OLIN CR 4737 .L43 1893a Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924080821154 In Compliance with current copyright law, Cornell University Library produced this replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1992 to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. 1998 (l^arncU JIlntoetHttg Bitbtary iS^ . L .3> u ^ f f-ite shows wh^ '' ' !/^msl6&Ziiifi£iSme^^ ■-'•"ne was taken. and five to \ THE ABSOLUTION FORMULA OF THE TEMPLARS ■ZJ-cJlf^ffr.-- HENRY CHARLES LEA, LL.D. :*°*Ht .■'^ ■1 -^tBf [Reprinted from Vol. V., Papers ^American Church History Society] Ube IKntcIiecb^cliei: press tea q737 '.Sj'Ti s^ '"'--l^o.cf^i^'' THE ABSOLUTION FORMULA OF THE TEMPLARS THE ABSOLUTION FORMULA OF THE TEMPLARS. By henry CHARLES LEA, LL.D. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Among the accusations brought against the Templars by Pope Clement V. in 1308, there was one to the effect that the officers of the Order — the Master, the Visitors, and the Preceptors — absolved the brethren from their sins. It is further asserted that de Molay admitted this in the presence of high personages before his arrest.' That the accusation was an after-thought is shown by the fact that it is not con- tained in the preliminary list of charges sent in September, 1307, by the Inquisitor Guillaume de Paris to his subordi- nates as a guide for them in the expected trials of the Templars.' Yet Clement was not the first to take note of this assumption of sacerdotal prerogatives, which, in fact, was well known to all who busied themselves with canon law, and public attention had already been called to it. In a diatribe on the disorders of the Church, written by a men- dicant friar apparently towards the end of the thirteenth cen- tury, all the three great Military Orders — the Hospital, the Temple, and the Teutonic Knights^are reproved for this usurpation of the power of the keys, although it is ascribed ' As formally expressed in the bull Faciens misericordiam, August 12, 1308, the charge is — " Item quod credebant, et sic dicebatur eis quod magnus magister a peccatis poterit eos absolvere. Item quoJ visitator. Item quod preceptores quorum multi erant layci. ** Item quod hsec faciebant de facto. Item quod aliqui eorum. ** Item quod magnus magister ordinis predict! hoc fuit de se confessus in presencia magnarum personarum antequam esset captus." — Michelet Prods des Templiers, I. gr. Cf. Mag. Bullar. Roman. IX. I2g (Ed. Luxemb.). ' Pissot Proch et Condamnation des Templiers, Paris, 1805, p. 39. [Reprinted from Vol. V., American Society of Church History.] 38 The Absolution Formula of the Templars. rather to ignorance than to wilful intrusion on priestly func- tions.' The truth or the falsity of the accusation has never, I believe, been investigated, and though the question is a subordinate one, yet everything connected with the catas- trophe of the Temple possesses interest, and this derives adventitious importance from its relation to the develop- ment of Catholic doctrine in the thirteenth century. To understand it rightly, we must bear in mind that the members of the Military Orders were monks, subject to all the rules and entitled to all the privileges of monachism. To appreciate their relations to the great subject of the sac- rament of penitence, we must, therefore, consider what, at the date of their foundation, were the customs of the re- ligious Orders, as well as what were the teachings of the Church with regard to confession and absolution, and we can then estimate how far Clement V. was justified in including this among the charges for which the Order was destroyed. The Templar Rule was based on the Cistercian, which in turn was a reform of the Benedictine. In the original Rule of Benedict there are no defined regulations on the subject. The sinner is counselled to confess to his abbot or to one of the older monks and to seek his advice, but, of course, there is nothing said as to absolution, which, in its sacramental character, was the creation of the schoolmen of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Public confession in the daily as- semblage or chapter was ordered for any external fault com- mitted in the prescribed routine of daily labor" — an exercise which had already, prior to Benedict, become customary in the monachism of the time." In the Cistercian reform this 'In treating of the three Military Orders the writer says : ' ' Usurpant laici sacerdotum officia, poenitentiam pro excessibus injungentes et eandem pro libito relaxantes, cum non sint eis claves commissEE, nee ligandi et solvendi uti debeant potestate. Remedium, ut magistri domorum mittant fratres literates ad studendum circa theologicas lectiones, nee circa scientias saeculares, ut habeant literates priores et sacerdetes." — Colkctiode Scandalis Ecclesia (Yio\- linger, Beitrdge %ur politischen, kirchlichen u. Cultur-geschichte, III. 196). ^ Segul. S. Benedict, t. vii. xlvi. (Migne's Patrologia, LXVI. 373, 694). Cf. Smaragdi Comment. (Migne, CII. 885) ; Reg. S. Chrodegangi c. 18 ; Jonae Aurelianens. de Instil. Laicali Lib. I. t. 16. ^ S. Eucherii Homil. VIII. The Absolution Formula of the Templars. 