pp. 17, 18, 28, 34.
+
+[2] Rodrigo, _Historia verdadera de la Inquisición_, 1876, vol. i, p.
+170.
+
+[3] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 540, 227.
+
+The real share of the Inquisition in a condemnation involving the
+death penalty is indeed a very difficult question to determine.
+According to the letter of the papal and imperial Constitutions of
+1231 and 1232, the civil and not the ecclesiastical tribunals assumed
+all responsibility for the death sentence;[1] the Inquisition merely
+decided upon the question of doctrine, leaving the rest to the
+secular Court. It is this legislation that the above-named apologists
+have in mind, and the text of these laws is on their side.
+
+[1] Decretals, cap. xv, _De Hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii. _Mon.
+Germ., Leges_, sect. iv, vol. ii, p. 196.
+
+But when we consider how these laws were carried out in practice, we
+must admit that the Church did have some share in the death sentence.
+We have already seen that the Church excommunicated those princes who
+refused to burn the heretics which the Inquisition handed over to
+them. The princes were not really judges in this case; the right to
+consider questions of heresy was formally denied them.[1] It was
+their duty simply to register the decree of the Church, and to
+enforce it it according to the civil law. In every execution,
+therefore, a twofold authority came into play: the civil power which
+carried out its own laws, and the spiritual power which forced the
+State to carry them out. That is why Peter Cantor declared that the
+Cathari ought not to be put to death after an ecclesiastical trial,
+lest the Church be compromised: "_Illud ab eo fit, cujus auctoritate
+fit_," he said, to justify his recommendation.[2]
+
+[1] Cf. Sexto, v. ii, cap. xi, and xviii. _De Hæreticis_, in Eymeric,
+_Directorium_, p. 110.
+
+[2] _Verbum abbreviatum_, cap. lxxvii, P.L., vol. ccv, col. 231.
+
+It is therefore erroneous to pretend that the Church had absolutely
+no part in the condemnation of heretics to death. It is true that
+this participation of hers was not direct and immediate; but, even
+through indirect, it was none the less real and efficacious.[1]
+
+[1] In Spain, the manner in which the Inquisition abandoned heretics
+to the secular arm denoted a real participation of the State in the
+execution of heretics. The evening before the execution the
+Inquisitors brought the King a small fagot tied with ribbons. The
+King as once requested "that this fagot be the first thrown upon the
+fire in his name." Cf. Baudrillart, _A propos de l'Inquisition_, in
+the _Revue Pratique d'Apologétique_, July 15, 1906, p. 354, note.
+
+The judges of the Inquisition realized this, and did their best to
+free themselves of this responsibility which weighed rather heavily
+upon them. Some maintained that in compelling the civil authority to
+enforce the existing laws, they were not going outside their
+spiritual office, but were merely deciding a case of conscience. But
+this theory was unsatisfactory. To reassure their consciences, they
+tried another expedient. In abandoning heretics to the secular arm,
+they besought the state officials to act with moderation, and avoid
+"all bloodshed and all danger of death." This was unfortunately an
+empty formula which deceived no one. It was intended to safeguard the
+principle which the Church had taken for her motto: _Ecclesia
+abhorret a sanguine_. In strongly asserting this traditional law, the
+Inquisitors imagined that they thereby freed themselves from all
+responsibility, and kept from imbruing their hands in bloodshed. We
+must take this for what it is worth. It has been styled "cunning" and
+"hypocrisy;"[1] let us call it simply a legal fiction.
+
+[1] Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 224.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+The penalty of life imprisonment and the penalty of confiscation
+inflicted upon so many heretics, was like the death penalty imposed
+only by the secular arm. We must add to this banishment, which was
+inscribed in the imperial legislation, and reappeared in the criminal
+codes of Lucius III and Innocent III. These several penalties were by
+their nature vindicative. For this reason they were particularly
+odious, and have been the occasion of bitter accusations against the
+Church.
+
+With the exception of imprisonment, which we will speak of later on,
+these penalties originated with the State. It is important,
+therefore, to know what crimes they punished. As a general rule, it
+must be admitted that they were only inflicted upon those heretics
+who seriously disturbed the social order. If the death penalty could
+be justly meted out to such rioters, with still greater reason could
+the lesser penalties be inflicted.
