^^ 
 
 ^\«^ ^^/t. 
 
 VA 
 
 O LIBRARIES q 
 
 GENERAL 
 LIBRARY 
 
THE INQUISITION 
 
THOMAS J. SHAHAN, S.T.D. 
 
 Jmtirimatur* 
 
 iflJOHN M. FARLEY, D.D., 
 
 Archbishop oj New York. 
 
 New York, June 24, 1907. 
 
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. 
 
 LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 
 
 91 AND 93 FIFTH AVENUE NEW YORK 
 
 LONDON, BOMBAY, AND CALCUTTA 
 
 1908 
 
Copyright, 1907, by 
 Bertrand L. Conway 
 
 AU Rights Reserved 
 
 
 First Edition, February, 1908 
 Reprinted, May, 1908 
 
 ^-d' ^ 7^ ^ 
 
 The Plimpton Press Norwood Mass. U.S.A. 
 
CO 
 
 J 
 
 ^^ 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 
 Hberalism, as if they distrusted the force of their own 
 arguments. Indeed they have hardly answered the first 
 objection of their opponents, when they instantly en- 
 deavor 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 wrong-doing 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 repro- 
 bation of mankind, the Inquisition of the Catholic Church 
 must needs escape all censure. On the contrary, the 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 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 institu- 
 tion 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 Uzes, published at Cologne (Paris), 
 in 1693, a Histoire de V 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 
 Galilean bias, which details with evident delight the 
 cruelties of the Holy Office.'' The illustrations are taken 
 from Philip Limborch's Historia Inquisiiionis} 
 
 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 
 
 1 Paul Fredericq, Historio graphic de rinquisition, p. xiv. Introduction 
 to the French translation of Lea's book on the Inquisition. This work of 
 Marsollier was republished and enlarged by another priest, the Abbe Gouget, 
 who added a Discours sur guelques auteurs qui ont traite du tribunal de 
 rinquisition. 
 
PREFACE vii 
 
 press, and has been translated into French.^ 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." ^ 
 
 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 docu- 
 ments. 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.^ 
 
 Tanon, the president of the Court of Cassation, has 
 proved far more impartial in his Histoire des Trtbunaux de 
 VInquisition en France} 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 
 
 1 Histoire de V Inquisition au moyen dge, Salomon Reinach. Paris, Fisch- 
 bacher, 1900-1903. 
 
 2 Paul Fredericq, loc. cit., p. xxiv. 
 
 3 The reader may gather our estimate of this work from the variotis criti- 
 cisms we will pass upon it in the course of this study. 
 
 * Paris, 1893. Dr. Camille Henner had already published a similar work, 
 Beitrdge zur Organisation und Competenz der pdpstlichen Ketzergeschichte, 
 Leipzig, 1890. 
 
viii PREFACE 
 
 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. 
 
 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 origi- 
 nated, 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 con- 
 sideration of the factors controlling the minds and souls 
 of men during the ages which laid the foundation of 
 modern civilization."^ 
 
 We must also go back further than the thirteenth cen- 
 tury 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 sup- 
 
 1 Preface, p. iii. 
 
PREFACE ix 
 
 pression 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 deli- 
 cate one. But no consideration whatever should pre- 
 vent 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." ^ 
 
 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 dreamt 
 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 under- 
 stand," says Yves Le Querdec,^ "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 pre- 
 sented some day or other. If they are not presented 
 fairly by those who possess the true solution or who 
 
 * Vol. ii, p. 231. 2 Univers, June 2, 1906. 
 
X PREFACE 
 
 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. '* 
 
 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 Cicero, De Oratore ii, 15. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Preface v 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 First Period (I-IV Century) : The Epoch of the Persecutions. 
 
 The Teaching of St. Paul on the Suppression of Heretics . i 
 
 The Teaching of Tertullian . 2 
 
 The Teaching of Origen 3 
 
 The Teaching of St. Cyprian 3 
 
 The Teaching of Lactantius 4 
 
 Constantine, Bishop in Externals 5 
 
 The Teaching of St. Hilary 6 
 
 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 8 
 
 The Attitude of St. Augustine towards the Manicheans . . 12 
 
 St. Augustine and Donatism 15 
 
 The Church and the Priscillianists 22 
 
 The Early Fathers and the Death Penalty 28 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 Third Period (a.d. 1100-1250). The Revival of the Mani- 
 chean Heresies 
 
 Adoptianism and Predestinationism 31 
 
 2d 
 
xii CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The Manicheans in the West 33 
 
 Peter of Bruys 3^ 
 
 Henry of Lausanne 39 
 
 Arnold of Brescia 39 
 
 £on de rfitoile 4© 
 
 Views of this Epoch upon the Suppression of Heresy ... 41 
 
 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 . 5^ 
 
 The Death Penalty for Heretics 54 
 
 Legislation of Popes Alexander III and Lucius III and 
 
 Frederic Barbarossa against Heretics 56 
 
 Legislation of Innocent III 5^ 
 
 The First Canonists 64 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 % The Catharan or Albigensian Heresy: Its anti-Catholic 
 and Anti-Social Character. 
 
 "» The Origin of the Catharan Heresy 69 
 
 Its Progress 70 
 
 It Attacks the Hierarchy, Dogmas, and Worship of the Catholic 
 
 Church 73 
 
 It Undermines the Authority of the State 77 
 
 The Hierarchy of the Cathari 80 
 
 The Convenenza 81 
 
 The Initiation into the Sect 83 
 
 Their Customs 88 
 
 Their Horror of Marriage 92 
 
 The Endura or Suicide 97 
 
CONTENTS xiii 
 
 PAGE 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 Fifth Period (Gregory IX and Frederic II). The Estab- 
 lishment OF the Monastic Inquisition. 
 
 Loms VIII and Louis IX 105 
 
 Legislation of Frederic II against Heretics 107 
 
 Gregory IX Abandons Heretics to the Secular Arm . . . in 
 
 The Establishment of the Inquisition 119 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 Sixth Period. Development of the Inquisition. (Innocent 
 
 IV and the Use of Torture.) 
 
 The Monastic and the Episcopal Inquisitions 136 
 
 Experts to Aid the Inquisitors 138 
 
 Ecclesiastical Penalties 142 
 
 The Infliction of the Death Penalty 144 
 
 The Introduction of Torture 147 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 Theologians, Canonists and Casuists. 
 
 Heresy and Crimes Subject to the Inquisition 159 
 
 The Procedure 166 
 
 The Use of Torture 168 
 
 Theologians Defend the Death Penalty for Heresy . . . 171 
 
 Canonists Defend the L^se of the Stake 176 
 
 The Church's Responsibility in Inflicting the Death Penalty 177 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 The Inquisition in Operation. 
 
 Its Field of Action 182 
 
 The Excessive Cruelty of Inquisitors 184 
 
xiv CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The Penalty of Imprisonment 189 
 
 The Number of Heretics Handed Over to the Secular Arm . 196 
 
 Confiscation 202 
 
 The auto defe 206 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 Criticism of the Theory and Practice of the Inquisition. 
 Development of the Theory on the Coercive Power of the 
 
 Church 208 
 
 Intolerance of the People 212 
 
 Intolerance of Sovereigns 214 
 
 The Church and Intolerance 216 
 
 The Theologians and Intolerance 217 
 
 Appeal to the Old Testament 218 
 
 England and the Suppression of Heresy 220 
 
 The Calvinists and the Suppression of Heresy . . . . 222 
 
 Cruelty of the Criminal Code in the Middle Ages . . . 225 
 
 The Spirit of the Age Explains the Cruelty of the Inquisition 227 
 
 Defects in the Procedure 228 
 
 Abuses of Antecedent Imprisonment and Torture . . . 231 
 
 Heretics who were also Criminals 233 
 
 Heresy Punished as Such 235 
 
 Should the Death Penalty be Inflicted upon Heretics? . . 238 
 
 The Responsibility of the Church 242 
 
 Abuses of the Penalties of Confiscation and Exile . . . 245 
 
 The Penitential Character of Imprisonment 248 
 
 The Syllabus and the Coercive Power of the Church . . 249 
 
 APPENDIX A 
 
 The Processus InquisUionis 258 
 
 APPENDIX B 
 
 Sentences of Bernard Gui 270 
 
 Bibliography 271 
 
 Index 277 
 
THE INQUISITION 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 FIRST PERIOD 
 
 I-IV Century 
 
 The Epoch of the Persecutions 
 
 St. Paul was the first to pronounce a sentence of con- 
 demnation 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.''^ 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 apos- 
 tates merited under the old dispensation ^ has been 
 changed into a purely spiritual penalty, excommunica- 
 tion. 
 
 During the first three centuries, as long as the era of 
 persecution lasted, the early Christians never thought 
 
 1 I Tim. i. 20. Cf. Tit. iii. lo-ii. "A man that is a heretic, after the 
 first and second admonition, avoid, knowing that he, that is such a one, is 
 subverted and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgment." 
 
 2 Deut. xiii. 6-9; xvii. 1-6. 
 
 2 « 
 
2 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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/' ^ 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 con- 
 trary, 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 com- 
 mander comprises the right to sit in judgment upon a 
 man's life, to condemn, to put in chains, to imprison and 
 to torture." ^ 
 
 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 
 
 1 "Ad ofi&cium hcereticos compelli, non illici dignum est. Duritia vincenda 
 est, non suadenda." Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiace, cap. ii, Migne, P. L., 
 vol. ii, col. 125. On the different readings and sense of this text, cf. Rigault, 
 ibid., note. The Scorpiace was written 211 or 212. 
 
 2 "Jam vero quae sunt potestatis, neque judicet de capite alicujus . . . 
 neque damnet, neque prasdamnet, neminem vinciat, neminem recludat, aut 
 torqueat." De Idololairia, cap. xvii, P. L., vol. i, col. 687. This work was 
 written 211 or 212. 
 
THE INQUISITION 3 
 
 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 em- 
 braced freely and not forced." ^ These words prove 
 that Tertullian was a strong advocate of absolute tolera- 
 tion. 
 
 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 be- 
 tween 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 con- 
 demn, as Moses commanded, the contemners of the law 
 to be put to death by burning or stoning."^ 
 
 St. Cyprian also repudiates in the name of the Gospel 
 the laws of the Old Testament on this point. He writes 
 
 1 "Tamen humani juris et naturalis potestatis unicuique, quod putaverit, 
 colere, nee alii obest aut prodest alterius religio. Sed nee religionis est cogere 
 religionem, quae sponte suscipi debeat, non vi." Liber ad Scapulam, cap. ii, 
 P. L., vol. i, col. 699; written about 212. 
 
 2 Cojttra Celsum, lib. vii, cap. xxvi. 
 
4 THE INQUISITION 
 
 as follows: "God commanded that those who did not 
 obey his priests or hearken to his judges/ 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." ^ 
 
 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 Divince 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 in- 
 stead of lessening their folly? Torture and piety have 
 nothing in common; there is no union possible between 
 truth and violence, justice and cruelty.^ . . . For they 
 
 1 Deut. xvii. 12. 
 
 2 "Nunc autem, quia circumcisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos Dei 
 ccepit, spiritali gladio superbi et contumaces necaniur, dum de Ecclesia 
 ejiciuntur." Ep, Ixii, ad Pomponium, n. 4, P. L., vol. iii, col. 371. Cf. 
 De unitate EcdesicR, n. 17 seq.; ibid., col. 513 seq. 
 
 3 Cf. Pascal, Lettre provinciate, xii. 
 
THE INQUISITION 5 
 
 (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." ^ 
 
 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 re- 
 store 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." ^ This 
 
 i"Nam si sanguine, si tormentis religionem defendere veils, jam non 
 defendetur ilia, sed polluetur, sed violabitur," etc. Divin. InstituL, lib. v, 
 cap. XX. 
 
 ''"Vos quidem, inquit, in iis qu£e intra Ecclesiam sunt episcopi estis; ego 
 
6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 assumption of power frequently worked positive harm 
 to the Church, although Constantine always pretended 
 to further her interests. 
 
 When Arianism began to make converts of the Chris- 
 tian emperors, they became very bitter toward the Catho- 
 lic 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 
 re'gime of violence. He also proclaimed, in the name of 
 ecclesiastical tradition, the principle of religious tolera- 
 tion. 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 im- 
 prisonment; 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 be- 
 tween the Church of the past and the Church of to-day." ^ 
 
 vero in lis qua^ extra geruntur episcopus a Deo sum constitutus." Eusebius, 
 Vita Constantini, lib. iv, cap. xxiv. 
 
 1 "Terret exsiliis et carceribus Ecclesia; credique sibi cogit, quae exsiliis 
 et carceribus est credita . . . Fugat sacerdotes, quae fugatis est sacerdotibus 
 propagata . . . Hasc de comparatione traditae nobis Ecclesiae, nuncque 
 
THE INQUISITION 7 
 
 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 ^ (the Church has a horror of bloodshed) ; and 
 they declare faith must be absolutely free, and conscience 
 a domain wherein violence must never enter.^ 
 
 The stern laws of the Old Testament have been abol- 
 ished by the New. 
 
 depcrditae, res ipsa quae in oculis omnium est atque ore claraavit." Liher 
 contra Auxentiuni, cap. iv. Written in 365. 
 
 1 "Christianus ne fiat propria voluntate miles, nisi coactus a duce. Habeat 
 gladium, caveat tamen ne criminis sanguinis effusi fiat reus." Canons of 
 Hippolytus, in the third or fourth century, no 74-75; Duchesne, Les origines 
 du culte Chretien, 2^ ed., p. 309. "Ita neque miUtare justo licebit," says Lac- 
 tantius, " neque accusare quemquam crimine capitali, quia nihil distat utrumne 
 ferro an verbo potius occidas; quoniam occisio ipsa prohibetur." Divin. 
 Institute lib. vi, cap. xx. Cf. the passages quoted from TertuUian, De 
 Idolatria, and from Origen, Contra Celsum. 
 
 2 "Non est religionis cogere religionem . . . ; sponte, non vi." Tertullian, 
 loc. cit. "Non est opus vi at injuria, quia religio cogi non potest." Lac- 
 tantius, Divin, Institut., lib. v, cap. xx. 
 
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 im- 
 perial majesty was to protect the true religion, whose 
 worship was intimately connected with the prosperity 
 of human undertakings.''^ 
 
 This concept of the State implied the vigorous pros- 
 ecution of heresy. We therefore see the Christian em- 
 perors severely punishing all those who denied the 
 orthodox faith, or rather their own faith, which they con- 
 sidered rightly or wrongly (sometimes wrongly) the faith 
 of the Church. 
 
 ^"Praecipuam imperatoriae majestatis curam esse perspicimus verae 
 religionis indaginem, cujus si cultum tenere potuerimus iter prosperitatis 
 humanis ape.rimus inceptis." Theodosii II, Novcllcc, tit. iii. (438). 
 
THE INQUISITION 9 
 
 From the reign of Valentinian I, and especially from 
 the reign of Theodosius I, the laws against heretics con- 
 tinued to increase with surprising regularity. We can 
 count as many as sixty-eight 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, v.g. the Manicheans and the Donatists. 
 
 1 On this legislation, cf. Riff el Geschichtliche Darsiellung der Verhaltnisses 
 zwischen Kirche und Staat, von der Griindung der Christenthum his auf Jus- 
 tinian I, Mainz, 1836, pp. 656-679; Loening, Geschichte des deutschen 
 Kirchenrechts, Strassburg, 1878, vol. i, pp. 95-102; Tanon, Histoire des iribu- 
 naux de Vlnquisition en France, pp. 127-133. 
 
 2 "Haereticorum vocabulo continentur et latis adversus eos sanctionibus de- 
 bent succumbere, qui vel levi argumento a judicio catholicas religionis et tramite 
 detect! fuerint deviare." Law of Arcadius, 395; Cod. Theodos., xvi, v. 28. 
 
 3"Non omnes eadem austeritate plectendi sunt." Law of 428, ibid., xvi, 
 V. 65. 
 
 4 For instance, the laws of 371, of 381, of 384, of 389, ibid., xvi, v. 3, 7, 
 13, 18, etc. 
 
 5 The Manicheans banished from Rome, ibid., 67; banished ab ipso aspectu 
 urbium diversarum, ibid., 64; banished ex omni quidem orbe terrarum, ibid., 
 n. 18 (law of 389). 
 
 ^"Encratites . . . cum Saccoforis sive Hydroparastatis . . . summo sup- 
 plicio et inexpiabili poena jubemus afifligi." Law of 382, ibid., 9. These 
 were Manichean sects. 
 
,0 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 Manicheans.^ This law did not 
 affect private opinions (except in the case of the En- 
 cratites, the Saccophori, and the Hydroparastatae), 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 
 
 1 Ihid., 65. 
 
 2 Laws of 407, ibid., 40, 41, 43; law of 428, ibid., 65. 
 
 3 "In mortem quoque inquisitio tendit, nam si in criminibus majestatis 
 licet memoriam accusare defuncti, non immerito et hie debet subire 
 judicium." Law of 407 {ibid., 40), which we will see revived in the Middle 
 Ages. 
 
 4 Law of 382, ibid., 9. 
 
 *Laws of 410 and 415, ibid., 51 and 56. 
 
THE INQUISITION ii 
 
 287: "We thus decree," he writes Julianus/ "against these 
 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 legis- 
 lation 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 fmd 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 
 
 1 Boeking, Corpus Juris antejustiniani, vol. i, p. 374- 
 
 2 Justinian, however, made the laws against the Manicheans more severe. 
 His code decreed the death penalty against every Manichean without excep- 
 tion. Cod. Just., book i, tit. v, law ii (487 or 510), ibid., law 12 (527). Cf. 
 Julien Ha vet, Vlieresie et le bras seculier au moyen age, in his CEuvres, Paris, 
 1896, ii, 121, n. 3. 
 
12 THE INQUISITION 
 
 practices that would not bear repetition, and this de- 
 bauchery was not peculiar to a few wicked followers, 
 but was merely the carrying out of the Manichean ritual, 
 which other heretics likewise admitted.^ 
 
 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 im- 
 possible 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 ac- 
 cepted your doctrines." 2 All he did was to hold public 
 conferences with their leaders, whose arguments he had 
 no difficulty in refuting.^ 
 
 The conversions obtained in this way were rather 
 numerous, even if all were not equally sincere. All con- 
 
 J Augustine, De hceresibus, Hasres, 46. 
 
 2"Illi in vos sasviant qui nesciunt cum quo labore verum inveniatur et 
 quam diflBcile caveantur errores . . . Ego autem, qui diu multumque jactatus 
 . . . omnia ilia figmenta . . . et temere credidi et instanter quibus potui 
 persuasi . . , , Scevire in vos non possum," etc. Contra epistolam Manichcei 
 quam vacant Fundamenti, n. 2 et 3. 
 
 3 On St. Augustine's relations with the Manicheans, consult the numerous 
 works which he devoted to this sect. Cf. Dom Leclerc, L'Afrique Chretienne, 
 Paris, 1904, vol. ii, pp. 113 -122. 
 
THE INQUISITION 13 
 
 verts 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 denuncia- 
 tion 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 Casae Nigrae 
 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 Aries (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 
 
 1 Cases are cited in the Admonitio of St. Augustine, at the beginning of 
 the treatise: De actis cum Felice ManicJuBo, P. L., vol. xlii, col. 510; cf. Ep. 
 ccxxxvi. 
 
 2 Dom Leclerc, L'Afrique Chretienne, Paris, 1904, vol. i, ch. iv; vol. ii, 
 ch. vi. 
 
,4 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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, re- 
 marks 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." ^ 
 
 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." ^ "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,^ Phinees,^ and Elias ^ put to death the 
 worshipers 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. 
 
 1 Ep. clxxxv, n. 7. 
 
 2 F. Martroye, Une tentative de revolution sociale en Afrique; Donatistes et 
 Circoncellions (Revue des Quest. Hist., Oct. 1904, Jan. 1905). 
 
 3 "Quasi in vindictam Dei null us mereatur occidi ... Si occidi malum 
 est, mali sui ipsi sunt causa." De schismate Donatistarum, lib. iii, cap. vi. 
 
 4 Exod. xxxii. 28. 
 6 Numb. XXV. 7-9, 
 e 3 K. 18-40. 
 
THE INQUISITION 15 
 
 Did not Christ forbid St. Peter to use the sword? "^ Yes, 
 undoubtedly, but Christ came to suffer, not to defend him- 
 self.2 The lot of Christians is diflFerent from that of Christ. 
 
 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 diflFerent teaching from the doctrine of tolera- 
 tion 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 Mani- 
 cheans. 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."^ 
 
 In one of his works, now lost, Contra partem Donati, he 
 maintains that it is wrong for the State to force schis- 
 matics to come back to the Church.* At the most, he 
 
 1 John xviii. ii. 
 
 ^De Schismate Don., cap. vii. 
 
 3 " Ut omnes intelligant non hoc esse propositi mei ut inviti homines ad 
 cujusquam communionem cogantur. Cesset a nostris partibus terror tem- 
 poralium potestatum; cesset etiam a vestris partibus terror congregatorum 
 Circumcellionum," etc. Ep. xxiii, n. 7. 
 
 4 "Sunt duo Ubri mei quorum titulus est Contra partem Donati. In 
 
i6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 was ready to admit the justice of the law of Theodosius, 
 which imposed a fme of ten gold pieces upon those schis- 
 matics who had committed open acts of violence. But no 
 man was to be punished by the State for private heretical 
 opinions.^ 
 
 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. Augus- 
 tine, 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? 
 
 Heretics and schismatics, he maintained, were to be 
 regarded as sheep who had gone astray. It is the shep- 
 herd's duty to run after them, and bring them back to 
 the fold by using, if occasion require it, the whip and 
 the goad.^ There is no need of using cruel tortures 
 like the rack, the iron pincers, or sending them to the 
 stake; for flogging is sufficient. Besides this mode of 
 
 quorum primo libro dixi, non mihi placere ullius secularis potestatis impetu 
 schismaticos ad communionem violenter arctari." Retract., lib. ii, cap. v. 
 
 We wonder how this text escaped the Abbe Martin, who in his Saint 
 Augustin, Paris, 1901, p. 373, maintains that the Bishop of Hippo "always 
 denied the principle of toleration." 
 
 1 "Non esse petendum ab imperatoribus ut ipsam hasresim juberent omnino 
 non esse, paenam constituendo eis qui in ea esse voluerint." Ep. dxxxv, n. 25. 
 
 2 Ep. xciii, n. 10. 
 
 3"Pertinet ad diligentiam pastoralem . . . inventas ad ovile dominicum, 
 si resistere voluerint, flagellorum terroribus vel etiam doloribus revocare." 
 Ep. dxxxv, n, 23. 
 
THE INQUISITION 17 
 
 punishment is not at all cruel, for it is used by school- 
 masters, parents, and even by bishops while presiding 
 as judges in their tribunals.^ 
 
 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.^ 
 
 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"^ 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/'* 
 
 1 "Non extendente eculeo, non sulcantibus ungulis non virentibus flammis, 
 sed virgarum verberibus . . . Qui modus coercitionis a magistris artium 
 liberalium et ab ipsis parentibus, saepe etiam in judiciis solet ab episcopis 
 adhiberi." Ep. cxxxiii, n. 2. Augustine here recommends the tribune 
 Marcellinus to treat his prisoners with the same kindness. 
 
 2 "Non tamen suppUcio capitali propter servandam etiam circa indignos 
 mansuetudinem christianam, sed pecuniis damnis propositis et in episcopos vel 
 ministros eorum exsiHo constituto." Ep. clxxxv, n. 26. "Et magis mansue- 
 tudo servatur ut coercitione exsihorum atque damnorum admoneantur." 
 Ep. xciii, n. 10. 
 
 3"Mansuetudo christiana." Ep. clxxxv, n. 26. "Propter catholicam 
 mansuetudinem commendandam." Ep. cxxxix, n. 2. 
 
 ''"Sed hoc magis sufiicere volumus, ut vivi et nulla corporis parte trun- 
 cati," etc. Ep. cxxxiii, n. i. 
 
 3 
 
i8 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.' ^ But we must carefully distinguish between 
 temporal and spiritual affairs." ^ "Because it is just to 
 inflict the death penalty for crimes against the com- 
 mon 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 be- 
 fore 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."^ 
 
 Despite these impassioned appeals for mercy, some Don- 
 atists were put to death. This prompted the schismatics 
 everywhere to deny that the State had any right to in- 
 flict the death penalty or any other penalty upon them.^ 
 
 ^ Rom. xiii. 4. 
 
 2"Sed alia causa est Provinciae, alia est Ecclesiae. Illius terribiliter 
 gerenda est administratio, hujus clementer commendanda est mansuetudo." 
 Ep. cxxxiv, n. 3. 
 
 3"Proinde si occidendos in his sceleribus homines putaveritis, deterrebitis 
 nos ne per operam nostram ad vestrum judicium aliquid tale perveniat: quo 
 comperto illi in nostram perniciem licentiore audacia grassabuntur, necessi- 
 tate nobis impacta et indicta ut etiam occidi ab eis eligamus, quam eos 
 occidendos vestris judiciis ingeramus." Ep. c, n. 2; cf. Ep. cxxxix, n. 2. 
 
 ^ "Non ad Imperatorum potestatem haec coercenda vel punienda pertinere 
 ebdere." Contra Epistolam Parmeniani, lib. i, cap. xvi. 
 
THE INQUISITION 19 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 But this is only an argument ad hominem. St. Augus- 
 tine means to says 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.^ He 
 denounces those Catholics who, outside of cases of self- 
 defense, had murdered their opponents.^ 
 
 The State also has the perfect right to impose the lesser 
 penalties of flogging, fmes, 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." * It is not true to claim that St. Paul 
 
 1 "Videte qualia faciunt et qualia patiuntur! Occidunt animas, afBiguntur 
 in corpore; sempiternas mortes faciunt et temporales se perpeti conqueruntur." 
 In Joann. Tractat. xi, cap. xv. 
 
 2 Ihid. 
 
 3"Postremo, etiamsi aliqui nostronim non Christiana moderatione ista 
 faciunt, displicet nobis." Ep. Ixxxvii, n. 8. 
 
 * Rom. xiii, 4; Augustine, Contra litteras Petilianif lib. ii, cap. Ixxxiii- 
 Ixxxiv; Contra Epist. Parmeniani, lib. i, cap. xvi. 
 
20 
 
 THE INQUISITION 
 
 here meant merely the spiritual sword of excommunica- 
 tion.^ 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.^ 
 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 
 
 Iife.3 
 
 The State, therefore, has the right to suppress heresy, 
 because the public tranquillity is disturbed by religious 
 dissensions."* Her intervention also works for the good 
 of individuals. For, on the one hand, there are some sin- 
 cere but timid souls who are prevented by their environ- 
 ment from abandoning their schism; they are encouraged 
 to return to the fold by the civil power, which frees them 
 from a most humiliating bondage.^ 
 
 On the other hand, there are many schismatics in good 
 
 i"Gladius, vindicta spiritualis quae excommunicationem operatur." 
 Contra Epist. Parmeniani, ibid. 
 
 2 Ibid. St. Augustine remarks that the Donatists themselves admitted that 
 the State punished poisoners: "Cur in veneficos vigorem legum exerceri juste 
 fateantur?" His reasoning would prove more than he intended, for poisoners 
 were punishable by death. 
 
 3 " Et quomodo redderent rationem de imperio suo Deo ? . . . quia pertinet 
 hoc ad reges saeculi christianos, ut temporibus suis pacatam velint matrem 
 suam Ecclesiam, unde spiritahter nati sunt." In Joann. Tractatus xi, cap. 
 xiv. 
 
 ■'"Nostri adversus illicitas et privatas vestrorum violentias ... a potes- 
 tatibus ordinatis tuitionem petunt, non qua vos persequantur, sed qua se 
 defendant." Ep. Ixxxii, n. 8. 
 
 6 Ep. clxxxv, n. 13. 
 
THE INQUISITION 2i 
 
 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. ^ The Church's rebellious children are not forced 
 to believe, but are induced by a salutary fear to listen to 
 the true doctrine.^ 
 
 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 tempera- 
 ment, an advocate of absolute toleration, but later on 
 experience led him to prefer a mitigated form of co- 
 ercion. 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 
 
 i"De vobis autem corripiendis et coercendis habita ratio est, quo potius 
 admoneremini ab errore discedere, quam pro scelere puniremini." Ep. xciii, 
 n. lo. 
 
 2 "Timor paenarum . . . saltern intra claustra cogitationis coercet malam 
 cupiditatem." Contra litteras Peiiliani, lib. ii, cap. Ixxxiii. "Melius est 
 (quis dubitaverit ?) ad Deum colendum doctrina homines duci quam psenae 
 timore vel dolore compelli . . . Sed multis profuit prius timore vel dolore 
 cogi ut postea possent doceri." Ep. clxxxv, n. 21. "Terrori utili doctrina 
 salutaris adjungitur." Ep. xciii, n. 4. 
 
 3"Illam vera esse Ecclesiam quas persecutionem patitur, non quae facit." 
 Ep. clxxxv, n. 10. 
 
22 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Agar.^ 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. 
 
 • • • • 
 
 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 .^ His 
 erudition and critical spirit were, however, so remarkable, 
 that an historian of weight declares that henceforth we 
 must rank him with St. Jerome.^ But his writings were, 
 in all probability, far from orthodox. We can easily 
 fmd 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 
 
 1 Ibid., n. II. 
 
 2 On Priscillian and his work, cf. Priscilliani quod superest, ed. G. Schepps, 
 1889, in the Corpus scriptorum latinorum, published by the Academy of Vienna, 
 vol. xviii; Aime Puech, in the Journal des savants, Feb., April, and May, 
 1891; Dom Leclerc, UEspagne Chretienne, Paris, 1906, ch. iii (the author 
 follows Puech step by step, and often copies him word for word); Friedrich 
 Paret, Priscillianus, Wiirzburg, 1891; Kuenstle, Antipriscilliana, Frieburg, 
 1905. 
 
 3 Puech, p. 121. Cf. Leclerc, p. 164. 
 * Schepps, op. cit., p. 24. 
 
THE INQUISITION 23 
 
 suffer to live." * He little dreamt when he wrote these 
 words that he was pronouncing his own death sentence. 
 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. Am- 
 brose, who likewise would not hearken to his defense.^ 
 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. 
 
 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 
 
 1 Exod. xxii. 18. 
 
 2Schepps, op. cit., p. 41- PrisciUian wrote an apology to the Pope en- 
 titled Liber ad Damasum, ibid., p. 39- Cf. Sulp. Sev. Chronicon. ii, P. L., 
 vol. XX, col. 155-159; Dialogi, iii, 11-23, ihid., col. 217-219. 
 
 3 Chronicon, loc. cit. It is worthy of remark that PrisciUian in his Uber 
 ad Damasum declared that in causa fidei he preferred to be judged by the 
 Bishops rather than by the civil magistrates. 
 
 4 Sulp. Sev., loc. cit. 
 
24 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 prom- 
 ise not to shed the blood of Priscillian and his companions. 
 But soon after St. Martin's departure, the Emperor, in- 
 stigated by the relentless bishops Rufus and Magnus, for- 
 got his promise of mercy, and entrusted the case to the 
 prefect Evodius, a cruel and hard-hearted official. Pris- 
 cillian 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 him- 
 self 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 con- 
 demned to death. Others of the sect were exiled. 
 
THE INQUISITION 25 
 
 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. Tech- 
 nically, 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.^ 
 
 In this way contemporary writers viewed the matter. 
 The Christians of the fourth century were all but unani- 
 mous, says an historian,^ in denouncing the penalty in- 
 flicted 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 
 
 iBernays, 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. Cf. E. Loening, 
 Geschichie des deutschen Kirchenreehis, vol. i, p. 97, n. 3. Aime Puech and 
 Dom Leclerc, loc. cit. 
 
 2 Puech, loc. cit., p. 250. 
 
 3 We have also a letter of the Emperor Maximus to Pope Siricius on the 
 trial, in which he says: "Hujusmodi non modo facta turpia, verum etiam 
 fceda dictu proloqui sine rubore non possumus." Migne, P. L., vol. xiii, 
 col. 592 sq. 
 
26 THE INQUISITION 
 
 just as strongly.^ 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.^ Even in Spain, where pub- 
 lic 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.^ 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 author- 
 ize it to use the sword against heretics."* 
 
 The blood of Priscillian was the seed of Priscillianism. 
 But his disciples certainly went further than their master; 
 they became thorough-going Manicheans. This explains 
 St. Jerome's^ and St. Augustine's^ strong denunciations 
 of the Spanish heresy. The gross errors of the Priscillian- 
 
 * Cf. Gams, Kirchengeschichte von Spanien, vol. ii, p. 382. 
 
 2 Sulpicius Severus, Dialogi, iii, 11-13. 
 
 3 Sulp. Sev., Chronicon, loc. cit. 
 
 4 In a discourse delivered at Rome in 389, the pagan panegyrist, Pacatus, 
 expresses his horror for those episcopal executioners, "who were present at 
 the tortures of the accused, and feasted their eyes and ears with their 
 groans and sufferings." Panegyrist veteres, ed. Baerhens, Leipzig, 1874, 
 p. 217. 
 
 ^ De Viris illusiribus, 1 21-123. 
 ^ De hoeresibus, cap. 70. 
 
THE INQUISITION 27 
 
 ists 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 con- 
 travening 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 punish- 
 ment are won back to the true faith." ^ 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. 
 The Church is endeavoring to state her position accu- 
 
 i"Merito patres nostri sub quorum temporibus haeresis haec nefanda 
 prorupit, per totum mundum instanter egere ut impius furor ab universa 
 Ecclesia pelleretur. Quando etiam mundi principes ita hanc sacrilegam 
 amentiam detestati sunt, ut auctorem ejus cum plerisque discipulis legum 
 publicarum ense prosternerent. Videbant enim omnem curam honestatis 
 auferri, omnem conjugiorum copulam solvi, simulque divinum jus humanum- 
 que subvert!, si hujusmodi hominibus usquam vivere cum tali professione 
 licuisset. Profuit ista districtio ecclesiasticas lenitati, quae etsi sacerdotali 
 contenta judicio, cruentas refugit ultiones, severis tamen christianorum 
 principum constitutionibus adjuvatur, dum ad spiritale nonnunquam recur- 
 runt remedium, qui timent corporale supplicium." Ep. xv, ad Turribium, 
 P. L., vol. liv, col. 679-680. 
 
28 THE INQUISITION 
 
 rately 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 rejugit 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 Pris- 
 cillian, 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 applica- 
 tion 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. f 
 
 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,^ St. Martin, St. Ambrose, 
 many Spanish bishops, and a bishop of Gaul named 
 Theognitus;^ in a word, of all who disapproved of the con- 
 
 * Corrigi eos volumus, non necari; nee disciplinam circa eos negligi volumus, 
 nee suppliciis quibus digni sunt exerceri. Ep. c, n. i. 
 2Cf. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogi, iii, 12, loc. cit., col. 218. 
 
THE INQUISITION 29 
 
 demnation 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." ^ 
 
 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 cer- 
 tain 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," ^ 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 fme and exile. 
 
 1 St. John Chrysostom remarks that the Savior forbade the servants to 
 gather up the cockle in the field of the householder, and adds: 
 
 TovTo 8^ eXeye, koK^iojv 7ro\^/ious ylvecrdai Kal aifMara Kal (Tcpdyas. Ov 
 •yhp 8ei avapelv alpenKov iirel 7r6Xe/i,os acrirovBos els ttiv olKov/xivrjv 
 ifAcWev eiadyeaOai. Homilia xlvi, in Matthcsum, cap. i. 
 
 2 Ibid., cap. ii. 
 
 ^"Cjeterum intra Ecclesiam potestates necessariae non essent nisi ut quod 
 non prasvalet sacerdos efficere per doctrinae sermonem, potestas hoc imperet 
 per discipUnae terrorem (cf. the diligentia disciplina of St. Augustine, Re- 
 tractat., lib. ii, cap. v). Sic per regnum terrenum c^eleste regnum proficit, 
 ut qui intra Ecclesiam positi contra fidem et disciplinam quam Ecclesiae 
 humilitas exercere non prsevalet, cervicibus superborum potestas principahs 
 imponat et ut venerationem mereatur virtute potestatis impertiat . . . Cog- 
 noscant principes sasculi Deo debere se rationem reddere propter Ecclesiam 
 
30 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 ques- 
 tion in practically the same terms as St. Augustine.^ 
 
 quam a Christo tuendam suscipiunt (cf. Augustine, In Joann. Tractat. xi, 
 cap. xiv). Nam sive augeatur pax et disciplina Ecclesiae per fideles principes, 
 sive solvatur, ille ab eis rationem exiget, qui eorum potestati suam Ecclesiam 
 credidit." Sententiarum, lib. iii, cap. 1, n. 4-6, P. L., vol. Ixxxiii, col. 
 
 723- 
 
 1 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 i} 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 wJmtever 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 here- 
 tics 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 i), 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 iioo 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 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, 
 
 1 In 556, Manicheans were put to death at Ravenna, in accordance with 
 the laws of Justinian. Agnelli liber poniificalis ecclesia Ravennatis, cap. 
 Ixxix, in Monum. Germanics, Rerum Langobard. Scriptores, p. 331. 
 
 2"Hujus temporibus pene per omnes civitates regni ejus (Rotharici) duo 
 episcopi erant, unus catholicus et alter arianus. In civitate Ticinensi usque 
 nunc ostenditur ubi arianus episcopus apud basilican Sancti Eusebii residens 
 baptisterium habuit, cum tamen ecclesiae catholics ahus episcopus resideret." 
 Pauli diacon., Histor. Langobard., Ub. iv, cap. xlii, Mon. Germ., Rer. Lango- 
 bard. SS., p. 134. We may still visit at Ravenna the Arian and Catholic 
 baptisteries of the sixth century. Cf. Gregorii Magni Dialogi, iii, cap. xxix, 
 Mon. Germ., ibid., pp. 534-535- 
 
 31 
 
32 THE INQUISITION 
 
 after it had been condemned by Pope Adrian I, and several 
 provincial councils.^ 
 
 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 The imprisonment to which Godescalcus was sub- 
 jected 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 ecclesias- 
 
 1 Einhard: Annales, ann. 792, in the Mon. Germ. SS., vol. i, p. 179. 
 
 2 "In nostra parochia . . . monasteriali custodise mancipatus est." Hinc- 
 mar's letter to Pope Nicholas I, Hincmari Opera, ed. Sirmond, Paris, 1645, 
 vol. ii, p. 262. 
 
 3"Verberum vel corporis castigatione . . . coercendus, says Hincmar, 
 secundum regulam sancti Benedicti." De non trina deitate, cap. xviii, in 
 Hincmari Opera, vol. i, p. 552. The rule of St. Benedict provided for the 
 acrior correctio, id est ut verberum vindicta in cum (monachum) procedat, 
 cap. xxviii; cf. Concilium Agaihense, ann. 506, cap. xxviii: "In monachis 
 quoque par sententiae forma servetur: quos si verborum increpatio non 
 emendaverit, etiam verberibus statuimus coerceri." Recall what St. 
 Augustine said of the use of flogging in the episcopal tribunals of his 
 time. 
 
THE INQUISITION 33 
 
 tical origin. The Roman law knew nothing of it. It 
 was at first a penalty peculiar to monks and clerics, al- 
 though 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.^ 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. Orleans, Arras, 
 Cambrai, Chalons, Goslai, Liege, 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 £on de I'Etoile (Eudo de Stella), 
 likewise troubled the Church, who to stop their bold propa- 
 ganda used force herself, or permitted the State or the 
 people to use it. 
 
 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 universce 
 plebts consensu? King Robert, dreading the disastrous 
 effects of heresy upon his kingdom, and the consequent 
 
 1 Cf. C. Schmidt, Histoire et doctrine de la secte des Cathares, vol. i, pp. i6- 
 54, 82. 
 
 2 Raoul Glaber, Hist., lib. iii, cap. viii, Hist, des Gaules, vol. x, p. 38. 
 For other authorities consult Julien Havet, L'heresie et le bras seculier au moyen 
 Qge, in his CEuvres, Paris, 1896, vol. ii, pp. 128-130. 
 
 4 
 
34 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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." ^ It might be 
 said, however, that this penalty originated with the 
 people, and that the king merely followed out the pop- 
 ular will. 
 
 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.'' 
 
 Several years later, the heretics who swarmed into the 
 diocese of Chalons attracted the attention of the Bishop 
 of the city, who was puzzled how to deal with them. He 
 consulted Wazo, the Bishop of Liege, 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 
 
 ^"Quoniam et ruinam patriae revera et animarum metuebat interitum." 
 Raoul Glaber, loc. cit. 
 
 2 Ep. Johannis monachi Floriacensis, in the Hist, des Gaules, vol. x, p. 
 498. 
 
 3 Julien Havet, op. cit., pp. 128-129. 
 
 It is not probable that the King was inspired by the laws of the empire 
 against the Manicheans. 
 
 ^ Cartulaire de I'abbaye de Saint-Pere de Chartres, ed. Guerard, vol. i, 
 p. 108 and seq.; cf. Hist, des Gaules, vol. x, p. 539. 
 
 ^"Prascipitem Francigenarum rabiem." Anselmi, Gesta episcop. Leodien- 
 sium, cap. Ixiii, Mon. GermanicR SS., vol. vii, p. 228. 
 
THE INQUISITION 35 
 
 we possess go to show. It is probable that the Bishop of 
 Chalons 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 re- 
 nounce 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.^ 
 
 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.^ 
 
 A little while before this the Archbishop of Ravenna 
 accused a man named Vilgard of heresy, but what the 
 
 1 "Imperator . . . quosdam hsereticos . . . consensu cunctorum, ne hae- 
 retica scabies latius serpens plures inficeret, in patibulo suspendi jussit." 
 Heriman, Aug. Chronicon, ann. 1052, Mon. Germ. SS., vol. v, p. 130. Cf. 
 Lamberti, Annales, 1053, ibid., p. 155. 
 
 2 Chronicon S. Andreae 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. 
 
36 THE INQUISITION 
 
 result of the trial was, we cannot discover. But we do 
 know that during this period other persons were prose- 
 cuted 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 num- 
 ber 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 corrupt- 
 ing 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.^ 
 
 1 Raoul Glaber, Hist., lib. ii, cap. xii, Hisi. des Gaules, vol. x, p. 23. 
 
 2 Raoul Glaber, ibid., lib. iv, cap. ii, Hist, des Gaules, vol. x, p. 45. 
 
 3 "Quod cum civitatis hujus majores laici comperissent, rogo mirabili 
 accenso, cruce Domini ab altere parte erecta, Heriberto nolente, illis omnibus 
 eductis," etc. Landulphe, Historia Mediolan., lib. ii, cap. xxvii, in the 
 Mon. Germanics SS., vol. viii, pp. 65-66. 
 
THE INQUISITION 37 
 
 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.^ 
 
 The Cathari of Toulouse were also arrested, and exe- 
 cuted: et ipsi destructi? A few years later, in 11 14, 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 1 144 the Bishop of Liege, 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, 
 
 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. 
 
