diff options
Diffstat (limited to '26329-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 26329-0.txt | 6480 |
1 files changed, 6480 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/26329-0.txt b/26329-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b387b27 --- /dev/null +++ b/26329-0.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: UTF-8 + +*** 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 26329-0.txt or 26329-0.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. |