+
+The penalty of confiscation was especially cruel, inasmuch as it
+affected the posterity of the condemned heretics. According to the
+old Roman law, the property of heretics could be inherited by their
+orthodox sons, and even by their agnates and cognates.[1] The laws of
+the Middle Ages declared confiscation absolute; on the plea that
+heresy should be classed with treason, orthodox children could not
+inherit the property of their heretical father.[2] There was but one
+exception to this law. Frederic II and Innocent IV both decreed that
+children could inherit their father's property, if they denounced him
+for heresy.[3] It is needless to insist upon the odious character of
+such a law. We cannot understand to-day how Gregory IX could rejoice
+on learning that fathers did not scruple to denounce their children,
+children their parents, a wife her husband or a mother her
+children.[4]
+
+[1] 4 and 19, cap _De hæreticis_, iv, 5, _Manichæos_ and
+_Cognovimus_.
+
+[2] Decretal _Vergentis_ of Innocent III. Decretals, cap. x, _De
+Hæreticis_, lib. v, tit. vii.
+
+[3] _Mon. Germ., Leges_, vol. ii, sect. iv, p. 197; Ripoll,
+_Bullarium ordinis Prædicat_., vol. i, p. 126.
+
+[4] Bull _Gaudemus_, of April 12, 1233, in Ripoll, vol. i, p. 56.
+
+Granting that banishment and confiscation were just penalties for
+heretics who were also State criminals, was it right for the Church
+to employ this penal system for the suppression of heresy alone?
+
+It is certain that the early Christians would have strongly denounced
+such laws as too much like the pagan laws under which they were
+persecuted. St. Hilary voiced their mind when he said: "The Church
+threatens exile and imprisonment; she in whom men formerly believed
+while in exile and prison, now wishes to make men believe her by
+force."[1] St. Augustine was of the same mind. He thus addressed the
+Manicheans, the most hated sect of his time: "Let those who have
+never known the troubles of a mind in search for the truth, proceed
+against you with rigor. It is impossible for me to do so, for I for
+years was cruelly tossed about by your false doctrines, which I
+advocated and defended to the best of my ability. I ought to bear
+with you now, as men bore with me, when I blindly accepted your
+doctrines."[2] Wazo, Bishop of Liège, wrote in a similar strain in
+the eleventh century.[3]
+
+[1] _Liber contra Auxentium_, cap. iv; cf. supra, p. 6.
+
+[2] _Contra epistolam Manichæi, quam vocant Fundamenti_, n. 2 and 3,
+supra, p. 12.
+
+[3] _Vita Vasonis_, cap. xxv and xxvi, Migne, P.L., vol. cxlii, col.
+752, 753; cf. supra, p. 51.
+
+But, continued St. Augustine, retracting his first theory,--and
+nearly all the Middle Ages agreed with him,--"these severe penalties
+are lawful and good when they serve to convert heretics by inspiring
+them with a salutary fear." The end here justifies the means.
+
+Such reasoning was calculated to lead men to great extremes, and was
+responsible for the cruel teaching of the theologians of the school,
+who were more logically consistent than the Bishop of Hippo. They
+endeavored to terrorize heretics by the specter of the stake. St.
+Augustine, bold as he was, shrank from such barbarity. But if, on his
+own admission, the logical consequences of the principle he laid down
+were to be rejected, did not this prove the principle itself, false?
+
+If we consider merely the immediate results obtained by the use of
+brute force, we may indeed admit that it benefited the Church by
+bringing back some of her erring children. But at the same time these
+cruel measures turned away from Catholicism in the course of ages
+many sensitive souls, who failed to recognize Christ's Church in a
+society which practiced such cruelty in union with the State.
+According, therefore, to St. Augustine's own argument, his theory has
+been proved false by its fatal consequences.
+
+We must, therefore, return to the first theory of St. Augustine, and
+be content to win heretics back to the true faith by purely moral
+constraint. The penalties, decreed or consented to by the Church,
+ought to be medicinal in character, viz., pilgrimages, flogging,
+wearing the crosses, and the like. Imprisonment may even be included
+in the list, for temporary imprisonment has a well-defined expiatory
+character. In fact that is why in the beginning the monasteries made
+it a punishment for heresy. If, later on, the Church frequently
+inflicted the penalty of life imprisonment, she did so because by a
+legal fiction she attributed to it a purely penitential character.