 2 Adhemar de Chabannes, Chron., lib. iii, cap. lix, in the Mon. Germ. SS., 
 
 vol. iv, p. I43• 
 3"Interea perreximus ad Belvacense concilium consulturi episcopos quid 
 facto opus esset. Sed fideHs interim populus, clericalem verens mollitiem 
 (notice these words on "the weakness of the clergy") concurrit ad ergastulum, 
 rapit, et subjecto eis extra urbem igne pariter concremavit." Guibert de 
 Nogent, De vita sua, lib. i, cap. xv, Hist, des Gaules, vol. xii, p. 366. 
 
38 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.^ We do not know what answer 
 he received. 
 
 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 tor- 
 tures at the stake, not only with patience, but with 
 joy."^ 
 
 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 con- 
 tempt for the Catholic religion, he burned a great num- 
 ber of crosses one Good Friday, and roasted meat in the 
 
 i"Hos turba turbulenta raptos incendio tradere deputavit; sed nos, 
 Dei favente misericordia, pene omnes ab instanti supplicio, de ipsis 
 meliora sperantes, vix tamen eripuimus," etc. Letter of the church of 
 Liege to Pope Lucius II, in Martene, Amplissima collectio, vol. i, col. 
 776-777. 
 
 2 "Cum per triduum assent admoniti et resipiscere noluissent, rapti sunt 
 a populis nimio zelo permotis, nobis (the Archbishop and his tribunal) tamen 
 invitis, et in ignem positi atque cremati." Letter of Evervin, provost of 
 Steinfeld to St. Bernard, cap. ii, in Bernardi Opera, Migne, P. L., vol. clxxxii, 
 col. 677. 
 
THE INQUISITION 39 
 
 flames. This angered the people against him. He was 
 seized and burned at St. Giles about the year 1 126.^ 
 
 Henry of Lausanne was his most illustrious disciple. 
 We have told the story of his life elsewhere.^ 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. 
 
 Arnold of Brescia busied himself more with questions 
 of discipline than with dogma ; the only reforms he advo- 
 cated were social reforms.^ He taught that the clergy 
 should not hold temporal possessions, and he endeavored 
 to drive the papacy from Rome. In this conflict, which 
 involved the property of ecclesiastics and the temporal 
 power of the Church, he was, although successful for a 
 time, fmally vanquished.^ St. Bernard invoked the aid 
 of the secular arm to rid France of him. Later on Pope 
 
 i"Sed post rogum Petri de Bruys, quo apud S. ^gidium zelus fidelium 
 flammas dominicas crucis ab eo succensas eum cremando, ultus est." Peter 
 the Venerable, Letter to the Archbishops of Aries and Embrum, etc., in the 
 Hist, des Gaules, vol. xv, p. 640. 
 
 2 Vie de saint Bernard, ist edit., Paris, 1895, vol. ii, pp. 218-233. 
 
 3 For details concerning Arnold of Brescia, cf. Vacandard, Vie de Saint 
 Bernard, vol. ii, pp. 235-258, 465-469. 
 
 * "Dicebat nee clericos proprietatem, nee episcopos regalia, nee monachos 
 possessiones habentes aliqua ratione salvari posse; cuncta haec principis esse, 
 ab ejusque beneficentia in usum tantum laicorum cedere oportere." Otto 
 Frising., Gesta Friderici, lib. ii, cap. xx. Cf. Historia Pontificalis, in the 
 Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xx, p. 538. 
 
40 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Eugenius III excommunicated him. He was executed 
 during the pontificate of Adrian IV, in 1 1 55. He was ar- 
 rested 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." ^ 
 
 In 1 148, the Council of Reims judged the case of the 
 famous Eon de I'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. £on was arrested for causing these disturb- 
 ances, and was brought before Pope Eugenius HI, then 
 presiding over the Council of Reims. 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.^ 
 
 * Boso, Vita Hadriani, in Watterich, Romanorum pontificum VitcB, vol. ii, 
 pp. 326 et 330; Otto Frising., Gesia Friderici, II, 21 and 23; Vincent de Prague, 
 in Watterich, vol. ii, p. 349, note; Geroch Reichersberg, De Investigatione 
 Antichristi, lib. i, cap. xlii; cf. p. 50, note. 
 
 ^ Continuatio Gemblacettsis, ad ann. 1146; Continuatio PrcsmonstratensiSf 
 
THE INQUISITION 41 
 
 Strangely enough, some of his disciples persisted in 
 believing in him; ''they preferred to die rather than re- 
 nounce 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 1 1 50). 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 or- 
 thodox 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 cer- 
 tain 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 be- 
 tween 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 
 
 ad annum 1148, in the Mon. Germ. SS., vol. vi, pp. 452-454; Robert Du 
 Mont, Chronicon, ad ann. 1148, ed. Delisle, vol. i, p. 248; William of 
 Newbridge, Chron., lib. i, cap. xix; Otto Frising, Gesta Frederici, lib. i, cap. 
 liv-lv. Cf. Schmidt, Histoire des Cathares, vol. i, p. 49- 
 
 i"Curice prius et postea ignibus traditi ardere potius quam ad vitam 
 corrigi maluerunt." William of Newbridge, i, xix. 
 
42 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Liege, the Bishop managed to save a few heretics from 
 the violence of the angry mob. At Cologne, the Arch- 
 bishop 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.^ 
 
 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, Theod- 
 win of Liege, 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 
 
 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, Hisi. dcs tribunaux de ring. 
 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 prcefecto Urbis 
 ligno adactiis. Finally, Geroch de Reichersberg tells us {De investigatione 
 Antkhristi, lib. i, cap. xlii, 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. 
 
 2 In 1050, two years after the death of Wazo, he wrote to the king of France, 
 asking him to assemble a council to judge confessed heretics: "Quamquam 
 hujusmodi homines nequaquam oporteat audiri; neque tarn est pro illis 
 concilium celebrandum quam de illorum supplicio exquirendum." Hist, 
 des Gaules, vol. xi, p. 498. Do these words imply the death penalty? It 
 seems not, for in that case he would not have said: de supplicio ex- 
 quirendum. 
 
THE INQUISITION 43 
 
 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.i |-jJ5 j-gpiy to the letter of the Bishop of 
 Chalons reveals his inmost thoughts on the subject. "To 
 use the sword of the civil authority," he says, "against 
 the Manicheans,2 jg contrary to the spirit of the Church, 
 and the teaching of her divine founder. The Savior 
 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.^ 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 pen- 
 alty we should use against them is excommunication."^ 
 
 The Bishop of Liege, quoting this parable of Christ 
 which St. Chrysostom had quoted before him, interprets 
 it in a more liberal fashion than the Bishop of Constanti- 
 nople. For he not only condemns the death penalty, 
 but all recourse to the secular arm. 
 
 Peter Cantor, one of the best minds of northern France 
 
 1 Vita Vasonis, cap xxv et xxvi, Migne, P. L., vol. cxlii, col. 753. 
 2 " An terrense potestatis gladio in eos sit animadvertendum necne." 
 Ibid., col. 752. 
 
 ^ Matt. xiii. 29-30. 
 
 4 Viia Vasonis, loc. cii., col. 753. 
 
44 THE INQUISITION 
 
 in the twelfth century, also protested against the inflic- 
 tion 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." ^ 
 
 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 have 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 
 
 i"Ait enim Apostolus: HEereticum hominem post trinam admonitionem 
 devita (Tit. iii, lo). Non ait: occide . . . Recludendi ergo sunt, non occi- 
 dendi." Verbu7n abbreviatum, cap. Ixxviii, Migne, P. L., vol. ccv, col. 231. 
 
 2 ' ' Quern ego vellem pro tali doctrina sua quamvis prava vel exsilio vel 
 carcere aut alia pasna prceter mortem punitum esse, vel saltern taliter occisum 
 ut Romana Ecclesia seu curia ejus necis quajstione careat." De investiga- 
 tione Antkhristi, lib. i, cap. xlii, ed. Scheibelberger, 1875, PP- 88-89. 
 
THE INQUISITION 45 
 
 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.^ 
 
 "Their courage," he replies, "arose from mere stub- 
 bornness; the devil inspired them with this constancy 
 you speak of, just as he prompted Judas to hang him- 
 self. These heretics are not real but counterfeit martyrs. 
 {perfidice 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." ^ 
 
 On principle, the Abbot of Clairvaux blames the 
 bishops and even the secular princes, who through in- 
 difference or less worthy reasons fail to hunt for the foxes 
 who are ravaging the vineyard 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." ^ i.e. 
 let us first refute their errors, and if possible bring them 
 back into the fold of the Catholic Church. 
 
 If they stubbornly refuse to be converted, let the bishop 
 excommunicate them, to prevent their doing further 
 
 1 Evervin's letter in Migne, P. L., vol. clxxxii, col. 676 and seq. 
 
 2/» Cantica, Sermo Ixiv, n. 12. 
 
 3 "Capiantur, non armis, sed argumentis." In Cantica, Sermo Ixiv, n. 8- 
 Lactantius had likewise said: "Verbis melius quam verberibus res agenda 
 est." Divin. Institut., lib. v, cap. xx. 
 
46 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 : ^ 
 aut corrigendi sunt, ne pereant; aut, ne perimant, coercendi? 
 St. Bernard was always faithful to his own teaching, as 
 we learn from his mission in Languedoc.^ 
 
 Having ascertained the views of individual church- 
 men, we now turn to the councils of the period, and find 
 them voicing the self-same teaching. In 1049, ^he council 
 held at Reims by Pope Leo IX declared all heretics ex- 
 communicated, but said nothing of any temporal penalty, 
 nor did it empower the secular princes to aid in the sup- 
 pression of heresy.* 
 
 The Council of Toulouse in 1 1 19, presided over by Ca- 
 lixtus II, and the General Council of the Lateran, in 
 1 139, 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 potestates 
 exteras coerceri prcecipimus.^ This order was, undoubtedly 
 
 1 " Subversores invictis rationibus convincantur, ut vel emendentur ipsi, 
 si fieri potest; vel, si non, perdant auctoritatem facultatemque alios subver- 
 tendi." 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. Read his letter to his 
 secretary Geoffroy, Bernardi Vita, lib. vi, pars 3, Migne, P. L., vol. clxxxv, 
 col. 410-416. 
 
 ^ Cf. Labbe, Concilia, vol. ix, col. 1042. 
 
 ^ Council of Toulouse, can. 3, Labbe, vol. x, col. 857; Council of Lateran, 
 can. 23, ibid., col. 1008. 
 
THE INQUISITION 47 
 
 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. 
 
 The Council of Reims in 1 148, presided over by Eugenius 
 III, did not even speak of this penalty, but simply for- 
 bade secular princes to give support or asylum to heretics.^ 
 We know, moreover, that at this council Eon de TEtoile 
 was merely sentenced to the seclusion of a monastery. 
 
 In fact, the executions 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." ^ 
 
 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.^ Peter Cantor also 
 
 1 Can. 18, Labbe, Concilia, vol. x, col. 1113. 
 
 2 Julien Havet, L'heresie et le bras seculier an moyen dge, in *his CEuvres, 
 vol. ii, p. 134. Still certain canonists, like Anselm of Lucca and the author 
 of the Panormia, declare about this time that the death penalty may be 
 inflicted upon heretics (cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 453, 454). at least upon 
 Manicheans. But these writers had no practical influence outside the 
 schola. 
 
 ^ De investigatione Antichristi, Hb. i, cap. xlii, loc. cit., pp. 8S-89. 
 
48 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 respon- 
 sible for their death, for he by whose authority a thing 
 is done is reponsible therefor: quia illud ah eo fit, cujus 
 audoritate fit." ^ 
 
 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 im- 
 prisonment, which was at first a monastic punishment, 
 had two objects in view: to prevent heretics from spread- 
 ing their doctrines, and to give them an opportunity of 
 atoning for their sins. In the minds of the ecclesias- 
 tical judges, it possessed a penitential, almost a sacra- 
 
 ^ He was discussing the consequences of a "judgment of God," or ordeal, 
 Verbum abbreviatum, cap. Ixxviii, Migne, P. L., vol. ccv, col. 231. 
 
THE INQUISITION 49 
 
 mental 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,^ 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.^ 
 
 iThe Decree of Gratian was written about 1140. Cf. Paul Fournier, 
 Les origines du Decret de Gr alien in the Revue d'histoire et de litter ature reli- 
 gieuses, vol. iii, 1898, p. 280. 
 
 2 This council was held in 1209, d'Achery^ Spicilegium, in-fol., vol. i, 
 p. 704, col. I. 
 
 50 
 
THE INQUISITION 51 
 
 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, y' 
 addressing the crowd, said: "My brethren, what punish- 
 ment 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, 
 
 1 William of Newbridge (Renun anglic, lib. ii, cap. xiii) relates that in 
 1 1 66 thirty heretics appeared in England, and that the Bishops to stop their 
 propaganda eos corporali disciplincB subdendos cailwlico principi tradiderunt. 
 King Henry II had them branded on the forehead with a red-hot iron, and 
 publicly flogged; he then banished them, forbidding any one to lodge or 
 succor them. As this happened in the winter time, they were frozen to death. 
 "This pious severity," adds the chronicler, "not only freed England from 
 the pest of heresy, but, by the fear it inspired, kept heretics from ever entering 
 the kingdom." Cf. Raoul de Diceto, Imagines historiorum, ed. Stubbs, 
 vol. i, p. 318. It has been questioned whether this penalty of branding with 
 a red-hot iron was not inspired by the canon which Martene attributes to the 
 Council of Reims in 1157 (Amplissima collectio, vol. vii, col. 74), and which 
 decrees that obstinate heretics ferro calido frontem et fades signati pellantur. 
 But the authencity of this conciliar decree has been denied by an eminent 
 critic, Julien Havet, op. cit., in his CEuvres, vol. ii, p. 137- That is why we 
 do not attach much importance to it. Besides, no civil or canon law has 
 been discovered which decrees such a penalty. 
 
 2Aubri de Trois Fontaines, Chron., ad. ann. 1160, Mon. German. SS. 
 vol. xxiii, p. 845. 
 
 ^Annates Colon, maximi, ad ann. 1163, Mon. German. SS., vol. vi, 
 
 p. 778. 
 
52 THE INQUISITION 
 
 and were pardoned, the other seven perished at the 
 stake.* 
 
 Philip, Count of Flanders, was particularly cruel in 
 prosecuting heretics.^ He had an able auxiliary also in 
 the Archbishop of Reims, 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.^ This oc- 
 curred in 1 183. Some years before. Archbishop Guillaume 
 and his council had sent two heretical women to the 
 stake."* 
 
 Hugh, Bishop of Auxerre (i 183-1206), prosecuted the 
 neo-Manicheans with equal severity; he confiscated the 
 
 ^"Adducti sunt in medium maximae multitudinis quae totum claustrum 
 occupabat, stante Guichardo Lugdunensi archiepiscopo et Bernardo Niver- 
 nensium episcopo, magistro quoque Galterio Landunensi episcopo, cum 
 Guillelmo Vizeliacensi abbate . . . Abbas dixit omnibus qui aderant: Quid 
 ergo, fratres, vobis videtur faciendum de his qui adhuc in sua perseverant 
 obstinatione ? Responderunt omnes: Comburantur! comburantur!" etc. 
 Hugo Pictav., Historia Vezeliacensis monasterii, lib. iv, ad finem, Hist, 
 des Gaules, vol. xii, pp. 343-344. 
 
 2*'Illo in tempore ubique exquirebantur et perimebantur (haeretici), sed 
 maxime a Philippo comite Flandrensium, qui justa crudelitate eos immiseri- 
 corditer puniebat." Raoul de Coggeshall, in Rerum Britann. medii avi 
 Scriptores, ed. Stevenson, p. 122. 
 
 3 "Tunc decretalis sententia ab archiepiscopo et comite prefixa est ut 
 deprehensi incendio traderentur, substantia vero eorum sacerdoti et principi 
 resignarentur." Sigeberti Continuatio Aquicinctina, ad. ann. 1183, in the 
 Mon. Germ. SS., vol. vi, p. 421. 
 
 *"Quae, cum salutaribus monitis nulla ratione acquievissent . . . , com- 
 muni concilio decretum est ut flammis concremarentur." Raoul de Cogges- 
 hall, loc. cit.; Hist, des Gaules, vol. xviii, p. 92. 
 
THE INQUISITION 53 
 
 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 1 1 63 a council of Tours enacted a decree fixing the 
 
 1 Robert d'Auxerre, Chron., ad. ann. 1205, in the Hisi. des Gaules, vol. 
 xviii, p. 273. 
 
 2 Quos Popelicanos vulgari nomine dicunt 
 
 Convincebantur et mittebantur in ignem. 
 
 says Guillaume le Breton, Philippeis, lib. i, verses 407-410. 
 
 3Aubri de Trois-Fontaines, ad. ann. 1200, in the Mon. Germ. SS., vol. 
 xxiii, p. 878. 
 
 4 Cf. Hisi. des Gaules, vol. xviii, pp. 264 and 729. 
 
 5 Chron. anonymi Laudunensis canonici, in the Hist, des Gaules, vol. xviii, 
 
 P- 713- 
 
 6 "Traditi fuerunt curiae Philippi regis, qui tanquam rex Christianissimus 
 et catholicus, vocatis apparitoribus, fecit omnes cremari, et cremati sunt 
 extra portam, in loco qui nuncupatur Campellus," etc. Hist, des Gaules, 
 vol. xvii, pp. 83-84. The women were spared. Cf . Caesarius of Heisterbach, 
 Dist. V, cap. xxii, who tells us that the king was absent when the heretics 
 were condemned. For other references, cf. Julien Havet, op. cit., p. 142, 
 note. 
 
54 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 im- 
 prison them and confiscate their property."^ 
 
 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 the 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 
 
 1 "Illi vero, si deprehensi fuerint, per catholicos principes custodut manci- 
 pati, omnium bonorum amissione mulctentur." Can. 4, Labbe, Concilia, 
 vol. X, col. 1419; Hist, des Gaules, vol. xiv, p. 431. 
 
 2 For the details of this case, cf . A letter of Henry, Abbot of Clairvaux, 
 Migne, P. L., vol. cciv, p. 235 and seq. 
 
 3"Scientes preterito processu longi temporis dominum comitem patrem 
 modemi temporis comitis ab universe Tolose populo accepisse in mandatis 
 instrument) inde composito, quod si quis hereticus inventus esset in Tolosana 
 iirbe vel suburbio, cum receptatore sue pariter ad supplicium traderetur, 
 publicatis possessionibus utriusqiie; unde multos combussimtis, et adhuc cum 
 
THE INQUISITION 55 
 
 Simon de Montfort arrived in southern France, in 
 1209, they followed the example of Count Ravtnond 
 by sending heretics to the stake ever\-where 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 1 197 
 which was just as terrible. He banished the W'aldenses 
 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 
 
 invenimus idem facere non cessamus." Letter written in 121 1 by the dty 
 of Toulouse to King Pedro of Aragon, in Teulet, LayeUes du tresor des Chartts, 
 vol. i, p. 36S. 
 
 1 On this expedition, cf. Achille Luchaire, op. est., ch. It. and t; Tanon, 
 op. cit., pp. 2S, 29. 
 
 ' Julien Havet, op. cU., p. 153, note. The reasons he gives for doubting 
 it are far from convincing. He starts with the idea that Raymond V, all his 
 life, favored the heretics. Luchaire holds the opposite view {op. cii., p. 46. 
 Cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 447). 
 
 3 "\'aldenses . . . et omnes alios luereticos . . . ab omni regno et potes- 
 tadvo nostro tanquam inimicos crucis Christi christian£eque fidei violatores 
 et nostras regnique nostri pubiicos hostes esire et fugere districte et irremeabiliter 
 praedpimus . . . Et si post tempus praefiTum (Dominicain Passi<Hiis Domini) 
 aliqui in tota terra nostra eos invenerint, duobus partibus renun suanmi 
 confiscatis, tertia sit inventoris; corpora eonim ignibus crementxir." De 
 Marca, Marca Hispamca, coL 1384. 
 
56 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 Brabangons, 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 indul- 
 gences to all who carried on this pious work. 
 
 In 1 184, Pope Lucius III, in union with the emperor 
 Frederic Barbarossa, adopted at Verona still more vigor- 
 ous measures. Heretics were to be excommunicated, 
 and then handed over to the secular arm, which was to 
 
 1 Notice the italicized words in the preceding note. 
 
 2 "Sacrosanctce Romanas Ecclesias canonibus obtemperantes, qui haereticos 
 a consortio Dei et sanctse Ecclesias et catholicorum omnium exclusos ubique 
 damnandos ac persequendos censuerunt." Loc. cit. 
 
 3 The princes are invited "ut tantis cladibus se viriliter opponant et contra 
 eos (haereticos) armis populum Christianum tueantur. Confiscentur eorum 
 bona et liberum sit principibus hujusmodi homines subjicere servituti." 
 Can. 27, Labbe, Concilia, vol. x, col. 1522. The Council of Montpellier in 
 1 195 presided over by the legate of Pope Celestine III renewed this decree in 
 nearly the same terms: "Constituit ut bona hujusmodi pestilentium hominum 
 publicentur et ipsi nihilominus servituti subdantur." Labbe, Concilia, 
 vol. X, col. 1796. The word servitus (subjicere servituti and servituti sub- 
 dantur) used by both councils means imprisonment (Julien Havet, op. cit., 
 
THE INQUISITION 57 
 
 inflict upon them the punishment they deserved (animad- 
 versio dehita). * The Emperor decreed the imperial ban 
 against them.^ 
 
 This imperial ban was, as Picker has pointed out, a 
 very severe penalty in Italy; for it comprised banish- 
 ment, the confiscation of the property, and the destruction 
 of the houses of the condemned, public infamy, the in- 
 ability to hold public oifice, etc.^ This is beyond ques- 
 tion the penalty the King of Aragon alluded to in his 
 
 p. 154). It is equivalent to the cusiodicB mancipati of the Council of 
 Tours in 1163. As Alexander III presided over both councils (Tours and 
 Lateran) it is most probable they decreed the same penalty. 
 
 1 "Si clericus est (hasreticus), vel cujuslibet religionis obumbratione fus- 
 catus, totius ecclesiastici ordinis prerogativa nudetur, et sic omni officio et 
 beneficio spoliatus secularis relinquatur arbitrio potestatis animadvcrsione 
 debita puniendus, nisi continue post deprehensionem erroris ad fidei catholicae 
 unitatem sponte recurrere et errorem suum ad arbitrium episcopi regionis 
 publice consenserit abjurare, et satisfactionem congruam exhibere. Laicus 
 autem nisi, prout dictum est, abjurata heeresi et satisfactione exhibita con- 
 festim ad fidem confugeret orthodoxam, secularis judicis arbitrio relinquatur, 
 debitam recepturus pro qualitate jacinoris ulticnem" etc. Canon 27, inserted 
 in the Decretals of Gregory IX, lib' v, tit. vii, De hereticis, cap. ix. 
 
 2 "Papa eos excommunicavit, imperator vero tarn res quam personas 
 ipsorum imperiali banno subjecit," says the Continuatio Zwetlensis altera, 
 ad ann. 1184, in the Mon. Germ. SS.,wo\. ix, p. 542. The council had used 
 the words animadvcrsione puniendi. Animadversio in the Roman law 
 signified the death penalty. Cf. The edict of Valerian in 258: In continenti 
 animadvertentiir. The imperial formula of condemnation seems to have 
 been: Gladio animadverti placet. Cf. Paul AUard, Dix legons sur le martyre, 
 Paris, 1906, p. 269, n. I. But in the Middle Ages animadversio comprised 
 different penalties. We notice, for example, that Frederic Barbarossa, in 
 accordance with the mind of the church, decreed no greater punishment than 
 banishment. 
 
 3 Ficker, Die gesetzliche Einfiihrung der Todesstrafe filr Ketzerei, in the 
 Mittheilungen des Instituts jur oesterreichische Geschichtsjorschung, vol. i 
 (1880), pp. 187, 188, 194, 195- 
 
58 THE INQUISITION 
 
 enactment. The penalty of the stake which he added, 
 although in conformity with the Roman law, was an in- 
 novation.^ 
 
 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 ac- 
 tivity, 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 ir, 
 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 sim- 
 ilar in tone: "Use against heretics the spiritual sword 
 of excommunication, and if this does not prove effec- 
 tive, use the material sword. The civil laws decree ban- 
 ishment and confiscation; see that they are carried 
 out." 3 
 
 1 Tanon has proved, however {op. cit., pp. 433 and seq.), that the canonists 
 had already revived the legislation of the first Christian Emperors against 
 heresy. 
 
 2 JuHen Havet, op. cit., p. 155. 
 
 3 " Ecclesiasticae districionis exercendo rigorem, et etiam, si necesse fuerit, 
 per principes et populum eosdem (ha^reticos) facias virtute matermlis 
 gladii coerceri." Letter of April i, 1198, to the Archbishop of Auch, 
 Innocent, Ep. i, 81. "NobiHbus viris principibus, comitibus et universis 
 baronibus et magnatibus in vestra provincia constitutis praecipiendo man- 
 damus et in remissionem injungimus peccatorum, ut . . . postquam per 
 
THE INQUISITION 59 
 
 At this time the Cathari were living not only in the 
 cities of Languedoc and Provence, but some had even 
 entered the papal States, v.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, 1 199, and September 22, 1207, which form a special 
 code for the use of the princes and the podesta. Here- 
 tics were to be branded with infamy; they were forbid- 
 
 dictum fratrem Rainerium fuerint excommunicationis sententia innodati, 
 eoricm botia confiscent et de terra sua proscribant; et, si post interdictum ejus 
 in terra ipsorum praesumpserint commorari, gravius animadvertant in eos, 
 sicut decet principes christianos." Letter to the Archbishop of Aix, April 21, 
 1 198, Ep. 194. The words gravius animadvertant seem to imply the death 
 penalty, but perhaps the Pope merely meant imprisonment. For in all his 
 laws, Innocent III never once decreed the death penalty. Nearly all histo- 
 rians are agreed on this point, as we will show later on. 
 
 " Mandamus ut vos fratres . . . spiritualem gladium exeratis; laici vero 
 bona eorum (haereticorum) confiscent et eos ejiciant de terra sua." Letter 
 of May 13, 1 198, to the legate Gui, Ep. i, 165. "Satanae in interitum carnis 
 traditas nuntietis et expositas personas eorum et judicio seculari, et bona 
 confiscationi tradita," etc. Letter of May 31, 1204, to his legates, Ep. vii, 
 71. Cf. letter of January 29, 1204, to the Bishop of Narbonne, Ep. vi, 243; 
 letter to the King of France, Ep. vii, 212, etc. The letters of Innocent III 
 are to be found in Migne, P. L., vol. ccxiv-ccxvi. 
 
 1 At Orvieto, where the Bishop had punished the heretics most severely after 
 a riot, Innocent III appointed a podesta Piero Parenzo to enforce the laws 
 and canons against obdurate heretics: "ut paenam exciperet legihus et canoni- 
 bus constitutam." The podesta "alios alligavit ferreis nexibus compeditos, 
 alios censuit publicis verberibus flagellandos, alios extra civitatem ccEgit 
 miserabiliter exulare, alios ptena mulctavit pecuniae . . . , domus etiam fecit 
 dirui plurimorum." Vita S. Petri Parentii, cap. vi, in the Acta SS., maii, 
 vol. v, p. 87. On the work and murder of Parenzo, cf. Luchaire, Innocent 
 III, Rome et PItalie, Paris, 1904, pp. 86-91. For Viterbo, cf. Gesta Innocentii, 
 cap. cxxiii, in Migne, P. L., vol. ccxiv, col. clxi; Ep. Innocent ii, viii, 85 and 
 105. 
 
6o THE INQUISITION 
 
 den 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 podesta and the secular princes 
 to do the same, and we desire and command this law en- 
 forced under penalty of ecclesiastical censures." ^ 
 
 We are not at all surprised at such drastic measures, 
 when we consider the agreement made by Lucius 1 1 1 with 
 Frederic Barbarossa, at Verona. But we wish to call at- 
 tention to the reasons that Innocent III adduced to justify 
 his severity, on account of the serious consequences they 
 
 1 " Districtius inhibemus ne quis haereticos receptare quomodolibet vel 
 defendere aut ipsis favere vel credere quoquomodo praesumat ... In terris 
 vero temporali nostrae jurisdiction! subjectis, bona eorum statuimus publicari; 
 et in aliis idem fieri praecipimus per potestates at principes seculares, quos ad 
 id exequendum, si forte negligentes extiterint, per censuram ecclesiasticam 
 appellatione postposita compelli volumus et mandamus." Letter of March 
 25, 1 199., to the magistrates and people of Viterbo. Ep. ii, i. "Ad elimi- 
 nandam omnino de patrimonio beati Petri hasreticorum spurcitiam, servanda 
 in perpetuum lege sancimus ut quicumque hjereticus, et maxime Patarenus, 
 in eo fuerit inventus, protinus capiatur et tradatur seculari curicc puniendus 
 secundum legitimas sanctiones. Bona vero ipsius omnia publicentur; ita ut 
 de ipsis unam partem percipiat qui ceperit ilium, alteram curia quae ipsum 
 punierit, tertia vero deputetur ad constructionem murorum illius terras ubi 
 fuerit interceptus. Domus autem in qua hasreticus fuerit receptatus funditus 
 destruatur, nee quisquam earn reaedificare praesumat, sed fiat sordium recepta- 
 culum, quae fuit latibulum perfidorum." Constitution of September 23, 1207, 
 Ep. X, 130. 
 
THE INQUISITION 6i 
 
 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.'' ^ 
 
 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 121 5 made the laws of Inno- ^ 
 cent III canons of the universal Church; it declared all 
 heretics excommunicated, and delivered them over to the 
 State to receive due punishment. This animadversio 
 dehita 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.^ 
 
 i"Ut temporalis saltern paena corripiat quern spiritualis non corripit 
 disciplina. Cum enira secundum legitimas sanctiones reis IcBse majestatis 
 punitis capite bona confiscentur eorum, filiis suis vita solummodo misericordia 
 conservata, quanto magis qui, aberrantes in fide, Domini Dei filium Jesum 
 offendunt, a capite nostro, quod est Christus, ecclesiastica debent districtione 
 praecidi et bonis temporalibus spoliari, cum longe sit gravius csternam quam 
 temporalem ladere majestatem" etc. Letter of March 25, 1199, to the magis- 
 trates of Viterbo, Ep. ii, i. This text is inserted in the Decretals, cap. x, 
 De hcereticis, lib. v, tit. vii. 
 
 2"Damnati vero praesentibus scecularibus potestatibus aut eorum baillivis 
 
62 THE INQUISITION 
 
 In practice, Innocent III, although very severe to- 
 wards obdurate heretics, was extremely kind to the igno- 
 rant and heretics in good faith. While he banished the 
 Patarins from Viterbo,^ 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 Ray- 
 mond, 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 dispen- 
 sations, when occasion arose. 
 
 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 
 
 relinquantur animadversione debita piiniendi, clericis prius a suis ordinibus 
 degradatis, ita quod bona hujusmodi damnatorum, si laici fuerint, confis- 
 centur; si vero clerici, applicentur ecclesiis a quibus stipendia receperunt," 
 etc. Labbe, Concilia, vol. xi, col. 148-150; Decretales, cap. xiii, De hcereticis, 
 lib. V, til. vii. 
 
 ^ Gesta Innocentii, cap. cxxiii, Migne, P. L., vol. ccxiv, col. clxi. 
 
 2 "Even if they seem to be a little unorthodox, absolve them if they are 
 willing to submit, and acknowledge their errors." 
 
 Letter to the Bishop of Verona, 1199. Ep. ii, 228; cf. Luchaire, Innocent 
 III, la croisade des Albigeois, pp. 58-60. 
 
 3 Luchaire, op. cit., p. 168 and seq. 
 
THE INQUISITION 63 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 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 Francev 
 in the twelfth century, and in the beginning of the thir- 
 
 1 Luchaire, op. cit., pp. 57, 58. JuHen Havet also says: "We must in jus- 
 tice say of Innocent III that, if he did bitterly prosecute heretics, and every- 
 where put them under the ban, he never demanded the infliction of the death 
 penalty. Ficker has brought this out very clearly." L'heresie et le bras 
 seculier, p. 165, n. 3. For Ficker's view, cf. op. cit., pp. 189-192 {supra, 
 p. 68). That men who were merely suspected of heresy were summarily 
 condemned and executed, as Luchaire says, we have seen in several instances. 
 A canon of Langres testifies to this fact in his appeal to Innocent III; "the 
 only reason," he says, "that I did not appear before the Bishop or the papal 
 delegates was the fear of death; because in this country (northern France) 
 the piety of the people is so great that they are always ready to send to the 
 stake, not only avowed heretics, but those merely suspected of heresy." 
 (Cf. Luchaire, op. cit., pp. 65, 66.) 
 
 Tanon, on the contrary, maintains {op. cit., pp. 448-450) that Innocent III 
 in certain instances did require the infliction of the death penalty upon here- 
 tics. Only one of the passages that he adduces is at all doubtful, viz., the 
 
64 THE INQUISITION 
 
 teenth. Most of the executions were due to the pas-^ 
 sions 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 Hcereticis of the Justinian 
 code, under the rubric: De edicto tmperaiorum in damp- 
 nationem hcereticorum} 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, main- 
 tained the views of St. Augustine on the penalties of 
 heresy, viz., fine and banishment.^ 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.'* 
 These different works appeared before the Lateran 
 
 Gravius animadvertant in eos in the Letter of April 21, 1198 (^Ep. i, 94). 
 Even supposing that this did mean the death penalty, it would not, properly 
 speaking, be the punishment of heresy, but of disobedience to the laws enacted 
 against heresy. But in fact no one can prove that it does not mean life- 
 imprisonment; cf. Supra, p. 59, n. 2. In any case, Tanon's view 
 does not agree with what we know of the conduct and writings of Inno- 
 cent III. 
 
 1 Tanon, op. cit., pp. 453-454. 
 
 2Tanon, p. 9, n. i. 
 
 3 Decretum, 2 Pars, Causa xxiii, quest. 4, 6, 7, 
 
 4 Rufinus, in his commentary on Causa 23, quest. 5, proves that "he who 
 has the power of the sword," has the right to execute great criminals, and in 
 Causa 24 he applies this principle to heretics: "Quomodo igitur qui manifeste 
 
THE INQUISITION 65 
 
 Council of 1215.^ They are a good indication of the 
 mind of the time. We may well ask whether the Arch- 
 bishop of Reims, the Count of Flanders, Philip Augustus, 
 Raymond of Toulouse, and Pedro of Aragon, who author- 
 ized the use of the stake for heretics, did not think they 
 were following the example of the first Christian em- 
 perors. 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 in- 
 fluenced by the customs of the time than by the written 
 law. 
 
 As a matter of fact, Gratian, who with St. Augustine 
 mentioned only fine and banishment as the penalites for 
 heresy, was followed for some time. We learn from 
 Benencasa's Summa of the Decree that heretics were 
 
 in haeresim labuntur, nee resipiscere volunt, puniendi sunt, in superiori causa 
 monstratum est." Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 455, 456 and notes. This thesis 
 is proved at great length. Johannes Teutonicus is more brief in his commen- 
 tary on ch. 39, quest. 4, of the Decree: Vides ergo quod hcereiici sunt occi- 
 dendi, prima tamen admonendi. The anonymous writer, whose commentary 
 is found in Huguccio's Summa of the Decree, teaches the same doctrine on 
 ch. 39, causa 23, quest. 4: Quando vult temporales mortes, id est paenas. Vel 
 proprie distinguere quod primo debent admoneri et deinde, si pertinaciter 
 resistere voluerint et incorrigibiles extiterint, poterunt morte afl&ci. He 
 quotes in favor of his thesis the law Arcani against the Manicheans. And 
 on ch. 41, Non invenitur, he adds: "Innuit quod pro sola h^resi non sint 
 morte puniendi. Solve ut prius. Quando enim sunt incorrigibiles, ultimo 
 supplicio feruntur, aliter non." Bibhotheque Nationale, Ms. 15379, fol. 49. 
 Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 456, 457 and notes. 
 
 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. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., 
 PP- 453-458- 
 6 
 
66 THE INQUISITION 
 
 punished not by death, but by banishment and con- 
 fiscation of their property.^ 
 
 V The Councils of Tours and Lateran also decreed confis- 
 cation, 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.^ 
 
 From the time of Lucius III, owing to the influence of 
 the lawyers, the two penalties of banishment and con- 
 fiscation prevailed. Innocent III extended them to the 
 universal Church.^ 
 
 This was undoubtedly a severer penal legislation 
 
 1 Biblioth. Nation., Ms. 3892, Siimma of Benencasa: 41, cap. 23, q. 4, 
 Non invenitur: Vincentius qujesivit ab Augustino ubi inveniatur exemplum 
 quod ecclesia petierit auxilium a regibus terrae contra inimicos, respondit: 
 Non in Evangelic nee in Apostolo istud exemplum reperitur. Tamen unum 
 exemplum Nabuchodonosor regis, in quo utrumque tempus figuratur, et 
 primitivae Ecclesiae in qua justi ab impiis cogebantur ad malum, et Ecclesiae 
 quae nunc est, in qua haeretici coguntur a Christianis, non ad mortem, sed ad 
 exilium vel dampnum rerum temporalium. 
 
 2 Canon 27, Labbe, Concilia, vol. x, col. 1522; Leonis, Epist. xv, ad 
 Turribium, Migne, Pat. lat., vol. liv, col. 679-680. 
 
 3 The legate Milo persuaded the consuls of Montpellier to swear, August i, 
 1209: "Ipsos (haereticos) persequemur secundum legitimas sanctiones, et 
 eorum bona omnia pro posse nostro infiscabimus," etc. D'Achery, Spici- 
 legium, 1723, in-fol., vol. i, pp, 706, 707. A little later, the Council of Avignon, 
 presided over by the two legates of Innocent III, proposed the oath of t'le 
 Consuls of Montpellier as a model for the civil authorities of Provence: "ut 
 eos (haereticos) puniant secundum canonicas et legitimas sanctiones, nihil- 
 ominus bona ipsorum omnia confiscantes." D'Acherj', Spicilegium, vol. i, 
 p. 704, col. I. 
 
 We have already mentioned the laws of Innocent (1198) for southern 
 France, and certain cities of Italy (pp. 58-60). We have another letter, January 
 5, 1199, to the Bishop of Syracuse, recommending him: "excommunicates 
 
THE INQUISITION 67 
 
 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. ^ They alone were handed 
 over to the secular arm; if they abjured their heresy, 
 they were at once pardoned, provided they freely ac- 
 cepted the penance imposed upon them.^ This kind 
 
 (haereticos) publice nuntiari facias et bona eorum a principibus publicari." 
 Ep. i, 509. On December 12, 1206, he exhorted the podesta, consuls, and 
 Council of Faenza: '^quoslibet pravitatis hoereticcs secta tores satagatis a civitate 
 vestra depellere" as Prato and Florence had done; Ep. ix, 204; cf. Letter 
 of March 10, 1206, Ep. ix, 18: "A civitate vestra penitus excludatis et sub 
 perpetuo banno consistant nee recipiantur de caetero vel etiam tolerentur in 
 civitate manere nisi ad mandatum Ecclesias revertantur, bona eorum . . . 
 confiscentur secundum legitimas sanctiones et etiam publicentur." The 
 hannum perpetuum and the legitimce sanctiones refer to the old Teutonic law 
 and the Roman law. The Pope even wrote to Hungary (Letter of October 
 II, 1200, Ep. iii, 3), where his laws were observed (cf. Ep. v, no, and Thomae 
 archdeacon! Hist. Salonitana in Schwandner, Rerum, Hungaric. SS., 1746, 
 vol. iii, p. 568). Finally, we have the promise made to the Pope by the 
 emperor Otto IV, March 22, 1209: "Super eradicando autem haeretice pravi- 
 tatis errore auxilium dabimus et operam efficacem." Mon. Germ., Leges, 
 vol. ii, p. 217. This promise was renewed in the same terms by Frederic II, 
 July 12, 1213, ibid., p. 224. 
 
 1 Innocent III merely condemned to prison in a monastery the heretical 
 abbot of Nevers: "Et quoniam metuendum est ne in laquem desperationis 
 incidens et ad perfidorum haereticorum insaniam ex toto conversus eorum 
 praevaricationibus contaminet gregem intactum, retrudi eum in districto 
 monasterio faciatis et ibi ad agendam poenitentiam sub arcta custodia deti- 
 neri." 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 
 
68 THE INQUISITION 
 
 treatment, it was true, was not to last. It, however, 
 deserves special notice, for the honor of those who 
 preached and practiced it. 
 
 above, and which is inserted in the Decretals of Gregory ix, cap. ix, De 
 hareiicis, lib. v, tit. vii. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 The Catharan or Albigensian Heresy — Its Anti- 
 Catholic AND Anti-Social Character 
 
 While Popes Alexander HI, Lucius HI, 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;^ it was related toOriental Manicheism^ 
 through the Paulicians and the Bogomiles, who professed 
 a dualistic theory on the origin of the world. 
 
 In the tenth century, the empress Theodora, who 
 detested the Paulicians, had one hundred thousand of 
 
 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. 
 Their opponents took delight in ridiculing this name. Cf. the anonymous 
 author of Error es haereticorum (of the fourteenth century), quoted by Dol- 
 Unger: "Kathari dicuntur a charto (cato), cujus posteriora osculantur, in 
 cujus specie eis Lucifer apparet," etc. Beitrage, vol. ii (Dokumente), 
 p. 293. 
 
 2 On the origin of the Manichean heresy, cf. Duchesne, Histoire ancienne 
 de rEglise, pp. 555, 556. 
 
 69 
 
70 THE INQUISITION 
 
 them massacred;^ the emperor, Alexis Comnenus (about 
 1 1 18), persecuted the Bogomiles in Hke 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, Gui- 
 raud Mercier, Bishop of Carcassonne, and Raymond of 
 Casalis, Bishop of Val d'Aran, in the diocese of Com- 
 minges.'* 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 alarm- 
 
 1 On the Paulicians, and this massacre, cf. DoUingcr, Bciirdge, vol. i, 
 
 PP- 1-34- , T.- • 
 
 2 On the Bogomiles (The Friends of God) cf. Vernet, in the Dictionncne 
 
 de Theologie Caiholique, Paris, Letouzey et Ane, vol. ii, col. 927-930. 
 
 3 On their route, cf. DoUinger, ibid., pp. 51-75. Vernet, ibid., vol. ii, 
 col. 1998 and seq. 
 
 4 Hist, des Gaules, vol. xiv, pp. 448, 449. 
 
 8 In 1 1 78, the legate Peter of St. Chrysogono was opposed by the Catharan 
 Bishops of Toulouse and Val. d'Aran. At Toulouse he held a public con- 
 ference with them, after giving them a safe-conduct. Vaissette, Histoire du 
 Languedoc, vol. xi, p. 82. 
 
THE INQUISITION 71 
 
 ing. Bonacursus, a Catharan bishop converted to Cathol- 
 icism, writes about 11 90: "Behold the cities, towns and 
 homes filled with these false prophets." ^ Caesarius, of 
 Heisterbach, tells us that a few years later there were 
 Cathari in about one thousand cities,^ especially in Lom- 
 bardy and Languedoc. 
 