39 was insisted upon and developed. Every day, after mass, the brethren assembled in chapter. Any one conscious of sin was expected to confess it and ask for pardon. If he did not do so, any one cognizant of it was required to accuse him ; he could defend himself, and judgment was pronounced by a majority of those present. If he was condemned to the discipline, he promptly stripped himself to the waist and was scourged till the abbot commanded it to cease, and the proceedings terminated by the prior listening to private confessions of such things as nocturnal illusions for which he granted absolution and penance.' In all this there is evidently nothing of the formal sacrament of penitence, and no other form of confession is prescribed. Even on the death-bed the dying monk only said " Confiteor " or "Mea culpa, de omnibus peccatis meis precor vos orate pro me." ' Here we have the prototype of the chapters of the Tem- plars as described in their Rule. Wherever four or more of the brethren were together they were commanded to hold a chapter on the vigils of Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, and on every Sunday of the year, excepting those of the three feasts. These were religious assemblies : each one on entering crossed himself in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and recited a Paternoster before taking his seat. The Preceptor or presiding officer preached a sermon, after which every one conscious of sin was expected to confess it. If he did not do so, any one acquainted with it called upon him to confess; if he denied it, witnesses were sum- moned and the case was debated. The culprit withdrew ; the chapter determined what penance to prescribe, and he was recalled. If this was scourging, it was performed on the spot by the presiding officer, but there were many degrees of penance, culminating in expulsion, and a long catalogue of offences is detailed, classified according to the ' Usus antiquiores Ordinis Cisterciensis c. Ixx. Ixxv. (Migne, CLX VI. 1443-6). ^ Ibid., t. xciv. (p. 1471). By the time of St. Bernard, however, there seems to be a custom springing up of annual confession at Easter. — S. Bemardi Serm. in Die Pascha §15 (Migne, CLXXXIII. 281). 40 The Absolution Formula of the Templars. penances due to them.' In very light cases the chapter some- times referred the offender to the chaplain who prescribed the penance." The proceedings of the chapter closed with a prayer by the presiding officer, prior to which he absolved all those present and warned them that those who did not confess their sins had no share in the spiritual merits and benefits of the Order.' The object for which the chapters were instituted was the confession and penancing of sins ' ; in fact, the chapter was a confessional, and each brother was instructed before entering it to search his conscience and reflect whether he had any transgression to confess and render satisfaction for.' The Rule in the elaborate form in which we have it dates from about the middle of the thirteenth century, and con- tains certain sacerdotal elements which I will consider here- after. In its early simplicity, as granted by the council of Troyes in 1127, the whole matter of hearing confessions and imposing penance is entrusted to the Master. There is nothing said as to absolution, but the expressions used show that the performance of the penance imposed by him is expected to obtain salvation for the sinner." At that time the schoolmen had not fairly commenced their work ; nothing was known of penitence as a sacrament, and even the power of the keys was as yet a vague ' La R}gle d-u Temple, publie'e pour la Societe de I'Histoire de France, par Henri de Curzon, Paris, 1886, Art. 385-502. * Jbid., Art. 526. ' " Car le Maistre ou cil qui tient le chapistre les assols dou pooir que il ait devant que il comence sa proiere." — Ibid., Art. 503, 538. * " Et sachies qui nostre chapistre furent etabli por ce que li frere se con- fessassent de lor fautes et les amendassent." — Ibid., Art. 389. ' Ibid., Art. 394. ' " Si aliquis f rater loquendo vel militando vel aliter leve deliquerit, ipse ultro delictum suum satisfaciendo magistro ostendat. De levibus si consuetudi- nem non habeant, levem poenitentiam habeat. Si vero eo tacente per aliquem alium culpa cognita fuerit, majori et evidentiori subjaceat disciplinae et emen- dationi. Si autem grave erit delictum retrahetur a familiaritate fratrum, nee cum illis simul in eadem mensa edat sed solus refectionem sumat. Dispensa- tioni et judicio Magistri totum incumbat, ut salvus in die judicii permaneat." — Harduin. Concil. VI. 11. 