+Any one of these punishments, therefore, may be considered lawful,
+provided it is not arbitrarily inflicted. This theory does not permit
+the Church to abandon impenitent heretics to the secular arm. It
+grants her only the right of excommunication, according to the
+penitential discipline and the primitive canon law of the days of
+Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, Lactantius, and Hilary.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+But is this return to antiquity conformable to the spirit of the
+Church? Can it be reconciled in particular with one of the condemned
+propositions of the Syllabus: _Ecclesia vis inferendæ potestatem non
+habet_?[1] _The Church has no right to use force_.
+
+[1] Proposit, xxiv.
+
+Without discussing this proposition at length, let us first state
+that authorities are not agreed on its precise meaning. Every
+Catholic will admit that the Church has a coercive power, in both the
+external and the internal forum. But the question under dispute--and
+this the Syllabus does not touch--is whether the coercive power
+comprises merely spiritual penalties, or temporal and corporal
+penalties as well. The editor of the Syllabus did not decide this
+question he merely referred us to the letter _Ad Apostolicæ Sedis_ of
+August 22, 1851. But this letter is not at all explicit; it merely
+condemns those who pretend "to deprive the Church of the external
+jurisdiction and coercive power which was given her to win back
+sinners to the ways of righteousness." We would like to find more
+light on this question elsewhere. But the theologians who at the
+Vatican Council prepared canons 10 and 12 of the schema _De Ecclesia_
+on this very point of doctrine did not remove the ambiguity. They
+explicitly affirmed that the Church had the right to exercise over
+her erring children "constraint by an external judgment and salutary
+penalties," but they said nothing about the nature of these
+penalties. Was not such silence significant? It authorized, one may
+safely say, the opinion of those who limited the coercive power of
+the Church to merely moral constraint. Cardinal Soglia, in a work
+approved by Gregory XVI and Pius IX, declared that this opinion was
+"more in harmony with the gentleness of the Church."[1] It also has
+in its favor Popes Nicholas I[2] and Celestine III,[3] who claimed
+for the Church of which they were the head the right to use only the
+spiritual sword. Without enumerating all the modern authors who hold
+this view, we will quote a work which has just appeared with the
+imprimatur of Father Lepidi, the Master of the Sacred Palace, in
+which we find the two following theses proved: 1. "Constraint, in the
+sense of employing violence to enforce ecclesiastical laws,
+originated with the state." 2. "The constraint of ecclesiastical laws
+is by divine right exclusively moral constraint."[4]
+
+[1] _Institutiones juris publici ecclesiastici_, 5 ed., Paris, vol.
+i, pp. 169, 170.
+
+[2] _Nicolai_, Ep. ad Albinum archiepiscop., in the _Decretum_, Causa
+xxxiii, quæst. ii, cap. _Inter hæc_.
+
+[3] Celestine, according to the criminal code of his day, declared
+that a guilty cleric, once excommunicated and anathematized, ought to
+be abandoned to the secular arm, _cum Ecclesia non habeat ultra quid
+faciat_. Decretals, cap. x, _De judiciis_, lib. ii, tit. i. This was
+the common teaching.
+
+[4] Salvatore di Bartolo. _Nuova expozitione dei criteri teologici_,
+Roma, 104, pp. 303, 314. The first edition of this work was put upon
+the Index. The second edition, revised and corrected, and published
+with the approbation of Father Lepidi, has all the more weight and
+authority.
+
+Indeed, to maintain that the Church should use material force, is at
+once to make her subject to the State; for we can hardly picture her
+with her own police and gendarmes, ready to punish her rebellious
+children. Every Catholic believes that the Church is an independent
+society, fully able to carry out her divine mission without the aid
+of the secular arm. Whether governments are favorable or hostile to
+her, she must pursue her course and carry on her work of salvation
+under them all.
+
+. . . . . . . .
+
+"Heresy," writes Jean Guiraud, "in the Middle Ages was nearly always
+connected with some antisocial sect. In a period when the human mind
+usually expressed itself in a theological form, socialism, communism,
+and anarchy appeared under the form of heresy. By the very nature of
+things, therefore, the interests of both Church and State were
+identical; this explains the question of the suppression of heresy in
+the Middle Ages."[1]
+
+[1] Jean Guiraud, _La répression de l'hérésie au moyen âge_, in the
+_Questions d'archéologie et d'histoire_, p. 44.
+
+We are not surprised, therefore, that when Church and State found
+themselves menaced by the same peril, they agreed on the means of
+defence. If we deduct, from the total number of heretics burned or
+imprisoned the disturbers of the social order and the criminals
+against the common law, the number of condemned heretics will be very
+small.