 There were at least seven to eight hundred of "the 
 Perfected" in Languedoc alone; and to obtain approxi- 
 mately the total number of the sect, we must multiply 
 this number by twenty or even more.^ 
 
 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 dual- 
 ism; they pretended that the evil spirit had so marred 
 the Creator's work, that matter had become the instru- 
 ment of evil in the world. Still they agreed with the 
 
 ^ Manifestatio hcsresis Catharorum, in Migne, P. L., vol. cciv, col. 778. 
 
 ^ Dialogi, Antwerp, 1604, p. 289. 
 
 3 This is DoUinger's estimate, Beitrdge, vol. i, pp. 212, 213. 
 
 * Alba was a city of Piedmont; Desenzano was a small city southwest of 
 Lac de Garde, where the Cathari were numerous. 
 
 5 Concorezzo was a district of Lombardy, Bagnolo was the name of many 
 cities in Italy; cf. Vernet, op. cii., col. 1993, 1994. 
 
72 THE INQUISITION 
 
 pronounced dualists in nearly all their doctrines and ob- 
 servances; their few theoretical differences were scarcely 
 appreciable in practice.^ 
 
 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 Speronistae, 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 Alhigeois (Albigenses), and Tisserands (Texe rants), 
 because many were weavers by trade; Avians, because of 
 their denial of Christ's divinity: Paulicians, which was 
 corrupted into Poplicani, Puhlicani, Piphes and Piples 
 (Flanders); Bulgarians {Bulgari) , horn 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.^ 
 
 1 On the Catharan doctrines, cf. HoWingcr, Beitrdge,vo\. \, pp. 132-200; 
 vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 52, 85, 273, 279, 293, 297, 301, 311, 321, 324, 326, 
 374, 612, 617, 620; Vernet, op. cit., vol. ii, col. 1993 and seq. 
 
 2 For the different names, cf. DoUinger, Beitrage, vol. i, pp. 127-132, 
 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 114, note. Bougre later on designated any heretic. 
 
 3 The Waldenses differed considerably from the Cathari, although in some 
 things they agreed. For their teachings, cf. DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii 
 {Dokumente), pp. 92, 251, 304, 328, 331, 344, 346, 351, 365, 367. In many 
 documents (cf. the Processus Inquisitionis, Appendix A) they were mistaken 
 one for the other. 
 
THE INQUISITION 73 
 
 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 basil- 
 ica, were the bones of some one 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.^ 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, 
 
 J Moneta (a Dominican Inquisitor about 1250), Adversus Calharos et 
 Valdenses, ed. Ricchini, 1743, p. 409. St. Dominic died in Moneta's bed at 
 Bologna, Aug. 6, 1231. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 42. 
 
 2 Moneta, ibid., p. 410. 
 
 3 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, Martene and Durand, Veterum scriptorum 
 . . . amplissima collectio, Paris, 1724, vol. ii, col. 554-557. 
 
y4 THE INQUISITION 
 
 cardinals, archdeacons, monks, canons, Dominicans, and 
 Friars Minor but the Pharisees of old ! The priests placed 
 heavy burdens upon the faithful people, and they them- 
 selves 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.^ 
 
 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 dis- 
 ciples of Jesus. The Roman Church was the woman of 
 the Apocalypse,^ drunk with the blood of the Saints, and 
 the Pope was Antichrist.^ 
 
 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 re- 
 pudiated marriage."* 
 
 Baptism of water was to them an empty ceremony,^ 
 
 as valueless as the baptism of John. Christ had un- 
 doubtedly said: "Unless a man be born again of water 
 and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom 
 
 1 Moneta, op. cit., pp. 390-396. 
 
 2Apoc. vii, 3, 18. 
 
 3 Moneta, op. cit., p. 397. 
 
 ^ Cf. DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokuntente), pp. 294, 297. 
 
 ^DoUinger ibid., pp. 5, 29, 68, 155, 197, 297. 
 
THE INQUISITION 75 
 
 of God." ^ But the acts of the Apostles proved that bap- 
 tism 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.^ 
 
 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 till 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, "^hich. 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: "This is My Body," they said, 
 simply means: "This represents My Body," thus antici- 
 pating the teaching of Carlstadt and Zwingli." They all 
 
 1 John iii. 5. 
 
 2 Act i. 5; viii. 14-17 Moneta, op. cit., p. 290. 
 
 3Moneta, op. cit., p. 394- DoUinger, op. cit., vol. i, p. 193; vol. ii (Doku- 
 mente), pp. 217, 240, 246. 
 
 4 Moneta, op. cit., p. 295; Alanus, Adversus hccreticos et Waldenses, ed. 
 
^6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.2 
 
 The Cathari, denying 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." ^ 
 
 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 im- 
 ages, and especially of the cross. The images and statues 
 
 Masson, p. 142; DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 23, 156, 198, 
 322. 
 
 1 "Quod mittitur in latrinam ventris et per turpissimum locum, quae non 
 possent fieri, si esset ibi Deus." Dollinger, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 5. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 27. Cf. Moneta, op. cit., p. 300; Gregory of Florence, Bishop 
 of Fano, about 1240, Disputatio inter Catholicum et Paterinum, in Martene 
 and Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, vol. v, p. 1729. 
 
 3 Osee, vi, 6; Moneta, op. cit., p. 300. Disputatio inter Catholicum et 
 Paterinum, p. 1730. 
 
 4 Cf. Dollinger, op. cit., vol. ii {Dokumente), pp. 23, 40, 56, 156, 377. 
 
THE INQUISITION 77 
 
 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 Savior's crucifixion 
 made this very belief a reason for condemning the ven- 
 eration 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 in- 
 strument 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 
 
 1 Dollinger, ibid., vol. ii, pp. 26, 56, 176, 323. 
 
 2 Moneta, op. cit., p. 461; Dispuiatio inter Catholicum et Paterinum, 
 p. 1748. 
 
 3 Dollinger, vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 6, 29, 73, 223. 
 
 * "Immo homo debebat spuere contra earn et facere omnem vilitatem," etc. 
 Dollinger, ibid., pp. 26; cf. p. 21. 
 5 Dollinger, ibid., pp. 168, i6g. 
 
yS THE INQUISITION 
 
 sinful to take an oath, and that the speech of every Chris- 
 tian should be yes, yes; no, no. ' Nothing, therefore, 
 could induce them to take an oath.^ 
 
 The authority of the State, even when Christian, ap- 
 peared 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 custom? of their own children, 
 or of strangers?" Peter replied: "Of strangers." Jesus 
 said to him: "Then are the children free (of every obli- 
 gation)." ^ 
 
 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 Matt. V, 37; James v, 12. 
 
 2 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 15, 83, 167, 323; Moneta, 
 op. cit., p. 470; Doat, xxi), p. 90; Bernard Gui, Practica inquisitionis, p. 239. 
 
 3 Matt. xvii. 24, 25. 
 
 4 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 69, 75; cf. vol. i, p. 183. 
 
 5 Contrary to the Catholic teaching, the Cathari absolved those who stole 
 from "non-believers," without obliging them to make restitution. "Audivit 
 ab Jacobo Auterii et ab aliis quod credentes propter hoc erant audaces ad 
 faciendum malum aliis hominibus et ad inferendum damnum eis, quia con- 
 fidebant, quod in morte reciperentur et sic absolverentur per eas ab omnibus 
 peccatis et salvarentur, et non audivit ab haereticis, nee credentibus, quod 
 haeretici inducerent aliquem credentem quem haereticare volebant quod 
 restitueret alicui ilia quae male abstulerat vel lucratus fuerat ab eo; credit 
 tamen, quod haeretici inducerent credentes, quod si aliquid injuste habuerant 
 
THE INQUISITION 79 
 
 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 hceret- 
 icos asserts: "all the Catharan sects taught that the 
 public prosecution of crime was unjust, and that no 
 man had a right to administer justice";^ a teaching 
 which denied the State's right to punish. 
 
 The Cathari interpreted literally the words of Christ to 
 Peter: "All that take the sword shall perish with the 
 sword," ^ and applied the commandment Non occides 
 absolutely. "In no instance," they said, "has one the 
 right to kill another";^ 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. 
 
 ab aliis credentibus, quod illud redderent, sed (non) credit, quod inducerent 
 eos ad reddendum quod in juste habuerant a non credentibus Tamen hoc 
 communiter hasretici tenebant, quod sive earum credentes redderent illud 
 quod male acquisiverant sive non, solummodo quod reciperentur per hasreti- 
 cos, quod absoluti essent ab omnibus peccatis et salvarentur. " Dollinger, 
 ibid., vol. ii, pp. 248, 249; cf. pp. 245, 246. 
 
 1 Doat, vol. xxii, p. 89. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 100. 
 
 3 " Quod vindicta non debet fieri ; quod j ustitia non debet fieri per hominem." 
 Summa contra hasreticos, ed. Douais, p. 133, Moneta, op. cit., p. 513. 
 
 4 Matt. xxvi. 52. 
 
 ^"Nullo casu occidendum." Doat, xxiii, 100; Summa contra hareticos^ 
 p. 133. Cf. Dollinger, Beitfage, vol. ii, p. 199. 
 
8o THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.^ 
 
 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 hodge- 
 podge 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 com- 
 mitted to the true Church by the disciples of Jesus. 
 
 This Church had its rulers, the Bishops, and its mem- 
 bers 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 impo- 
 sition of hands for the initiation or Consolamentum, the 
 breaking of bread which replaced the Eucharist, and 
 
 ^ Doat, xxii, 89; Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii, pp. 199, 200, 287. 
 
THE INQUISITION 8i 
 
 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 sel- 
 dom, 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 Convenen^a) 
 to renounce the Catholic faith, and to receive the Cath- 
 aran initiation (the Consolamentum) , at least at the hour 
 of death.2 This was the first step on the road to per- 
 fection. 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 bless- 
 ing"; the third time they added: "Good Christians, give 
 us God's blessing and yours; pray God that he preserve 
 
 ^Ci.'Db\\mger,Beitrage,\o\. i, pp. 200-203; vo\.ii{Dokumente),^^. 194, 
 266, 278, 292, 295, 324, etc. 
 
 2 "Fecit pactum h^reticis, quod ipsi vocant la convenensa, quod peteret 
 hcereticos in infirmitate sua, ut reciperent cum et servarent animam ipsius." 
 Sententice inquisitionis Tolosance, in Limborch, p. 29. " Interrogatus si fecit 
 haereticis conventionem, quod possent eum haereticare et recipere in fidem et 
 sectam suam in fine, dixit quod sic." Bollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii {Doku- 
 mente), p. 18. 
 7 
 
82 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 Convenen^a.^ 
 
 The Convenen^a 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."^ 
 
 1 DoUinger, ihid., p. 4; cf. pp. 18, 19, 25, 30, 39; vol. i, pp. 237, 238. 
 
 2 Bollinger, vol. ii, pp. 4, 376. 
 
 3 Boat, vol. xxxii, fol. 170; cf. Bollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii, pp. 27, 145, 
 182, 183, 187, 236, 249. 
 
 4 "Paciscens cum eis, ut si in articulo mortis esses, licet non haberes usum 
 linguae nihilominus te in suam sectam reciperent." Boat, Acta inquisitionis 
 Carcass., vol. i, fol. 317; cf. Bollinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, p. 213; vol. ii, pp. 4, 
 236. 
 
 ^Ordinarily, "mos hgereticorum existit, quod, ubi duo perfecti hceretici ad 
 hjereticandum aliquem infirmum conveniunt, alter eorum solus et communiter 
 antiquior in hseresi infirmum hasreticet." Bollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii, p. 39. 
 But in times of persecution only one of "the Perfected" was required to 
 confer the consolamentum. 
 
THE INQUISITION 83 
 
 Those who died without the Catharan consolamenium 
 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 Convenen^a promised, the Catharan initiation 
 or consolamenium gave;^ the first made "Believers," and 
 
 1 The Cathari commonly taught that there was no hell: quod infernus 
 nihil est ... ; quod animcR non damnabuntur. Cf. Summa adversus Catha- 
 ros, ed. Douais, 132; cf. p. 127. "De corpore in corpus, donee veniret in 
 manus bonorum hominum." Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii, pp. 36, 174, 175. 
 
 2 DoUinger, ihid., pp. 153, 175. 
 
 3 Dollinger, ibid., p. 24; cf. pp. 31, 36, 153, 174, 191, 207, 216, 235. 
 
 ■* The rites of the Consolamentum are indicated in a ritual published by 
 Cledat under the title: Le nouveau Testament traduit au XIII^ siecle en 
 langue provengale, suivi d'un rituel cathare, Paris, 1888; and in the Practica 
 inquisitionis hceretice pravitatis of Bernard Gui, ed. Douais, Paris, 1886. 
 
84 THE INQUISITION 
 
 predisposed souls to sanctity; the second made "the Per- 
 fected," 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 Per- 
 fected" was appointed by the Church to report upon the 
 life of the postulant, who daily had to venerate his su- 
 perior, according to the Catharan rite.^ 
 
 After this probation, came the ceremony of "the de- 
 livery" (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, 
 
 1 Cf. Jean Guiraud, Le Consolamentum ou initiation catJmre, in Questions 
 d'histoire et d\ircheologie chretienne. Paris, 1906, pp. 95-149. 
 
 2 See the case of Guillaume Tardieu in Doat, vol. xxiii, p. 201 and seq. 
 Another case may be found in Ms. 609 (fol. 41) of the library of Toulouse: 
 "Sed dicti heretici noluerunt earn ipsam hereticare donee bene esset instructs 
 fidem et mores hereticorum et fecisset primo tres quadragenas" (the three 
 Catharan lents). 
 
THE INQUISITION 85 
 
 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 con- 
 tinued: "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 re- 
 ceive it from you and from the Church." ^ 
 
 After these words came the Ahrenuntiatio. 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 doc- 
 trines 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 effi- 
 cacious for salvation? 
 
 — No, I do not believe it. 
 
 — Do you renounce the veil, which the priest placed 
 upon your head, after you were baptized? 
 
 1 Cledat, Rituel Caihare, pp. xi-xv. 
 
86 THE INQUISITION 
 
 — I do renounce it.^ 
 
 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 prohatio? The words of his 
 promise are to be found in Sacconi: "I promise to de- 
 vote 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 cere- 
 mony of the Parcia was then repeated. 
 
 Then, according to the ritual, "the Bishop takes the 
 book (the New Testament), and places it upon the head 
 
 1 Sacconi, Summa de CatJtaris, in Martene and Durand, Thesaurus novus 
 anecdotorum, vol. v, p. 1776. 
 
 2 Cledat, Rituel Cathare, pp. xvi and xx. 
 
 3 Sacconi, op. cit. 
 
THE INQUISITION 87 
 
 of the candidate, while the other "good men" present im- 
 pose 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 Conso- 
 lamentum was finished; "the Believer" had become one 
 of "the Perfected." 
 
 However, before the assembly dispersed, "the Per- 
 fected" proceeded to carry out two other ceremonies: 
 the vesting and the kiss of peace. 
 
 "While their worship was tolerated," writes an his- 
 torian,^ "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 cindam ad 
 carnem nudum subtus mamillas.^ They resembled the 
 cord or scapular that the Catholic tertiaries wore to repre- 
 sent the habit of the monastic order to which they belonged. 
 They were therefore called ' haeretici vestiti/ ^ which be- 
 came a common term for "the Perfected." 
 
 * Rituel cathare, pp. xx and xxv. 
 
 2 Jean Guiraud, Le consolamentum ou initiation cathare, loc. cit., p. 134. 
 
 3 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), p. 36. 
 
 4 "Haeretici perfecti vulgariter vestiti dicti." Council of Beziers in 1299, 
 in Martene and Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, vol. iv, p. 225. Cf. 
 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, p. 205; vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 178, 179, 194, 
 
 195- 
 
88 THE INQUISITION 
 
 ''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.2 The Cathari explained the esoteric character 
 of this prayer by that passage in the Apocalypse which 
 
 i"Omnes praesentes adoraverunt haereticos et acceperunt pacem ab 
 haereticis, scilicet homines oscvdantes haereticos bis in ore ex transverso et 
 muHeres acceperunt pacem a libro hccreticorum, deinde osculatae fuerunt 
 sese ab invicem similiter bis in ore ex transverso," etc. DoUinger, ibid., 
 vol. ii, p. 41. "Si sint illic mulieres, aHqua illarum recipit pacem de cubito 
 aUcujus hsretici." Sacconi, in Martene and Durand, loc. cit., vol. v, p. 1776. 
 "Mulier accepit pacem a Hbro et humero haereticorum." Bollinger, ibid., 
 vol. ii, p. 34; Rituel cathare, p. xxi. 
 
 2 "Quod nullus debebat dicere Paler Noster, quae est sancta oratio, nisi 
 esset haereticus vestitus," etc. DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), 
 p. 199; cf. pp. 212, 237, 246. 
 
THE INQUISITION 89 
 
 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.^ 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.^ 
 
 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 Per- 
 fected" were present to administer the consolamentum, 
 this "bread of the holy prayer" would itself ensure their 
 
 1 Apoc. xiv, 1-4. 
 
 ^ Moneta, op. cit., p. 328. On the Catharan text of the Pater Noster, cf. 
 Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, p. 229. 
 
 3"Promisit quod ulterius non esset atque comederet sine socio et sine 
 oratione et quod captus sine socio non comederet per triduum." Doat, 
 Acta inquisitionis Carcassoncs, vol. ii, 272. 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. 
 
90 THE INQUISITION 
 
 salvation.^ They were therefore very anxious to keep 
 some of it on hand; and we read of ''the Behevers" 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 transversa.^ 
 
 1 "Talem panem vocant panem sanctas orationis et panem fractionis, et 
 credentes eorum vocant panem benedictum sive panem signatum." Dol- 
 linger, Beitrdge, vol. ii, p. 4. "Respondit ci quod dictus panis majorem 
 virtutem centies habebat quam panis qui benedicitur in ccclesia in die do- 
 minica, licet non fiat signum crucis super dictum panem nee spargatur aqua 
 benedicta." Ibid., p. 148. "Geralda . . . fecit fieri de pane benedicto per 
 dictum haereticum propter devotionem et fidem, quam habebat, quod posset 
 salvari in fide dicti haeretici et accepit de dicto pane et comedit et partem 
 reservavit et multis annis conservavit, et aliquando de illo pane comedit." 
 Limborch, Sententice inquisitionis Tolos., p. 160. "Dicta Navarra dixit ipsas 
 Lombardse quod tantum valebat panis et qui vellet habere bonos homines 
 in obitu et non posset habere eos, eo quod erat panis bonorum hominum." 
 Doat, Acta inquisit. Carcass., vol. v, fol. 188. 
 
 2 Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), p. 35. 
 
 ^"Servitium hasreticorum quod dicunt apparellamentum quod faciunt de 
 mense in mensem." Doat, op. cit., vol. ii, fol. 280. ^'Apparellando se cum 
 eis de mense in mensem et alia omnia faciendo quae heretici praecipiunt et 
 faciunt observari," etc. Ibid., vol. iv, fol. 205. 
 
 ^ Sacconi, loc. cit., pp. 1765, 1766; Moneta, op. cit., p. 306; Doat, Acta In- 
 quisit. Carcass., vol. v, fol. 246. Cf. Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, pp. 232-235. 
 
 * Vaissete, Histoire du Languedoc, vol. iii, Preuves, p. 387. 
 
THE INQUISITION 91 
 
 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 thfee 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.^ 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 They never ate meat in fact, and this law of abstinence 
 extended, as we have seen, to eggs, cheese, and every- 
 thing which was the result of animal propagation. They 
 were allowed, however, to eat cold-blooded animals like 
 
 ^ Bernard Gui, Practica inquisitionis, p. 239. 
 
 2 Douai, Les manuscriis du chateau de Merville, in the Annates du Midi, 
 1890, p. 185. 
 
^2 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 ad- 
 mitted 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." " 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.^ 
 
 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 
 
 1 "Numquam comedunt carnes . . • nee caseum nee ova, nee aliquid quod 
 nascitur per viam generationis seu coitus." Bernard Gui, Practica inquisi- 
 tionis, p. 240. Cf. DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii ((Dokumenie), pp. 22, 27, 30, 
 145, 146, 149, 152, 181, 193, 234, 235, 246, 248, 282, 329. Ms. 609 
 of Toulouse, fol. 2 v°, 36, 39, 41, 46, 65. Cf. Jean Guiraud; La morale 
 des Albegeois, in the Questions d'histoire et d'arcJieologie chretienne, pp. 
 63-66. 
 
 2 Practica Inquisitionis, p. 240. 
 
 3 Cf. Jean Guiraud, loc. cit., pp. 63, 64, 69; DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, 
 p. 236. 
 
THE INQUISITION 93 
 
 said: "Whosoever should look upon a woman to lust 
 after her, hath already committed adultery with her in 
 his heart";* 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 of the dead, shall 
 neither be married nor take wives." ^ "It is good," says 
 St. Paul, "for a man not to touch a woman." ^ 
 
 The Cathari interpreted these texts literally, and when 
 theiropponents 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 Consola- 
 mentum.^ 
 
 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 chil- 
 dren. But the propagation of the human species is 
 
 1 Matt. V, 28; Dollinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii {Dokumente), p. 56. 
 
 2 Luke XX, 35; Dollinger, loc. cit., p. 91; Moneta, op. cit., 326. 
 
 3 I Corinth, vii. i, 7. Dollinger, op. cit., vol. ii {Dokumente), p. 281. 
 
 4 Dollinger, ibid., vol. ii, pp. 29, 54, 55; cf. vol. i, pp. 175-177. 
 
 5 "Quod pomum vetitum primis parentibus nil aliud fuit quam delectatio 
 coitus, et addidit quod ipsum pomum porrexit Adam mulieri." Dollinger, 
 op. cit., vol. ii, p. 34; cf. p. 612, cf. p. 88. 
 
^4 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 prcegnans 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 con- 
 demn 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 fmd words strong enough to express 
 their contempt for marriage. " Marriage," _ they said, 
 "is nothing but licentiousness; marriage is merely prosti- 
 
 1 "Quod rogaret Deum ut liberaret earn de daemone quam habebat in 
 ventre." DoUinger, ibid., p. 35. "Quod praegnans erat de dzemonio." 
 Ms. 609, of the library of Toulouse, fol. 230. 
 
 2 Doat, vol. xxii, p. 57. 
 
 2 Practica Inquisitionis, p. 130. 
 
THE INQUISITION 05 
 
 tution/' * In their extreme hatred, they even went so 
 far as to prefer open licentiousness to it, saying: "Co- 
 habitation with one's wife is a worse crime than adultery." 
 One might be inclined to think that this was merely an 
 extra vagent 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 puhlice et sine vere- 
 cundia peccatum fiehat? 
 
 No one, therefore, was admitted to the consolamentiim 
 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 
 
 1 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), pp. 40, 156; Ms. 609 of Tou- 
 louse, fol. 41 v°, 64. 
 
 2 DoUinger, ibid., vol. ii, p. 23; cf. 156. 
 
 3"Aladaicis, uxor infirmi, absolvit maritum suum Deo et bonis homini- 
 bus." Doat, Acta inquisit. Carcass., vol. ii, fol. 115. "Forneria, mater 
 ipsius testis, fuit haereticata et recessit a viro suo." Ibid., vol. iv, fol. 204. 
 "Dixit quod ipsa Aladaicis libenter dimitteret virum suum et teneret fidem 
 haereticorum et recederet cum haereticis, si placeret eis." DoUinger, Bei- 
 trdge, vol. ii, p. 24. "Dixit (haereticus) ipsi loquenti si ipse vellet dimittere 
 dictam Ramundam, ipse ex parte Dei absolvebat eum de dicto matrimonio, 
 et sic matrimonium inter eos dictus haereticus separavit." Ibid., p. 229. 
 
^6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 was one of the results of the neo-Manichean teach- 
 ings. 
 
 Moreover, they carried their principles so far as to con- 
 sider 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 
 fmger; 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 Per- 
 fected" (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 
 
 Cf. Jean Guiraud, La morale des Alhigeois, in the Questions d'histoire, pp. 
 77-79. 
 
 1 DoUinger, Beitrage, vol. ii, p. 243. 
 
 2"Prius posuerat quemdam pannum linteum album super dictam infir- 
 mam," etc. Limborch, Sententice Inquisit. Tolos., p. 186; cf. p. 190. A 
 father forbade his daughter to touch him, because he had received the con- 
 solamentum. Ibid., p. iii. 
 
 3 "Ego non sum haereticus," said a heretic of Toulouse, "quia uxorem 
 habeo et cum ipsa jaceo et filios habeo," etc. G. Pelhisse, Chronique, ed. 
 Douais, p. 94. 
 
THE INQUISITION 97 
 
 slept with their clothes on, and thus managed to follow 
 out the letter of the law: tamen induti ita quod unus alium 
 in nuda came non tangehat} 
 
 Many Catholics were fully persuaded that this pre- 
 tended love of purity was merely a cloak to hide the gross- 
 est immorality .2 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 
 refuge in suicide,^ which was called the Endura. There 
 were two forms for the sick heretic, suffocation and fast- 
 ing. 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.* 
 
 » DoUinger, Beiirdge, vol. ii, pp. 148, 149- 
 
 2Dollinger, ibid., pp. 245, 296, 312, 371, 372. 
 
 3 "Tunc imponunt ei quod non debeat amplius comedere carnem nee ova 
 nee easeum, non tangere mulierem . . . , et quod si non posset se abstinere a 
 praedictis, melius est quod moriatur en la endura, quam si aliquid prcedictorum 
 transgrederetur." Doat, Acta hiquisit. Carcass., vol. xxxii, fol. 170. 
 
 4"Quando autem in extremo vitae perieulo aliquem reeipere volunt, dant 
 
 ei optionem utrum velit in regno eoelorum esse eonsors mart5T:um, vel eon- 
 
 fessorum. Si elegerit statum martyrum, tunc manutergio ad hoe speciahter 
 
 deputato . . . strangulant ipsum. Si statum confessorum elegerit, tune post 
 
 8 
 
c)8 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 Inqui- 
 sition of Carcassonne, for instance, tells us of a Cath- 
 aran 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 re- 
 fuse 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 
 
 manus impositionem nihil dant ei ad visum vel ad esum, nisi puram aquam 
 ad bibendum, et ita fame ipsum perimunt." DoUinger, ibid., p. 373 (this 
 passage is taken from the Summa de Cathari s of Sacconi). Cf. pp. 271,370. 
 i"Ne dicta infirma perderet bonum quod receperat." Ms. 609 of the 
 library of Toulouse, fob 134. 
 
THE INQUISITION 99 
 
 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 en- 
 dura. "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." 2 
 
 It sometimes happened that the parents of "the con- 
 soled" withstood more or less openly the cruelty of "the 
 Perfected." 
 
 When this happened, some of "the Perfected" re- 
 mained 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 
 
 1 DoUinger, Beitrage, vol. ii (Dokumente), p. 250. 
 
 ^ Ibid., vol. i, p. 222; cf. p. 193. 
 
 3 "Post aliquot dies (after the Catharan initiation) haeretici extraxerunt 
 dictum infirmum de domo sua et portaverunt in domum hasreticorum, et ibi 
 dictus infirmus obiit." Doat, Acta InquisH. Carcass., vol. ii, fol. 115. This 
 was a frequent case in the Acts of the Inquisition of Carcassonne, says Dol- 
 linger, Beitrage, vol. i, p. 225, n. i. 
 
100 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 hus- 
 band, 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." ^ 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.^ 
 
 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 per- 
 
 1 DoUinger, ihid., vol. ii, p. 19. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 24. 
 
 3"Qusedam mulier de Constanciano . . . qua dimiserat maritum suum 
 et fugerat ad partes Savartesii, misit se ad enduram . . .; duodecim 
 septimanis vel circa, antequam moreretur, stetit in endura^ Ibid., 
 p. 25. 
 
 4 Ms. 609, of the library of Toulouse, fol. 28. Cf. Dollinger, Beitrdge, 
 vol. ii, p. 26. "Posuit se et stetit in endura donee fuit mortua, ita quod 
 nihil comedebat, nee bibebat nisi aquam." 
 
 2 Sometimes the heretics undergoing the endura put sugar in the water 
 they drank, aquam cum zucara. Limborch, Liber sentent, fol. 79 B. 
 
THE INQUISITION loi 
 
 forate her intestines.^ Another woman opened her veins 
 in the bath.^ 
 
 Such methods of suicide were exceptional, although 
 the endura itself was common,^ at least among the Cathari 
 of Languedoc.^ "Every one," says a trustworthy his- 
 torian, "who reads the acts of the tribunals of the In- 
 quisition of Toulouse and Carcassonne must admit that 
 the endura, voluntary or forced, put to death more vic- 
 tims than the stake of 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 
 
 1 Ms. 609, of Toulouse, fol. 33. 
 
 2 Ibid., fol. 70. Cf. Tanon, op. cii., pp. 224, 225. 
 
 3 " Haereticati seu in sanitate seu in asgritudine ex tunc non debebant 
 comedere aliquid vel bibere, sed si non possent abstinere a potu, debebant 
 bibere aquam frigidam, et sic mori en la endura erat magnum meritum, et 
 quando moriebantur, eorum anima ibat ad regnum patris. Audivit etiam, 
 quod si haereticati facerent se minui, quousque totus sanguis de corpore 
 exivisset, bonum opus faciebant, ut sic cito mori possent et cito venire ad 
 gloriam Patris. Et taliter occidere se non reputabant malum vel peccatum, 
 sed bonum et meritum." DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. ii (Dokumente), p. 248. 
 
 ■4 Molinier {U Endura, pp. 293, 294) thinks that this practice was peculiar 
 to Languedoc, and only came into vogue at the close of the thirteenth century. 
 In this hypothesis, we must hold not only that Sacconi's Summa de Catharis 
 is interpolated (cf. supra, p. 116), but also that those guilty of the interpolation 
 were men of Languedoc. This last conjecture is rather improbable. 
 
 5 DoUinger, Beitrdge, vol. i, p. 226. Cf. cases of endura cited by Bol- 
 linger, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 20, 24, 25, 26, 37, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 147. 
 157, 205, 234, 238, 239, 242, 248, 250, 271, 295, 370, 373. Molinier (UEn- 
 dura, p. 288) himself writes: "Cruel as it was, the endura seems always to 
 have accompanied the consolamenium, at least with some of the Albigensian 
 ministers." 
 
102 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 histo- 
 rians have proved.^ That in itself would justify the 
 Church in treating its followers as heretics. 
 
 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 vigor- 
 ously. The Catharan absolute rejection of the oath of 
 fealty was calculated to break the bond that united sub- 
 jects 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 
 
 1 Jean Guiraud, Le consolamentum ou initiation catliare, in Questions 
 (Thistoire, p. 145 seq. 
 
THE INQUISITION 103 
 
 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 com- 
 munity, vowed to the most rigorous chastity. Ifthis 
 ideal had been realized, the human race would have dis- 
 appeared 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 elite 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 capere 
 capiat.^ 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. 
 
 There is consequently no parity whatever between the 
 
 ^ Molinier repeats this accusation {U Endura, p. 282, n. 2). 
 
 2 Matt. xix. 11-12. 
 
 3 Cf. Summa contra hareticos, pp. 96-99. 
 
104 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 puntantur. The other 
 penalties specified are infamy and confiscation ; in a word, 
 all the consequences of banishment."^ 
 
 1 Godefroy, Le ceremonial fran^ais, vol. i, p. 27. We have seen that the 
 Council of Avignon and the town of Montpellier adopted the laws of Innocent 
 III. 
 
 2 "Statuimus quod haeretici qui a catholica fide deviant, quocumque nomine 
 censeantur, postquam fuerint de hasresi per episcopum loci vel per aliam 
 personam ecclesiasticam quae potestatem habeat (papal legate) condemnati, 
 indilate animadversione debita puniantur," etc. Ordonnances des roys de 
 France, vol. xii, pp. 319, 320. 
 
 105 
 
,o6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 fesii- 
 nanter faciant quod debebunt" ' These words in them- 
 selves 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. 
 
 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 magis- 
 trates to receive due punishment, ut animadver stone debita 
 puntantur. 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 
 
 i"Statuimus et mandamus ut barones terrai . . . solliciti sint et . . . 
 predictos (hcereticos) diligenter investigare studeant et fideliter invenire, et 
 cum eos invenerint, prssentent sine mora . . . personis ccclesiasticis superius 
 memoratis, ut, eis praesentibus, de errore haeresis condemnatis, omni odio, 
 prece et pretio . . . postpositis, de ipsis festinanter faciant quod debebunt." 
 Ordonnances des roys de France, vol. i, p. 51; Labbe, Concilia, vol. vii, col. 171. 
 
 2 We will mention later on the penalties decreed against heretics in the 
 Etablissements de Saint Louis and the Coutumes de Beauvaisis de Beaumanoir. 
 Julien Havet {op. cit., pp. 169, 170), however, explains the animadversio 
 debita of the laws of Louis VIII and Louis IX in accordance with the later 
 documents, i.e. the penalty of the stake. 
 
THE INQUISITION 107 
 
 others"; the bishop is to provide for their needs out of 
 the property confiscated.^ The fear of death here seems 
 to imply that the animadversio dehita 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. 
 
 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 121 5, condemned heretics to every form of 
 banishment, to perpetual infamy, together with the con- 
 fiscation 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 
 
 1 "Haereticos, credentes, fautores et receptatores seu defensores eorum, 
 adhibita cautela ne fugere possint, archiepiscopo vel episcopo, dominis 
 locorum seu bajulis eorumdem cum omni festinantia studeant intimare, ut 
 animadversione dehita puniantur . . . Haeretici autem qui timore mortis vel 
 alia quacumque causa, dummodo non sponte, redierent ad catholicam unita- 
 tem, ad agendam poenitentiam per episcopum loci in muro tali includantur 
 cautela quod facultatem non habeant alios corrumpendi." D'Achery, 
 Spicilegium, in-fol., vol. i, p. 711. 
 
,o8 THE INQUISITION 
 
 was a far greater crime than to offend the majesty of the 
 emperor." ^ 
 
 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 in- 
 troduce 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 podesta of Pavia 
 to banish all heretics from the city limits.'' About 
 the year 1230, therefore, it was the generally accepted 
 
 i"Catharos, Paterenos, Leonistas, Speronistas, Arnoldistas, et omnes 
 haereticos utriusque sexus, quocumque nomine censeantur, perpetua dampna- 
 mus infamia, diffidamus atque bannimus, censentes ut bona talium confis- 
 centur nee ad eos revertantur, ita quod 61ii ad successionem eorum pervenire 
 non possint, cum longe gravius sit aeternam quam temporalem offendere 
 majestatem," etc., cap. vi; cf. cap. vii. Monum. GernianicB, Leges, sect, 
 iv, vol. ii, pp. 107-109. 
 
 2 The Latin, Ms. 5152 at the National library of Paris contains the Acta 
 of Cardinal Hugolino of 1221, regarding the changes in the statutes of the 
 various Italian cities. In the statutes of Piacenza, for example, he had in- 
 serted de verho ad verbum statutum ultinii Lateranensis concilii {\ 21^) et leges 
 domini imperatoris Frederici super hcereticis expellendis et conservanda ecclesi- 
 astica libertate. For more details, cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 196, with references. 
 
 3 Cf . Raynaldi, Annal. Eccles., for the year 1225, sect. 47; cf. Ficker, 
 op. cit., pp. 199, 200. 
 
 * Cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 430. 
 
THE INQUISITION 109 
 
 law throughout all Italy (recall what we have said above 
 about Faenza, Florence, etc.) to banish all heretics, con- 
 fiscate 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 have been the prime mover in bring- 
 ing about this change. 
 
 Frederic II, influenced by the jurists who were reviv- 
 ing the old Roman law,^ promulgated a law for Lom- 
 bardy in 1224, which condemned heretics to the stake, 
 or at least to have their tongues cut out.^ 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,^ and we could 
 
 1 We have seen above (p. 64) that according to both the civil and canon 
 law heretics were subject to the death-penalty throughout the Middle Ages. 
 But the laws of Frederic II induced the Pope to inflict this penalty of the 
 stake. 
 
 2 In 1 23 1, in his law Inconsutilem tunicam, the emperor made a 
 direct reference to the old Roman laW: Proiit veteribus legibus est 
 indicium . 
 
 3"Utriusque juris auctoritate muniti . . . duximus sanciendum: ut qui- 
 cumque per civitatis antistitem vel dioecesis in qua degit, post condignam 
 examinationem fuerit de hceresi manifeste convictiis et hcBreticus judicatus, per 
 potestatem, concilium et catholicos viros civitatis et dioecesis eorumdem, ad 
 requisiiionem antistitis illico capiatur, auctoritate nostra ignis judicio con- 
 cremandus, ut vel ultricibus flammis pereat, aut, si miserabili vitae ad coer- 
 citionem aliorum elegerint reservandum, eum lingucc plectro deprivent," etc. 
 A Constitution sent to the Archbishop of Magdeburg, in the Mon. Germ., 
 Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. 126. 
 
 ^"Haeretici . . . comprehensi sunt in civitate Argentina. Producti, vero 
 cum negarent hseresim, judicio ferri candentis ad legitimum terminum reser- 
 
no THE INQUISITION 
 
 easily cite other similar executions.^ The emperor, there- 
 fore, merely brought the use of the stake from Germany 
 into Italy. Indeed it is very doubtful whether this law 
 was in operation before 1230.^ 
 
 But in that year, Guala, the Dominican, who had be- 
 come Bishop of Brescia,^ used his authority to enact 
 for his episcopal city the most severe laws against 
 heresy. The podesta 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 Ill's com- 
 parison 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 
 
 vantur, quorum numerus fuit octoginta vel amplius de utroque sexu. Et 
 pauci quidem ex eis innocentes apparuerunt, reliqui omnes coram ecclesia 
 convicti per adustionem dampnati sunt et incendio perierunt." Amiales 
 Marbacenses, ad arm. 1215, in the Mon Germ. SS., vol. xvii, p. 174. 
 
 1 Cf. Julien Havet, op. ciL, pp. 143, 144. 
 
 2 Cf. on this point Ficker, op. cit., pp. 198, 430, 431. 
 ^ On Guala, cf. Ficker, op. cit., pp. 199-201. 
 
 ^ "Infra decern dies," says the podesta, " eos et eas puniam velut haereticos 
 Manicheos et reos criminum lese majestatis secundum leges et jura imperialia 
 et canonica et specialiter infra scriptam legem Domini Frederici imperatoris 
 et secundum ejus tenorem." Then follows the imperial law of 1224. This 
 statute of the city of Brescia is found in the Monumenta historic patricB, 
 vol. xvi, pp. 1584, 1644. On the date, 1130, cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 199. We 
 know that Innocent III, in his law of 1199, was the first to put heresy on a 
 par with treason, although he did not draw the logical conclusion from this 
 comparison. He also compared the Cathari and the Patarins to the Man- 
 icheans (Ep. X, 54), without saying anything about the death penalty. Guala 
 drew the logical conclusion. 
 
THE INQUISITION m 
 
 Gaula 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.^ The imperial law of 
 1 224 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 dehita. All who 
 abjured and accepted a fitting penance were to be im- 
 prisoned for life, without prejudice to the other penalties 
 for heresy, such as confiscation. ^ 
 
 About the same time, Annibale, the Senator of Rome, 
 
 1 Cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 200. Gregory IX was four years Pope before he 
 enacted these new laws. 
 
 2 Dampnati vero per ecclesiam scculari judicio relinquantur animadver- 
 sione dehita puniendi, clericis prius a suis ordinibus degradatis. Si qui autem 
 de predictis, postquam fuerint deprehensi, redire voluerint ad agendam con- 
 dignam poenitentiam, in perpetuo carcere detrudantur. Registers of Gregory 
 IX, n. 539; Raynaldi, Annates, ad ann. 1231, sects. 14-15; inserted in the 
 Decretales, cap. xv, De hcereticis, Hb. v, tit. vii, where, in place of redire vol- 
 uerint, we read noluerint. Voluerint is the true reading, as we may prove 
 by comparison with the text of the Council of Toulouse (1229), and the 
 imperial law of 1231, in which Frederic II, writes: "Si qui de predictis, 
 postquam fuerint deprehensi, territu mortis redire voluerint ad agendam 
 poenitentiam, in perpetuum carcerem detrudantur." Cap. ii, Mon. Germ., 
 Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p 196. 
 
112 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 dehita, is not specified, as if every one knew 
 what was meant. ^ 
 
 Inasmuch as repentant 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 
 
 1 "Omnes haeretici in Urbe . . . singulis annis a senatore, quando regiminis 
 sui prsestiterit juramentum, perpetuo diffidantur. Item haereticos qui fuerint 
 in Urbe reperti praesertim per inquisitores datos ab Ecclesia vel alios viros 
 catholicos senator capere teneatur et captos etiam detinere, postquam fuerint 
 per Ecclesiam condempnati, infra octo dies animadversione debita puniendos." 
 Raynaldi, ad ann. 1231, sect. 16-17; Ficker, op. cit., p. 205. These statutes 
 are similar to those of Brescia (1230); the statutes of Bologna (1246) read: 
 "Hgeretici et fautores eorum in perpetuo banno ponantur et alias pasnas et 
 alias injurias sustineant secundum formam Statutorum Domini papae Gre- 
 gorii." Consequently, the podesta had to swear that he would banish all 
 heretics; if they remained in the city, and refused to abjure, they were con- 
 demned and burned. Ficker, op. cit., pp. 205, 206. We see that the penalty 
 of the stake was enforced only when the penalty of banishment had proved 
 inefficacious. This reminds us of the law of Pedro, King of Aragon in 1197. 
 
THE INQUISITION 113 
 
 penance.* This" case tells us instantly how we are to 
 interpret the antmadversio dehita of contemporary doc- 
 uments. 
 
 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 pre- 
 paring his Sicilian Code, which appeared at Amalfi in 
 August, 1 23 1. The first law, Inconsuiilem 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 
 
 1 "Eodem mense (February), nonnulli Paterenorum in Urbe invent! sunt, 
 quorum alii sunt igne cremati, cum inconvertibiles essent; alii donee poeniteant 
 sunt ad Casinensem ecclesiam et apud Cavas directi." Ryccardus de S. 
 Germano, ad ann. 1231, in the Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xix, p. 363; cf. Viia 
 Gregorii, in Muratori, Reruni italicarum SS., vol. iii, p. 578. On March 3d, 
 Gregory sent a number of heretics to the Abbot of La Cava, ordering him 
 to keep them in arctissima fovea et sub vinculis jerreis. Cf. Ficker, op. cit., 
 p. 207. 
 
 2 Cf. the reply of Frederic to Gregory IX, February 28, 1231, in Huillard- 
 Breolles, Historia diplomatica Frederici II, vol. iii, p. 268. Ryccardus de 
 S. Germano, loc. cit. 
 