1144. The Absolution Formula of the Templars. 41 conception. Naturally, therefore, in this original Rule there are no cominands as to confession to priests or the seeking of absolution from them. Whatever power to bind or to loose was exercised in the Order lay in the hands of the Master, and the penalties which he inflicted were not punishment, but penance. The distinction between the forum internum dinA th.e. forum externuin,h&tween reconcilia- tion to the Church and reconciliation to God, had not as yet been clearly defined by the schoolmen ; it was virtually unknown in practice and all offences were on the same plane. In the completed Rule we can trace these same characteristics. The proceedings in the chapter were not simply to enforce the discipline of the Order, but to save the soul of the sinner.' The penitential character of the inflictions is seen in the injunction that the culprit is to endure them cheerfully and willingly — he should feel shame for the sin, but not for the penance ' ; and when this is scourging, administered on the spot, all those present are enjoined to pray God to pardon him, whereupon the breth- ren all recite a Paternoster, and if there is a chaplain present he offers a special prayer.' When the penance is a pro- longed one, the chapter must determine when it shall cease, and then before the penitent is introduced all the brethren kneel and pray God to give him grace to preserve him from sin hereafter.' The religious character of the penance is ' "Nul frere ne doit reprendre autre frere fors par charite et par entention de faire li sauver s'arme." — R^gls, Art. 412. ' " Chaucun frere doit bien et volentiers faire la penance que li est en- chargee par chapistre." — Ibid.^ Art. 415. "Et nul frere ne doit avoir honte de penance en maniere que il Ten laisse a faire ; mais chascun doit avoir honte de faire le pechie, et la penance doit chas- cun faire volenterement." — Ibid., Art. 494. " Maisbiensachies que mult est belle chose de faire penance." — Ibid., Art. 533. When the penance comprised weekly public scourging in church " et doit venir a sa discipline a grant devocion et receore le en patience devant tout le peuple qui sera au mostier." — Ibid., Art. 468-73. ' " Biau seignors freres, vees ci votre frere qui vient a la discipline, pries notre Seignor qu'i li pardointses defautes." — Ibid., Art. 502. * Ibid., Art. 520. 42 The Absolution Formula of the Templars. still further seen in the regulation that if it is not administered on the spot by the presiding officer, it is subsequently to be inflicted by the chaplain ; as sacerdotalism advanced, indeed, some even argued that it ought always to be done by a priest and not by the master or commander.' At the time when the Order was organized there was nothing strange in thus entrusting to the master or preceptor the administration of the rites of confession, absolution, and satisfaction. The monk, though not in holy orders, by his vows and his dedication to the service of God, was invested with a quasi-sacerdotal character. Even at the end of the twelfth century we learn from Peter Cantor that in some convents a monk could confess to any of his brethren and accept penance from him, though by this time absolution was becoming recognized as a sacerdotal function and was administered by the abbot, the sacrament being thus split in two." But even apart from this monastic character lay- men had not as yet been excluded from the hearing of con- fessions. It was not long before the founding of the Order that the Blessed Lanfranc taught that confession of secret sins could be made to any ecclesiastic, from priest to osti- arius, or in their absence to a righteous layman who could cleanse the soul from sin.' No work of the twelfth cen- tury exercised so controlling an influence on the develop- ment of the sacramental conception of penitence as the forgery which passed current under the authoritative name of St. Augustin, yet in this it is asserted that in the ab- sence of a priest confession to a layman is equally effica- cious * — a principle which was adopted by Gratian and Peter Lombard.' In the thirteenth century, even after ' Ibid., Art. 523, 525. • Jo. Morini de Administr. Sacram. Pcenitent, Lib. vili. c. ix. n. 23. — Martene de antiq. Ritibus Ecclesi