+
+Heretics in the Middle Ages were considered amenable to the laws of
+both Church and State. Men of that time could not conceive of God and
+His revelation without defenders in a Christian kingdom. Magistrates
+were considered responsible for the sins committed against the law of
+God. Indirectly, therefore, heresy was amenable to their tribunal.
+They felt it their right and duty to punish not only crimes against
+society, but sins against faith.
+
+The Inquisition, established to judge heretics, is, therefore, an
+institution whose severity and cruelty are explained by the ideas and
+manners of the age. We will never understand it, unless we consider
+it in its environment, and from the viewpoint of men like St. Thomas
+Aquinas and St. Louis, who dominated their age by their genius.
+Critics who are ignorant of the Middle Ages may feel at liberty to
+shower insult and contempt upon a judicial system whose severity is
+naturally repugnant to them. But contempt does not always imply a
+reasonable judgment, and to abuse an institution is not necessarily a
+proof of intelligence. If we would judge an epoch intelligently, we
+must be able to grasp the viewpoint of other men, even if they lived
+in an age long past.
+
+But although we grant the good faith and good will of the founders
+and judges of the inquisition--we speak only, be it understood, of
+those who acted conscientiously--we must still maintain that their
+idea of justice was far inferior to ours. Whether taken in itself or
+compared with other criminal procedures, the Inquisition was, so far
+as the guarantees of equity are concerned, undoubtedly unjust and
+inferior. Such judicial forms as the secrecy of the trial, the
+prosecution carried on independently of the prisoner, the denial of
+advocate and defence, the use of torture, etc., were certainly
+despotic and barbarous. Severe penalties, like the stake and
+confiscation, were the legacy which a pagan legislation bequeathed to
+the Christian State; they were alien to the spirit of the Gospel.
+
+The Church in a measure felt this, for to enforce these laws she
+always had recourse to the secular arm. In time, all this criminal
+code was to fall into desuetude, and no one to-day wishes it back
+again. Besides, the crying abuses committed by some of the
+Inquisitors have made the institution forever odious.
+
+But in abandoning the system of force, which she formerly used in
+union with the State, does not the Church seem to condemn, to a
+certain degree, her past?
+
+Even if to-day she were to denounce the Inquisition, she would not
+thereby compromise her divine authority. Her office on earth is to
+transmit to generation after generation the deposit of revealed
+truths necessary for man's salvation. That to safeguard this treasure
+she uses means in one age which a later age denounces, merely proves
+that she follows the customs and ideas in vogue around her. But she
+takes good care not to have men consider her attitude the infallible
+and eternal rule of absolute justice. She readily admits that she may
+sometimes be deceived in the choice of means of government. The
+system of defence and protection that she adopted in the Middle Ages
+succeeded, at least to some extent. We cannot maintain that it was
+absolutely unjust and absolutely immoral.
+
+Undoubtedly we have to-day a much higher ideal of justice. But though
+we deplore the fact that the Church did not then perceive, preach or
+apply it, we need not be surprised. In social questions she
+ordinarily progresses with the march of civilization, of which she is
+ever one of the prime movers.
+
+But perhaps men may blame her for leaving abandoned and betrayed the
+cause of toleration, which she so ably defended in the beginning. Do
+not let us exaggerate. There was, undoubtedly, a period in which she
+did not deduce, from the principle she was the first to teach, all
+its logical consequences. The laws she enforced against heretics
+prove this. But it is false to say that, while in the beginning she
+insisted strongly on the rights of conscience, she afterwards totally
+disregarded them. In fact, she exercised constraint only over her own
+stray children. But while she acted so cruelly toward them, she never
+ceased to respect the consciences of those outside her fold. She
+always interpreted the _compelle intrare_ to imply with regard to
+unbelievers moral constraint, and the means of gentleness and
+persuasion. If respect for human liberty is to-day dominant in the
+thinking world, it is due chiefly to her.
+
+In the matter of tolerance, the Church has only to study her own
+history. If, during several centuries, she treated her rebellious
+children with greater severity than those alien to her fold, it was
+not from a want of consistency. And if to-day she manifests to every
+one signs of her maternal kindness, and lays abide for ever all
+physical constraint, she is not following the example of
+non-Catholics, but merely taking up again the interrupted tradition
+of her early Fathers.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Inquisition, by E. Vacandard
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE INQUISITION ***
+
+***** This file should be named 26329-8.txt or 26329-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/6/3/2/26329/
+
+Produced by David McClamrock
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.