 9 
 
1,4 THE INQUISITION 
 
 was in reality the beginning of the Inquisition. All sus- 
 pects were to be tried by an ecclesiastical tribunal, and 
 if, being declared guilty, they refuse to abjure, they were 
 to be burned in presence of the people.^ 
 
 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.^ The kind of death was not indi- 
 cated. But every one knew that the common German cus- 
 
 1 "Statuimus in primis, ut crimen hoereseos et damnatae sectae cujuslibet, 
 quocumque nomine censeantur sectatores (prout veteribus legibus est in- 
 dictum) inter publica crimina numerentur: immo crimine laesas majestatis 
 nostn-e debet ab omnibus horribilius judicari, quod in divinaj majestatis 
 injuriam noscitur attentatum, quamvis judicii potestate altcrum alteri non 
 excellat. Nam sicuti perduellionis crimen personas adimit damnatorum 
 et bona, et damnat post obitum memoriam defunctorum; sic et in prtedicto 
 crimine, quo Patereni notantur, per omnia volumus observari . . . Per 
 officiales nostros, sicut et alios malefactores, inquiri ac inquisitione notatos 
 ... a viris ecclesiasticis et praelatis examinari jubemus. Per quos si inventi 
 fuerint a fide catholica saltern in articulo deviare ac . . . in erroris concepta 
 insania perseverent, praesentis nostras legis edicto damnatos, mortem pati 
 . . . decernimus quam affectant: ut vivi in conspectu populi comburantur, 
 flammarum commissi judicio." Constitut. Sicil., i, 3, in Eymeric, Directorium 
 inquisitorum. Appendix, p. 14. 
 
 2 "Ut haeretici . . . ubicumque per imperium dampnati ab Ecclesia fuerint 
 et seculari judicio assignati, animadversione debita puniantur. Si qui de 
 predictis, postquam fuerint deprehensi territu mortis redire voluerint ad 
 agendam pcenitentiam, in perpetuum carcerem detrudantur." The ani- 
 madversione debita is explained further on by a passage taken from the law of 
 the Senator of Rome: "Praeterea quicumque haeretici reperti fuerint in civi- 
 tatibus, opidis seu ahis locis imperii per inquisitores ab apostolica sede datos 
 et ahos orthodox^ fidei zelatores, hii qui jurisdictionem ibidem habuerint 
 ad inquisitorum et aliorum cathoHcorum virorum insinuationem eos capere 
 teneantur et captos arctius custodire donee per censuram ecclesiasticam 
 condempnatos dampnabili morte perimant." Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, 
 vol. ii, p. 196. Then follows a comparison with the rei lescs majestatis. 
 
THE INQUISITION 
 
 115 
 
 torn 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 SiciHan Code and the law of Ravenna were bind- 
 ing upon all his subjects; the law of June 26, 1238, merely 
 promulgated these other laws throughout the kingdom of 
 Aries and Vienne.^ Henceforth all uncertainty was at 
 an end. The legal punishment for heretics throughout 
 the empire was death at the stake. 
 
 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, 
 1 23 1, urging the bishops and archbishops to further his 
 plans. ^ He did not meet with much success, however, 
 
 1 The most ancient book on German customs, the Sachsenspiegd, written 
 probably a Httle before 1235 (cf. Hansische Geschichtsbldtter, 1876, pp. 102, 
 103), condemns (ii, 13, sect. 7) heretics to the stake: "Swilch cristen man 
 ungeloubic ist oder mit zcoubere umme get oder mit vergifnisse, unde des 
 verwunden wirt, den sal man uf der hurt burnen." Sachenspiegel, ed. 
 Weiske et Hildebrand, 1877, p. 47. 
 
 2 Cf. these imperial laws in the Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, pp. 
 281-284. Cf. for more details, Ficker, op. cit., p. 223. 
 
 3 For the letters sent to the Bishop of Salsburg, cf. Ficker, 0/?. cit., p. 204. 
 There is also a letter to the Dominicans of Freisach, dated November 27, 
 1 23 1, pubHshed in the Acta imperii of Winkelmann, and another to Conrad 
 
ii6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 although the Dominicans and the Friars Minor did their 
 best to help him. Still some cities like Milan, Verona, Pia- 
 cenza and Vercelli adopted the measures of persecution 
 which he proposed. At Milan, Peter of Verona, a Domin- 
 ican, on September 1 5, 1233, had the laws of the Pope and 
 the Senator of Rome inscribed in the city's statutes.^ The 
 animadversio dehita was henceforth interpreted to mean 
 the penalty of the stake. " In this year," writes a chron- 
 icler 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 podesta of Piacenza 
 sent to the Pope the heretics he had arrested."* Vercelli, 
 at the instance of the Franciscan, Henry of Milan, in- 
 corporated in 1233 into its statutes the law of the Senator 
 
 of Marburg, October ii, 1231, in Kuchenbecker, Analccta Hassiaca, vol. iii, 
 p. 73. For further details concerning these documents, cf. Ficker, op. cit.^ 
 pp. 213, 214. 
 
 1 Corio, Uistoria di Milano, ed. Vinegia, 1554, fol. 96; cf. Ficker, op. cit., 
 pp. 210, 211. 
 
 2 "Mediolanenses incipierunt comburere ereticos." Memories Medio- 
 lanenses, ad ann. 1233, in the Man. Germ. SS., vol. xviii, p. 402. (The 
 chronicler is ignorant of what happened at Milan in 1034.) The podesta 
 Oldrado de Tresseno of Lodi, who governed Milan in 1233, and who pre- 
 sided over the executions of heretics, recorded the facts in an inscription on 
 his statue, which can still be read on the facade of the Palazzo della Ragione 
 in Milan: 
 
 Atria qui grandis solii regalia scandis, 
 Praesidis hie memores Oldradi semper honores, 
 Civis Laudensis, fidei tutoris et ensis. 
 Qui solium struxit, Catharos, ut debuit, uxit. 
 
 3 Cf. Parisius de Cereta, Man. Germ. SS., vol. xix, p. 8, and Maurisius in 
 Muratori, Rer. Ital. SS., vol. xiii, p. 38. 
 
 * Annal. Placent., in Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xviii, p. 454. 
 
THE INQUISITION 117 
 
 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 fmd 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 fmd everywhere so marked 
 an eagerness to carry out his wishes. A number of the 
 cities of Italy for a long time continued to punish obsti- 
 nate 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 Etahlisse- 
 
 1 Cf. Corio, Uistoria di Milano, loc. cit. For further details regarding 
 upper Italy, cf. Ficker, op. cit., pp. 210, 211. 
 
 2 The papal letter of October 11, 1231, says: "Quatenxis prelatis, dero et 
 populo convocatis generalem facialis predicationem . . . et adjunctis vobis 
 discretis aUquibus ad haec sollicitius exsequenda, dihgenti perquiratis sollici- 
 tudine de haereticis et etiam infamatis, et si quos culpabiles et infamatos 
 inveneritis, nisi examinati velint absolute mandatis Ecclesiae obedire, pro- 
 cedatis contra eos juxta statuta nostra contra haereticos noviter promulgata." 
 Kirchenbecker, Analecta Hassiaca, vol. iii, p. 73. We will relate further on 
 how Conrad understood his mission of Inquisitor, and how he fulfilled it. 
 
 3Cf. on this point, Ficker, op. cit., p. 224. 
 
 ^Aubri de Trois-Fontaines, ad ann. 1239, Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xxiii, 
 pp. 944, 945. For other references to this fact, cf. Julien Havet, op. cit., 
 
ii8 THE INQUISITION 
 
 ments de Saint Louis and the Coutumes de Beau- 
 vaisis. 
 
 "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." ^ 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." ^ 
 
 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 1 1 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 
 
 p. 171, n. 2. Mont-Wimer or Mont-Aime is situated in Marne, a commune 
 of Bergeres-les-Vertus. 
 
 ^ Etablissements de saint Louis, ch. cxxiii; cf. ch. Ixxxv; in the Ordonnances 
 des roys de France, vol. i, pp. 211, 175. 
 
 ? CPUtumes de Beat(,yaisis, xi, 2; cf. xxx, 11, ed Beugnot, vol. i, pp. 157, 413. 
 
THE INQUISITION 119 
 
 the first, moreover, to establish an extraordinary and per- 
 manent 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 
 Patarins had sprung up everywhere, especially in southern 
 Italy and France and northern Spain, the secrecy of 
 their movements made the task of the bishops 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 arch- 
 deacons 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 inhabi- 
 tants 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 Catho- 
 lic. After the bishop had questioned all who had been 
 
120 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 re- 
 fused 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 re- 
 fused to abjure they were handed over to the secular 
 arm.i jhjs ^as an attempt to recall the bishops to a 
 sense of their duty. The Lateran Council of 121 5 re- 
 enacted the laws of Lucius III; and to ensure their enforce- 
 ment it decreed that every bishop who neglected his duty 
 should be deposed, and another consecrated in his place.^ 
 The Council of Narbonne in 1227 likewise ordered the 
 bishops to appoint synodal witnesses {testes synodales) 
 in every parish to prosecute heretics,^ 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 wit- 
 nesses. And again, as a contemporary bishop, Lucas 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?" ^ 
 
 1 Lucius III, Ep. clxxi, Migne, P. L., vol. cci, col. 1297 and seq. 
 
 2 The Bull Excommunicamus, Decretals, cap. xiii, in fine, De hcereticis, 
 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 
 
THE INQUISITION 121 
 
 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.^ 
 
 "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 observ- 
 ance; 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 
 
 errores, cap. xix, in the Bibliotheca Patrum, 4 ed., vol. iv, col. 575-714. Lucas 
 was Bishop of Tuy in GaHcia, from 1239 to 1249. 
 
 1 Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 315 and seq. 
 
 2 Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 318. 
 
122 THE INQUISITION 
 
 of Christ with what it most sorely needed. As the neces- 
 sity 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 guaran- 
 tee 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.^ 
 
 Gregory IX fully understood the help that the Domini- 
 cans and Franciscans could render him as agents of the 
 Inquisition throughout Christendom.^ 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., pp. 318, 319. 
 
 2 Of course these religions were to render other services to the church- 
 
THE INQUISITION 123 
 
 It is probable that the Senator of Rome refers to them 
 in his oath in 1231, when he speaks of the Inquisitores 
 datos ah Ecclesia} Frederic II, in his law of 1232, also 
 mentions the Inquisitores ah apostolica sede datos? The 
 Dominican Alberic traveled through Lombardy in Novem- 
 ber, 1232, with the title of Inquisitor hcereticce pravitatis? 
 In 1 23 1 a similar commission was entrusted to the Domini- 
 cans 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." ^ 
 
 Their duties are outlined in a letter of Gregory IX to 
 
 1 Raynaldi, Annates, ad ann. 1231, sect. 16, 17; cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 205. 
 
 2 Cap. iii, in the Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. 196. 
 
 3 Potthast, Regesta Roman. Ponti}., no. 904, i. 
 
 ^Cf. Ficker, op. cit., p. 213; cf. Potthast, n. S859, 8860. 
 
 sPotthast, no. 9143-9152. At the same time, Gregory IX sent a bull "to 
 the Priors and Friars of the Order of Preachers." Cf. Lea, op. cit., p. 329 
 and seq. Robert le Bougre was appointed inquisitor for northern France, 
 April 19, 1233. Ripoll, Bullarium, vol. i, p. 45. 
 
,24 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Conrad of Marburg, October ii, 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 testi- 
 mony; 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 gratice)? The 
 heretics who abjured during this period were treated with 
 leniency. If secret heretics, they were dismissed with 
 
 1 Kuchenbecker, Analecta Hassiaca, vol. iii, p. 73; cf. Ficker, op. cit., 
 p. 213. Similar instructions may be found in the Processus inquisitionis 
 (Appendix A). 
 
 2 "Quod et tempus gratia sive indulgentiae appellamus." Processus 
 Inquisitionis, cf. Appendix A. "Assignato eis termino competenti quod 
 tempus graticB vocare soletis." Consultation of the Archbishop of Narbonne, 
 at the Council of Beziers in 1246, c. ii. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 330, note 2. 
 
THE INQUISITION 125 
 
 only a slight secret penance; if public heretics, they were 
 exempted from the penalties of death and life-imprison- 
 ment, 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 theirown accord, 
 they were to be denounced by the Catholic people. At 
 first the number of witnesses required to make an accusa- 
 tion valid was not determined; later on two were declared 
 necessary. 2 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 a bearer of false witness.^ But her hatred of heresy 
 led her later on to set aside this law, when the faith was 
 
 1 "Illis autem qui ad mandatum Ecclesiae venerint, non imponetur publica 
 poenitentia, nisi sint publici haerctici . . . cum quibus etiam ita misericordia 
 fiat quod non condempnentur ad mortem, non ad carcerem perpetuum, non 
 ad peregrinationem nimis longam, sed aliae poenitentiae injungantur quas pro 
 qualitate delicti inquisitores viderint imponendas." Consultation of the 
 cardinal Bishop of Albano, in Doat, vol. xxxi, fol. 5. On the acts of this 
 cardinal, who was none other than Pierre de Colmieu, the old Archbishop of 
 Rouen, cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 144, 145. 
 
 2 G. Durand, Speculum judtciorum, Hb. i, parts iv, De teste, sect. 11. 
 Gui Foucois (who became Pope under the name of Clement I\') thought that 
 more than two witnesses were helpful, and in some cases absolutely necessary." 
 "Ideoque non crederem tutum ad vocem duorum testium hominem bonae 
 opinionis damnare, licet videar contra jus dicere." Consultation in Doat, 
 vol. xxxvi, quest, xv. Cf. Eymeric, Directorium, 3^ pars, De testium multi- 
 plicatione, p. 445. 
 
 3Pseudo-Julii, Ep. ii, cap. 17; Gratian, Decretum, pars 2^, Causa v, 
 quaest. iii, cap. v. 
 
126 THE INQUISITION 
 
 in question. As early as the twelfth century, Gratian 
 had declared that the testimony of infamous and heret- 
 ical witnesses might be accepted in trials for heresy.^ 
 
 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 sus- 
 pects.2 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.^ Henceforth 
 the testimony of a heretic was considered valid, al- 
 though it was always left to the discretion of the In- 
 quisition 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.^ 
 
 Witnesses for the defence rarely presented themselves. 
 Very seldom do we come across any mention of them.*' 
 
 1 Pars ii, Causa ii, quaest. vii, cap. xxii; Causa vi, quaest. i, cap. xix. 
 
 2 Historia diplomatica Frederici II, vol. iv, pp. 299, 300. Frederic re- 
 enacted at Ravenna, February 22, 1232, the law of 1220 against heretics, 
 with the additional clause: "Adjicimus quod hasreticus convinci per hasreticum 
 possit." 
 
 ^ Bull Consuluit, of January 23, 1261, in Eymeric, Directorium inquisitor um. 
 Appendix, p. 40. 
 
 ^ Cap. V, In fidei favor em. Sexto v, 2; Eymeric, Directorium inquisitor um, 
 p. 105. 
 
 s Eymeric, ihid., 3^ pars, quaest. Ixvii, pp. 606, 607. Pegna, ihid., pp. 607, 
 609, declares that great cruelty or even insulting words — v.g. to call a 
 man cornutus or a woman meretrix — might come under the head of enmity, 
 and invalidate a man's testimony. 
 
 ^ Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 445, 447. 
 
THE INQUISITION 127 
 
 This is readily understood, for they would almost inevi- 
 tably have been suspected as accomplices and abettors 
 of heresy. For the same reason, the accused were prac- 
 tically denied the help of counsel. Innocent III had for- 
 bidden advocates and scriveners to lend aid or counsel 
 to heretics and their abettors.^ 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. ^ 
 
 Heretics or suspects, therefore, denounced to the In- 
 quisition 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 ^ — that the accused or their friends would 
 
 1 Decretals, cap. xi, De JicBreticis, lib. v, tit. vii. 
 
 - Eymeric, Directorium inquisitor urn, 3^ pars, quaest. xxxix, p. 565; cf. 
 446; Lea, op. ciL, vol. i, 444. Sometimes, however, the accused was granted 
 counsel, but juxta juris jormam ac stylum et usum officii Inqicisitionis; cf. 
 Vidal, Le tribunal d' Inquisition, in the Annates de Saint-Louis des Frangais, 
 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 2^ 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. 
 
 3 Guillem Pelhisse tells us that the Cathari sometimes killed those who 
 had denounced their brethren. " Pcrsecutores eorum percutiebant, vulnerabant 
 et occidebant," Chronique, ed. Douais, p. 90. A certain Arnold Dominici, 
 who had denounced seven heretics, was killed at night in his bed by "the 
 
128 THE INQUISITION 
 
 revenge themselves on their accusers, induced the In- 
 quisitors to withhold the names of the witnesses.^ The 
 only way in which the prisoner could invalidate the testi- 
 mony against him was to name all his mortal enemies. 
 If his accusers happened to be among them, their testi- 
 mony was thrown out of court.^ But otherwise, he was 
 obliged to prove the falsity of the accusation against him 
 — a practically impossible undertaking. For if two wit- 
 nesses, 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. 
 
 Believers." Ibid., pp. 98, 99. As early as 1229, the papal legate, after his 
 investigation in the South, brought back all the testimony with him to Rome, 
 "ne forte si aliquando inventa fuisset (inquisitio) in terra ista a malevolis, 
 in mortem testium qui contra tales deposuerant redundaret," and even this did 
 not prevent the heretics from killing the accusers of their brethren: "nam et 
 sola suspicione, post recessum ipsius legati, fuere tales aliqui et persecutores 
 haereticorum plurimi interfecti." C. de Puy-Laurens, Chronique, cap. 40. 
 Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 438; Tanon, op. cit., p. 390. 
 
 1 Eymeric, Directorium, 3^ pars, q. 72; An nomina testium et denuntia- 
 torum sint delatis piiblicanda, p. 627. The law on this point varied from 
 time to time. But between the years 1244 and 1254 a manual of the Inqui- 
 sition {Processus inqiiisitionis, cf. Appendix A) says: "Neque a juris ordine 
 deviamus nisi quod testium non publicamus nomina propter ordinationem 
 sedis apostolicae sub domino Gregorio (IX) provide factam et ab Innocentio 
 (IV) postmodum innovatam." Cf. bull of Alexander IV, Layettes du tresor 
 des Chartes, vol. iii, n. 4221. 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. Cf. Lea, op. cit., p. 438 and note; Vidal, Le tribunal d* Inquisition 
 de Pamiers in the Annales de Saint Louis des Frangais, vol. ix, pp. 294, 295. 
 
 2 Eymeric, Directorium, 3' pars, De defensionibus reorum, p. 446 and seq. 
 
 3 According to the Processus inquisitionis the rule was: "Ad nullius con- 
 dempnationem sine lucidis et apertis probationibus vel confessione propria 
 processimus." Appendix A. Cf. Eymeric, De duodecimo modo terminando 
 
THE INQUISITION 129 
 
 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 im- 
 posed 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 pentitent 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 wrong-doer, 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." ^ 
 
 But "the sin of heresy was too grave to be expiated 
 simply by contrition and amendment." ^ The Inquisitor, 
 therefore, pointed out other means of expiation: "The 
 penances customarily imposed by the Inquisition were 
 
 processusm fidei per condempnationem convicti de haresi et persistentis in 
 negativa, in the Directorium, 3* pars, pp. 521-525. 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., p. 459. 
 
 3 Lea, ibid., p. 463. 
 10 
 
,30 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 poencE con- 
 jusihiles, — 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 mums or prison." ^ 
 
 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 conver- 
 sion, or from him who showed by relapse that there was 
 no trust to be placed in his pretended repentance." ^ 
 
 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. 
 
 1 Lea, ibid., p. 462. For further details about these penances, ibid., p. 463 
 and seq.; cf. Ch. Molinier, U Inquisition dans le midi de la France au XIII 
 et au XIV^ siecles, pp. 358-398. 
 
 2 Lea, ibid., p. 460. 
 
 3 "Quia sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia non habet amplius quod faciat 
 contra te, pro tuis demeritis in hiis scriptis te relinquimus curiae seculari." 
 
THE INQUISITION 131 
 
 However, the law allowed the heretic to abjure even at 
 the foot of the stake; in that case his sentence was com- 
 muted to life imprisonment.^ 
 
 It is hard to conceive of a greater responsibility than 
 that of a mediaeval Inquisitor. The life or death of the 
 heretic was practically at his disposal. The Church, there- 
 fore, 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 in rushing into it. He should be un- 
 moved 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. 
 
 Liher sententiarum inquisitionis Tholosanct ah anno Ch. 1307 ad ann. 1323, 
 in Limborch, Historia Inquisiiionis, Amsterdam, 1692, p. gi. 
 
 1 "Si qui . . . territu mortis redire voluerint ad agendam poenitentiam, in 
 perpetuum carcerem detrudantur." Constitution of Frederic (1232) quoted 
 above; cf. the Council of Toulouse (1229) and the text of Gregory IX. For 
 heretics converted at the foot of the stake, cf. Eymeric, op. cit., f- pars, De 
 decimo modo terminandi processum fidei per condemnationem hcsretici impami- 
 tentis non relapsi, p. 515. 
 
132 THE INQUISITION 
 
 In doubtful cases, he should be very careful not to be- 
 lieve too easily what may appear probable, and yet in 
 reality is false; nor on the other hand should he stub- 
 bornly 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 coun- 
 tenance, and let his sentences never be prompted by 
 avarice or cruelty.* 
 
 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 at your 
 hands": ut puniatur sic temeritas perversorum, quod inno- 
 centice puriias non Icedaiur.^ 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. 
 
 ^ Practica Inquisitionis, pars 6^ ed. Douais, 1886, pp. 231-233. Eymeric 
 gives a similar portrait of the ideal Inquisitor. Directorum, 3^ pars, qusst. 
 I, De Conditione Inquisitionis, p. 534; cf. qucest, xvi, De conditionibus vicarii 
 inquisitoris, p. 547. The Inquisitor had to be forty years old: ibid., 
 P- 535- This was fixed by Clement V, Clementinarum, lib. v, tit. iii, cap. 
 i--iii. 
 
 2 Quoted by Ficker, op. cit., p. 220. 
 
THE INQUISITION 133 
 
 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 banish- 
 ment, 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 podesta 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 her- 
 self in sentences of death. In fact, his law of 123 1 
 decrees that: "Heretics condemned by the church are 
 to be handed over to the secular courts to receive due 
 punishment {animadversio dehita)." ^ The emperor Fred- 
 eric 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: auc- 
 
 ^"Dampnati vero per Ecclesiam seculari judicio relinquantur, animad- 
 versione debita puniendi." Decretales, cap, xv, De Hareticis, lib. v, tit. vii. 
 
134 THE INQUISITION 
 
 toritate nostra ignis judicio concremandus} 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.^ This explains 
 why Gregory IX did not believe that in handing over here- 
 tics to the secular arm he participated directly or indirectly 
 in a death sentence.^ The tribunals of the Inquisition 
 
 ^ Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. 126. 
 
 2"Hceretici . . . ubicumque per imperium dampnati ab Ecclesia fuerint et 
 seculari judicio assignati, animadversione debita puniantur." Ibid., p. 196. 
 The Sicilian constitution of 1233 decrees that all who have been declared 
 impenitent heretics, prceseniis nostrcs legis edicto damimtos, tnorlcm pati 
 decernimus. In Eymeric, Directorium, Appendix, p. 15. 
 
 3 Lea writes {op. ciL, 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: Nee eniin decuit Apostolicam Sedem, 
 in oculis siiis cum Madianita ccsunte JudcBo, manum suam a sanguine pro- 
 hibere, ne si secus ageret non custodire populum Israel . . . viderctur. 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 uses the same weapons. 
 Even if the comparison is not a very happy one, still we must not exaggerate 
 its import. We quote the rest of the papal letter, so that our readers may 
 see that it did not treat of the execution of heretics at all. "Fratribus ordinis 
 Praedicatorum habentibus zelum Dei et in opere potentibus Apostolica scripta 
 direximus, ut ad caput hujusmodi reptilium conterendum, vulpes parvulas 
 capiendas et maxillas eorum, qui Christi Ecclesiam lacerebant, in freno cohi- 
 bendas et camo, potentes assurgerent, et oves errantes ad ovile suis humeris 
 reportarent nee non personas infectas scabra rubigine vetustatis lima suae 
 praedicationis eraderent, ut mundae in sanctuarium Domini et caslestem 
 patriam introirent; nee enim decuit apostolicam sedem, in oculis suis cum 
 Madianita coeunte Judaeo, manum suam a sanguine prohibere (the weapons 
 used by the Holy See are simply the Scripta apostolica, cited above), ne si 
 
THE INQUISITION 135 
 
 which he established in no way modified this concept of 
 ecclesiastical justice. The Papacy, the guardian of or- 
 thodoxy for the universal Church, simply found that 
 the Dominicans and the Franciscans were more docile 
 instruments than the episcopate for the suppression 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. 
 
 But as a matter of fact, it unfortunately changed com- 
 pletely 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 pre- 
 tense was made to satisfy the demands of justice by 
 requiring that the Inquisitors be prudent and impartial 
 judges. But this made everything depend upon indi- 
 viduals, 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. 
 
 secus ageret non custodire populum Israel, nee super grege suo noctis vigilias 
 vigilare, sed dormire seu dormitare potius videretur. Porro nee fuit man- 
 dantis intentio, nee scribentis voluntas hoc habuit, ut super aliis Provinciis, 
 prEeterquam de hseresi infamatis ad eos scripta hujusmodi emanarent . . . 
 Mandamus . . . contra haereticos hujusmodi studeatis solicite debitum Pas- 
 toralis officii exercere, et eos reconciliare Domino . . ." Ripoll, Bullarium ord. 
 FF. Pradkatorum, vdl. i, p. 66. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 SIXTH PERIOD 
 
 Development of the Inquisition 
 Innocent IV and the Use of Torture 
 
 The successors of Gregory IX were not long in perceiv- 
 ing 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 pro- 
 cedure 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 
 
 iLea, op, cit., vol. i, p. 330 seq. 
 136 
 
THE INQUISITION 137 
 
 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 concur- 
 rence), 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 In- 
 quisitor 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 ren- 
 dered 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, how- 
 ever, 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 con- 
 sultation, proceeds to direct that Inquisitors in deciding 
 
,38 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 This decretal remained henceforth the law. But as 
 the Inquisitors at times seemed to act as if it did not exist, 
 Boniface VI II and Clement IV strengthened it by declar- 
 ing null and void all grave sentences in which the Bishop 
 had not been consulted.^ 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. 
 
 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 tri- 
 bunals in matters of heresy were often very complex, 
 "it was soon found requisite to associate with the In- 
 quisitors 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 
 
 1 Ibid., p. 335. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 413-416. 
 
 ^ Sexto, lib. V, tit ii, cap. 17, Per hoc; Clementin; lib. v, tit. iii, cap. if 
 Multorum querela. 
 
 3 The Decretal Multorum querela; Eymeric, Dircctorium, p. 112. Often 
 the Bishop and the Inquisitor named the one delegate. "• 
 
THE INQUISITION 139 
 
 deliberate with them over the evidence, and advise with 
 them on the sentence to be rendered." ^ 
 
 The official records of the sentences of the Inquisition 
 frequently mention the presence of these experts, perttisind 
 honi 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 de fe. . . . 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 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 388. Cf. The Bull of Innocent IV, July 11, 1254. 
 Layettes du Tresor des Charles, vol. iii, no. 41 n (cf- 4113)- Alexander IV 
 calls them experts, per Hi, in his bull of April 15, 1255, Potthast, Regesta, no. 
 15, 804; Registers edited by De la Ronciere, no. 372; Alexander renewed his 
 decree in a bull of April 27, 1260, CoU. Doat, xxx, fol. 204; cf. also Urban IV, 
 Bull of August 2, 1264. 
 
 2 Douais, La Formule; communicato honorum virorum consilio des sentences 
 inquisitoriales, in the Congres scientifique international des Catholiques (section 
 of Sciences historiques), Fribourg (Switzerland), 1898, pp. 316-367. 
 
 ^Ihid., p. 323. 
 
,40 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 vouch- 
 safed him by God. The Inquisitor then read over his sum- 
 mary of each case, sometimes withholding the name of the 
 accused, and they voted the sentence " Penance at the dis- 
 cretion of the Inquisitor" — "that person is to be impris- 
 oned, or abandoned totheseculararm"— while the Gospels 
 lay on the table "so that our judgment might come from 
 the face of God, and our eyes might see justice." ' 
 
 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 sen- 
 tence.2 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 prac- 
 tice of the Inquisition, at least as far as the names were 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 389; Doat, vol. xxvii, fol. 108. The Sermones of 
 the Inquisitor Bernard of Caux were not always held on Sundays (Tanon, 
 op. cit., p. 425). 
 
 2 Douais, La jormule: Communicato bonorum virorum consilio, loc. cit., 
 
 PP- 324, 326. 
 
THE INQUISITION 141 
 
 concerned.^ This was also the practice of the Inquisitors 
 of southern France, as Bernard Gui tells us. The ma- 
 jority 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 in- 
 terrogatories." ^ 
 
 We can readily see how the periti or honi 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 ab- 
 stract. We know that the same disease calls for different 
 treatment in different individuals; in like mannei* a crime 
 must be judged with due reference to the mentality of 
 
 1 Eymeric, Directorium, 3^ pars, quest. 80, Comm. 129, p. 632. 
 
 2 Tanon, op. cit., p. 421. "Ante sermonem vero, captato tempore oppor- 
 tune, petitur per inquisitores consilium a praedictis (bonis viris), facta prius 
 extractione summaria et compendiosa de culpis, in quo complete tangitur 
 substantia cujuslibet personce . . . sine expressione nominis alicujus persons 
 ad cauielam, ut liherius de posnitentm pro tali culpa imponenda sine affectione 
 personcB judicent consulentes. Solidius tamen consilium, si omnia complete 
 exprimerentur, quod faciendum est ubi et quando possunt haberi persons 
 consulentes quibus non est periculum revelare; esset etiam minus calump- 
 niosum. Sed ta?nen non jiiit usus inquisilonis ah antiquo, propter periculum 
 jam przetactum; verumptamen confessiones singulorum prius integraliter 
 explicantur coram doycesano vel ejus vicario, aliquibus peritis paucis et sec- 
 retariis et juratis." Bernard Gui, Practica, 3^ pars, p. 83. On the com- 
 munication of the names, cf. a bull of Alexander IV. Layettes du tresor 
 des Charles, vol. iii, no. 4221. 
 
142 THE INQUISITION 
 
 the one who has committed it. The Inquisition did not 
 seem to understand this.^ 
 
 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 re- 
 quiring 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. Anyone who considers the 
 rough manners of this period, must admit that the 
 Church did a great deal to mitigate the excessive cruelty 
 of the mediaeval prisons. 
 
 The Council of Toulouse, in 1229, decreed that re- 
 pentant heretics "must be imprisoned, in such a way 
 that they could not corrupt others." ^ it also declared 
 
 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." 
 
 2 "Ad agendam poenitentiam ... in muro tali includantur cautela quod 
 
THE INQUISITION 143 
 
 that the Bishop was to provide for the prisoners' needs 
 out of their confiscated property. Such measures be- 
 token 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 some- 
 times 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 or- 
 ders 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." ^ But this last provision was not 
 always carried out. Too often the prisoners were con- 
 fined 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 
 
 > 
 
 facultatem non habeant alios corrumpendi." D'Achery, Spicilegium, in-fol. 
 vol. i, p. 711. 
 
 1 Cf. on this point Vidal., op. at., in Annales de Saint-Louis des Fran^ais, 
 1905, PP- 361-368. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 491. 
 
 3 "In aliis domunculis sunt miseri commorantes in compedibus tarn 
 ligneis quam ferreis, nee se movere possunt, sed subtus se egerunt atque 
 mingunt nee jacere possunt nisi resupini in terra frigida; et in hujusmodi 
 tormentis nocte dieque longis temporibus quotidie perseverant. In aliis vero 
 carcerum locis degentibus, non solum lux et aer subtrahitur, sed et victus 
 excepto pane doloris et aqua, quae etiam rarissime ministratur." Document 
 quoted by Vidal, op. cit., 1905, p. 362, note. Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 491, 
 492. 
 
144 THE INQUISITION 
 
 zealous in his attempts at prison reform.* That he suc- 
 ceeded in bettering, at least for a time, the lot of these 
 unfortunates, in whom he interested himself, cannot be 
 denied.^ 
 
 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 par- 
 ticipating in the death sentences, they were still very 
 eager for the execution of the heretics they abandoned to 
 the secular arm. This is well attested by both docu- 
 ments 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 eccle- 
 siastical and civil laws against heresy. If they re- 
 fused or neglected to do this, they themselves were 
 
 1 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 pris- 
 oners should be faithfully given them, etc. Cf. Decretal Multorum querela 
 in Eymeric, Directorium, p. 112. 
 
 2 His legates Pierre de la Chapelle and Beranger de Fredol visited in 
 April, 1306, the prisons of Carcasconne and Albi, changed the jailers, removed 
 the irons from the prisoners, and made others leave the subterraneous cells in 
 which they had been confined. Doat, vol. xxxiv, fol. 4 and seq; Douais, 
 Documents, vol. ii, p. 304 seq. Cf. Compayre, Etudes historiques sur VAlbi- 
 geois, pp. 240-245. 
 
THE INQUISITION 145 
 
 liable to excommunication and their rebellious cities to 
 interdict.^ 
 
 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 aban- 
 doned to the secular arm, the podesta or ruler of the city 
 must take charge of them at once, and within five days 
 enforce the laws against them." ^ 
 
 This law, or rather the bull Ad Extirpanda, which con- 
 tains 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 fme enforced by the ban. Moreover, each podesta, 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 
 
 i"Eis excummunicatione ligandis et terris ipsorum interdicto Ecclesiae 
 supponendis. Civitas autem quae his institutis duxerit resistendum vel . . . 
 punire neglexerit . . . , aliarum caraet commercio civitatum," etc. Decretal 
 Ad abolendam, in the Decretals, cap, ix, de Hareticis, lib. v, tit. vii. Cf. 
 Sexto, lib. V, tit. ii, c. 2. Ut Officium; Council of Aries, 1254, can. iii; Coun- 
 cil of Beziers, 1246, can. ix. 
 
 2"Damnatos de haeresi . . . potestas vel rector . . . eos sibi relictos re- 
 cipiat statim, vel infra quinque dies ad minus, circa eos constitutiones contra 
 tales editas servaturus." Bull Ad extirpanda, May 15, 1252, in Eymeric, 
 Directorium, Appendix, p. 8. 
 
 3 Ibid. 
 
 II 
 
,46 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.^ 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, In- 
 consutilem iunicam, which expressly decreed that such 
 heretics be sent to the stake.^ 
 
 These decrees remained the law as long as the Inquisition 
 lasted. The bull Ad Exiirpanda 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 Inno- 
 cent 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 Cf. the bulls Cum adversus, Tunc potissime, Ex Commissis nobis, etc., in 
 Eymeric, ibid., pp. 9-12. 
 
 ^Ibid., pp. 13-15. 
 
 3 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 339; cf. Potthast, Regesta, nos. 19348, 19423, 19428, 
 19433. 19522, 19896, 19905. 
 
THE INQUISITION 147 
 
 A little later, Nicholas IV, who during his short pon- 
 tificate (1288- 1 292), 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.^ 
 
 It is therefore proved beyond question that the Church, 
 in the person of the Popes, used every means at her dis- 
 posal, 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 ex- 
 communicated, unless absolved from the censure, was 
 regarded as a heretic himself within a year's time, and 
 was liable therefore to the death penalty .^ The princes 
 of the day, therefore, had no other way of escaping this 
 penalty, except by faithfully carrying out the sentence 
 of the Church. 
 
 • ••••••• 
 
 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. 
 
 ^ Registers, published by Langlois, no. 4253. For the interest Nicholas IV 
 took in the Inquisition, cf. Douais, Monuments, vol. i, pp. xxx-xrri. 
 
 2 Alexander IV decreed this penalty against the contumacious, Sexto, De 
 Hareticis, cap. vii. Boniface VIII extended it to those princes and magistrates 
 who did not enforce the sentences of the Inquisition: quam excommunica- 
 tionem si per annum animo sustinuerit pertinaci, extunc velut haereticus 
 condemnetur. Sexto, De Hareticis, cap. xviii in Eymeric,, 2^ pars, p. no. 
 Cf. ibid., 2^ pars, quest. 47, pp. 360, 361. 
 
148 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 that 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,^ l^ys it 
 down as an "accepted rule of canon law that no confes- 
 sion is to be extorted by torture." ^ Besides, Nicholas I, 
 in his instructions to the Bulgarians, had formally de- 
 nounced the torturing of prisoners.^ He advised that the 
 testimony of three persons be required for conviction; 
 
 1 Causa V, quaest. v, Illi qui, cap. iv; Causa xii, quaest. ii, Fraternitas. 
 
 2"Confessio ergo in talibus non extorqueri debet, sed potius sponte pro- 
 fiteri. Pessimum est enim de suspicione aut extorta confessione quemquam 
 judicare," etc. Causa xv, quaest. vi, cap. i. It has been said that severe 
 flogging might be a most violent form of torture. Tanon (op. cit., pp. 371, 
 372). But St. Augustine certainly did not mean this. 
 
 3 "Si fur vel latro deprehensus fuerit et negaverit quod ei impingitur, 
 asseritis apud vos quod judex caput ejus verberibus tundat et aliis stimulis 
 ferreis, donee veritatem depromat, ipsius latera pungat: quam rem nee divina 
 lex, nee humana prorsus admittit, cum non invita, sed spontanea debeat esse 
 confessio; nee sit violenter elicienda, sed voluntarie proferenda. Denique, si 
 contigerit vos, etiam illis pasnis illatis, nihil de his quae passo in crimen obji- 
 ciuntur, penitus invenire, nonne saltem nunc erubescitis et quam impie judi- 
 cetis agnoscitis? Similiter autem si homo criminatus, taha passus sustinere 
 non valens dixerit se perpetrasse quod non perpetravit; ad quern, rogo, tants 
 impietatis magnitude revolvitur, nisi ad eum qui hunc talia cogit mendaciter 
 confiteri? Quamvis non confiteri noscatur sed loqui hoc ore profert, quod 
 corde non tenet." Responsa ad Consulta Bulgarorum, cap. Ixxxvi, Labbe, 
 Concilia, vol. viii, col. 544. 
 
THE INQUISITION 149 
 
 if these could not be obtained, the prisoner's oath upon 
 the Gospels was to be considered suificient. 
 
 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 dis- 
 favor, until at last the Popes, particularly Innocent III, 
 Honorius III, and Gregory IX, legislated them out of 
 existence.^ 
 
 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 accord- 
 
 1 Decretals, lib. v, tit. xxxv, cap. i-iii. Cf. Vacandard, U&glise et les 
 Ordalies in Etudes de critique et d'histoire, 3d ed., Paris, 1906, pp. 191-215. 
 On the abuse of ordeals in trials for heresy, cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 303-312. 
 
,50 IHE INQUISITION 
 
 ance with the Verona decree of Ldcius III, prescribes the 
 recognized form of canonical purgation for the trial of 
 all suspected heretics." ^ 
 
 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 and 
 the beginning of the thirteenth century.- But this was 
 exceptional; in Italy, apparently, it had never been used. 
 
 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 podesta 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." ^ The Pope here tries to defend the use of torture, 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 421. Cf. Paul Foumier, Les officialiies au moyen 
 dge, Paris, 1880, pp. 249, 280; Esmein, Histoire de la procedure criminelle en 
 France, Paris, 1882, pp. 19, 77. 
 
 2 Tanon, op. cit., pp. 362-373; Notice sur le Formulaire de Guillaume de 
 Paris, 1888, p. S3- 
 
 3 "Teneatur potestas vel rector haereticos . . . cogere citra membri diminu- 
 
THE INQUISITION 151 
 
 by classing heretics with thieves and murderers. A mere 
 comparison is his only argument. 
 
 This law of Innocent IV was renewed and confirmed 
 November 30, 1259, by Alexander IV/ and again on 
 November 3, 1265, by Clement IV.^ The restriction of 
 Innocent III to use torture "which should not imperil 
 life or injure limb" (Cogere citra memhri diminutionem et 
 mortis periculum), left a great deal to the discretion of 
 the Inquisitors. Besides flogging, the other punish- 
 ments inflicted upon those who refused to confess the 
 crime of which they were accused were antecedent im- 
 prisonment, the rack, the strappado, and the burning 
 coals.^ 
 
 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 career 
 et arcta vita* was deemed an excellent method of extorting 
 confessions. 
 
 "It was pointed out," says Lea, "that judicious re- 
 
 tionem et mortis periculum, tanquam vere latrones et homicidas animarum 
 . . . errores suos expresse fateri." Bull Ad extirpanda, in Eymeric, Directo- 
 rium. Appendix, p. 8. 
 
 1 Potthast, Regesta, no. 17714- 
 
 2 Ibid., no. 19433- 
 
 3 Vidal (Le tribunal d^ inquisition de Pamiers, loc. cit., i, 1905, p. 286) quotes 
 also the torture of the boots, and the torture of water, which were seldom 
 used; the last was pecuUar to Spain. Cf. ibid., pp. 284-286. 
 
 4 "Per durum carcerem et vitam arctam est ab eis confessio extorquenda." 
 Document of 1253 or 1254, published by Douais, Documents, vol. i, p. Ixvii. 
 Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 360-362. 
 
,52 THE INQUISITION 
 
 striction of diet not only reduced the body, but weakened 
 the will, and rendered the prisoner less able to resist alter- 
 nate threats of death and promises of mercy. Starva- 
 tion, in fact, was reckoned one of the regular and most 
 efficient methods to subdue unwilling witnesses and de- 
 fendants/' ^ This was the usual method employed in 
 Languedoc. " It is the only method," writes Mgr. Douais,^ 
 ''to extort confessions mentioned either in the records 
 of the notary of the Inquisition of Carcassonne ^ or in the 
 sentences of Bernard Gui.^ It was also the practice of 
 the Inquisitors across the Rhine." ^ 
 
 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 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 421. 
 
 2 Douais, Documents, vol. i, p. ccxl. 
 
 3 Douais, Documents, vol. ii, p. 115 and seq. 
 
 ^ Loc cit., pp. 105, 114, 120, 145. Mgr. Douais adds: This is the only 
 method of extorting confession mentioned by Bernard Gui in his Practica. 
 This is not accurate. We will see later on that the Practica also recommends 
 the use of torture. Mgr. Douais here alludes to the following passage: 
 "Quando aliquis vehementer suspectus . . . persistat in negando . . . non 
 est aUqualiter relaxandus, sed detinendus per annos plurimos, ut vexatio det 
 intellectum." Practica, 5^ pars, ed. Douais, p. 302. 
 
 5 "Si autem recuset hoc facere (confiteri), recludatur in carcere et incutiatur 
 ei timor quod testes contra ipsum habeantur, et si per testes convictus fuerit, 
 nulla fiat ei misericordia quin morti tradetur; et sustentetur tenui victu, quia 
 timor talis humiliabit eum," etc. David d' Augsburg, Tractatus de inqui- 
 sitione hereticorum, ed. Preger, Mainz, 1878, p. 43. 
 
 ^ Cf . several cases in Languedoc a little before 1 243 in Douais, Documents, 
 vol. i, p. 240. 
 
THE INQUISITION 153 
 
 was stretched and bound, so that he could not move. 
 Cords were attached to his arms and legs, and then con- 
 nected 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 cham- 
 ber; 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 dan- 
 gerous 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 His- 
 toire de V 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 
 
 i"De concilio quorumdam proborum qui se asserebant vidisse penis 
 examinari hcereticos in partibus Tholosanis, fecisti plantas pedum ejusdem 
 mulieris juxta carbones accensos apponi." Letter of John XXII, July 28, 
 13 19, in Vidal, op. cii., October, 1905, p. 5. 
 
,54 THE INQUISITION 
 
 brazier, that the Inquisitor might have an opportunity 
 to resume his interrogatory. 
 
 Such methods of torturing the accused were so detest- 
 able, that in the beginning the torturer was always a civil 
 official, as we read in the bull of Innocent I V.^ 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 re- 
 moved. Their object was at last obtained indirectly. 
 On April 27, 1260, Alexander IV authorized the Inquis- 
 itors and their associates to mutually grant all the needed 
 dispensations for irregularities that might be incurred.^ 
 This permission was granted a second time by Urban IV, 
 August 4, 1262;^ it was practically an authorization to 
 assist at the interrogatories at which torture was em- 
 ployed. From this time the Inquisitors did not scruple 
 to appear in person in the torture chamber. The man- 
 
 1 "Teneatur podesta vel rector hereticos cogere," etc. Bull Ad ex^ir panda. 
 
 2 Collection Doat, xxxi, fol. 277, quoted by Douais, Documents, vol. i, 
 p. XXV, n. 3. 
 
 ^ Regesta, no. 18390; Eymeric, Directorium, p. 132, 
 
THE INQUISITION 155 
 
 uals of the Inquisition record this practice and approve 
 it.^ 
 
 Torture was not to be employed until the judge had 
 been convinced that gentle means were of no a vail. ^ Even 
 in the torture chamber, while the prisoner was being 
 stripped of his garments and was being bound, the In- 
 quisitor 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 in- 
 creased 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.' 
 
 The Inquisitors realized so well that such forced con- 
 fessions 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 an- 
 other room where his confession was made. If, however, 
 
 1 Eymeric, Directoriiim, 3* pars, p. 481; Pegna's Commentary, p. 482. 
 
 2 A grave suspicion against the prisoner was required before he could be 
 tortured. "It would be iniquitous, and a violation of both human and divine 
 law to torture anyone, unless there was good evidence against him, perche 
 in negotio di tanta importanza si puo facilmente commetter errore,'^ says the 
 Inquisitor Eliseo Masini in his Sacro Arsenate ovvero prattica dell' Officio 
 della santa Inquisizione, Bologna, 1665, pp. 154, 155. 
 
 3 Eymeric, Director ium, 3^ pars., p. 481, col. i. 
 
156 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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, with- 
 out the pressure of force or fear." ^ 
 
 "It is a noteworthy fact, however, that in the frag- 
 mentary 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 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 427. Cf. Eymeric, Directorium, ibid., p. 481 
 col. 2; Vidal, op. cit., 1905, p. 283. The Abbe Vidal, op. cit., p. 155, quotes 
 an instance of these pretended spontaneous confessions at the tribunal of 
 Pamiers; the records state that a certain Guillem Agassa prcedicta confessus 
 fuit sponte; whereas a little before we read: ''postquam depositus fuit de tor- 
 mento." Lea also quotes the case of Guillem Salavert, who, in 1303, testified 
 that his confession esse veram, non factam vi tormentor um, although he had 
 been actually tortured, op. cit., vol. i. p. 428. 
 
 2 Lea. op. cit., p. 424. "Talis arctari seu restringi poterit in dieta, vel 
 alias in carcere seu vinculis, vel etiam qua^stionari de consilio peritorum, prout 
 qualitas negotii et personae conditio exegerit, ut Veritas eruatur," says Bernard 
 
THE INQUISITION 157 
 
 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.^ 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 confes- 
 sion 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. 
 
 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 heart- 
 less 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 
 
 Gui in his Praclica, p. 284; cf. p. 112, no. 20; p. 138, no. 36. " Possunt etiam 
 tales heretici per questionum tormenta citra membri diminutionem et mortis 
 periculum . . . et errores suos expresse fateri et accusare alios haereticos." 
 Ibid., p. 218. We may well be astonished, therefore, to find Mgr. Douais, 
 the editor of the Practica, affirming that "the Practica of Bernard Gui is 
 silent on the question of torture." Doctiments, vol. i, p. 238. 
 
 1 Clement V required the consent of the Inquisitor and the local Bishop 
 before a heretic could be tortured, vel tormentis expoficre illis. Decretal 
 MuUorum querela, in Eymeric. Directorium, 2^ pars, p. 112. 
 
158 THE INQUISITION 
 
 to use torture without the Bishop's consent, if he could 
 be reached within eight days.' 
 
 " 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." ^ 
 
 The code of the Inquisition was now practically com- 
 plete, for succeeding Popes made no change of any impor- 
 tance. 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 
 menibri 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. 
 
 1 Decretal, MuUorum querela. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 424; Bernard Gui, Practica, ed. Douais, 4" pars, 
 p. 188. Bernard Gui did not hesitate to assert (ibid., p. 174) that the bulls 
 of Clement V: Multonim querela and Nolentes ought to be modified or even 
 repealed so as to give more freedom to the Inquisitors : indigent ut remedientur, 
 suspendantur aut modereniur in melius, seu potius totaliter. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 Theologians, Canonists, and Casuists of the In- 
 quisition 
 
 The gravity of the crime of heresy was early recognized 
 in the Church. Gratian discussed this question in a 
 special chapter of his Decretum} 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. 
 
 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 re- 
 vealed truths. Innocent III, in his constitution of Sep- 
 tember 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.^ Fred- 
 
 1 Causa xxxi, q. vii, cap. 16. 
 
 2 "Servanda in perpetuum lege sancimus ut quicumgue hareticus, maxime 
 Paterenus . . . protinus capiatur et tradatur secular! cviriae puniendus secun- 
 dum legitimas sanctiones," etc. Ep. x, 130. 
 
 159 
 
i6o THE INQUISITION 
 
 eric II spoke in similar terms in his Constitutions of 1220, 
 1224, and 1232.^ This was the current teaching through- 
 out the Middle Ages.^ 
 
 But it is important to know what men then under- 
 stood 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." ^ 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.'* 
 
 ^"Catharos, Paterenos, Leonistas, Speronistas, Arnoldistas, et omnes 
 hareticos utriusque sexus, quocumque nomine censeantur, perpetua dampnamus 
 infamia," etc. Constitution of November 22, 1220, cap. 6, in Mon. Germ., 
 Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, pp. 107-109. "Ut quicumque . . . fuerii de hceresi 
 manijeste convictus et hcBreticus judicatus . . . illico capiatur," etc. Con- 
 stitut. de 1223, ibid., p. 126. "Si inventi fuerint a fide catholica salient in 
 articulo deviate . . . , mortem pati decernimus." Sicilian Constitution, i, 3, 
 in Eymeric, Direct. Inquisit., Appendix, p. 14. This recalls the law of 
 Arcadius of 395. Cod. Theod., xvi, v. 28; cf. supra p. 9, n. 2. 
 
 ^ Cf. the canonists cited by Tanon, op. cit., pp. 455-458. An anonymous 
 writer, whose commentary is found in Huguccio's Summa of the Decretum, 
 says: "Innuit quod pro sola hceresi non sint morte puniendi. Solve ut prius. 
 Quando enim sunt incorrigibles, ultimo supplicio feriantur; aliter non." Bibl. 
 nation., Ms. 15379, fol. 49. 
 
 3 "Haereticus \° qui errat a fide," etc. S. Raymundi, Summa, lib. i, cap. 
 De HcBreticis, sect, i, Roman Edition, 1603, p. 39. 
 
 ^"Hjeresis consistit circa ea quae fidei sunt . . . dissentiendo cum perti- 
 nacia ab illis." Summa, Ila, Ilae, quaest. xi, Conclueio; cf. ibid., ad 3um, 
 quotations from St. Augustine 
 
THE INQUISITION i6i 
 
 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 diflference 
 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,^ 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.^ 
 
 "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 sum- 
 
 1 Num. xvi. 31-33. 
 
 2 "Talis est differentia qualiter inter genus et speciem . . . ; peccatum 
 gravius haeresi . . . , quis enim dubitaverit esse sceleratius commissum quod 
 est gravius vindicatum?" Loc. cit., lib. i, cap. De schismatics, pp. 45-47. 
 
 12 
 
,62 THE INQUISITION 
 
 mons, he was at once considered excommunicated for 
 heresy, and if he remained under this second excommuni- 
 cation for a year, he was liable to be condemned as a real 
 heretic. The light suspicion caused by his first excom- 
 munication became in turn a vehement and then a violent 
 suspicion which, together with his continued contumacy, 
 constituted a full proof of heresy." ^ 
 
 The theologians insisted greatly upon respect for eccle- 
 siastical 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 (Hosti- 
 ensis +1271), went so far as to say that "whoever con- 
 tradicted or refused to accept the decretals of the Popes 
 was a heretic." ^ Such obedience was looked upon as a 
 culpable disregard of the rights of the papacy, and con- 
 sequently a form of heresy.^ 
 
 Tanon, op. cit., pp. 235, 236. "Si quis per annum excommunicatus 
 stetit pro contumacia in causa quae non sit fidei, effictur suspectus leviter de 
 hferesi, et ut responsurus de fide potest citari. Si renuit comparere, eo facto 
 est excommunicatus, tanquam contumax in causa fidei, et consequenter 
 aggravatur, quia jam fit suspectus de hasresi vehementer . . . Tunc vel infra 
 annum comparet, vel non. Si non, tunc anno elapso est ut hsereticus con- 
 demnandus. Transivit enim suspicio levis in vehementem, et vehemens in 
 violentam." Eymeric, Directorium, 2" pars, quest. 47, pp. 360, 361. This 
 theory was not carried out in practice {op. cit., p. 236). 
 
 2 "Hasreticus est, qui decretalibus epistolis contradicit aut eos non recipit." 
 In Baluze-Mansi, Miscellanea, vol. ii, p. 275; cf. DoUinger, La papaute, 
 Paris, 1904, p. 335, n. 362. 
 
 The canonist, Zanchino Ugolini, in his Tractatus de Hxreticis, cap. ii, 
 published at Rome in 1568, at the expense of Pius V, includes in his enume- 
 ration of heresies neglect to observe the papal decretals, because this consti- 
 tuted an apparent contempt for the power of the Keys. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, 
 p. 229, note. 
 
THE INQUISITION 163 
 
 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 licentious- 
 ness, 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.* 
 
 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 fmd 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, 141 9, authorizes the 
 Inquisitors to prosecute these usurers.^ 
 
 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 Inquisi- 
 tion, unless there was manifest heresy involved.^ But 
 
 1 Tractat, de Hcsret., cap. ii; cf. Lea, ibid., p. 400. Sentences of this kind 
 were rather rare; cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 249, 250, notes. 
 
 2"Demum etiam quidam Christiani et Judaei non verentur asserere quod 
 usura non sit peccatum, aut recipere decern pro centum mutuo datis seu 
 quicquam ultra sortem; in his et simiUbus atque in nonnulHs aliis spirituaUbus 
 et gravibus praeceptis multipUciter excedunt. Nos igitur discretioni tuas 
 committimus quatenus ad extirpationem omnium hujusmodi pravitatum et 
 errorum vigilanter insistas." Bull Inter ccetera, sent to the Inquisitor Pons 
 Feugeyron. Cf. Tanon, cit., pp. 243, 245. 
 
 3 Bull of December 9, 1257, in Doat, xxxi, fol. 244-249, analyzed by Douais, 
 
,64 THE INQUISITION 
 
 casuists were not wanting to prove that heresy was in- 
 volved in such cases. ^ The belief in the witches* nightly 
 rides through the air, led by Diana or Herodias of Pales- 
 tine, 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 dis- 
 putation on the subject before the Bishop of Paris, and 
 recorded by Thomas of Cantimpre, in which the daughter 
 of the Count of Schwalenberg was regularly carried away 
 every night for several hours, gave immense satisfac- 
 tion to the adherents of the new doctrine, and eventually 
 an ample store of more modern instances was accumu- 
 lated to confirm Satan in his enlarged privileges." ^ 
 Satan, it seems, imprinted upon his clients an indelible 
 mark, the stigma diabolicum. 
 
 "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 
 
 Documents, vol. i, p. xxv. Cf. Bull, Quod super Nonnullis, of January 10, 
 1260: "Respondetur quod . . . inquisitores ipsi de iis (divinationibus et 
 sortilegiis), nisi manifeste saperent haeresim se nullatenus intromittant." 
 RipolL, vol. i, p. 388. 
 
 1 For the attitude of the church toward sorcerers, cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, 
 pp. 434-436. When the celebrated canonist, Astesa-Jius of Asti, wrote his 
 Summa de Casibus Conscientice in 131 7, the canons decreed only a penance 
 of forty days for magic. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 497; Thomas of Cantimpre. Bonum Universale, 
 lib. iii, cap. Iv. 
 
THE INQUISITION 165 
 
 and Herodias were necessarily heretics in their waking 
 hours." 1 
 
 About 1250, the Inquisitor Bernard of Como taught 
 categorically that the phenomena of witchcraft, especially 
 the attendance at the witches' Sabbat, 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." ^ Witch- 
 craft was, therefore, amenable to the tribunals of the 
 Inquisition.^ 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., pp. 497, 498, with reference to Nicholas Jaquerius, Flagel- 
 lum hiBreticorum, cap. vii and xxviii. 
 
 2"Praeterea plurimae hujus perfidae sectas . . . combustae, quod minime 
 factum fuisset, neque summi pontifices hoc tolerassent, si taha tantummodo 
 phantastice et in somniis contingerent, et tales personse realiter et veraciter 
 haereticae non essent, et in hasresi realiter et manifeste deprehensas . . . nam 
 ecclesia non punit crimina nisi manifesta et vere deprehensa . . . Per hgec 
 ergo omnia quae dicta sunt, et per plura alia qu^ adduci possent, Hquido 
 constat, quod tales strigiae ad praefatum ludum non in somniis neque phan- 
 tastice, ut quidam affirmant, sed realiter et corporaliter ac vigilando vadant." 
 Lucerna Inquisitorujn, Romae, 1584, p. 144. 
 
 3 In a letter of one of the cardinals of the Holy Office, dated 1643, witch- 
 craft is classed with heresy: "Contra quoscumque haereticos et a fide Christiana 
 apostatas, aut cujusvis damnatae haeresis sectatores, sortilegia hsresim sa- 
 pientia, seu de heeresi vel de apostasia a fide suspectos, divinationes et incan- 
 tationes aliaque diabolica maleficia et prestigia contractantes." Douais, 
 Documents, vol. i, p. ccliv. In practice, the heretical tendency of witchcraft 
 was hard to determine. Each judge, therefore, as a rule, pronounced sen- 
 tence according to his own judgment. In 145 1, Nicholas V enlarged the 
 powers of Hugues le Noir, Inquisitor of France, by granting him jurisdiction 
 over divination, even when it did not savor of heresy. (Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, 
 512, Ripoll, Bullarium, vol. iii, p. 301.) In this way astrologers, palmists. 
 
i66 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 
 (pcena talionis)} "From the very beginning, he was 
 placed in the same position as the one he accused, even 
 to the extent of sharing his imprisonment." ^ The 
 denuntiatio did not in any way bind the accuser; he 
 merely handed in his testimony, and then ceased prose- 
 cuting 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 pro- 
 ceeded to try him. This was the most common method 
 of procedure; from it the Inquisition received its 
 name.^ 
 
 and diviners all became subject to the Inquisition. Cf. Bull of Sixtus V, 
 Cceli et terra, January 5, 1586, on astrologers. (Eymeric, Directorum, Pegna's 
 Bullarium, p. 142.) 
 
 i"Et hoc quidem generaliter verum est, quod nullus auditur accusans 
 sine libelli inscriptione, in quo obliget se ad paenam talionis." TancrMe, 
 Ordo judiciorum, lib. ii, cap. Qualiter, Lyons ed., 1547, p. 91. For the 
 practice and exceptions cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 260, n. 4. 
 
 2 Tancrede, ibid., cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 259. 
 
 2 On these three forms of action, cf. Eymeric, Directorium, 3^ pars, p. 413 
 
THE INQUISITION 167 
 
 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 piano, absque advocaiorum strepitu 
 et figura} Bernard Gui insisted on this in his Practica? 
 Eymeric advised his associates, when an accuser ap- 
 peared before them who was perfectly willing to accept 
 the pcena talionis in case of failure, to urge the im- 
 prudent man to withdraw his demand. For he argued 
 that the accusatio might prove harmful to himself, and 
 besides give too much room for trickery.' In other words, 
 the Inquisitors wished to be perfectly untrammeled in 
 their action. 
 
 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 extrava- 
 gant and far-fetched. "Paramo in the quaint pedantry 
 
 et seq. Innocent III introduced the inquisitio into the canonical legislation 
 as the regular method of procedure. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 283-285. 
 
 1 Bull Prx cunctis of July 28, 1262, in RipoU, Bullarium, vol. i, p. 428; 
 Sexto, De Hareticis, cap. 20: Limborch, p. 268. 
 
 "^ Practica, 4^ pars, ed. Douais, p. 192. 
 
 3 "Inquisitor istum modum non libenter admittat, turn quia non est in 
 causa fidei usitatus, turn quia est accusanti multum periculosus, turn quia 
 est multum litigiosus. " Director ium," p. 414, col. i. 
 
i68 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 author- 
 ity is cited to show that these confessions were sufficient 
 to justify the conviction and punishment." ^ 
 
 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 call- 
 ing it technically not a "repetition" but a "continuance 
 of the first torture": Ad continuandttm iormenta, non 
 ad tterandum, as Eymeric styles it.^ This quibbling 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 406; Louis de Paramo, De on'gine et progresstc 
 officii santcB Inquisitionis ejusque utilitate et dignitate libri tres, Madrid, 1598, 
 PP- 32, 2>2>- 
 
 2 "Quod si, questionatus decenter, noluerit fateri veritatem, ponanatur 
 
THE INQUISITION 169 
 
 of course gave full scope to the cruelty and the indis- 
 creet zeal of the Inquisitors.^ 
 
 But a new difficulty soon arose. Confessions, ex- 
 torted under torture, had, as we have seen, no legal 
 value. Eymeric himself admitted that the results ob- 
 tained in this way were very unreliable, and that the 
 Inquisitors should realize this fact.^ 
 
 If, on leaving the torture chamber, the prisoner re- 
 iterated his confession,^ the case was at once decided. 
 But suppose, on the contrary, that the confession ex- 
 torted 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 evi- 
 
 alia genera tormentorum coram eo, dicendo quod oportet eum transire per 
 omnia, nisi prodat veritatem; quod si nee sic, poterit ad terrorem, vel etiam 
 ad veritatem secunda dies vel tertia assignari, ad continuandum tormenta, 
 non ad iterandum: quia iterari, non debent, nisi novis supervenientibus indiciis 
 contra eum; quia tunc possunt; sed continuari non prohibentur." Eymeric, 
 Directorium, 3^ pars, p. 481, col. 2. 
 
 1 In 13 1 7, Bernard Gui, complaining of the Clementine restrictions, asks 
 why the Bishops should be limited in applying torture to heretics, when they 
 could apply it without limit in everything else. Gravamina, coll. Doat, xxx, 
 loi; cf. Lea, op. ciL, vol. i, p. 557. 
 
 2"Scientes quod quaestiones sunt fallaces et inefficaces." Op. cit., p. 481, 
 col. I. 
 
 3 Ibid., p. 481, col. 2. 
 
 4 Masini, Sacro Arsenale, pp. 183-186. 
 
lyo THE INQUISITION 
 
 dently 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 dis- 
 cretion 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 (?) tor- 
 tured to betray them." ^ 
 
 As a matter of course, the canonists and the theologians 
 approved the severest penalties inflicted by the Inquisi- 
 tion. St. Raymond of Pennafort, however, who was 
 one of the most favored counsellors of Gregory IX, still 
 upheld the criminal code of Innocent 111. The sever- 
 est penalties he defended were the excommunication 
 of heretics and schismatics, their banishment and the 
 confiscation of their property. ^ His Summa was un- 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 425. 
 
 2 Lea writes {op. cit., vol. i, p. 229, note): "Saint Raymond of Pennafort, 
 the compiler of the decretals of Gregory IX, 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 
 
THE INQUISITION 171 
 
 doubtedly completed when the Decretal of Gregory IX 
 appeared, authorizing the Inquisitors to enforce the cruel 
 laws of Frederic II. 
 
 But St. Thomas, who wrote at a time when the Inquisi- 
 tion 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 Savior forbids the servants of the house- 
 holder to gather up the cockle before the harvest time, 
 lest they root up the wheat with it.^ St. John Chrysostom, 
 he says, ''argues from this text that it is wrong to put 
 heretics to death." ^ But according to St. Augustine the 
 words of the Savior: "Let the cockle grow until the har- 
 vest," are explained at once by what follows: "lest per- 
 haps 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: 
 
 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 "de- 
 stroyed." Summa, lib. i, cap. De Hctreticis and De Schismaticis. 
 
 1 Matt. xiii. 28, 30. 
 
 2 In Maithxum, Homil. xlvi. 
 
,72 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Cum metus iste non suhest . . . non dormiat severitas dis- 
 ciplince} We doubt very much whether such reason- 
 ing would have satisfied St. John Chrysostom, St. 
 Theodore the Studite, or Bishop Wazo, who understood 
 the Savior's prohibition in a literal and an absolute 
 sense. 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 If we are not mistaken, St. Thomas is here trying to 
 prove on the authority of St. Augustine that it is some- 
 times 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 
 
 1 Augustine, Contra epistol. Parmeniani, lib. iii, cap. ii. S. Thomas, Summa, 
 Ila, Ilae, quaest. x, art. 8, ad 4m. 
 
 - S. Thomas, Sumnia, loc. cit., ad 4m. 
 
THE INQUISITION 173 
 
 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.^ St. Thomas 
 misses the point entirely, and gives his readers a false idea 
 of the teaching of St. Augustine. 
 
 Thinking, however, that he has satisfactorily answered 
 all the objections against his thesis, he states it as fol- 
 lows: "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 de- 
 base 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 per- 
 sist in their error after two admonitions, the Church 
 despairs of their conversion, and excommunicates them 
 to ensure the salvation of others whom they might cor- 
 
 1 "Illi autem . . . quod sibi faciunt, nobis imputant. Quis enim nostrvun 
 velit non solum aliquem illorum perire, verumetiam aliquid perdere ? Sed si 
 aliter non meruit pacem habere domus David, nisi Absalon filius ejus in 
 bello quod contra patrem gerebat, fuisset extinctus, quamvis magna cura 
 mandaverit suis, ut eum quantum possent vivum salvumque servarent, ut 
 asset cui pcenitenti paternus affectus ignosceret, quid ei restitit, nisi perditum 
 flere et sui regni pace acquisita suam maestitiam consolari ? Sic ergo catholica 
 mater Ecclesia, bellantibus adversus eam quibus allis quam filiis suis . . . , 
 si aliquorum perditione cseteros tarn multos colligit, prassertim quia isii, non 
 sicut Absalon casu bellico, sed spontanea magis interitu pereunt, dolorem 
 materni cordis lenit et sanat tantorum liberatione populorum." Ep. clxxxv, 
 ad Bonijacium, no. 32. 
 
174 THE INQUISITION 
 
 rupt ; she then abandons them to the secular arm that 
 they may be put to death." ^ 
 
 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 Aholendam decreed 
 that converted heretics who relapsed into heresy were 
 to be abandoned to the secular arm without trial.^ But 
 at the time this Decretal was published, the Animadversio 
 dedita of the State entailed no severer penalty than banish- 
 ment 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 
 
 J Summa, Ila Ilae, quaest. xi, art. 3. 
 
 2'*Illos quoque qui, post abjurationem praefati erroris . . . , deprehensi 
 fuerint in abjuratam haeresim recidisse, seculari judicio sine uUa penitus 
 audientia decernimus relinquendos." Decretals, in cap. ix, De hareticis^ 
 lib. V, tit. vii. 
 
THE INQUISITION 175 
 
 debiia began to prevail.^ In St. Thomas's time it meant 
 the death penalty; and we find him citing the bull Ad 
 Aholendam ^ 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. 
 
 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 advan- 
 tages, such as riches, dignities, and the like. These tem- 
 poral advantages are subordinate to the spiritual, and 
 charity must prevent their endangering the eternal sal- 
 vation 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 en- 
 danger 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, 
 
 1 On the various views of the casuists regarding the relapsed, cf. Lea, 
 op. cii., vol. i, pp. 543-546. 
 
 2 Summa, Ila Ilae, quaest. ix, art. 4: Sed contra. 
 
,76 THE INQUISITION 
 
 although she receives him to penance for his soul's salva- 
 tion, 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 indicat- 
 ing how it was to be inflicted. The commentators who 
 followed him were more definite. The Animadversio dehita, 
 says Henry of Susa (Hostiensis + 1271), in his com- 
 mentary on the bull Ad aholendam, 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, 
 
 1 "Sed quando recepti (ab Ecclesia) iterum relabuntur, videtur esse signum 
 inconstantiae eorum; et ideo ulterius redeuntes recipiuntur quidem ad picni- 
 tentiam, non tamen ut liberentur a sententia mortis." Ibid. 
 
THE INQUISITION 177 
 
 and they shall gather him and cast him into the fire, and he 
 burneth." '^ 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.^ According to this peculiar 
 exegesis, the law and custom of the day merely sanctioned 
 the law of Christ. To regard our Savior as the precursor 
 or rather the author of the criminal code of the Inquisi- 
 tion evidences, one must admit, a very peculiar temper 
 of mind. 
 
 • ••«•••• 
 
 The next step was to free the Church from all responsi- 
 bility in the infliction of the death penalty — truly an 
 extremely difficult undertaking. 
 
 St. Thomas held, with many other theologians, that her- 
 etics condemned by the Inquisition should be abandoned 
 to the secular arm, judicio sceculari. But he went further 
 and declared it the duty of the State to put such criminals 
 to death.^ The State, therefore, was to carry out this 
 sentence at least indirectly in the name of the Church. 
 
 1 John, XV, 6; Hostiensis, on the decretal Ad abolendum, cap. xi, in 
 Eymeric, Directorhim inquisitorum, 2* pars, pp. 149, 150. 
 
 2 On the decretal Ad abolendum, cap. xiv, in Eymeric, ibid., pp. 170, 171. 
 Bartolo says the same of witches. "Mulier striga, de qua agitur, sive, latine 
 lamia, debet tradi ultimo supplicio et igne cremari. Fatetur enim Christo et 
 baptismati renuntiasse; ergo debet mori, justa dictum Domini nostri Jesu 
 Christi apud Joannem, cap. xv; Si quis in me non munserit, etc. Et lex 
 evangelica praevalet omnibus aiis legibus, et debet servari etiam in foro con- 
 tentioso." In Ziletti, Consilia selecta, 1577, vol. i, p. 8. 
 
 ^ Summa, Ila, Ilae, qujest. xi, art. 3. 
 
 13 
 
,78 THE INQUISITION 
 
 A contemporary of St. Thomas thus meets this diffi, 
 culty: "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." ^ 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. 
 
 The casuists of the Inquisition, however, came to the 
 rescue, and tried to defend the Church by another subter- 
 fuge. 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 re- 
 lapsed 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 miti- 
 gate its sentence in such a way as to avoid bloodshed or 
 danger of death." ^ We regret to state, however, that 
 
 i"Papa noster non occidit, nee praecipit aliquem occidi, sed lex occidit 
 quos papa permittit occidi, et ipsi se occidunt qui ea faciunt unde debeant 
 occidi." Disputatio inter catholicum et Paterinum hctrcticum, cap. xii, in 
 Martfene, Thesaurus Anecdotorum, vol. v, col. 1741. 
 
 2"De foro nostro ecclesiastico te projicimus et tradimus seu relinquimus 
 brachio saeculari ac potestati curias saecularis, dictam curiam scecularem 
 eflScaciter deprecantes quod circa te citra sanguinis effusionem et mortis 
 
THE INQUISITION 179 
 
 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. 
 
 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 
 
 periculum sententiam suam moderetur." Forma tradendi hcBreticum per- 
 tinacem, alias non relapsum, curicR seculari. Eymeric, Directorium inquisi- 
 torum, 3*^ pars, p. 515, col. 2. Cf. Forma ferendi sententiam contra eum qui 
 in hctresim est relapsus, sed pcenitens, et ut relapsus traditur curicR seculari. 
 Ibid., p. 512, col. i; Forma tradendi seu relinquendi brachio scscidari eum, qui 
 convictus est de hcsresi per testes legitimos, et stat pertinaciter in negativa, 
 licet fidem catholicam profiteatur, ibid., p. 524, col. i. Bernard Gui quotes 
 the Canons to justify this pretended appeal for clemency: "Relinquimus 
 brachio et judicio curiae secularis, eamdem affectuose rogantes, prout suadent 
 canonicae sanctiones, quatinus citra mortem et membrorimi ejus mutilationem 
 circa ipsum suum judicium et suam sententiam moderetur {vel sic, quatinus 
 vitam et membra sibi illibata conservet). Practica inquisitionis, ed. Douais, 
 p. 127; cf. pp. 128, 133-136; cf. Limborch, Historia inquisitionis, pp. 289- 
 291. The CanoniccB Sanctiones, to which Bernard Gui refers, are undoubtedly 
 the decretal Novimus, which we will quote in the following note, and the 
 bull Ad aboldendam of Innocent IV. 
 
 1 Cf. the decretal Novimus, in the Decretals, cap. 27, lib. v, tit. xl; 
 "Et sic intelligitur tradi curiae seculari, pro quo tamen debet Ecclesia efEca- 
 citer intercedere, ut citra mortis periculum circa eum sententia moderetur." 
 Cf. also lib. ii, tit. i, cap. 10, Cum ab homine : "Cum Ecclesia non habeat 
 ultra quid faciat, ne possit esse ultra perditio plurimorum, per secularem 
 comprimendus est potestatem, ita quod ei deputetur exilium, vel alia legitima 
 paena inferatur." This law dealt with degraded clerics and forgers aban- 
 doned to the secular arm. 
 
,8o THE INQUISITION 
 
 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. More- 
 over, as it furnished a specious means of evading by the 
 merest form the prohibition against clerics taking part 
 in sentences involving the effusion of blood and death, 
 and the irregularity resulting therefrom, the Inquisitors 
 used it to reassure their conscience. 
 
 Finally, however, some Inquisitors, realizing the empti- 
 ness of this formula, dispensed with it altogether, and 
 boldly assumed the full responsibility for their sentences. 
 They deemed the role of the State so unimportant in the 
 execution 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} Although not 
 intended as an accurate statement of fact,- it indicates 
 
 1 " Experientia nos saepe docuit, cum omnes quas incinerari fecimus ex 
 eorum confessionibus patuit, ipsas fuisse involuntarias circa maleficia in- 
 ferenda," etc. Malleus maleficarum maleficas el earum haresitn framea 
 conterens, auct. Jacobo Sprengero, Lugduni, 1660, pars ii, quaest. i, cap. ii, 
 p. 108, col. 2. The author quotes the Formicarium de malejicis et eorum 
 prcEstigiis ac deceptionihus of the famous Jean Nider, who "recitat hoc ex 
 inquisitore Eduensis dioecesis, qui etiam in ipsa dioecesi multos de maleficiis 
 reos inquisierat et incinerari fecerat." Ibid., p. 106, col. 2. He also speaks 
 of the Inquisitor Cumanus who, in 1485, "uno anno quadraginta et unam 
 maleficam incinerari fecit,^' ibid., p. 105, col. 2. 
 
 2 We must interpret in the same sense the decree of the Council of Con- 
 stance pronouncing the penalty of the stake against the followers of John 
 Huss, John Wyclif and Jerome of Prague: "Ut omnes et singuli spirituales 
 
THE INQUISITION i8r 
 
 pretty well the current idea regarding the share of the 
 ecclesiastical tribunals in the punishment of heretics. 
 • *•••••• 
 
 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 Penna- 
 fort 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. 
 
 et seculares qui errores vel haereses Johannis Huss et Joannis Wiclif in sacro 
 hoc concilio condemnatos praedicant, dogmatizant vel defendunt; et personas 
 Joannis Huss et Hieronymi catholicas et sanctas pronuntiant vel tenent, et 
 de hoc convicti fuerint, tanquam haeretici relapsi puniantur ad ignem." 
 Session xliv, 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. This is evident from the vi^ords used in the condemnation of 
 John Huss: "Haec sancta synodus Joannem Huss, attento quod Ecclesia Dei 
 non haheat ultra quid agere valeat, judicio stBculari relinquit et ipsum curiae 
 secular! relinquendum fore decernit." Ibid., col. 410, sessio xv, anno 1415. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 The Inquisition in Operation 
 
 We do not intend to relate every detail of the In- 
 quisition'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 Tem- 
 plars; 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) intro- 
 duced it into Sardinia.^ Its activity in Flanders and 
 
 ^ On the spread of the Inquisition, cf. Lea, op. cit., passim. 
 ^Potthast, no. 22307; Registres cTHonorius IV, published by Maurice 
 Prou, 1888, no. 163. 
 
 182 
 
THE INQUISITION 183 
 
 Bohemia in the fifteenth century was very considerable. 
 These were the chief centers of its operations. 
 
 Some of the Inquisitors had an exalted idea of their 
 office. We recall the ideal portrait of the perfect In- 
 quisitor 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.^ There are some whose memory is beyond 
 reproach; in fact the Church honors them as saints, 
 because they died for the faith.^ 
 
 But others fulfilled the duties of their ofifice in a 
 spirit of hatred and impatience, contrary both to nat- 
 ural 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 con- 
 demned and sent to the stake.^ Such summary justice 
 strongly resembles injustice. 
 
 1 Mgr. Douais, for example, gives a list, with biographical notes, of the 
 Inquisitors of Toulouse from 1229 to 1329. Documents, vol. i, pp. cxxix-ccix. 
 
 "^v.g. Peter of Verona, assassinated by heretics in 1252. Cf. Lea, op. ciL, 
 vol. 2, p. 215. 
 
 3 "Si testes, qui se confitebantur aliquantulum criminis eorum conscios et 
 
,84 THE INQUISITION 
 
 But Robert the Dominican, known as Robert the Bugre, 
 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 Bugre was at first suspended from his office, and 
 finally condemned to perpetual imprisonment.^ 
 
 participes, in illorum absentia reciperentur ct dictis eorum simpliciter cre- 
 deretur, ita ut accusatis talis daretur optio, aut sponte confiteri et vivere 
 aut innocentiam jurare et statim mori." Testimony of the Archbishop of 
 Mainz and Bernard the Dominican in Aubri des Trois-Fontaines, Mon. 
 Germ. SS., vol. xxiii, p. 931. "Ut nullius, qui tantum propalatus esset, 
 accusatio vel recusatio, nullius exceptio vel testimonium admitteretur, nee 
 ullus defendendi locus daretur, sed nee induciae deliberation is darentur, sed 
 in continenti oportebat eum vel reum se confiteri et in pocnitentiam recalvari, 
 vel crimen negare et cremari." Gesta Trevirens in Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xiv, 
 p. 400. 
 
 1 Aubri des Trois Fontaines, ad ann. 1239, Mon. Germ. SS., vol. xxiii, 
 944, 945; Chronique of Mathieu Paris in Raynaldi, Annates eccles., ad ann. 
 1238, no. 52; cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 114-117. 
 
THE INQUISITION 185 
 
 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: domunculas 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, and became altogether helpless. Some 
 even died in great agony of their torments.^ The com- 
 plaint 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 Car- 
 cassonne 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 in- 
 vented." ^ Another letter of his (1301), addressed to 
 
 1 Nonnulli vero ponuntur in eqiiuleis, in quibus quamplurimi per tormen- 
 torum acerhitatem corporis destituuntur memhris et impotentes redduntur 
 omnino. Nonnulli etiam propter impatientiam et dolorem nimium morte 
 crudelissima finiunt dies suos. Vidal, Jean Galand et les Carcassonnais, 
 Paris, Picard, 1903, p. 32, no. 2; cf. p. 40, nos. 3-5; p. 41, no. 9; Le Tribunal 
 d' inquisition de Pamiers, loc cit., 1905, pp. 151, 152. 
 
 2"Certiorati per aliquos fide dignos . . . eo quod innocentes puniant, 
 incarcerent et multa gravamina eis inferant et per qucedam tormenta de novo 
 exquisita multas falsitates . . . extorqueant." Histoire de Languedoc, vol. x, 
 Preuves, col. 273. 
 
i86 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Foulques de Saint-Georges, contained a similar denunci- 
 ation.* 
 
 In a bull intended for Cardinals Taillefer de la Chap- 
 pelle and Berenger de Fredol, 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 deter- 
 mine. The official account of his interrogatory declares 
 that he was subjected to three and a half tratti di June. 
 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.^ Burchard, the 
 papal prothonotary, states that he was put to the tor- 
 ture seven times.^ It made very little difference whether 
 
 i"A captionibus, qucBstionihus et inexcogitatis tormentis incipiens . . . 
 vi et metu tormentorum^ fateri compellit." Histoire du Languedoc, vol. x, 
 Preuves, col. 379. 
 
 2"Adeo gravantur et hactenus sunt gravati carceris angustia, lectorum 
 inedia, et victualium penuria, et sevitia tormentorum, quod spiritum reddere 
 sunt coacti." Douais, Documents, vol. ii, p. 307. 
 
 3"Multa et assidua quaestione, multis diebus, per vim vix pauca extorsi- 
 mus," etc. Villari, La storia di Girolamo Savonarola, Firenze, 1887, vol. ii, 
 p. 197. 
 
 * Diarium in Memoires de Commynes, Preuves, Bruxelles, 1706, p. 424. 
 
THE INQUISITION 187 
 
 these tortures were inflicted per modum continuationis or 
 per modum iterationis, as the casuists of the Inquisition 
 put it. At any rate, it was a crying abuse. ^ 
 
 We may learn something of the brutality of the Inquisi- 
 tors 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 a dispensa- 
 tion 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 Em- 
 
 1 On this question, cf. Lea, op. cii., vol. iii, pp. 229, 230 and notes. Read 
 a recent work of H. Lucas, Fra Girolamo Savonarola, a biographical study, 
 London, Sands, 1905. 
 
 2 "Fecisti plantas pedum ejusdem mulieris juxta carbones accensos apponi, 
 quje ipsorum calorem sentiens," etc., Document quoted par Vidal, Le tribunal 
 d'Inquisition de Pamiers, loc. cit., October, 1905, p. 5. 
 
 3 Cf. Huillard-BreoUes, Historic diplomatica Frederici II, vol. iv, p. 462; 
 of. pp. 435. 444- 
 
,88 THE INQUISITION 
 
 peror 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 Tem- 
 plars. 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.^ 
 
 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 ;^ she would never have been con- 
 sidered a heretic at all, much less a relapsed one. 
 
 1 The tribunals of the Inquisition were perhaps never more cruel than 
 in the case of the Templars. At Paris, accordhig 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, Jaques 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. In his bull of 
 July 22, 1773, Clement XIV says: "Etiamsi concilium generale Viennese, 
 cui negotium examinandum commiserat, a formali et definitiva sententia 
 ferenda consuerit se abstinere." Bullarium Romanum, Continuatio, Prati, 
 1847, vol. V, p. 620. On the trial of the Templars, cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, 
 pp. 249-320; Langlois, Histoire de France, vol. iii, 2^ partie, 1901. 
 
 2 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, 
 
THE INQUISITION 189 
 
 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 11.^ 
 
 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 fre- 
 quently 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, wearing the 
 crosses, etc.), were imprisonment, abandonment to the 
 secular arm, and confiscation of property. 
 
 ''Imprisonment, according to the theory of the In- 
 quisition, 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 
 
 ^ The complaints of various Popes prove this. Cf. Hefele, Le cardinal 
 Ximenes, Paris, 1857, pp. 265-374. On the Spanish Inquisition consult with 
 due precaution Uhistoire de r Inquisition d'Espagne, by Llorente, 181 7, and the 
 following works of Lea : Chapters from the religious history of Spain cofinected 
 with the Inquisition (Philadelphia, 1890) and The Moriscos of Spain (Phila- 
 delphia, 1901). Cf. Ch. v. Langlois, L' Inquisition d'apres les travaux recents, 
 Paris, igo2, pp. 89-141; Bernaldez, Historia de los Reyes: Cronicas de las 
 reyes de Castilla, Fernandez y Isabel, Madrid, 1878; Rodrigo, Historia ver- 
 dadera de la Inquisicion, 3 vol., Madrid, 1876-1877. 
 
190 
 
 THE INQUISITION 
 
 from the rest of the flock, thus removing all danger of 
 infection." ^ 
 
 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 stridus, 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 cor- 
 rupting others; but this could not be strictly enforced, 
 and about 1306 Geoff roi d'Ablis stigmatizes as an abuse 
 the visits of clergy and the laity of both sexes, permitted 
 to prisoners." ^ 
 
 As far back as 1282, Jean Galand had forbidden the 
 jailer of the prison of Carcassonne to eat or take recrea- 
 tion 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 
 
 ^ Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 484. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 486, 487. 
 
 2 Collection, Doat, vol. xxxii, fol. i, 25. 
 
THE INQUISITION iqi 
 
 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 con- 
 verted prisoners, he added, were very liable to relapse, and 
 to infect others, and usually died at the stake. ^ 
 
 *'In the milder form or mums largus, the prisoners 
 apparently were, if well behaved, allowed to take exer- 
 cise in the corridors, where sometimes they had op- 
 portunities 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 stridus, 
 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 oflFences 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 mem- 
 bers 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 
 
 1 Eymeric, Directorium, p. 507. 
 
192 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 1246, who 
 had committed acts of both Catharan and Waldensian 
 heresy, and had prevaricated in her confession, the sen- 
 tence 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.'' ^ 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 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. 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 487. The in pace was a frightful punishment. 
 In 1350 the Archbishop of Toulouse besought King John to mitigate its 
 severity, and he consequently issued an Ordonnance that the superior of the 
 convent should twice a month visit and console the prisoner, who moreover 
 should have the right twice a month to ask for the company of one of the 
 monks. Even this slender innovation provoked the bitterest resistance ( ?) of 
 the Dominicans and Franciscans, who appealed to Pope Clement VI, but in 
 vain. Lea, vol. i, p. 488, note; Vassete, Histoire du Languedoc, vol. iv, 
 Preuves, p. 29. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 491, 
 
THE INQUISITION 193 
 
 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.^ 
 
 Bernard must be considered a severe Inquisitor. The 
 register of the notary of Carcassonne, published by Mgr. 
 Douais, contains for the years 1249- 125 5 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, transi- 
 tus ultramarinus? 
 
 Bernard Gui, Inquisitor at Toulouse for seventeen 
 years (i 308-1 325), 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 
 de je in which he rendered the sentences we possess to- 
 day, he condemned three hundred and seven to prison, 
 
 1 Douais, Documents, vol. i, pp. cclx-cclxi; vol. ii, pp. i-89. 
 
 2 Douais, Documents, vol. i, pp. cclxvii-cclxxxiv; vol. ii, pp. 115, 243. 
 
 14 
 
194 ™E INQUISITION 
 
 i.e. about one third of all the heretics brought before 
 his tribunal.^ 
 
 The tribunal of the Inquisition of Pamiers in the Ser- 
 mones of 13 18-1324, 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 
 stridus); on August 12, 1324, ten out of eleven tried were 
 condemned for life to the strict prison: ad strictum murt 
 Carcassonne inquisitionis carcerem in vinculis ferreis ac in 
 pane ei aqua? We gather from these statistics that the 
 Inquisition of Pamiers inflicted the penalty of life im- 
 prisonment 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 im- 
 prisonment was sometimes commuted into temporary 
 imprisonment, and both into pilgrimages or wearing the 
 
 1 Douais, Documents, vol. i, pp. ccv., cf. Appendix B. 
 Note that the register records 930 condemnations. Cf. Lea, op. cit.y 
 vol. i, p. 550. 
 
 2Vidal, op. cit., April, 1905, pp. 313-321. 
 
THE INQUISITION 195 
 
 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 hun- 
 dred and nineteen cases of release from prison with the obli- 
 gation to wear the cross, and of this number, fifty-one were 
 subsequently released from even the minor penalty .^ Pris- 
 oners were sometimes set at liberty on account of sickness, 
 v.g. women with child, or to provide for their families. 
 
 "In 1246 we fmd Bernard de Caux, in sentencing Ber- 
 nard Sabbatier, a relapsed heretic, to perpetual imprison- 
 ment, adding that as the culprit's father is a good Catholic, 
 and old and sick, the son may remain with him, and sup- 
 port him as long as he lives, meanwhile wearing the 
 crosses." ^ 
 
 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 indiffer- 
 ence,'' we must also admit that others sometimes mitigated 
 its severity. 
 
 1 Vidal, op. cit., July, 1905, p. 376. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, 495. 
 
 3 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, 486. 
 
 < Recall what was said above, and the reforms of Clement V. 
 
,q6 the inquisition 
 
 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. How- 
 ever, we have some interesting statistics of the more im- 
 portant tribunals on this point. The portion of the regis- 
 ter of Bernard de Caux which relates to impenitent her- 
 etics has been lost, but we have the sentences of 
 the Inquisition of Pamiers (13 18-1324), and of Toulouse 
 (1308- 1 323.) In nine Sermones or autos de fe^ of the 
 tribunal of Pamiers, condemning sixty-four persons, only 
 five heretics were abandoned to the secular arm.^ 
 
 Bernard Gui presided over eighteen autos de ]e, and 
 condemned nine hundred and thirty heretics; and yet 
 he abandoned only forty-two to the secular arm.^ 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 sen- 
 tenced to death.^ 
 
 1 The Sermo generalis after which the sentences were solemnly pronounced 
 by the Inquisitors was called in Spain auto de }e. 
 
 2 Cf. Vidal, op. cit., July, 1905, p. 369. 
 
 3 Cf. The sentences of Bernard Gui in Douais, Documents, vol. i, p. ccv, 
 and Appendix B. 
 
 ^ Even while the Inquisition was in full operation, the heretics who managed 
 to escape the ecclesiastical tribunals had no reason to congratulate them- 
 selves. For we read that Raymond VII, Count of Toulouse in 1248, caused 
 
THE INQUISITION 197 
 
 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.^ 
 
 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 con- 
 versos, penitents, obdurate and relapsed heretics were 
 present at the auto de fe in Toledo, March, 1487; and, 
 according to the most conservative estimate, Torquemada 
 sent to the stake about two thousand heretics " ^ in 
 twelve years. 
 
 eighty heretics to be burned at Berlaiges, near Agen, after they had confessed 
 in his presence, without giving them the opportunity of recanting. As Lea 
 says: op. cit., vol. i, p. 537, "From the contemporary sentences of Bernard 
 of Caux, it is probable that, had these unfortunates been tried before that 
 ardent champion of the faith, not one of them would have been condemned 
 to the stake as impenitent." 
 
 1 Of course we do not here refer to honest historians Uke 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 Reciieil des Historiens des Gaules (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. Cf. 
 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 55°- The exact number is 42 out of 930. Cf. Douais. 
 Documents, vol. i, p. ccv, and Appendix B. 
 
 2 Langlois, L' Inquisition d'apres des tableaux recents, igo2, ^p. 105,106. 
 This number, without being certain, is asserted by contemporaries, Pulgar 
 and Marineo Siculo. Cf. Hefele, Le Cardinal Ximenes, Pans, 1856, pp^ 
 290 291. Another contemporary, Bernaldes, speaks of over 700 burned 
 
198 THE INQUISITION 
 
 "During this same period," says a contemporary his- 
 torian, "fifteen thousand heretics did penance, and were 
 reconciled to the Church." ^ 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.^ 
 
 The zeal of the Inquisitors seemed to abate after a timc.^ 
 Perhaps they thought it better to keep the Jews and 
 the Mussulmans in the church by kindness. But kind- 
 ness 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 chil- 
 
 from. 1481-1488; cf. Gams, Kirchengeschichte von Spanicn, vol. iii, 2, 
 p. 69. 
 
 1 Pulgar, in Hefele, op. cit., p. 291. 
 
 2 Torquemada established the Inquisition in the different cities of Castile, 
 Aragon, Valencia, and Catalonia. 
 
 3 "The Inquisition of Valencia condemned one hundred and twelve con- 
 versos in 1538 (of whom fourteen were sent to the stake); at the auto de fe 
 of Seville, September 24, 1559, three were burned, and eight were reconciled 
 and sentenced to life-imprisonment; on June 6, 1585, the Inquisitors of Sara- 
 gossa 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. 
 
THE INQUISITION 199 
 
 dren. Five hundred thousand persons, about one six- 
 teenth of the population, were thus banished from Spain, 
 and forced to seek refuge on the coasts of Barbary.^ 
 "Behold," writes Brother Bleda, "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." ^ 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. 
 
 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, Siimmis desider antes, December 5, 
 1484, made matters worse. The Pope admitted that men 
 and women could have immoral relations with demons, 
 and that sorcerers by their magical incantations could 
 injure the harvests, the vineyards, the orchards and the 
 fields.^ 
 
 1 Langlois, op. cit., p. no. 
 
 2 Cf. Bleda, Defensio fidei in causa neophytorum sive Moriscorum regni 
 Valentini totiusque Hispanic, Valencia, 1610; Tractatus de jusia Moriscorum 
 ab Hispania expulsione, Valencia, 1610; cf. Llorente, Histoire de Plnquisition 
 d'Espagne, Paris, 18 17, vol. iii, p. 430. 
 
 i"Sane nuper ad nostrum non sine ingenti molestia pervenit auditum, 
 quod in nonnuUis partibus Allemaniae superioris . . . complures utriusque 
 sexus personae ... a fide catholica deviantes, cum daemonibus incubis et 
 succubis abuti ac suis incantationibus et conjurationibus aliisque nefandis 
 superstitionibus et sortilegiis, excessibus, criminibus et delictis, mulierum 
 
200 THE INQUISITION 
 
 He also complained of the folly of those ecclesiastics 
 and laymen who opposed the Inquisition in its prosecu- 
 tion of heretical sorcerers, and concluded by conferring 
 additional powers upon the Dominican Inquisitors, In- 
 stitoris 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 have an influ- 
 
 partus, animalium foetus, terras fruges, vinearum uvas et arborum fructus, 
 necnon homines, mulieres, pecora, pecudcs, et alia diversorum generum 
 animalia, vineas quoque, pomeria, prata, pascua, blada, frumenta et alia 
 terras legumina, perire, suffocari et extinguere." Bullarium, vol. v, p. 296 
 and seq., and Pegna's Bullarium in Eymeric, Directorium Inquisit., p. 83. 
 The notion of dcemones succubi et incubi comes from St. Augustine: "Et 
 quoniam creberrima fania est, multique se expertos vel ab eis qui expert! 
 essent, de quorum fide dubitandum non est, audisse confirmant, Sylvanos et 
 Faunos, quos vulgo incubos vocant, improbos saipe extitisse mulieribus et 
 earum appetisse ac peregisse concubitum, et quosdam dcemones, quos Dusios 
 Galli nuncupant, hanc assidue immunditiam et tentare et efficcre plures 
 talesque asseverant, ut hoc negare impudentiaj videatur," etc. De Civitate 
 Dei, lib. xv, cap. xxiii, no. i. Cf. Summa, pars i^, cjuxst. li, art. 3, ad 6um. 
 On witches, cf. the bulls Honest is of Leo X (February 15, 152 1), Dudum of 
 Adrian VI (July 20, 1522), Cceli et terrm of Sixtus V (January 5, 1586), in 
 Eymeric, loc. cit., pp. 99, 105, 142. 
 
 1 Pastor writes (History of the Popes, vol. v, p. 349) concerning the reality 
 of these facts: "The question whether the Pope believed in them has nothing 
 to do with the subject. His judgment on this point has no greater importance 
 than attaches to a papal decree in any other undogmatic question, e.g. in 
 a dispute about a benefice." The learned historian is wrong, for the Pope's 
 views made a great difference in this particular case. Many canonists cited 
 it as proof, and the Inquisitors acted on it in their tribunals. "Prasterea qui 
 hoc asserunt somnia esse et ludibria, certe peccant contra reverentiam matri 
 debitam," says the Jesuit Delrio, Disquisitio magna, ed. 1603, lib. II, quasst. 
 xvi, p. 149; cf. p. 159; cf. Malleus maleficarum of Sprenger, and the Novus 
 malleus maleficarum of Spina, Cologne, 1581, p. 146 and seq., etc. 
 
THE INQUISITION 201 
 
 ence upon the canonists and Inquisitors of his day; this 
 is clear from the trials for witchcraft held during this 
 period.^ It is impossible to estimate the number of sor- 
 cerers condemned. Louis of Paramo triumphantly de- 
 clared that in a century and a half the Holy Office sent to 
 the stake over thirty thousand.- 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 stigmatiz- 
 ing 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 con- 
 fessions that were valueless, and of abandoning them to 
 the secular arm without suificient cause.^ 
 
 1 On this question, cf. Janssen-Pastor, Geschichte dcs deutschen Volkcs, 
 vol. viii, Fribourg, 1894, p. 507 and seq.; Finke, Historisches Jahrbuch, 
 vol. xiv, p. 341 and seq.; Lea, op. cit., vol. iii, pp. 492-549- 
 
 2 r>e Origine Ofticii sanct(B Inquisitionis, p. 206. Lea says that "Protes- 
 tants and Catholics rivaled each other in the madness of the hour." Op. cit., 
 
 vol. iii, p. 549- 
 
 3 "Experientia rerum magistra aperte docet gravissimos quotidie committi 
 errores a diversis Ordinariis, Vicariis et Inquisitoribus, sed pra^cipue a secu- 
 laribus judicibus in formandis processibus contra striges sive lamias et 
 maleficas in grave praejudicium tam justitiae quam hujusmodi mulierum 
 inquisitarum: cum longo tempore observatum fuerit, plures hujusmodi 
 processus non rite ac juridice formatos, imo plerumque necesse fuisse quam- 
 plures judices reprehendere et multos et impertinentes modos habitos in 
 formandis processibus, reis interrogandis, excessivis torturis inferendis ita, 
 ut quandoque contigerit injustas et iniquas proferri sententias, etiam ultimi 
 
202 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Confiscation, though not so severe a penalty as the 
 stake, bore very heavily upon the victims of the Inquisi- 
 tion. 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 prop- 
 erty 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 imprisonment. Bernard Gui answered 
 those who objected to this ruling, by showing that, as a 
 matter of fact, there was no real pecuniary loss in- 
 volved. For, he argued: "Secondary penances are in- 
 flicted only upon those heretics who denounce their 
 accomplices. But, by this denunciation, they ensure 
 the 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." ^ Actual confiscation took place in the 
 
 supplicii, sive traditionis brachio saeculari, et reipsa compertum est, multos 
 judices ita faciles proclivesque fuisse ob leve aut minimum indicium credere 
 aliquam talem esse strigem, et nihil omnino praetermisisse ab hujusmodi 
 muliere, etiam modis illicitis, talem confessionem extorquere, cum tot tamen 
 tantisque inverisimilitudinibus, varietatibus et contrarietatibus, ut super tali 
 confessione nulla aut modica vis fieri posset." Pignatelli, Consultationes 
 novissimce canoniccs, Venetiis, 2 in fol., vol. i, p. 505, Consultatio 123. 
 
 ^ "Si autem aliquibus videatur absurdum, gratiam prcecipue de confisca- 
 tione bonorum in prejudicium fisci aut domini temporalis per Inquisitores 
 fieri non debere, attendant quod ex predicta gratia promissa et facta ex 
 causa rationabili, ut prasmittitur, revelantur personae ali^e quae latebant, et 
 
THE INQUISITION 203 
 
 case of all obdurate and relapsed heretics abandoned to 
 the secular arm, with all penitents condemned to per- 
 petual 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 consid- 
 ered 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 In- 
 quisition, had a great deal to do with the interest they 
 aroused. We do not say that the Holy Office system- 
 atically increased the number of its condemnations 
 merely to increase its pecuniary profits. But abuses of 
 this kind were inevitable. We know they existed, because 
 
 quod in uno videtur amitti recuperatur in pluribus cum augmento." Prac- 
 tica, 3 pars, p. 185. 
 
 1 This was done with great solemnity. The bones and even the decom- 
 posed body of the heretic were carried through the city streets at the souna 
 of a trumpet, and then burned. The names of the dead were read out, and 
 the Hving were threatened with a like fate if they followed their example, 
 "De cimeteriis . . . extumulati . . . et ossa eorum et corpora fastentia per 
 villam tracta et voce tibicinatoris per vicos proclamata et nominata dicentis: 
 Qui aytal fara, aytal perira." Chronique of Guillem Pelhisse, published by 
 Douais, p. no. Guillem Pelhisse was one of the first Inquisitors of 
 Albi. 
 
 2 Eighty-nine out of nine hundred and thirty. Cf. Douais, Documents, 
 vol. i, p. ccv, and Appendix B. 
 
204 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 confis- 
 cations, 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," ^ 
 
 Most historians have said little or nothing about the 
 money side of the Inqusition. 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." ^ There was indeed very 
 
 1 Langlois, op. cit., pp. 75-78. Cf. Lea, op. ciL, vol. i, pp. 501-524, cf. 
 Tanon, op. cit., pp. 523-538. 
 
 2 Lea, op. cit., p. 522. 
 
THE INQUISITION 205 
 
 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 ex- 
 aggerated, 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 de- 
 pended for support/'^ 
 
 • ••••••, 
 
 This summary of the acts of the Inquisition is at best 
 but a brief and very imperfect outline. But a more com- 
 plete 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 arbi- 
 trary 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 
 
 1 I.ea, op. cit., p. 4S0 
 
2o6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 the confession of suspects as the beginning of their con- 
 version. They therefore believed any means used for 
 that purpose justified. They thought that an In- 
 quisitor 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 de fe as the worst horror of 
 the Inquisition. It is hardly ever pictured without burn- 
 ing flames and ferocious looking executioners. But an 
 auto de fe 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.^ 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 de je 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. In France the 
 heretics were not dressed in any particular costume or mitred as in Spain 
 during the sixteenth century. There is but one mention of mitred heretics, 
 viz. at the auto de fe against sorcerers at Arras in 1459. "Et illec furent 
 mitres d'une mitre oil estait peinct la figure du diable en telle maniere qu'ils 
 avaient confesse lui avoir fait hommage, et eulx k genoux peincts devant 
 le diable; et illecq, par M. P. Le Broussart, Inquisiteur de la foy chretienne, 
 preschiez publiquement, present tout le peuple; et y avoit tant de gens que 
 ce estoit merveille, car de tous les villages d'entour Arras et de dix ou 
 douze lieues allenviron et plus y avait de gens." Fredericq, Corpus docu- 
 mentorum inquisitionis Neerlandica, vol. i, p. 353. 
 
THE INQUISITION 207 
 
 We have seen, moreover, that in many places, even in 
 Spain at a certain period, the number of heretics con- 
 demned 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." ^ 
 
 In fact, imprisonment and confiscation were as a rule 
 the severest penalties inflicted. 
 
 1 op. cit., vol. i, p. 480. In making this statement, Lea of course means 
 to exclude the witchcraft trials, which he treats in another part of his work. 
 Cf. vol. iii, ch. vii, pp. 492-549. 
 
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 CathoHc 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 ex- 
 communicated heretics, and tried to win them back 
 to the orthodox faith by 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. Augus- 
 
 208 
 
THE INQUISITION 209 
 
 tine, and many others,^ protested strongly in the name 
 of Christian charity against the infliction of the death pen- 
 alty upon heretics. St. Augustine, who formed the mind 
 of his age, at first favored the theory of absolute tolera- 
 tion. But afterwards, perceiving that certain good re- 
 sults 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. 
 
 The revival of the Manichean heresy in the eleventh 
 century took the Christian princes and people by sur- 
 prise, 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 Liege, repre- 
 sented the party of absolute toleration, while others, under 
 the leadership of St. Bernard, advocated the theory of 
 
 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 not punish in eternity. 
 But he by no means "argues" that this punishment should be in the hands 
 of either Church or State. "Scitote eum (Deum) ideo ad praesens reddidisse 
 supplicia, ne in sternum puniret . . . Optandum est adulteris ut in prassen- 
 tiarum brevi et cita paena cruciatus frustrentur ceternos." Commentar., m- 
 Naum, i, 9, P. L., vol. xxv, col. 1238. This is the chief text quoted by 
 Lea. 
 
 15 
 
2IO THE INQUISITION 
 
 St. Augustine. Soon after churchmen began to decree 
 the penalty of imprisonment for heresy — a penalty un- 
 known to the Roman law, and regarded in the beginning 
 more as a penance than a legal punishment. It origi- 
 nated in the cloister, gradually made its way into the tri- 
 bunals 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 regime lasted from 1 1 50 
 till 121 5, from Gratian to Innocent III. Heresy, the 
 greatest sin against God, was classed with treason, and 
 visited with the same penalty. The penalty was banish- 
 ment with all its consequences; i.e. the destruction of the 
 houses of heretics, and the confiscation of their prop- 
 erty. Still, because of the horror which the Church had 
 always professed for the efi"usion 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 be- 
 gan by decreeing death as a secondary penalty,^ in case 
 
 1 Cf. supra, pp. 62, 63. 
 
 2 " Et si post tempus prasfixum," says Pedro of Aragon, "aliqui in tota terra 
 nostra eos invenerint . . . , corpora eorum ignibus crementur." De Marca, 
 Marca Hispanica, col. 1484. In the statutes of Bologna of 1245, the podest^ 
 swore to banish heretics; if they refused to leave the city and were not con- 
 
THE INQUISITION 211 
 
 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,^ 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, es- 
 pecially 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. 
 
 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 tor- 
 
 verted, they were to be arrested and sent to the stake. Ficker, op. cit., pp. 
 205, 206. 
 
 1 Cf. the law of Arcadius of 395 {Cod. Theodos., xvi, v. 28), which says: 
 "Qui vel levi argumento a judicio catholicae reUgionis et tramite detecti 
 fuerint de\aare," and the SiciUan constitution Inconsutilem tunicam (in 
 Eymeric, Directorium inquisitorum. Appendix, p. 14), where we read: "Si 
 inventi fuerint a fide cathohca saltern in articulo deviare," and again: "Prout 
 veteribus legibus est indictum." 
 
 2 Practically speaking, the Inquisitors often remained unmoved at the lot 
 of heretics. The following fact is a proof. "It was in the year 1234, the 
 day on which the news of St. Dominic's canonization reached Toulouse. 
 The Bishop, Raymond du Felgar, had just said solemn mass in the Dominican 
 convent, in honor of this canonization, and was on his way to the refectory 
 with the brethren, when some one came from the city saying that they were 
 about to 'hereticate' an old woman, sick with the fever. The Bishop at 
 once went with the prior to this house, approached the sick woman, who, 
 
212 THE INQUISITION 
 
 ments. 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 doc- 
 trine 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 wis- 
 dom. Respect for the opinion of others supposes a temper 
 of mind which takes years to acquire. It is a question 
 whether the average man is capable of it. Intolerance 
 regarding religious doctrines especially, with the cruelty 
 
 regarding him at first as a Catharan bishop, confessed her faith openly to 
 him, and then persisted in her heresy when she learned who he was. There- 
 upon, he condemned her as a heretic, and handed her over to the Count's 
 vicar, who had her transferred to Pre-le-Compte, where she was burned in 
 her bed." After this, the Bishop and the Dominicans went to the refectory, 
 where they joyfully ate their dinner, giving thanks to God and to St. Dominic: 
 Episcopus vero et fratres et socii hoc completo venerunt ad refectorium et 
 quag parata erant cum laetitia comederunt, gratias agentes Deo et beato 
 Dominico. G. Pelhisse, Chronigue, ed. Douais, pp. 97, 98; Tanon, op. cit., 
 PP- 54. 55- The condemnation and execution of this sick woman did not 
 interfere with their festivities in honor of St. Dominic, because they all thought 
 that they had performed a pious duty. Such light-heartedness is very 
 hard for us to understand to-day. 
 
THE INQUISITION 213 
 
 that usually accompanies it, has practicaly been the law 
 of history. From this view-point, the temper of mind of 
 the mediaeval 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 Orleans, Mont- 
 Wimer, Soissons, Liege, 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 them- 
 selves, 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." ^ 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 re- 
 ligious principles, which ensured that moral unity de- 
 sired by every ruler. Pagan antiquity had dreamed of 
 this unity, and its philosophers, interpreting its mind, 
 
 * Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 222. 
 
214 THE INQUISITION 
 
 showed themselves just as intolerant as the theologians 
 of the Middle Ages. 
 
 "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." ^ Apart from the 
 stake, was not this the Inquisition to the life? In coun- 
 tries 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 re- 
 ceived from heaven a sort of special investiture. This 
 was the case with the Christian empire. Constantine, to- 
 wards the end of his career, thought himself ordained by 
 God, "a bishop in externals," ^ and his successors strove 
 
 1 La fin du paganism, vol. i, pp. 47, 48- Cf. Plato's Republic, 
 Book II; Laws, Book X. 
 
 2 "Ego vero in eis quae extra (Ecclesiam) geruntur episcopus a Deo sum 
 consiitutus." Eusebius, VUa Consiantini, lib iv, cap. xxiv. 
 

 THE INQUISITION 215 
 
 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 pros- 
 perity of human undertakings." ^ 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.^ 
 
 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." ^ 
 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 pre- 
 serve and to maintain it," and woe betide the one who 
 dared disturb it. Feeling himself invested with both 
 
 1 "Praecipuam imperatoriae majestatis curam esse perspicimus veras reli- 
 gionis indaginem, cujus si cultum tenere potuerimus iter prosperitatis 
 humanis aperimus inceptis." Theodosius II, Novellce, tit. iii (438). 
 
 2 Cf. supra, p. 29, n. 3. 
 
 3"Et omnes alios hagreticos . . . tanquam inimicos crucis Christi chris- 
 tianasque fidei violatores et nostras etiam regnique nostri publicos hostes exire 
 ac fugere districte et irremeabiliter praecipimus." Law of 1197, in De Marca, 
 Marca Hispanica, col. 1384. 
 
2i6 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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. 
 
 It would have 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 premisses of the State's logical conclusion, 
 the death penalty.^ The Church, therefore, could hardly 
 
 i"Cum ad conservandum pariter et fovendum Ecclesiae tranquillitatis 
 statum ex commisso nobis imperii rcgimine defensores a Deo simus consti- 
 tuti . . ., utriusque juris auctoritate muniti, duximus sanciendum," etc. 
 Constitution of 1224, Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. 126. Cf. the 
 Constitution of March, 1232, ibid., p. 196, and the Sicilian Constitution 
 Inconsutilem tunicam, where we read: "Statuimus in primis, ut crimen 
 heereseos et damnatae sect^ cujuslibet, quoqumque nomine censeantur (prout 
 veteribus legibus est indictum) inter publica crimina numerentur." In 
 Eymeric, Directorum Inquisitorum, Appendix, p. 14. 
 
 2 "Cum enim secundum legitimas sanctiones reis lasa, majestatis punitis 
 capite bona confiscentur eorum . . .; cum longe sit gravius (Bternam qtmm 
 temporalem Icedere majestaiem," etc., said Innocent III in a letter of 
 March 25, 1199, Ep. ii, i. "Cum longe sit gravius aeternam quam tempo- 
 ralem offendere majestatem," said Frederic II in his Constitution of 1220, 
 
THE INQUISITION 217 
 
 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 theory upheld by the Church reacted on 
 the State and caused it to adopt violent measures, 
 while the State in turn compelled the Church to ap- 
 prove 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 happen- 
 ing 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 inflict- 
 ing 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 
 
 Mon Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. io8. And he repeats this comparison 
 in his Constitution of 1232, n. 8: "Si reos lesas majestatis," etc., ibid., p. 197. 
 A law of 407 {Cod. Theod., xvi, v. 40) had long before classed heresy with 
 treason. 
 
2i8 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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,^ 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 whole- 
 sale 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: 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 171 and seq. 
 
 2De Schismate Donatistarum, p. iii, cap. vii; cf. supra, pp. 16, 17. 
 
 3 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 238. St. Pius V, in a letter to Charles IX, March 28, 
 1569, demanded the destruction of the Huguenots, donee deletis omnibus, and 
 cited the destruction of Agag and the Amalekites. Cf. Vacandard, Le$ 
 
THE INQUISITION 219 
 
 " 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."^ 
 
 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," ^ 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^ spoke of 
 the penalty of fire to be inflicted upon heretics.^ 
 
 This strange method of exegesis was not peculiar to 
 the founders and the defenders of the tribunals of the In- 
 quisition. England, which knew nothing of the Inquisi- 
 tion save for the trial of the Templars, was just as cruel 
 to heretics as Gregory IX or Frederic 11. 
 
 Papes et la Saint-Barthelemy, in Etudes de critique et (Thistoire, 3 ed., 1906, 
 pp. 231-238. 
 
 1 Deut. xiii. 6-9; cf. xvii. 1-6. 
 
 2 Matt. V. 17. 
 
 3 John XV. 16. 
 
 * Cf . supra, pp. 176, 177. 
 
220 THE INQUISITION 
 
 "The statute of May 25, 1382, directs the King to issue 
 to his sheriffs commissions to arrest Wyclifs traveling 
 preachers, and aiders and abettors of heresy, and hold 
 them till they justify themselves selon reson ei la ley de 
 seinte esglise. After the burning of Sawtre by a royal 
 warrant confirmed by Parliament in 1400, the statute 
 ' de hcereticis 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 enuring 
 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 1 41 4 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 
 
THE INQUISITION 221 
 
 suppressed. In 1533, Henry VIII repealed the statute of 
 1400, while retaining those of 1382 and 141 4, 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 state- 
 craft. One of the earliest measures of the reign of Ed- 
 ward VI was the repeal of this law, as well as those of 
 1382 and 1 41 4, 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 141 4, 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 hceretico comhurendo 
 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 excommunica- 
 tion, deprivation, degradation, and other ecclesiastical 
 censures, not extending to death. ' ^ 
 
 These ideas of intolerance were so fixed in the public 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 352-354. 
 
222 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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." * 
 
 Calvin held the same views. His inquisitorial spirit 
 was manifest in his bitter prosecution and condemnation 
 of the Spaniard Michael Servetus.^ 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; 
 
 1 CEuvres completes de Calvin, Brunswick, 1 863-1900, vol. xiv, p. 
 612. 
 
 2 Servetus was condemned October 26, 1533, to be burned alive, and was 
 executed the next day. As early as 1545, Calvin had written: "If he (Ser- 
 vetus) comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart alive, as long as I 
 have authority in this city: Vivum exire numquam patiar. CEuvres completes, 
 vol. xii, p. 283." Calvin, however, wished the death penalty of fire to be com- 
 muted into some other kind of death. 
 
THE INQUISITION 223 
 
 I merely put to death a confessed heretic." ^ Michael 
 Servetus assuredly did not gain much by the substitu- 
 tion of Calvin for the Inquisition.^ 
 
 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 him- 
 self 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 repri- 
 mand the unruly, but to punish them severely as an 
 example to thousands." ^ 
 
 1 Ferdinand Buisson, Sehastien Castellio, Paris, 189 1, p. 151. To justify 
 this execution, Calvin published his Defensio orthodoxcE fidei de sacra Trinitate, 
 contra prodigiosos errores Michalis Serveti Hispani, ubi ostenditur hcereiicos 
 jure gladii ccercendos esse, Geneva, 1554. 
 
 2 In 1530, Michael Servetus wrote: "It is very unjust to put men to 
 death simply because they err in interpreting certain texts of the Scriptures." 
 Cf. M. N. Weiss, Bulletin de la societe du protestantisme frangais, December, 
 1903, p. 562. The author adds: "The imperial laws under which Servetus 
 was tried were the decrees of Justinian and the laws of Frederic II. The 
 reformers who desired a rehgious Renaissance through the Scriptures had 
 not revised the existing legislation. Servetus well said that 'Justinian's 
 code was not the law of the primitive church, which never prosecuted for 
 scriptural teachings, or questions relating thereto.' This appeal to the 
 apostolic traditions showed that he was more logical than the other re- 
 formers." Ibid., p. 565. 
 
 3 Cf. Ferdinand Buisson, op. cit., ch. xi. 
 
224 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Theodore of Beza, who had seen several of his coreligion- 
 ists burned in France for their faith, likewise wrote in 
 1554, in Calvanistic Geneva: "What crime can be greater 
 or more heinous than heresy, which sets at nought the 
 word of God and all ecclesiastical 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.^ In brief, before the 
 Renaissance there were very few who taught with Huss^ 
 that a heretic ought not to be abandoned to the secular 
 arm to be put to death.^ 
 
 1 De hcEreticis 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 CEuvres completes of Calvin, vol. xv, p. 19. Sebastien Castellio published 
 in March, 1554, his Traite des heretiques, a savoir s'il faut les persecuter, 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, 
 
THE INQUISITION 225 
 
 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 ex- 
 aggerated, 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 boiling 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." ^ 
 
 Contra libellum Calvini in quo osiendere conatur hcBreticos jure gladii ccercendos 
 esse, which was not pubHshed until 1612, in Holland. We know that the 
 Calvinists of our day utterly repudiate the theory of Calvin. On November 
 I, 1903, the city of Geneva erected a statue in the Place de Champel where 
 Servetus had been burned, with this inscription: A Michel Servet. Fils 
 respectueux et reconnaissants de Calvin, mais condamnant une erreur qui 
 fut celle de son siecle, et fermement attaches a la liberte de conscience selon 
 les vrais principes de la Reformation et de I'Evangile, nous avons eleve ce 
 monument expiatoire, le 27 octobre 1903. 
 
 1 Lea, op. ciL, vol. i, pp. 234, 235. He continues: "An Anglo-Saxon law 
 punishes a female slave convicted of theft, by making eighty other female slaves 
 each bring three pieces of wood and burn her to death, while each contributed 
 a fine besides; and in medieval England, burning was the customary penalty 
 for attempts on the life of the feudal lord. In the customs of Arques, granted 
 by the Abbey of Saint-Bertin in 1231, there is a provision that if a thief have 
 a concubine who is his accomplice, she is to be buried alive. . . . Frederic II, 
 16 
 
226 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 
 
 the most enlightened prince of his time, burned captive rebels to death in 
 his presence, and is even said to have encased them in lead in order to roast 
 them slowly. In 1261, St. Louis humanely abolished a custom of Touraine 
 by which the theft of a loaf of bread or a pot of wine by a servant from his 
 master was punished by the loss of a limb. In Frisia, arson committed at 
 night was visited with burning alive; and by the old German law, the penalty 
 of both murder and arson was breaking on the wheel. In France, women 
 were customarily burned and buried alive for simple felonies, and Jews were 
 hung by the feet between two savage dogs, while men were boiled to death 
 for coining. In Milan, Italian ingenuity exhausted itself in devising deaths 
 of lingering torture for criminals of all descriptions. The Carolina, or 
 criminal code of Charles V, issued in 1530, is a hideous calatogue of blinding, 
 mutilation, tearing with hot pincers, burning alive, and breaking on the 
 wheel. In England, prisoners were boiled to death even as lately as 1542, . . . 
 and the barbarous penalty for high treason was hanging, drawing and quar- 
 tering." 
 
 1 "Dominic and Francis, Bonaventure and Thomas Aquinas, Innocent III 
 and St. Louis were types in their several ways, of which humanity in any 
 age might well feel proud, and yet they were as unsparing of the heretic as 
 Ezzelin da Romano was of his enemies." Lea, op. ciL, vol. i, p. 234. Lea 
 seems very fond of making such exaggerated statements. We know that 
 neither St. Francis nor Innocent III was ever present at any bloody execu- 
 tions, nor did they ever approve of them. The case of St. Dominic is not 
 so clear. It would be difficult to prove that he ever put any heretics to death, 
 but many trustworthy authors like the Dominicans Benoit (Histoire des 
 Albigeois, 1691, vol. ii, p. 129) and Percin (Monumcnta Conventus Tholosani, 
 1693, pp. 84-89) agree in giving him the title of "the first Inquisitor." Ber- 
 
THE INQUISITION 227 
 
 hope of gain, or lust of blood or pride of opinion, or wanton 
 exercise of power, but sense of duty, and they but repre- 
 sented what was universal public opinion from the thir- 
 teenth to the seventeenth century." ^ 
 
 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 rela- 
 tion 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 in- 
 dividuals, no matter what their source. No one, for in- 
 stance, would dream of defending Cauchon, the iniquitous 
 
 nard Gui declares that he exercised Inquisitionis officium contra labem 
 hcereticam auctoritate legati Apostolica sedis sibi commissum in partibus 
 Tholosanis. If he were not actually an Inquisitor, he at least was employed 
 by Gregory IX to prepare the way for the Inquisition, which was definitely 
 established in 1231. 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p- 234. 
 
228 THE INQUISITION 
 
 judge of Joan of Arc, or other cruel Inquisitors who 
 like him used their authority to punish unjustly sus- 
 pects brought before their tribunal. From this stand- 
 point, 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" ? ^ 
 
 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 ob- 
 serve this method of procedure in heresy trials can readily 
 be understood; for the pcena 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. Be- 
 sides, 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 
 criticised, did not exist; the suspect was cited, and a 
 
 i"Uno sublime spectacolo di perfezione sociale," says the author of an 
 article in the Civilta Cattolica, 1853, vol. i, p. 595 seq., cited by DoUinger, 
 La papaute, 1904, p. 384, n. 684. 
 
THE INQUISITION 229 
 
 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." ^ 
 
 In the ecclesiastical procedure, on the contrary, the 
 names of the witnesses were withheld, save in very excep- 
 tional 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. 
 
 * Tanon, op., cit., pp. 287, 288, 
 
230 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 eificiency of heresy trials. But such con- 
 siderations 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 In- 
 quisitors 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 ;^ 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. ' In a word, they wished the laws of justice to 
 be scrupulously observed, and at times mitigated.'* But 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 139. 
 
 2 Clementinae, De hareticis, Decretal Multorum Querela, cap. i, sect. i. 
 3"Cessante vero periculo supradicto, accusatorum et testium nomina 
 
 (prout in aliis fit judiciis) publicentur. Caeterum in his omnibus praecipimus, 
 tarn episcopos quam inquisitores puram et providam intentionem habere, ne 
 ad accusatorum vel testium nomina supprimenda, ubi est securitas, peri- 
 culum esse dicant." Sexto, De hcereticis, cap. xx; cf. Tanon, op. cit., 
 
 P- 391- 
 
 * Dollinger is very unjust when he says: "From 1200 to 1500 there is a 
 long uninterrupted series of papal decrees on the Inquisition; these decrees 
 
THE INQUISITION 231 
 
 examined in detail, these laws were far from being perfect. 
 
 Antecedent imprisonment and torture, which played so 
 important a part in the procedure of the Inquisition, were 
 undoubtedly very barbarous methods of judicial prose- 
 cution. 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 de- 
 fend to-day the punishment known as the career 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 admin- 
 istered 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 
 
 increase continually in severity and cruelty." La Papaute, 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." 
 
 1 We say nothing here of the ruses adopted to obtain the arrest of heretics, 
 or to discover their secrets. Cf. Tanon, op. cit, pp. 356-358; Vidal, Revue 
 des Questions Historiques, January, 1906, pp. 102-105. 
 
 2"Non est aliqualiter relaxandus, sed detinendus per annos plurimos ut 
 vexatio det intellectum." Bernard Gui, Practica Inquisitionis, 5 pars, 
 formula 13, p. 302. Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 419, 420, Tanon, op. cit., 
 PP- 361, 362. 
 
 3 Cf . supra, p. 32, n. 3. 
 
232 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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.^ 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,^ the brutality of the ecclesiastical tribunals 
 was often on a par with the tribunals of the pagan 
 persecutors. Pope Nicolas 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 con- 
 trary, a prisoner, under stress of torture, acknowledges 
 
 1 It must be noted that flogging could be and was sometimes administered 
 in a cruel and barbarous manner, so that it became a frightful punishment. 
 Cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 372. 
 
 2 This was the view of St. Augustine, Ep. cxxxiii, 2. 
 
 ^ " Citra membri diminutionem et mortis periculum." Bull Ad extirpanda, 
 in Eymeric, Directorium inguisitoruni. Appendix, p. 8. 
 
THE INQUISITION 233 
 
 himself guilty of a crime he never committed, is not the 
 one who forced him to lie, guilty of a heinous crime?" ^ 
 
 The penalties which the tribunals of the Inquisition 
 inflicted upon heretics are harder to judge. Let us ob- 
 serve first of all that the majority of the heretics aban- 
 doned 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 de- 
 fending 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 
 
 1 Responsa ad consulta Bulgarorum, cap. Ixxxvi; Labbe, Concilia, vol. viii, 
 col. 544. Cf. supra, p. 148, n. 3. 
 
234 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 dis- 
 astrous. Its asceticism with regard to commerce be- 
 tween 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 con- 
 dition of savagism. It was not only a revolt against 
 the Church, but a renunciation of man's domination over 
 nature." ^ Its growth had to be arrested at any price. 
 Society, in prosecuting it without mercy, was only defend- 
 ing herself against the working of an essentially destruc- 
 tive force. I.t 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.^ 
 
 This important observation has so impressed certain 
 
 1 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. io6. 
 
 2 Jean Guiraud has proved that the Waldenses, Fraticelli, Hussites, Lol- 
 lards, etc., attacked society, which acted in self-defence when she put them 
 to death. La repression de Vheresie au moyen d-ge, in the Questions d'hisioire 
 ei d'archeologie Chretienne, p. 24 and seq. 
 
THE INQUISITION 235 
 
 historians, that they have been led to think the In- 
 quisition dealt only with criminals of this sort. "His- 
 tory," says one of them, "has preserved the record of the 
 outrages committed by the heretics of Bulgaria, the Gnos- 
 tics, and the Manicheans; the death sentence was inflicted 
 only upon criminals who confessed their murders, rob- 
 beries, 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." ^ 
 
 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, of 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 fuertnt a fide catholica 
 saltern in articulo deviare? " This was also the view of 
 
 1 Rodrigo, Historia verdadera de la Inquisicion, Madrid, 1876, vol. i, 
 pp. 176, 177. 
 
 2 Constitution Inconsutilem tunicam. Cf. supra, p. 114, n. i. 
 
236 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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. ^ 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.^ 
 We need not wonder at these views and practices, for 
 
 1 Summa Ila, Ilae, q. x, art. 8; q. xi, art. 3 and 4. Mgr. Douais is of 
 a different opinion. Recently he wrote: "A heretic is one who obstinately 
 persists in his error. A heretic was not hable to the Inquisition for holding 
 or expressing opinions which were more or less contrary to the teaching of 
 the Church. He was prosecuted only when he obstinately persisted in holding 
 doctrines, which were utterly subversive not only of dogma but of church 
 unity. The Insabbatati (Waldenscs) held views of this character, etc. . . . 
 The heretic also was one who believed such errors (Waldensian) and who — 
 be it understood — manifested them externally." Douais, Saint Raymond 
 dc Pcnnajort et Ics heretiqucs. Directoire a I'usage des inquisitcurs aragonais 
 (1242), in Le Moyen Age, vol. iii (1899), p. 306. But unfortunately the 
 text quoted by Mgr. Douais makes no such distinction: "Et videtur quod 
 haeretici sint qui in suo errore perdurant sicut Insabbatati," etc. "Credcntes 
 vero dictis erroribus (errors of the Insabbatati) similiter haeretici sunt dicendi." 
 Ibid. In making special mention of the Waldenses, the Directorium by no 
 means excluded other heretics. The Waldenses are merely cited as an 
 example. St. Raymond of Pennafort indeed held that "whoever obstinately 
 persists in his error is a heretic." In fact, the commentary of Mgr. Douais, 
 which we have given above, is a modern view entirely, which we have never 
 seen expressed by the writers of the Middle Ages. Cf. supra, p. 160 and 
 notes. 
 
 2 Cf. Tanon, op. cit., pp. 407-412; Lea, op. cit., p. 448; Molinier, U Inqui- 
 sition dans le Midi de la France au XIII^ et au XI V^ siecle, pp. 358- 
 367- 
 
THE INQUISITION 237 
 
 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 theo- 
 logical crime, became amenable to their tribunal. In 
 punishing it, they believed that they were merely fulfill- 
 ing one of the duties of their office.^ We have now 
 to examine and judge the penalties inflicted upon her- 
 esy 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 
 
 1 This was the view held as late as the seventeenth century. After the 
 revocation of the edict of Nantes, Jurieu, who had protested most strongly 
 against this measure, called upon the princes to use their power for the true 
 religion, and the pure doctrine. He writes: "Princes and magistrates are 
 the anointed of God, and his lieutenants on earth. . . . But they are strange 
 lieutenants indeed, if as magistrates they feel no special obligation to God; 
 how then can we imagine a Christian magistrate, the lieutenant of God, 
 fulfilling all the duties of his state, if he does not feel called upon to prevent 
 rebellion against God, that the people go not after another God, or serve the 
 true God in a way He does not will." Cf. Baudrillart, U Eglise Catholique 
 la Renaissance, le Protestantisme, 1904, pp. 234, 235. 
 
 2 Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 543-547- 
 
238 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 Savior's teach- 
 ing, in the parable of the cockle and the good grain. 
 As Wazo, Bishop of Liege said: "May not those who 
 are to-day cockle become wheat to-morrow?"^ 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 char- 
 ity. 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.^ 
 
 ^Cf. supra, pp. 3, 4, 17, 28. 
 
 2 Viki Vasonis, cap. xxv, in Migne, P. L., vol. cxlii, col. 753. 
 3 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 INQUISITION 239 
 
 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 argu- 
 ment. 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. ^ Is not a sacrilegious communion the worst 
 possible insult to the divine majesty? Must we argue, 
 therefore, that every unworthy communicant, if unre- 
 pentant, must be sent to the stake? 
 
 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 
 
 the infliction of the death penalty upon heretics. But in this he was not fol- 
 lowed either by his contemporaries or his immediate successors. Before him, 
 Origen and St. Cyprian had protested against this appeal to the Mosaic law. 
 Cf. Supra, pp. 3 and 4. 
 
 1 Mgr. Bonomelli, Bishop of Cremona, writes: "In the Middle Ages, they 
 reasoned thus: If rebellion against the prince deserves death, a fortiori does 
 rebeUion 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 derge frangais, August i, 1905, p. 457. Cf. supra^ 
 p. 5. n. I. 
 
240 THE INQUISITION 
 
 St. John XV. 6: Si quis in me non 7nanserit, in ignem mit- 
 ient et ardet, made by the mediaeval canonists,^ is not 
 worth discussing. It was an abuse of the accommodated 
 sense which bordered on the ridiculous, although its con- 
 sequences 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 role of the Church and the role 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." ^ "The Church," says an- 
 other 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." ^ "This," says Lea, "is a 
 
 1 Cf. supra, p. 177. 
 
 ^ Lettres a un gentilhomme russe sur V Inquisition espagnole, ed. 1864, 
 pp. 17, 18, 28, 34. 
 
 3 Rodrigo, Historia verdadera de la Inquisicion, 1876, vol. i, p. 176. 
 
THE INQUISITION 241 
 
 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 In- 
 quisition 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." ^ 
 
 The real share of the Inquisition in a condemnation in- 
 volving the death penalty is indeed a very diificult ques- 
 tion 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 responsi- 
 bility for the death sentence;^ 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 Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 540. 
 
 2 Ibid., pp. 227, 228. 
 
 3"Dampnati vero per Ecclesiam, seculari judicio relinqimntur, animad- 
 versione debita puniendi." Decretals, cap. xv, De hareticis, lib. v, tit. vii. 
 "Haeretici . . . , ubicumque per imperium dampnati ab Ecclesia fuerint et 
 seculari judicio assignati," etc., Mon. Germ., Leges, sect, iv, vol. ii, p. 196. 
 The Processus Inquisitionis, written between 1244 and 1254, also says: "Per 
 sententiam definitivam hcBreticum judicamus, relinguentes ex nunc judicio 
 seculari." Cf. Appendix A. 
 
 17 
 
242 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 for- 
 mally denied them.^ It was their duty simply to register 
 the decree of the Church, and to enforce 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 compro- 
 mised: " Illud ah eo fit, cujus auctoritate fit'' he said, to 
 justify his recommendation.^ 
 
 1 Cf. supra p. 147 and note. 
 
 2 Boniface VIII declares expressly that the judgment of heretics is purely 
 ecclesiastical: "Prohibemus quoque districtius potestatibus, dominis tempo- 
 ralibus et rectoribus eorumdemque officialibus supradictis ne ipsi de hoc 
 crimine (cum mere sit ecclesiasticum) quoquo modo cognoscant et judicent." 
 The sentence of the Inquisitors put an end to the trial: donee eorum nogotium 
 per Ecclesi(Z judicium terminetur. Cf. Sexto, v. ii, cap. xi. and xviii, De 
 hcereticis, in Eymeric, Directorum, p. no. Cf. Lea, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 539, 
 540. 
 
 3 This is what Boniface expressly says; loc cit. 
 
 ■^''Sed nee convicti ab hujusmodi judicio (the ordeals were in question) 
 tradendi essent morti, quia hoc judicium quodammodo est ecclesiasticum, 
 quod non exercetur sine praesentia sacerdotis, per quod, cum traditur morti, 
 a sacerdote traditur; quia illud ab eo fit cujus auctoritate fit." Verbum 
 abbreviaium, cap. Ixxviii, P. L., vol. ccv, col. 231. 
 
THE INQUISITION 243 
 
 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 though indirect, it 
 was none the less real and efficacious.^ 
 
 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 ahhorret a sanguine. In strongly 
 asserting this traditional law, the Inquisitors imagined that 
 they thereby freed themselves from all responsibility, and 
 
 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 at once requested 
 "that this fagot be the first thrown upon the fire in his name." Cf. Baudril- 
 lart, A propos de r Inquisition, in the Revue pratique d' Apologetique, July 15, 
 1906, p. 354, note. 
 
 2 Cf. supra, p. 178. 
 
244 THE INQUISITION 
 
 kept from imbruing their hands in bloodshed. We must 
 take this for what it is worth. It has been styled "cun- 
 ning "and "hypocrisy";^ let us call it simplya legal fiction.^ 
 
 * Lea, op. cit., vol. i, p. 224. 
 
 2 The following text, taken from a Liber Peniientialis of the thirteenth 
 century, shows what efforts the canonists made to free the Church from all 
 responsibility in condemning heretics to death. We quote it from Dollinger, 
 Beiirdge, vol. 2, pp. 621, 622. "Cum secundum prap.dicta constat ecclesiam 
 non debere sanguinem effundere neque manu neque lingua, videtur esse 
 reprobabile quod cum hajretici et Publicani convincuntur in foro ecclesiastico 
 de infidelitate sua, statim traduntur curiae, id est seculari potestati ad com- 
 burendum vel occidendum, et quod pejus est non possunt evadere quin 
 occidantur, vel judicium subeant ferri candentis. Si enim veros se dicunt 
 esse Christianos, non creditur eis, nisi per judicium ferri candentis probent: 
 si vero dixerint se fuisse ha^reticos, sed veros modo poenitentes, non creditur 
 eis nisi simili modo hoc probent, cum tamen non sit tutum viro ecclesiastico 
 hoc modo tentare Deum. Si autem in tali judicio deprehensi fuerint et se 
 esse haereticos et poenitere nolle confessi, statim occiduntur. Videtur tamen 
 eadem observatio de eis esse consideranda qua3 observatur de Juda;is, de 
 quibus scriptum est: Ne occidas eos, ne quando obliviscantur. Si enim 
 volunt esse sub jugo nostras servitutis in pace neque fidem nostram impugnare 
 neque nos, sustinendi sunt inter nos et deputandi ad sordida officia, ne se 
 possint extoUcre super Christianos. Verumtamen ideo praecipue sustinentur 
 Judaji, quia capsarii nostri sunt, et portant testimonium legis contra se pro 
 nobis. A multis etiam bonis viris audivimus quod si haeretici vel excommuni- 
 cati contra Christianos velint insurgere vel impugnare fidem publicis per- 
 suasionibus et pra^dicationibus, non est peccatum eos occidere, sed si quieti 
 velint esse et pacific!, non sunt occidendi, quod videtur posse haberi ex canone 
 ita dicente: Excommunicatorum interfectoribus, prout in ordine Rom. 
 ecclesiae didicisti secundum intentionem modum congruum satisfactionis 
 injunge. Non enim eos homicidas arbitramur, quos, adversus excommuni- 
 catos catholicje zelo matris ecclesiae ardentes, aliquos eorum trucidasse con- 
 tigerit (cf. Gratiani Decretum, Causa 23, q. 5, cap. 47). Nee credimus quod 
 haeretici super infidelitate sua in foro ecclesiastico condemnati curiae sunt 
 tradendi, ita quod a sacerdotibus dicatur judicibus: Occidite istos haereticos: 
 sed sustinet ecclesia ut statim rapiantur a viris saecularibus ad supplicium, 
 nee aliquod eis prasstat patrocinium sicut Judaeis, et sicut etiam praestat 
 clericis degradatis." 
 
THE INQUISITION 245 
 
 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 pen- 
 alty 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, inas- 
 much as it affected the posterity of the condemned 
 heretics. According to the old Roman law, the property 
 
 * "Gratian, in qu. 7, Causa 23 of the Decretum, proves that the property 
 of heretics should be confiscated on the authority of St. Augustine, who 
 himself founds it on the Roman law; his interpreters unanimously refer it to 
 this law, as its true origin," etc. Tanon, op. cit., p. 524. "His auctoritatibus 
 liquido monstratur, quod ea quae ab haereticis male possidentur, a catholicis 
 juste auferuntur." Gratian, Decretum, 4, causa xxiii, quasst. vii, in fine. 
 "Imperatorum siquidem jure statutum est, ut quicumque a catholica unitate 
 inventus fuerit deviare, suarum rerum debeat omnimodam prasscriptionem 
 perferre." Summa Rolandi, ed. Thaner, Inspruck, 1874, p. 96. Roland 
 became Pope under the name of Alexander II. 
 
246 THE INQUISITION 
 
 of heretics could be inherited by their orthodox sons, and 
 even by their agnates and cognates.^ 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.^ There was but one exception to this law. Fred- 
 eric II and Innocent IV both decreed that children could 
 inherit their father's property, if they denounced him for 
 heresy.^ It is needless to insist upon the odious char- 
 acter 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.* 
 
 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? 
 
 1 4 and 19, cap. De luBreticis, iv, 5, Manichceos and Cognovimus. 
 
 '^ Decretal Vergentis of Innocent III. Decretals, cap. x, De hcereticis 
 lib. V, tit. vii. 
 
 3 Law of Frederic: Commissis nobis calitus of March, 1232, incorporated 
 into the Decretal of Innocent IV, October 31, 1243: "Nee quidem a miseri- 
 cordiae finibus duximus excludendum, ut, si qui paternae hasresis non sequaces, 
 latentam patrum perfidiam revelaverint, quacumque reatus illorum animad- 
 versione plectantur, prasdictas punitioni non subjaceat innocentia filiorum." 
 Mon. Germ., Leges, vol. ii, sect, iv, p. 197; Ripoll, Bullarium ordinis Pradicat., 
 vol. i, p. 126. 
 
 *"Ita quod pater filio vel uxori, filius ipse patri, uxor propriis filiis aut 
 marito vel consortibus ejusdem criminis, in hac parte sibi aliquatenus non 
 parcebant." Bull Gaudemus, of April 12, 1233, in Ripoll, vol. i, p. 56. 
 
THE INQUISITION 247 
 
 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. Hil- 
 ary 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." ^ 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."^ Wazo, Bishop of Liege, wrote in a 
 similar strain in the eleventh century.^ 
 
 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. 
 
 1 Liher contra Auxeniium, cap. iv; cf. supra, p. 6. 
 
 2 Contra epistolam ManichcBi, 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. 
 
 4 Cf. supra, p. 21, n. i. 
 
248 THE INQUISITION 
 
 Such reasoning was calculated to lead men to great ex- 
 tremes, and was responsible for the cruel teaching of the 
 theologians of the school, who were more logically consist- 
 ent than the Bishop of Hippo. They endeavored to 
 terrorize heretics by the specter of the stake. St. Augus- 
 tine, 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, wear- 
 ing 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 
 
THE INQUISITION 249 
 
 in the beginning the monasteries made it the 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.^ Anyone 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 injerendce potestatem non habet?^ The Church 
 has no right to use force. 
 
 Without discussing this proposition at length, let us 
 
 1 Cf. supra, pp. 32, S3- 
 
 2 " The penal code of the Inquisition ... is worth studying as the concept 
 of a pecuUar system which tried to reconcile the severest methods of sup- 
 pression with the principles of ecclesiastical penalty and discipline, by ficti- 
 tiously attributing a purely penitential character to all penalties except death, 
 even to life imprisonment," etc. Tanon, op. cit., p. iii. 
 
 3 "Nunc autem, quia circumcisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos Dei 
 coepit," says St. Cyprian, "spintali gladio superbi et contumaces necantur 
 dum de Ecclesia ejiciuntur." Cypriani, Ep. Ixii, ad Pomponium, no 4, P. L., 
 vol. iii, col. 371. Cf. supra, pp. 2-7. 
 
 ^ Proposit, xxiv. 
 
250 THE INQUISITION 
 
 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 in- 
 ternal forum. But the question under dispute — and 
 this the Syllabus does not touch — is whether the coer- 
 cive power comprises merely spiritual penalties, or tem- 
 poral and corporal penalties as well.^ The editor of the 
 Syllabus did not decide this question; he merely referred 
 us to the letter Ad apostolicce 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 ex- 
 ercise 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 
 
 1 Gayraud, Discourse delivered in the Chamber of Deputies, January 28, 
 1901. 
 
 2 "Cum vero Ecclesiae potestates alia sit et dicatur ordinis, alia jurisdic- 
 tionis: de hac altera speciatim docemus, earn non esse solum fori interni et 
 sacramentalis, sed etiam fori extern! ac publici, absolutam atque omnino 
 plenam, nimirum legiferam, judiciariam, coercitivam. Potestatis autem 
 hujusmodi subjectum sunt Pastores et Doctores a Christo dati, qui eam 
 libere et a quavis saeculari dominatione independcnter exercent; adeoque 
 cum omni imperio regunt Ecclesiam Dei tum necessaris et conscientiam 
 
THE INQUISITION 251 
 
 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, de- 
 clared that this opinion was ''more in harmony with the 
 gentleness of the Church."^ It also has in its favor 
 Popes Nicholas I ^ and Celestine III,^ who claimed for the 
 Church of which they were the head the right to use only 
 the spiritual sword. Without enumerating all the mod- 
 ern 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: i. "Constraint, in 
 the sense of employing violence to enforce ecclesiastical 
 
 quoque obligantibus legibus, turn decretoriis judiciis, turn denique salutaribus 
 pcBuis in sontes etiam invitos, nee solum in iis quae fidem et mores, cultura et 
 sanctificationem, sed etiam in iis quae externam Ecclesias disciplinam et 
 administrationem respiciunt." Can. lo. "Si quis dixerit, a Christo Domino 
 et Salvatore nostro EcclesicC suce collatam tantum fuisse potestatem dirigendi 
 per consilia et suasiones, non vero jubendi per leges, ac devios contumacesque 
 exteriori judicio ac salubribus pcenis coercendi atque cogendi," etc. Can. 12. 
 
 1 "Sunt enim qui docent potestatem coercitivam divinitus Ecclesiae collatam 
 paenis tantummodo spiritualibus contineri . , . Sententia (haec) prior magis 
 Ecclesiae mansuetudini consentanea videtur." Institutiones juris publici 
 ecdesiastici, 5 ed., Paris, vol. i, pp. 169, 170. 
 
 2 "Ecclesia gladium non habet nisi spiritualem." Nicolai, Ep. ad Albinum 
 archiepiscop., in the Decretum, Causa xxxiii, quasst. ii, cap. Inter h(BC. Note, 
 however, that the Pope was not treating this particular question ex professo. 
 
 3 Celestine, according to the criminal code of his day, declared that a 
 guilty cleric, once excommunicated and anathematized, ought to be aban- 
 doned to the secular arm, cum Ecclesia non Jmbeat ultra quid facial. Decre- 
 tals, cap. X, De judiciis, lib. ii, tit. i. This was the common teaching. Cf. 
 supra, p. 136, n. 3. 
 
252 THE INQUISITION 
 
 laws, originated with the State." 2. "The constraint of 
 ecclesiastical laws is by divine right exclusively moral 
 constraint." ^ 
 
 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 independ- 
 ent society, fully able to carry out her divine mission 
 without the aid of the secular arm. Whether govern- 
 
 1 "La coazione, nel senso di intervento della forza materiale per la esecu- 
 zione di leggi ecclesiastiche, ha origine da poteri umani." "La coazione delle 
 leggi ecclesiastiche per dirritto divino e solamente coazione morale." Sal- 
 vatore di Bartolo. Nuova espozitione dci criteri teologici, Roma, 1904, 
 pp. 303 and 314. The first edition of this work was put upon the Index. 
 The second edition, revised and corrected, and published with the approba- 
 tion of Father Lepidi, has all the more weight and authority. Salvatore di 
 Bartolo quoted a number of authors in favor of his thesis, among them the 
 Abbe Bautain. "Catholic discipline," he said, "is eminently liberal, because 
 it is altogether spiritual, and altogether moral; it uses only those methods 
 which are conformable to its nature, and therefore the more conformable to 
 the spirit of true liberty, which acts upon human wills through the intellect, 
 and the heart, and never by external violence or constraint. . . . The Church 
 directs her children by laws which she imposes without constraint, and which 
 she asks the faithful conscientiously to obey. Everyone obeys them, if he 
 wills and as he wills, according to his conscience. She forces no one by ex- 
 ternal means, and if others use force in her name, she denounces them. The 
 cruelty of the secular arm is not due to the Church, and if at times the tem- 
 poral sword has been associated with the spiritual sword, under the pretext 
 of winning back souls more readily, and of extending more vigorously and 
 more rapidly the Kingdom of God, the Church which is absolutely opposed 
 to brute force, and which wishes to gain souls, cannot be held responsible, 
 even though the imprudence of her ministers was the cause of this excess." 
 La Religion et la Liber te. Conference 6, Paris, 1865. From the historical 
 standpoint, the author's thesis is inaccurate and naive. But his view of the 
 Church's coercive power is clearly stated. 
 
THE INQUISITION 253 
 
 ments 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 anti-social 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."^ 
 
 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 dis- 
 turbers 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 with- 
 out defenders in a Christian kingdom. Magistrates were 
 considered responsible for the sins committed against the 
 law of God. Indirectly, therefore, heresy was amenable 
 
 1 Jean Guiraud, La repression de I'heresie au moyen dge, in the Questions 
 (Tarcheologie ei d'histoire, p. 44. 
 
254 TNE INQUISITION 
 
 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, there- 
 fore, an institution whose severity and cruelty are ex- 
 plained by the ideas and manners of the age. We will 
 never understand it, unless we consider it in its environ- 
 ment, and from the view-point of men like St. Thomas 
 Aquinas and St. Louis, who dominated their age by 
 their genius. Critics to whom the Middle Ages is an 
 unknown book may feel at liberty to shower insult and 
 contempt upon a judicial system whose severity is natu- 
 rally repugnant to them. But contempt does not always 
 imply a reasonable judgment, and to abuse an institu- 
 tion is not necessarily a proof of intelligence. If we 
 would judge an epoch intelligently, we must be able to 
 grasp the view-point of other men, even if they lived 
 in an age long past. 
 
 But even if 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, un- 
 doubtedly unjust and inferior. Such judicial forms as 
 the secrecy of the trial, the prosecution carried on inde- 
 
THE INQUISITION 255 
 
 pendently 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 con- 
 fiscation, were the legacy which a pagan legislation be- 
 queathed to the Christian State; they were align 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 govern- 
 
256 THE INQUISITION 
 
 ment.^ 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 un- 
 just 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 having 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 her- 
 etics prove this. But it is false to say that, while in 
 the beginning she insisted strongly on the rights of con- 
 science, she afterwards totally disregarded them. In 
 
 1 This is also a thesis of Salvatore di Bartolo: "Ne la Chiesa fe infallibile 
 nel suo governo." Op. cit., p. 307. And he declares the three following 
 propositions theologically certain: i. Puo il R. Pontefice promulgare leggi 
 disconvenienti. 2. Puo il Sommo Pontefice governar la Chiesa in modo dis- 
 conveniente. 3. I Romani Pontefici non furono infallibili nell' istituire i 
 tribunali di Suprema Inquisizione contro I'eretica pravita, i c[ua]i inflipgevano 
 pene violente ai rei. Op. cit., pp. 120 and 124. Melchior Cano wrote in the 
 same sense: "Non ego omnes Ecclesiae leges approbo," etc. De locis theo- 
 logicis, Hb. V, cap. v, concl. 2. Apologists freely admit these principles; but 
 they often hesitate to apply them, when they come to judge certain facts 
 of history. 
 
THE INQUISITION 257 
 
 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 out- 
 side 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 aside 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. 
 
 ^ This is an important distinction, which an historian, otherwise accurate, 
 has forgotten to make. "How," he asks, "was a rehgion of love and tolera- 
 tion, which is founded on the Gospel, led to burn alive those who did not 
 accept its teachings. That is the problem." Paul Fredericq, introduction 
 to the French translation of Lea, vol. i, p. v. Lea himself does not make 
 this mistake. He shows, on the contrary, that the Church never prosecuted 
 non-Christians, and that she "exercised no constraint over unbelievers." 
 Op. cit., vol. i, p. 240. But he deems this inconsistent. To be perfectly 
 consistent, he holds that the church should have burned the unbeUevers as 
 well as the heretics. To our mind, the contrary is true; to be consistent, she 
 ought to treat her own children differently. 
 
 2 Cf. De la tolerance religieuse. Vacandard, Paris, Bloud. Science et 
 Religion. 
 
 iS 
 
APPENDIX A 
 
 Processus Inquisitionis 
 
 Under this title we reproduce the oldest known copy 
 of a manual of the Holy Office, discovered by the Domini- 
 can Francois Balme, in the University Library of Madrid, 
 and published by Tardif in the Nouvelle Revue historique 
 de droit jrancais et eiranger, Paris (Larose et Forcel), 1883, 
 pp. 670-678. The date of the first formula is 1244. The 
 work was evidently written about this time. 
 
 Although very brief, it gives a rather complete insight 
 into the procedure and the penal code of the Inquisition. 
 In several passages, especially in the Formula interroga- 
 torii, the heretic in question is called a Waldensian, 
 although the heretical doctrine mentioned is Catharan. 
 
 Latere commissionis 
 
 Viris religiosis et discretis dilectis in Christo fratribus 
 Guilelmo Raymondi et Petro Dur^nti, Ordinis Predicato- 
 rum Fr. Pontius fratrum ejusdem ordinis in Provincia 
 Provincie servus inutilis et indignus, salutem et spiritum 
 caritatis. 
 
 De zelo discretionis et devotionis vestre plenarie con- 
 fidentes, Vos in provincia Narbonensi, exceptis Villelonge 
 
 258 
 
APPENDIX 259 
 
 et Villemuriensi archdiaconatibus, diocesis Tholosani, et 
 in Albiensi, Ruthenensi, Mimatensi et Aniciensi diocesibus 
 ad inquirendum de hereticis, credentibus, fautoribus, 
 receptatoribus, et defensoribus eorum et etiam infamatis, 
 auctoritate Domini Pape nobis in hac parte commissa, 
 in remissionem peccatorum vestrorum duximus transmit- 
 tendos, eadem vobis auctoritate mandantes quatenus 
 juxta mandatum et ordinationem Sedis Apostolice in 
 negotio procedatis eodem viriliter et prudenter. Quod 
 si ambo hiis exequendis interesse non potueritis, alter 
 vestrum ea nichilominus exequatur. 
 
 Datum Narbone, XII Kal. novembris Anno Domini 
 1244. 
 
 Processus inquisiiionis 
 Processus talis: Infra terminos inquisitionis nobis per 
 Priorem Provincie auctoritate praedicta, commisse ac 
 limitate, locum eligimus, qui ad hoc commodior esse 
 videtur, de quo vel in quo de locis aliis inquisitionem 
 faciamus, ubi, Clero et populo convocatis, generalem 
 faciamus predicationem, Litteris tam Domini Pape quam 
 Prions provincialis de Inquisitionis forma et commissione 
 publice legimus, et sicut convenit explanamus, et exinde 
 generaliter citamus vel verbo presentes, vel absentes per 
 litteras in hunc modum: 
 
 Modus citandi 
 " Inquisitores heretice pravitatis Capellano tali . . . 
 
26o APPENDIX 
 
 salutem in Domino. Auctoritate qua fungimur districte 
 vobis precipiendo mandamus quatenus parochianos sive 
 habitatores omnes illius ecclesie sive loci, masculos a XIV, 
 feminas a XII et inferioris (?) etatis, si forte deliquerint, 
 et ex parte et ex auctoritate nostra citetis ut, tali 
 die et tali loco responsuri de hiis quae contra fidem 
 commiserint et heresim abjuraturi compareant coram 
 nobis; et si de loco illo alia Inquisitio facta non fuerit, 
 omnibus de ipso loco qui nominatim citati vel aliter 
 venia digni non essent, immunitatem carceris indulgemus, 
 si, infra tempus assignatum, sponte venientes et peni- 
 tentes tam de se quam de aliis puram et plenam dix- 
 erint veritatem." 
 
 Quod et tempus gratie sive indulgentie appellamus. 
 
 Modus abjurandi et forma jurandi 
 
 Omnem quemque, dum se ad confitendum presentat, 
 facimus abjurare omnem heresim et jurare quod dicat 
 plenam et puram veritatem, de se et aliis vivis et mortuis, 
 super facto seu crimine heresis et Valdensie; quod fidem 
 catholicam servabit ac defendet, et Hereticos, cujuscum- 
 que secte, non solum aut recipiet aut defendet, eisque 
 favebit aut credet, quin potius eos eorumve nuntios bona 
 fide persequetur et capiet, vel saltem Ecclesie aut princip- 
 ibus eorumve bajulis, qui eos capere velint et valeant, 
 revelabit, et Inquisitionem non impediet, imo eam im- 
 pedientibus se opponet. 
 
APPENDIX 261 
 
 Formula interrogaiorii 
 
 Deinde requiritur si vidit hereticum vel Valdensem et 
 ubi et quando, et quoties et cum quibus, et de aliis cir- 
 cumstantiis diligenter. — Si eorum predicationes aut moni- 
 tiones audivit, et eos hospitio recepit aut recipi fecit. — Si 
 de loco ad locum duxit seu aliter associavit, aut duci vel 
 associari fecit. — Si cum eis comedit aut bibit, vel de 
 pane benedicto ab eis. — Si dedit vel misit eis aliquid. — 
 Si fuit eorum questor aut nuntius, aut minister. — Si 
 eorum depositum vel quid aliud habuit. — Si ab eorum 
 libro, aut ore, aut cubito pacem accepit. — Si hereticum 
 adoravit, vel caput inclinavit, vel genua flexit, vel dixit 
 Benedicite coram eis; vel si eorum consolamentis aut 
 appareillamentis interfuit. Si cene Valdensi affuit, si 
 peccata sua fuit eis confessus, vel accepit penitentiam 
 vel didicit aliquid ab eis. — Si aliter habuit familiarita- 
 tem seu participationem cum hereticis vel Valdensibus, 
 seu quoquo modo. — Si pactum vel preces vel munera 
 recepit, aut fecit super veritate de se aut de aliis non 
 dicenda. — Si quemquam monuit vel induxit seu induci 
 fecit ad aliquid de predictis. — Si scit alium vel aliam 
 fecisse aliquid de premissis. — Si credidit hereticis seu 
 Valdensibus, aut erroribus eorumdem. 
 
 Tandem de hiis omnibus et quandoque de pluribus non 
 sine causa rationabili requisitus, scriptis fideliter que de 
 se confessus fuerit vel deposuerit de aliis, coram nobis 
 
262 APPENDIX 
 
 ambobus vel altero et aliis duobus ad minus viris idoneis 
 ad hec sollicitius exequenda adjunctis, universa que 
 scribi fecerit recognoscet, atque hoc modo acta Inquisi- 
 tionis ad confessiones et depositiones sive per notarium 
 confecta, sive per scriptorem alium, roboramus. 
 
 Et quando terra est generaliter corrupta, generaliter 
 de omnibus inquisitionem secundum modum facimus 
 pretaxatum: nomina omnium redigentes in actis et illorum 
 qui se nihil scire de ahis vel in nullo se asserunt deliquisse, 
 ut, sive mentiti fuerint sive postea delinquerint, sicut 
 frequenter de pluribus reperitur, et eos abjurasse constet, 
 et de singulis requisites (fuisse). 
 
 Modus singiilos cUandi 
 
 Quando autem citamus aliquem singulariter, scribimus 
 sub hac forma: 
 
 "Talem, ex parte et auctoritate nostra uno pro omnibus 
 peremptorio citetis edicto, ut tali die, tali loco, de fide 
 sua, vel de tali culpa compareat responsurus vel receptu- 
 rus carceris (paenam), aut simpliciter penitentiam pro 
 commissis; vel defensurus parentem mortuum, vel sen- 
 tentiam de se aut de mortuo cujus heres existit audi- 
 turus." 
 
 In singulis quam plurimum citationibus, exprimentes 
 auctoritatem ex qua citamus et quam notoria est in terra, 
 et in dignitate positis deferentes personis, et loca et cita- 
 tionis causam declaramus, et loca tuta et contemptos 
 
APPENDIX 263 
 
 dilationis sive terminos assignamus, et nulli negamus 
 defensiones legitimas neque a juris ordine deviamus, nisi 
 quod testium non publicamus nomina, propter ordina- 
 tionem Sedis Apostolice sub Domino Gregorio provide 
 factam et ab Innocentio, beatissimo Papa nostro, postmo- 
 dum innovatam in privilegium et necessitatem fidei 
 evidentem, super quo habemus testimonials litteras 
 Cardinalium aliquorum. Circa hoc tamen sufficienter 
 providemus et caute tam eis contra quos Inquisitio fit 
 quam testibus, juxta sanctum consilium Prelatorum. 
 
 Hanc autem formam servamus in injungendis peni- 
 tentiis et condempnationibus faciendis. — Eos qui redire 
 volunt ad ecclesiasticam unitatem ex causa iterum 
 facimus heresim abjurare, et ad fidei observationem ac 
 defensionem et hereticorum persecutionem et inquisi- 
 tiones per promotionem, ut supra, et penitentie pro 
 nostro arbitrio injungende receptionem et impletionem, 
 solemniter et cum publicis instrumentis obligare: deinde, 
 juxta formam Ecclesie, beneficio absolutionis impenso, 
 injungimus penitenti et recipienti penitentiam carceris in 
 hunc modum: 
 
 Modus et forma reconciliandi et puniendt redeuntes ad 
 ecclesiasticam unitatem 
 
 "In nomine Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, Amen. Nos 
 inquisitores heretice pravitatis, etc. Per inquisitlonem 
 quam de hereticis et infamatis ex mandato facimus apos- 
 
264 APPENDIX 
 
 tolico, invenimus quod tu talis, sicut confessus es in 
 judicio coram nobis, hereticos plures adorasti, receptasti, 
 visitasti, et eorum erroribus credidisti. Idcirco tibi 
 taliter deprehenso ad ecclesiasticam tamen unitatem, de 
 corde bono et fide non ficta, prout asseris, revertenti et 
 abjuranti ut supra, et te, si contra feceris, ad penam 
 hereticis debitam sponte obliganti, et recognoscenti quod 
 ab excommunicatione qua tenebaris pro premissis astric- 
 tus, absolutus es sub ea conditione et retentione quod si 
 veritatem, vel de te vel de aliis, inventus fueris suppress- 
 isse, et si penitentiam et mandata que tibi injungimus non 
 servaveris et impleveris, ex tunc tibi absolutio prasfata 
 non prosis, sed pro non facta penitus habeatur. Adjunctis 
 et assistentibus nobis talibus prelatis jurisque discretis, 
 de ipsorum et aliorum consilio, ad agendam penitentiam 
 de premissis, quibus Deum et Ecclesiam nequiter offen- 
 disti, tibi in virtute prestiti juramenti, juxta mandatum 
 precipimus Apostolicum ut in carceram tolerabilem et 
 humanum tibi, in civitate ilia, paratum sine mora intendas, 
 facturus ibidem salutarem et perpetuam mansionem. 
 Sane si hoc mandatum nostrum implere nolueris, aut 
 ingredi dififerendo, aut post ingressum forsitan exeundo, 
 aut alias contra superius a te abjurata et jurata sive 
 promissa, quocumque tempore veniendo, aut per hoc 
 fictam conversionem tuam . . . et in penitentiam decla- 
 mando, te ex tunc tanquam inpenitentem punimus, cul- 
 pisque astrictum perjoribus, et omnes qui te scienter aut 
 
APPENDIX 265 
 
 receperint aut defenderint aut tibi nostra non implenti 
 mandata, vel ne impleas, consilium, auxilium qualiter- 
 cumque impenderint vel favorem, tanquam hereticorum 
 fautores, receptatores et defensores, excommunicationis 
 vinculo, auctoritate qua fungimur innodamus, decern- 
 entes reconciliationem et misericordiam tibi factam 
 ulterius prodesse non posse, et te justissime pariter ex 
 tunc seculari judicio, velut hereticum, relinquentes." 
 
 Litter e de penitentiis jaciendis 
 
 De penitentiis vero, quas non immurandis injungimus, 
 damus litteras sub hac forma : 
 
 *'Universis Christi fidelibus prsesentes litteras inspec- 
 turis, tales inquisitores, etc. . . . Cum talis lator . . . 
 sicut ex ipsius confessione coram nobis in judicio facta in 
 crimine labis heretice sic deliquit, nos eidem sponte atque 
 humiliter ad sinum Sancte Matris Ecclesie revertenti, et 
 labem prorsus hereticam abjuranti ac demum ab excom- 
 municationis vinculo juxta formam Ecclesie absoluto, 
 injungimus ut in detestationem (sui) erroris duas cruces 
 coloris crocei, longitudinis duarum palmarum, latitu- 
 dinisque duarum, et in se trium digitorum amplitudinem 
 habentes, portet, et in superiore veste perpetuo, unam 
 anteriorem in pectore et alteram posterius in spatulis; 
 vestem in qua cruces portaverit coloris crocei nunquam 
 habens. Intersit diebus dominicis et festivis, dum vixerit, 
 
266 APPENDIX 
 
 misse et vesperis et sermoni general!, si fiat in villa in qua 
 fuerit, nisi impedimentum habuerit, sine fraude; proces- 
 siones per tot annos sequatur, virgas largas in manu inter 
 Clerum et populum portans, et cui processioni affuerit 
 presentans se in statione aliqua, ut exponat populo quod 
 hie propter ilia que contra fidem commissit, penitentiam 
 istam agit. Visitet quoque, per tot annos, limina tot 
 sanctorum, et in singulis peregrinationibus supradictis 
 presentet litteras nostras quas ipsum habere volumus et 
 portare, ostendere teneatur prelato Ecclesie quam visi- 
 taverit et eidem de sua peregrinatione debito modo per- 
 fecta ejusdem testimoniales nobis litteras reportare. 
 Eapropter, karissimi, vos rogamus quod ei prefatum talem 
 has nostras habentem litteras crucesque portantem et ea 
 servantem que injunximus eidem ac per omnia catholice 
 conversantem invenistis, occasione illorum que ipsum 
 contra fidem superius commisisse invenimus, nullatenus 
 molestetis nee sustineatis ab aliis molestari, vestras ei 
 testimoniales litteras liberaliter concedendo. Sin autem 
 secus eum facientem aut etiam attemptantem videritis, 
 ipsum tanquam perjurum, excommunicatum et culpis 
 astrictum perjoribus habeatis. Ex tunc enim et recon- 
 ciliationem et misericordiam sibi factam eidem prodesse 
 non posse decernimus, et tam ipsum velut hereticum quam 
 omnes qui eum scienter, aut receperint aut defenderint, 
 aut aliter ei consilium auxilium vel favorem impenderint, 
 velut hereticorum fautores, receptatores, seu defensores 
 
APPENDIX 267 
 
 excommunicationis vinculo, auctoritate qua fungimur, 
 innodamus." 
 
 Forma sententie relinquendi hrachio seculari 
 
 Hereticos eorumque credentes, premissis et expressis 
 culpis et erroribus, et aliis que in hujusmodi processibus 
 solent sententiis, sic dampnamus. 
 
 "Nos inquisitores prefati, auditis et diligenter attentis 
 culpis et demeritis dicti talis et illis precipue circum- 
 stantiis que ad extirpendam de terra labem hereticam 
 fidemque plantandam, sive plectemdo, sive ignoscendo, 
 debent potissime nos movere, adjunctis et assistentibus 
 nobis Reverendis Patribus, etc., supradictum talem, quia 
 hereticorum erroribus credidit, et adhuc credere convin- 
 citur, cum examinatus et convictus sive confessus reverti 
 et absolute mandatis ecclesia obedire contempnat, per sen- 
 tentiam definitivam hereticum judicamus, relinquentes ex 
 nunc judicio seculari et tarn ipsum velut hereticum con- 
 tempnamus quam omnes qui eum scienter de cetero aut 
 receperint, aut defenderint, aut eidem consilium, auxilium 
 aut favorem impenderint, velut hereticorum fautores, 
 receptatores, defensores excommunicationis vinculo auc- 
 toritate qua fungimur innodantes/' 
 
 Forma sententie contra eos qui heretici decesserint 
 Mortuos quoque hereticos et credentes, expressis eorum 
 erroribus et culpis et aliis, dampnamus similiter isto modo: 
 
268 APPENDIX 
 
 "Nos inquisitores, etc., visis ac diligenter inspectis et 
 attentis culpis ac demeritis talis superius notati, et de- 
 fensionibus propositis pro eodem, et circumstantiis quas 
 circa personas et dicta testium et alia considerari oportuit 
 et attendi, adjunctis et assistentibus nobis talibus, etc., 
 eumdem talem, etc., definitive pronunciando, judicamus 
 hereticum decessisse atque ipsum et ipsius memoriam 
 pari severitate dampnantes, ossa ejus si ab aliis discerni 
 poterunt, de cemeterio ecclesiastico exhumari simulque 
 comburi decernimus in detestationem criminis tarn 
 nefandi." 
 
 Condemnationes et penitentias memoratas facimus 
 et injungimus, clero et populo convocatis solemniter et 
 mature, facientes eos quibus penitentias injungimus mem- 
 oratas, prius ibidem abjurare atque jurare prout supe- 
 rius continetur; et de hujusmodi condempnationibus et 
 carcerum penitentiis fiunt publica instrumenta sigillorum 
 nostrorum assessorum testimoniis roborata. 
 
 Forma vero litterarum que de aliis penitentiis conce- 
 duntur retinetur in actis. 
 
 Ad nullius vero condempnationem, sine lucidis et 
 apertis probationibus vel confessione propria processi- 
 mus nee, dante Domino, procedemus. Et omnes con- 
 dempnationes et pentitentias quas majores fecimus et 
 facere proponimus non solum de generali sed etiam de 
 speciali sigillato consilio prelatorum. 
 
APPENDIX 269 
 
 Plura quidem alia facimus in processu et aliis, que scripto 
 facile non possent comprehendi, per omnia juris tenentes 
 ordinem aut sedis ordinationem apostolice specialem. 
 Bona hereticorum tarn dampnatorum quam immura- 
 torum publicare facimus et compellimus ut debemus, et 
 per hoc est quod specialiter confundit hereticos et cre- 
 dentes, et, si bene fieret justitia de damnatis et relapsis, 
 et bona publicarentur fideliter, et incarceratis provid- 
 eretur in necessariis competenter, in fructu Inquisitionis 
 gloriosus Dominus et mirabilis appareret. 
 
APPENDIX B 
 
 
 II II II II II II II II II II II II II II 
 
 H M 
 II II 
 
 
 o 
 
 On 
 II 
 
 £z£i '6i aunf 
 
 • M On • • 
 
 • H • • • 
 
 
 
 
 i:z£i 'ei jaquia^dag 
 
 \0 Tt HI • 
 
 VO O • • • 
 
 M • • • 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 see I 't^puBei^inf 
 
 M 
 
 1-1 
 
 00 M O • • 
 
 (N M • • • 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 ^ 
 
 izfi 'e ;sn3nv 
 
 
 
 
 <N VO i fO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 M 
 
 lefi 'fri Xinf 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ] \ M 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 iz£i '6z 9un£ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 [ M 
 
 M 
 
 6i£:i 'g j3qui33aQ 
 
 
 
 
 
 M 1 
 
 
 
 
 j M ] 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 6l£l 'gZ J3qUI3AO|sJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 1 
 
 6r£i 'of J3qui0}d3g 
 
 
 
 
 
 9if I 'i qDJBjY; 
 
 CS • M (N • • • • 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 £i£i'oz J3qin3}d3s 
 
 ] 1 [ [ ' * M 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 ziCi 'of lu<^V 
 
 MMVO-.-. 
 
 M . . . . " 
 
 
 
 On 
 H 
 
 zi£i 'fs lu<iV 
 
 
 • fO O CO O Lr< 
 to CO M 
 
 
 
 LO 
 
 oifi '6 ludy 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 oiCi 'S [udy 
 
 rO 
 
 1-1 O CN • t^ 
 
 CN >0 .1-1 
 
 o 
 
 . . . ^ . 
 
 
 M 
 M 
 
 Oof I 'f e jaqopo 
 
 
 [ ■ ' ■ M 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 6of I 'Sz A^j^ 
 
 Tf 
 
 ^ O O • M 
 
 U-) 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 On 
 
 gofi '£ qDJBpt 
 
 
 
 C^ 
 
 
 ! <^ 
 
 N 
 
 '. '. . a ', 
 
 
 ON 
 
 
 X 
 
 b. 
 < 
 
 0. 
 
 ^- 
 a- 
 
 '(A 
 
 V 
 
 Q- 
 
 C 
 
 c: 
 
 *r 
 
 b 
 
 t 
 < 
 
 2 
 
 o: 
 
 1 
 
 E 
 
 > 'z 
 
 '> c 
 
 „ a, 
 
 11 
 
 C 
 > 
 
 OJ 
 
 c 
 c 
 
 pi 
 
 C 
 
 )-. 
 c 
 
 c 
 
 !« 
 
 OJ 
 
 ■t-j 
 
 :3 
 
 a 
 
 C 
 
 £ 
 
 (L 
 
 c 
 c 
 c- 
 
 *> 
 
 *5 
 
 Exponendi in scala 
 
 Degradandi 
 
 Exulatus 
 
 . 
 
 : ^ 
 
 . OJ 
 
 S 
 o -^ 
 u a 
 
 N S 
 
 it 
 
 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 This volume does not contain any unpublished docu- 
 ments. Every reference in the footnotes may be verified 
 in books that have already been published. We have, 
 however, gone conscientiously to the sources, although 
 occasionally we cite works at second hand. Among the 
 best of these are the works of Lea, Tanon, Douais, and 
 DoUinger. 
 
 We have already given our estimate of Lea and Tanon 
 in the preface. 
 
 Mgr. Douais is chiefly an editor of documents; his 
 
 critical ability is usually beyond reproach. I would make 
 
 one exception, however, with regard to his edition of 
 
 Bernard Gui's Pradica inquisitionis hcereticce praviiatis. 
 
 There are four manuscripts of this work, two of which 
 
 (Nos. 387, 388) are in the Hbrary of Toulouse. Tanon 
 
 (loc. cit., p. 163) "regrets that Mgr. Douais, instead of 
 
 giving us a critical edition of the text, simply copied 
 
 Manuscript 387, whereas No. 389 is the better. For, 
 
 according to Molinier, this manuscript is the older; it 
 
 belonged to the Inquisition of Toulouse, where, as its 
 
 condition shows, it was in constant use; and finally, it 
 
 contains important marginal notes in the fourth part." 
 
 271 
 
272 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 The documents published by Dollinger, although of 
 unequal value, are on the whole very useful. It is a great 
 pity, however, that he edited them with so little care. 
 Molinier has criticised him rather severely, pointing out 
 many errors, omissions, and inconsistencies. (Revue His- 
 torique LIV, p. 155, seq.) His treatise introducing these 
 documents is also rather untrustworthy. Still we do 
 not hesitate to use this work, such as it is, for, from our 
 view-point the mistakes are unimportant. 
 
 The following bibliography is far from being complete- 
 For other works I would refer the reader to 
 
 Molinier, Les Sources de VHistoire de France, vol. 3, pp. 58-77, Paris, 
 
 1903. 
 Vernet, Article Cathares in the Dictionnaire de iheologie Catholique, 
 
 vol. 2, col. 1997-99 (1905). 
 Fredericq, Historiographie de r Inquisition, the preface to Reinach's French 
 
 translation of Lea's History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages. 
 
 Alain, De fide catholica contra hcereticos sui temporis, Migne, Pat. lat., 
 
 vol. ccx, 305-430. 
 Alphandery, Les idees morales chez les heterodoxes latins au debut du 
 
 XIII^ Steele, Paris, 1903, pp. 34-99- 
 Bernard De Come, Lucerna inquisitorum hcereticce pravitatis, Rome, 1584. 
 Bernard Gui, Practica officii inquisitionis hereticce pravitatis, ed, Douais, 
 
 Paris, 1886. 
 Bonacursa, Manifestatio heresis Catarorum, Migne, Pat. lat., cciv, 775- 
 
 792; d'Achery, Spicilegium, in fol. i, 208-215. 
 Cledat, Le nouveau Testament traduit au XIII^ siecle en langue pro- 
 
 vengale, suivi d'un Rittiel cathare, Paris, 1888. 
 Doat (collection), Documents relatifs a Inquisition, a la Bihliotheque 
 
 nationale, 17 vol. (vol. xxi-xxxvii). Vols, xxix and xxx contain a 
 
 copy of Bernard Gui's Practica. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 273 
 
 Dodrina de modo procedendi contra hcereticos, in Martene, Thesaurus 
 novus Anecdotorum, v, 1 797-1822, a treatise composed about 
 
 1275- 
 Dollinger, Beitrage zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters, Munich, 1890, 
 
 2 vol. in 8°. The second volume is made up of documents. 
 
 Dovms, Documents pour servir a Vhistoire de V Inquisition dans le Lan- 
 guedoc, Paris, 1900, 2 vol. The documents of the second volume 
 are: ist. The Sentences of Bernard de Caux and of Jean de Saint 
 Pierre (i 244-1 248). 2d. Testimony against Pierre Garcias of 
 Bourguet-Nau of Toulouse, received by Bernard de Caux and 
 Jean de Saint Pierre (Aug. 22 to Dec. 10, 1247). 3d. The register 
 of the notary of the Inquisition of Carcassonne. 4th. The Pontifi- 
 cal commission of Cardinal Taillefer de la Chapelle and Berenger 
 Fredol (April 15 to May, 1306). 
 La formule Communicato hoyiorum virortim Consilio des sentences 
 inquisitoriales in the Compte rendu du quatrieme congrhs scientifique 
 international des cathoUques, Fribourg (Switzerland), 1898, sect, des 
 Sciences historiques, pp. 316-367, and in Le Moyen Age, 1898, 
 pp. 157-192, 286-311. 
 Saint Raymond de Pennafort et les heretiques, Directoire a Vusage des 
 inquisiteurs aragonais, 1242, in Le Moyen Age. xii (1899), 305-325. 
 
 Du Plessis d'Argentre, Collectio judiciorum de novis erroribus, etc., 
 Paris, 1728 et seq., 3 vol. in fol. 
 
 Egbert (Ekkebertus, +1185), Sermones xiii contra Catharos in Migne, 
 Pat. lat., cxcv, 13-102. 
 
 Eymeric (Nicolas). Directorium inquisitortim, written about 1376. We 
 quote the Venetian edition of 1607, vdih Pegna's commentary. 
 
 Picker, Die gesetzliche Einfiihrung der Todesstrafe fiir Ketzerei, in the 
 Mittheilungen des Institiits fiir Oesterreichische Ceschichts forschung, 
 Innspruck, 1880, vol. i, pp. 177-226, 430-431. 
 
 Fredericq (Paul), Corpus documentorum inquisitionis hcereticce pravitatis 
 NeerlandiccE (1205-1525), vol. i, 1889; vol. ii, 1896; vol. iii, 1906; 
 vol. iv, 1900. 
 
 Cregoire de Fano, about 1240, Disputatio inter Catholicum et Paterinum 
 hcereticum, in MsiTtene, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, vol. v, col. 
 
 1715-1758- 
 Guillem Pelhisse, Chronicon (1230-1237), edited by Ch. Molinier, 
 De fratre Guillelmo Pelisso veterrimo inquisitionis historico, Paris, 
 
 19 
 
274 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 1880, and by Mgr. Douais in Les Sources de Vhistoire de V inquisition 
 
 dans le midi de la France, Paris, 1882. 
 
 Cuiraud (Jean), Questions d'histoire et archeologie chretienne, Paris, 1906. 
 
 Havet ( Julien) Uheresie et le bras seculier au moyen age jusgu'au XI 11^ 
 
 siecle, in the Bibliotheque de I'Ecole des Chartes XLI, 488-517; 570- 
 
 607, and in (Euvres completes, Paris, 1896, vol. ii, pp. 1 17-180. 
 
 Henner (Camille), Beitrdge zur Organisation und Competenz der pdpst- 
 
 lichen Ketzergeschichte, Leipzig, 1890. 
 Huillard-Breolles, Historia diplomatica Frederici II, Paris, 1854-1861, 
 
 12 vol. in 4°. 
 Labbe et Cossart, Concilia (sacrosancta) , Paris, 1 671-1672, 18 vol. in-fol. 
 Langlois (ch. v), L' Inquisition d'apres les travaux recents, Paris, 1902. 
 Lea (Henry-Charles), A history of the inquisition in the Middle Ages, 
 1888, 3 vol.; a French translation by Salomon Reinach, 1900-1902. 
 Limborch, Historia inquisitionis , Amsterdam, 1692. This work con- 
 tains the Liber sententiarum inquisitionis Tolosance of Bernard Gui. 
 Louis De Paramo, De origine et progressu officii sanctce Inquisitionis 
 
 ejusque utilitate et dignitate libri tres, Madrid, 1598. 
 Lucas De Tuy (i 239-1 288), De altera vita fideique controversiis adversus 
 Albige7ises, written about 1240, in the Bibliotheca Patrum, 4th ed., 
 vol. ivb, pp. 575-714- 
 Marthne and Durand, Ampllssima collectio veterum scriptorum, etc., Paris, 
 1724-1743, 9 vol. in-fol. 
 Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, Paris, 1717, 5 vol. in-fol. 
 Masini (Eliseo), Sacro Arsenale ovvero Prattica dell' Officio della Santa 
 
 Inquisizione, Bologna, 1665. 
 Migne, Patrologia latina, 218 vol. in -4°. 
 
 Molinier (Ch.), U Inquisition dans le midi de la France au XI 11^ et au 
 XI V^ siecle. Etude sur les sources de son histoire, Paris, 1880. 
 Uendura, coutume religieuse des dernier s sectaires albigeois, in the 
 
 Annales de la Faculte de Bordeaux, vol. iii, 1881. 
 Rapport sur tme mission execidee en Italie, in the Archives des mis- 
 sions scientifiques et litteraires, Paris, 1888, 3d series, vol. xiv. 
 Moneta, of Cremona (Inquisitor from 1231 to 1250), Adversus Catharos 
 et Valdenses libri quinque, ed. Richini, Rome, 1743- 
 Monumenta GermanicB historica, Scriptores, 31 vol. in-fol. 
 Monumenta Germanics historica. Leges, in-4°. 
 Milller (K.), Die Valdenses und ihre einzelne Gruppen bis zum Anfang 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 275 
 
 des X/F^^ Jahrhunderts, an important work, in the Theologische 
 SHidien und Kritiken, 1886, pp. 665-732, and 1887, pp. 45-146. 
 Percin (T.-T-)j Monumenta Conventus Tholosani ordinis FF. Prcedica- 
 
 torum primi, Toulouse, 1693. 
 Potthast, Regesta pontificuni Romanorum inde ah anno post Christum natum 
 MCXCVIII ad annum MCCCIV, Berlin, 1874-1875, 2 vol. in-4°. 
 Processus Inquisitionis, a manual of the year 1244, in the Nouvelle 
 Revue historique de droit frangais et etranger, 1883, pp. 669-678. 
 See Appendix A. 
 Questiones domini Guidonis Fulcodii et responsiones ejus, a treatise on 
 procedure for Inquisitors, written about 1254, edited by Cesare 
 Carena, Tradatus de officio sanctissimce inquisitionis , 1669, p. 367- 
 393. Gui Foucois became Pope under the name of Clement IV. 
 Raoul Ardent, about iioo, Serfno in dominica VIII post Trinitatem, 
 Migne, Pat. lat., civ, 2007-2013. 
 Registres d' Alexandre IV, published by La Ronciere, Paris, 1895-1902. 
 Registres d'Honorius IV, pubhshed by Maurice Prou, Paris, 1888. 
 Registres de Nicolas IV, published by Langlois, Paris, 1886-1893. 
 Ripoll, Bidlarium ordinis FF. Pradicatorum, Paris, Biblioth. Nationale, 
 
 Inventaire H 1671. 
 
 Rodrigo, Historia verdadera de la Inqidsicion, 3 vol., Madrid, 1876-187 7 
 
 Sacconi (Rainier or Raineri), a converted heretic and Inquisitor about 
 
 1258, Summa de Catharis et Leonistis et Pauperihus de Lugduno, in 
 
 Martene, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, vol. v, pp. i457-i776- 
 
 Salve Burce, of Piacenza, about 1235, Supra Stella, in DolHnger's 
 
 Beitrage, quoted above, vol. ii, pp. 52-84. 
 Schmidt (C), Histoire et doctrine de la secte des Cathares ou Alhigeois, 
 
 Paris, 1849, 2 vol. in-8°. 
 Tanon, Histoire des tribunaux de VInquisition en France, Paris, 1893, 
 
 in -8°. 
 Vaissete, Histoire generale du Languedoc, old edition, 1 730-1 745; new 
 
 edition, 1872-1892. 
 Vidal (J. M.), Un inquisiteur juge par ses victimes, Jean Galland et les 
 
 Carcassonnais, Paris, 1903. 
 Le tribunal de VInquisition de Pamiers, in the Annates de Saint-Louis- 
 
 des-Frangais, Rome and Paris, 1904-1906. 
 Zanchino Ugolini, De hcereticis tractatus aureus, Mantua, 1567; Rome, 
 
 1579- 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abjuration, 129. 
 
 Abrenuntiatio of the Cathari, 85. 
 
 Absolution, mutual of Inquisitors, 
 
 154. 
 
 Accusatio, 166. 
 
 Adalbero, Bishop of Liege, toler- 
 ance of, 37. 
 
 Adam, trial of, 168. 
 
 Ad Extir panda, the bull, 145, 150, 
 
 154. 
 Adoptianism, 31. 
 Adrian IV, and Arnold of Brescia, 
 
 40. 
 Adrian VI, bull on sorcery, 200, 
 Advocates, denied by Inquisition, 
 
 127. 
 Alba, Cathari of, 71. 
 Albertus Magnus, and witchcraft, 
 
 164. ■ 
 Albigenses, crusade against, 54. 
 Alexander III, his laws against 
 
 heresy, 56, 57. 
 Alexander IV, and torture, 151, 
 
 154. 
 on testimony of heretics, 126, 
 Alexis Comnenus, 70. 
 Amaury de Beynes, 53. 
 Ambrose, St., denounces the con- 
 demnation of Priscillian, 25. 
 
 A nimadversio, various meanings 
 of. 57> 59. 61, 105-107, lu- 
 lls. 133. 174, 176. 
 
 Annibale, Senator of Rome, no. 
 
 Anselm of Lucca, 47, 64, 65. 
 
 Apparellamentum, of the Cathari,' 
 90. 
 
 Apringius, 18. 
 
 Arcadius, law against heretics, 9, 
 160, 211, 
 
 Arnold of Brescia, 39, 40. 
 
 Astrology, classed as heresy, 166. 
 
 Augustine, St., his toleration, 12. 
 and the Donatists, 15-21. 
 his denunciation of Priscillian- 
 ism, 26. 
 
 Auto defe, 139, 193, 206. 
 
 Bagolenses, 71. 
 
 Ban, the imperial, 57, 107. 
 
 Banishment, for heresy, 58, 66, 
 
 170, 174, 210. 
 Baptism, rejected by Cathari, 74. 
 Bartolo, theses on the coercive 
 
 power, 252. 
 Benencasa, 65. 
 
 Berlaiges, heretics burned at, 197. 
 Bernard, St., on toleration, 45. 
 opposes Arnold of Brescia, 39. 
 
 277 
 
278 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Bernard, St., opposes Henry of 
 
 Lausanne, 39. 
 Bernard of Caux, his treatment of 
 
 the relapsed, 174. 
 his sentences, 193. 
 Bernard of Como, on the witches' 
 
 Sabbat, 165. 
 Bernard Gui, and the Inquisitorial 
 
 procedure, 167. 
 approves of torture, 156, 169. 
 his sentences, 193, 270. 
 Bleda, and the banishment of the 
 
 Moriscos, 199. 
 Bogomiles, 70. 
 Bonacursus, 71. 
 Boniface VIII, 138, 147. 230, 
 
 242. 
 Braisne, Cathari burned at, 53. 
 Bread, blessed of Cathari, 89. 
 Bullinger, approves death-penalty 
 
 for heresy, 223. 
 
 Caesarius of Ilcisterbach, on the 
 
 number of the Cathari, 71. 
 Calixtus II, 46. 
 Calvin, advocates death-penalty, 
 
 222. 
 Cambrai, heretic burned at, 35. 
 Capital punishment, denied by 
 
 Cathari, 79. 
 Castellio, denounces death-penalty, 
 
 224. 
 Cathari, their teachings, 72 et seq. 
 different names of, 72. 
 number of, 71. 
 hierarchy of, 80. 
 fasting of, 91. 
 Celestine III, 56, 251. 
 
 Celibacy, Catharan idea of, 92-97. 
 
 Catholic idea of, 103. 
 Chalons, Cathari at, 34. 
 Charles II (England), 221. 
 Charles V (Emperor), 226. 
 Chrysostom, St., on toleration, 29. 
 Circumccllioncs, 10, 14. 
 Clement IV, and torture, 151. 
 
 and the episcopal Inquisition, 
 138. 
 
 enforces bull Ad Extirpanda, 
 146. 
 
 on the number of witnesses, 125. 
 Clement V, and the Templars, 188. 
 
 and prison reform, 144. 
 
 on the cruelty of Inquisitors, 186. 
 Coals, torture of the burning, 153. 
 Cologne, heretics burned at, 38, 51. 
 Concorrezenses, 71. 
 Confiscation, 56, 58, 60, 66, 170, 
 
 174, 202-205, 245. 
 Conrad of Marburg, 117, 123, 132. 
 Consolamentum, 74, 75, 81, 83. 
 Constantine the Great, 5, 73. 
 Convenenza, 81. 
 Councils of Rome, (313) 13. 
 
 of Aries (314), i3- 
 
 of Mainz (848), 32. 
 
 of Quiercy (849), 32. 
 
 of Reims (1049), 46. 
 
 of Toulouse (11 19), 46, 66. 
 
 of Reims (1148), 40. 
 
 of Reims (1157), 51- 
 
 of Tours (1163), 53, 56. 
 
 of Lateran (1179), 67. 
 
 of Verona (1184), 144. 
 
 of Avignon (1209), 50, 66. 
 
 of Lateran (1215), 61, 107. 
 
INDEX 
 
 279 
 
 of Narbonne (1227), 120. 
 of Toulouse (1229), 106, 142. 
 of Constance (i4i4)» 180. 
 Cyprian, St., on toleration, 3. 
 
 Decretals, respect due to the, 162. 
 De hcBretico comburendo, 220, 221, 
 Demons, succubi and incubi, 199. 
 Denunciation, duty of, 125. 
 Dtmmtiatio, 166. 
 Dominic, St., 226. 
 Dominicans, as Inquisitors, 121. 
 Donatists, 13 e^ seq. 
 
 Edict of Milan, 5. 
 Edward VI (England), 221. 
 Elipandus, 31. 
 Elizabeth (England), 221. 
 Endura, 97-101. 
 Eon de I'Etoile, 40. 
 Eriberto, 36. 
 Eugenius III, 40, 47. 
 Evervin, 45. 
 Evodius, 24. 
 
 Excommunication, of abettors of 
 heresy, 60, 145, 146. 
 
 of heretics, 170. 
 Exhumation, of dead heretics, 203. 
 Experts, for heresy trials, 138. 
 
 assembly of, 139-142. 
 Eymeric, and the Inquisitorial 
 procedure, 167. 
 
 on torture, 168. 
 
 picture of ideal Inquisitor, 157. 
 
 Farel, approves of death-penalty, 
 
 222. 
 Fasts of the Cathari, 91. 
 
 Felix of Urgel, 31. 
 Flogging, 16, 51, 148, 151. 
 Franciscans, as Inquisitors, 121. 
 Francis, St., of Assisi, 226. 
 Frederic II (Emperor), his legis- 
 lation against heresy, 107, 
 109, 126, 133, 134, 235. 
 his influence upon Gregory IX, 
 
 113, 225. 
 uses Inquisition for political 
 ends, 187. 
 
 Gayraud, on the Syllabus, 250. 
 Geroch of Reichersberg, 44, 47. 
 Godescalcus, on predestination, 32. 
 Goslar, heretics hanged at, 35. 
 Grace, time of, 124. 
 Gratian, 50, 64, 148, 158. 
 Gregory IX, his legislation against 
 heresy, iii, 115, 132. 
 
 institutes the Inquisition, 115, 
 119. 
 
 calumniated by Lea, 123. 
 
 his laws against ordeals, I49- 
 
 and torture, 150. 
 Gregory X, and the episcopal 
 
 Inquisition, 137. 
 Guala, Bishop of Brescia, 109, no. 
 Gui Foucois, cf. Clement IV. 
 Guibert de Nogent, 37. 
 Guillaume, Archbishop of Reims, 
 
 52. 
 Guillem Pelhisse, 127. 
 Guiraud, 234, 253. 
 
 Henry II (England), 51. 
 Henry III (Emperor), 35. 
 Henry V (England), 220. 
 
28o 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Henry VIII (England), 221. 
 Henry of Lausanne, 39. 
 Henry of Milan, 116. 
 Henry of Susa, 176. 
 Heresy, definitions of, 160. 
 
 considered treason, 108, 113. 
 
 relapse into, 174-176. 
 
 a public crime, 235. 
 
 a political factor, 187. 
 
 of the Cathari, ']2 et seq. 
 Heretication, 78, 81, 82, 84, 95, 
 
 211. 
 Hilary, St., on toleration, 6. 
 Hincmar, Archbishop of Reims, 32. 
 Honorius III, his legislation 
 against heretics, 108. 
 
 his law against ordeals, 149. 
 Honorius IV, 182. 
 Huguccio,advocates death-penalty, 
 
 64. 
 Hugh, Bishop of Auxerre, 52. 
 Humiliati, 62. 
 Huss, 180, 224. 
 
 Idacius, 23. 
 
 Imprisonment, purpose of, 48. 
 
 antecedent, 151, 231. 
 
 for relapse, 237. 
 
 character of, 142, 189, 191, 195. 
 Innocent III, his legislation on 
 heresy, 58-63. 
 
 his laws against ordeals, 149. 
 
 his treatment of Raymond VI, 
 62. 
 
 does not inflict death-penalty, 
 
 63. 
 classes heresy with treason, 61. 
 and the Patarins, 158. 
 
 Innocent IV, his legislation against 
 heresy, 145, 150, 154. 
 authorizes torture, 147, 150. 
 and the episcopal Inquisition, 
 
 137- 
 Innocent VIII, his bull on sor- 
 cery, 199. 
 In pace, 192. 
 Inquisitor, aged required, 132. 
 
 cruelty of, 185, 186. 
 
 duties of, 124. 
 
 portrait of, 131. 
 Inquisitio, 166. 
 
 Inquisition, the episcopal, 119, 
 136. 
 
 the legatine, 121. 
 
 its origin, 115, 119. 
 
 development of, 122 et seq. 
 
 its spread, 182 e/ seq. 
 
 political use of, 187. 
 
 procedure of, 228. 
 
 number of victims of, 234. 
 
 used to crush the Templars, 
 188. 
 
 used against Joan of Arc, 188. 
 Intolerance, natural to man, 212. 
 
 of sovereigns, 213. 
 
 of Plato, 214. 
 Irregularity, incurred by Inquisi- 
 tors, 154. 
 Isidore, St., of Seville, 30. 
 Ithacius, 23. 
 Ivo of Chartres, 64. 
 
 Jacquerius, 165. 
 Jailers, rules for, 190. 
 Jeanne de la Tour, 192. 
 Jean Galand, 185. 
 
INDEX 
 
 281 
 
 Jerome, St., calumniated by Lea, 
 209. 
 
 denounces Priscillianism, 26. 
 
 his idea of schism, 161. 
 Jews, and usury, 163. 
 
 banished from Spain, 198. 
 Joan of Arc, 188. 
 John d' Andre, 177. 
 John Teutonicus, 64. 
 John XXII, 153, 224. 
 Jurieu, intolerance of, 283. 
 Justinian, code of, 11, 64. 
 
 Kiss, Catharan, of peace, 88. 
 
 Lactantius, on toleration, 4, 5. 
 
 Lateran, cf. Council. 
 
 Lea, estimate of his history, VI. 
 
 unfair to Leo the Great, 30. 
 
 unfair to Gregory IX, 123. 
 
 unfair to Innocent III, 226. 
 
 unfair to St. Francis, 226. 
 
 unfair to St. Jerome, 209. 
 
 admits the small number of 
 victims, 207. 
 Leo, St., the Great, and the Pris- 
 cillianists, 27. 
 
 on persecution, 28. 
 Leo IX, 46. 
 
 Leo X, bull on sorcery, 200. 
 Lollardy, 220. 
 Louis VIII (France), 105. 
 Louis IX, St. (France), 106, 118. 
 Lucas, Bishop of Tuy, 120. 
 Lucius III, his legislation against 
 heresy, 56, 144. 
 
 regulates the episcopal Inquisi- 
 tion, 119. 
 
 his decretal ad Abolendam, 174. 
 
 Magic, accusation against Priscil- 
 lian, 24. 
 considered heresy, 163. 
 
 Maistre, Joseph de, 240. 
 
 Malleus Malejicarum, 180, 200. 
 
 Manicheans, persecution of, 11-13. 
 law of Diocletian against, 11. 
 
 Marriage, denounced by Cathari, 
 g2 et seq. 
 
 Marsollier, Jacques, vi, 153. 
 
 Martin St., his tolerance, 24. 
 
 Martin V, and usurers, 163. 
 
 Maximus (Emperor), 23. 
 
 Melancthon, approves of the exe- 
 cution of Servetus, 224. 
 
 Metempsychosis, of the Cathari, 
 83. 
 
 Milan, heretics burned at, 36, 116. 
 
 Mitre, of condemned heretics, 206. 
 
 Molay, Jacques, 188. 
 
 Monteforte, heretics burned at, t,6. 
 
 Montwimer, heretics burned at, 
 117. 
 
 Mo ranis, 184. 
 
 Moriscos, 198. 
 
 Names, of witnesses withheld, 128. 
 
 Newman, Cardinal, on suppres- 
 sion of facts, ix. 
 
 Nevers, heretics burned at, 53. 
 
 Nicholas I, denounces the use of 
 torture, 148, 232. 
 on ecclesiastical penalties, 257. 
 
 Nicholas IV, his legislation against 
 heresy, 147. 
 
 Nicholas V, 165. 
 
282 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Oath, use of, denounced by the 
 Cathari, 78. 
 
 Optatus, St., advocates the death- 
 penalty, 14. 
 
 Ordeals, 129, 149, 244. 
 
 Origen, tolerance of, 3. 
 
 Orleans, heretics burned at, 31. 
 
 Pamiers, registers of, 194, 196. 
 Panormia, 47, 64. 
 Paramo, 167, 201. 
 Parenzo, St., 59. 
 
 Paris, heretics burned at, 53. 
 
 Pastor, on Innocent VIII, 200. 
 
 Patarins, 72. 
 
 Patricius, 24. 
 
 Paul, St., excommunicates here- 
 tics, I. 
 
 Paulicians, massacre of, 70, 
 
 Peter of Bruys, 38. 
 
 Peter Cantor, 43, 48, 243. 
 
 Peter, of S. Chrysogono, 70. 
 
 Peter, St., of Verona, 116, 183. 
 
 Piero Parenzo, 59. 
 
 Pierre Cauchon, 188. 
 
 Pierre Mauran, 54. 
 
 Philip Augustus, 53. 
 
 Philip, Count of Flanders, 52. 
 
 Philip the Fair, 185, 188. 
 
 Pilgrimages, as penances, 125. 
 
 Pius V and the Huguenots, 218. 
 
 Plato, 214. 
 
 Prayer, the Lord's, 84. 
 
 Primacy, of the Pope, denied by 
 the Cathari, 73. 
 
 Priscillianism, 22-27. 
 
 Prohatio of the Cathari, 86. 
 
 Processus Inquisitionis, 258-269. 
 
 Rack, torture of, 152. 
 
 Raymond V, 54. 
 
 Raymond VII, 196. 
 
 Raymond, St., of Pennafort, 160- 
 
 171. 
 Relapse, penalty for, 174-176, 212, 
 
 237- 
 
 Responsibility of the Church in 
 the infliction of the death 
 penalty, 41, 42, 47, 144, et 
 seq., 177 et seq., 244. 
 
 Ritual, of the Cathari, 85, 86. 
 
 Robert the Pious, 34. 
 
 Robert the Bugre, 123, 184. 
 
 Rodrigo, his work on the Inquisi- 
 tion, 235. 
 
 Rome, Patarins, burned in, 112. 
 
 Roman law, revival of, 50, 149. 
 
 Sabbat, the witches', 164. 
 Sachenspiegel, 115. 
 Sacraments, denied by the Cath- 
 ari, 74. 
 Sardinia, Inquisition in, 182. 
 
 Cathari in, 37. 
 Savonarola, 186. 
 Secrecy of the Inquisition, 167. 
 Secular arm, abandonment to the, 
 56, 67, 130, 177, 178, 196, 
 
 243- 
 Sermo generalis, 139, 193, 206. 
 
 Servetus, 222, 223. 
 Sicilian Code, of Frederic II, 112, 
 114, 134, i49» 160, 211, 216. 
 Simon de Montfort, 54. 
 Sixtus V, 200. 
 
 Spain, Inquisition in, 189, 197-199. 
 Speronistse, 72. 
 
INDEX 
 
 283 
 
 Sprenger, 180, 200. 
 
 Soglia, Cardinal, theory of tolera- 
 tion, 251. 
 
 Soissons, heretics burned at, t^'j. 
 
 Sophronisteria, 214. 
 
 Stake, penalty of the, 31, 35, 36, 
 37> 5i> S3, 58, 62, 63, 109, 
 ii5-ii7> 130. 134, 196, i97> 
 237. 
 
 Strasburg heretics burned at, 109. 
 
 Suger, Abbot, 40. 
 
 Sulpicius Severus, 25. 
 
 Superstition, classed as heresy, 
 163. 
 
 Syllabus, the, 249. 
 
 Synodal witnesses, 120. 
 
 Talio, penalty of the, 166. 
 Taxation, its lawfulness denied by 
 
 the Cathari, 78. 
 Templars, 188. 
 Tertullian, on toleration, 2, 3. 
 Theodora, the Empress, 69. 
 Theodore of Beza, 224. 
 Theodosius I (Emperor), 9. 
 Theodosius II (Emperor), 8. 
 Theodvvin of Liege, 42. 
 Theognitus, 28. 
 
 Thomas Aquinas, St., definition 
 of heresy, 160. 
 
 defends the death-penalty, 171 
 et seq. 
 
 on the relapsed, 175, 236. 
 Torquemada, 197, 198. 
 Torture, in the trials of the In- 
 quisition, 147-158, 231. 
 
 different forms of, 1 51-154. 
 
 repetition of, 168. 
 
 value of confessions, extorted by, 
 
 iSS- 
 of witnesses, 170. 
 recommended by Bernard Gui, 
 
 156. 
 condemned by Nicholas I, 148, 
 
 232. 
 presence of clerics at, 154. 
 length of, 155. 
 Transmigration, of souls, 83. 
 
 Urban IV, and the episcopal In- 
 quisition, 137. 
 and the Inquisitorial procedure, 
 
 167. 
 and torture, 154. 
 Usury, 163. 
 
 Valentinian I, 9. 
 
 Valerian, Edict of, 57. 
 
 Veneration of Cathari, 81. 
 
 Verona, heretics burned at, 116. 
 
 Veronese code, 149. 
 
 Vestment, sacred, of the Cathari, 
 
 87. 
 Vezelai, heretics burned at, 51, 
 Vilgard, 35. 
 Viterbo, Patarins at, 62. 
 
 Waldenses, confounded with the 
 Cathari, 260. 
 heresy of, 72. 
 War, denounced by Cathari, 79. 
 Wazo, of Liege, 42, 43. 
 Witchcraft, 199-201. 
 Witnesses, character of, 125. 
 number required, 125. 
 few for the defence, 126. 
 
284 
 
 Witnesses, age of, 260. 
 dangers incurred by, 127. 
 refused for enmity, 126. 
 Synodal, 120. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Wyclif, 220. 
 
 Zanchino Ugolino, 163. 
 Zurkinden, 224. 
 
LONGMANS, GREEN, &^ GO'S PUBLICATIONS 
 
 Cbe mt^tmimttt ILiftrarp 
 
 A SERIES OF MANUALS FOR CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND STUDENTS 
 
 EDITED BY THE RIGHT REV. MGR. BERNARD WARD, 
 
 PRESIDENT OF ST. EDMUND'S COLLEGE, WARE 
 
 AND THE REV. HERBERT THURSTON, S.J. 
 
 THE TRADITION OF SCRIPTURE: Its Origin, Authority, 
 and Interpretation. By the Rev. William Barry, D.D., 
 sometime Scholar of the EngHsh College, Rome, formerly 
 Professor of Theology in St. Mary's College, Oscott. 
 Crown 8vo. Pp. xxvi-278 $1.20, net 
 
 "The most satisfactory manual hitherto published. It will easily take its place in 
 our higher schools as well as in the library of every Catholic gentleman and critic." — 
 Ecclesiastical Review. 
 
 THE HOLY EUCHARIST. By the Right Rev. John Cuth- 
 bert Hedley, O.S.B., Bishop of Newport. Crown 8vo. 
 Pp. xx-278 $1.20, net 
 
 "It merits the highest praise. Our . . . readers will do well to add 'The Holy 
 Eucharist' to the collection of books which they have within easy reach." — Ave Maria. 
 
 THE LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS: An Introduction to 
 Hagiography. From the French of Pere H. Delehaye, 
 S.J., BoUandist. Translated by Mrs. Virginia M. Craw- 
 ford. Crown 8vo. Pp. xx-241 $1.20, net 
 
 "The editors of the Westminster Library may be congratulated on the latest addition 
 to the series. And even apart from its intrinsic interest, the appearance of the work at 
 the present moment is particularly opportune." — Tabid. 
 
 THE PRIEST'S STUDIES. By T. B. Scannell, D.D. 
 Crown 8vo. Pp. xii-240 $1.20, net 
 
 The author shows not only that most priests can find time for study, 
 but that study is a necessary part of their work. Nothing is farther 
 from his mind than to divert a priest from the performance of his mis- 
 sionary duties, but rather is it his intention to help him to a more efficient 
 exercise of these, for priests in EngHsh -speaking countries, he says, must, 
 as a rule, be men of action rather than men of letters. 
 
 Contents: Introductory. Holy Scripture. The Fathers. Dog- 
 matic Theology. Moral Theology and Canon Law. Ascetical Theol- 
 ogy. The Liturg}'. Church History. Secular History. Art. Science. 
 Literature. Bibliography. Index. 
 
 Other volumes are in preparation. 
 
LONGMANS, GREEN, 6^ GO'S PUBLICATIONS 
 
 Works by the Very Rev. Canon P. A. Sheehan, D.D. 
 
 EARLY ESSAYS AND LECTURES. Crown 8vo. Pp. x- 
 354 $i.6o, net 
 
 Contents. — Essays. Religious Instruction in Intermediate Schools 
 — In a Dublin Art Gallery — Emerson — Free-Thought in America — 
 German Universities (Three Essays) — German and Gallic Muses — 
 Augustinian Literature — The Poetry of Matthew Arnold — Recent 
 Works on St. Augustine — Aubrey de Vera (a Study). Lectures. Irish 
 Youth and High Ideals — The Two Civilizations — The Golden Jubilee 
 of O'Connell's Death — Our Personal and Social Responsibilities — The 
 Study of Mental Science — Certain Elements of Character — The Limi- 
 tations and Possibilities of Catholic Literature. 
 
 LOST ANGEL OF A RUINED PARADISE: A Drama of 
 Modern Life. Crown 8vo. Pp. vi-i68 $i.oo, 7iet 
 
 PARERGA. A Companion Volume to " Under the Cedars and 
 the Stars." Crown 8vo. 360 pages. $1.60, net. 
 
 [February, 1908 
 
 LUKE DELMEGE. A Novel. 
 
 Crown 8vo. Pp. viii-580 $1.50 
 
 "This is an exceedingly powerful and absorbing book. Beginning with the true 
 artistic quiet and restraint, it strengthens and broadens in power and interest until it 
 moves on like a great procession. ... It is a novel, but it is more than that. It is a 
 great sermon, a great lesson, almost a great drama. . . . We cordially commend 'Luke 
 Delmege' for its lofty purpose and thought, its adequate diction, and its high incenti\e 
 . . . there is in it an occasional touch of humor which is very welcome and which is 
 truly Irish in its nature." — The Sun, Baltimore, Md. 
 
 GLENANAAR. A Novel of Irish Life. 
 
 Crown 8vo. Pp. vi-321 $1.50 
 
 " ... A story powerful in conception, graphic in description, and dramatic in 
 plot, that puts him' unquestionably in the front rank of contemporary Irish novelists. 
 . . . Besides a slender love-story, free from pieliald pathos and rnavykish sentimentality, 
 there can be found* in 'Glenanaar' a wonderful luxuriance of incident and wealth of 
 folklore, which together with gentle humor and sweet human sympathy adorn every 
 chapter. . . . We have laid this charming book down with a promise to read it over 
 again at the first opportunity." — Gaelic American, New York. 
 
 LISHEEN. A Novel. Crown 8vo. Pp. vi-454 $i-5o 
 
 "A capital study of modern conditions in Ireland. A sympathetic study, too, and 
 it will be welcomed heartily by the big circle of his admirers." — Cleveland Leader. 
 
 "The pleasant scenes ring true, there is vigor and movement in the_ action, and what- 
 ever faults one may find with details the book has one supreme merit, it is readable from 
 cover to cover, and anyone who lays it down before the last page takes little interest 
 either in Irish life or in a good story." — Belfast Northern Whig. 
 
LONGMANS, GREEN, £r= GO'S PUBLICATIONS 
 
 THE INNER LIFE OF THE SOUL. Short Spiritual Mes- 
 sages for the Ecclesiastical Year. By S. L. Emery. Crown 
 8vo, cloth extra $1.50, net. By mail, $1.60 
 
 " ... It is a work of which we CathoHcs in America may be proud. . . . The 
 author of this book, writes with a distinctively Hlerary flavor and shows a ready command 
 of pure limpid diction that flows on in charming freshness like a crystal stream through 
 a grassy meadow. Nor is the genuine poetic talent lacking. To this literary style is 
 added an enthusiasm for the life of loving union with God that bursts upward like a 
 flame yet at the same time is tempered with discretion that is truly Catholic. . . . In 
 the opening meditation, bearing the same title as the book, a lofty flight is taken which 
 is unbroken to the end. There is freshness, vigor, variety, enthusiasm on every page. ..." 
 
 — Catholic University Bulletin. 
 
 THE MASTER TOUCH. AN ALLEGORY. By W. Q. 
 
 With frontispiece. Crown 8vo $0.40 
 
 "The atmosphere of the far-away period is admirably reproduced, and the book 
 will please all lovers of the childlike naivete that characterized the faithful in the olden 
 times." — Ave Maria. 
 
 LENT AND HOLY WEEK. Chapters on Catholic Obser- 
 vances and Ritual. By Herbert Thurston, S.J. Crown 
 
 8vo $2.00 
 
 Contents: Chap. I. Septuagesima and the Lenten Fast — II. 
 
 Shrove Tuesday and Ash Wednesday — III. The Quarant 'Ore — IV. 
 
 The Lenten Liturgy — V. the Feasts of the Passion — VI. Palm Sunday 
 
 — VII. Tenebrs — VIII. Maundy Thursday — IX. Good Friday — 
 X. The Three Hours — XL Holy Saturday — XII. Easter Sunday. 
 
 This volume aims at supplying a popular account of those external 
 observances by which the season of Paschal preparation is marked off 
 from the rest of the ecclesiastical year. Although a devotional purpose 
 has not been excluded, the writer's principal object has been to touch 
 upon points of historical and liturgical interest, points which often bring 
 us into immediate relation with the practice of the early Christian cen- 
 turies. The discipline of fasting, the Lenten Hturgy, and in particular 
 the ceremonies of Holy Week, have all been treated with some degree 
 of fulness. . . . The book is in no sense controversial. Although written 
 from a CathoHc standpoint, it does not pretend to do more than supply 
 a plain statement of liturgical facts, such as w^ould be accepted by the 
 more serious students of every Communion. 
 
 STORIES ON THE ROSARY. By Louisa Emily Dobree, 
 Author of "Stories of the Seven Sacraments," etc. 
 
 Part I. Containing 5 Stories. Crown 8vo $0.50 
 
 Part II. Containing 5 Stories. Crown 8vo $0.50 
 
 Part III. Containing 5 Stories. Crown 8vo $0.50 
 
LONGMANS, GREEN, d^ GO'S PUBLICATIONS 
 
 BEGINNINGS OF THE CHURCH, THE — A SERIES 
 OF HISTORIES OF THE FIRST CENTURY. By 
 
 the Abbe Constant Fouard, Honorary Cathedral Canon, 
 Professor of the Faculty of Theology at Rouen, etc., etc. 
 
 "This is not merely biography; it is veritable history as well. The whole period 
 is rehabilitated, the people made to appear before us as they actually Hved. Geography, 
 topography, ethnology and politics are here combined to form a picture instinct with 
 living reality. We do not think that we are saying too much when we declare that this 
 work should at once hnd a place in every Christian library." — Catholic Standard. 
 
 1. THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD: A Life of our 
 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Translated from the 
 Fifth Edition with the Author's sanction and co-operation, 
 with an Introduction by Cardinal Manning. Two vols., 
 with 3 Maps, small 8vo, gilt top $4.00 
 
 2. ST. PETER AND THE FIRST YEARS OF CHRIS- 
 TIANITY. Translated from the Second Edition with the 
 Author's sanction and co-operation, with an Introduction 
 by Cardinal Gibbons. In one vol., with 3 Maps, small 8vo, 
 cloth, gilt top $2.00 
 
 3. ST. PAUL AND HIS MISSIONS. Translated with the 
 Author's sanction and co-operation. In one vol., with 
 Maps, small 8vo, cloth, gilt top $2.00 
 
 4. THE LAST YEARS OF ST. PAUL. Translated with 
 the Author's sanction and co-operation. With Maps and 
 Plans. Small Svo^ gilt top $2.00 
 
 5. ST. JOHN AND THE CLOSE OF THE APOSTOLIC 
 AGE. Translated with the sanction and co-operation of 
 the Author's executors. With a Portrait of the Abbe 
 Fouard. Small 8vo, gilt top. .$1.60, net. By mail, $1.72 
 
 *** The six volumes comprising this set can be supplied in uniform binding, boxed. 
 Price, $g.6o, net. Expressage additional. 
 
 STUDIES ON THE GOSPELS. By Vincent Rose, O.P. 
 Professor in the University of Fribourg. Authorized Eng- 
 hsh Version by Robert Fraser, D.D., Domestic Prelate 
 of H.H. Pius X. Crown 8vo $2.00 
 
 "A work of the very first importance. No Scriptural work in English from the 
 pen of a Catholic can we at this moment recall which does so much to meet the urgent 
 demands of New Testament Criticism. . . . Honest, open-minded, and clearly a candid 
 lo\'er of truth, he is as distinguished an apologist as one could wish." — Catholic World. 
 
LONGMANS, GREEN, ^ GO'S PUBLICATIONS 
 
 ESSAYS IN PASTORAL MEDICINE. By Austin oMal- 
 LEY, M.D., Ph.D., LL.D. Ophthalmologist to Saint 
 Agnes's Hospital, Philadelphia, and James J. Walsh 
 M.D., Ph.D., LL.D., Adjunct Professor of Medicine at 
 the New York Polychnic School for Graduates in Medicine; 
 Professor of Nervous Diseases and of the History of Medi- 
 cine, Fordham University, New York. Second Impression. 
 8vo. 373 pages $2.50, net. By mail, $2.68 
 
 "AU professors of moral science and all priests on the mission ought to provide 
 themselves with the 'Essays in Pastoral Medicine.' It is impossible to go into the details 
 of a book Uke this; and so we will confine ourselves to sajang that this volume is the best 
 and most complete in its subject-matter that we have ever seen. All the moral questions 
 that arise in connection with the origin of life, with human co-operation with the creative 
 purpose of God; the questions regarding responsibility that are suggested h)y inebriety, 
 hysteria, neurasthenia, epilepsy, suicide, and hereditary criminality, are discussed here 
 with scientific competence and in an English style of admirable clarity and power." — 
 Catholic World. 
 
 " ... Should give the intelligent student much food for thought, for it opens up 
 a mine of information not usually explored by those outside the medical profession. To 
 the pastor it is particularly adapted. It gives him knowledge which it would be hard 
 for him to secure elsewhere. All the essays are practical explanations of necessary things 
 to do in emergencies as well as imder ordinary conditions and are so written that all 
 may easily understand. . . ." — Catholic Union and Times. 
 
 "... It is a great work — one might justly say, indeed, an invaluable one to 
 both priests and doctors." — Catholic Standard and Times. 
 
 "The book . . . seems to us one of the best of its kind. For English-speaking 
 clergv it is perhaps the very best. The authors keep steadily in vaew English and Amer- 
 ican life, customs, and modes of thought. On the other hand, they are staimch Catholics." 
 — The Tablet, London. 
 
 "... These scholarly essays by Drs. O'MaUey and Walsh are pathfinders and 
 most admirable, and should be read and pondered over by the physician, surgeon, gyne- 
 cologist, priest, minister, editor, lawyer, patient, teacher and parent. The volume 
 really fills a long -felt want in medicine and sociology." — Medical Record. 
 
 "This book will be of incalculable service to the priest and the conscientious physi- 
 cian. . . . For many reasons we are led to the verdict that these essays hold the first 
 place in the English language along the lines proper to Pastoral_ Medicine, and we should 
 like to see a copy in the library of every priest and of every physician. ..." — Donaho^s 
 
 Magazine. 
 
 Works by Rev. B. W. Maturin, formerly of Cowley St. John, Oxford 
 
 SOME PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES OF THE SPIR- 
 ITUAL LIFE. i2mo $1.50 
 
 PRACTICAL STUDIES ON THE PARABLES OF OUR 
 LORD. Crown 8vo $1.50 
 
 SELF-KNOWLEDGE AND SELF-DISCIPLINE. Crown 
 8vo $1 .50, we/ 
 
 LAWS OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE. Crown 8vo . . $1.50, net 
 
 *** This b a series of nine chapters dealing with the Beatitudes. 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0035518740 
 
 BRimE DO NOT 
 PHOTOCOPY