CHAPTER XIV.

THE STAKE.

Like confiscation, the death-penalty was a matter with which the Inquisition had theoretically no concern. It exhausted every effort to bring the heretic back to the bosom of the Church. If he proved obdurate, or if his conversion was evidently feigned, it could do no more. As a non-Catholic, he was no longer amenable to the spiritual jurisdiction of a Church which he did not recognize, and all that it could do was to declare him a heretic and withdraw its protection. In the earlier periods the sentence thus is simply a condemnation as a heretic, accompanied by excommunication, or it merely states that the offender is no longer considered as subject to the jurisdiction of the Church. Sometimes there is the addition that he is abandoned to secular judgment--"relaxed," according to the terrible euphemism which assumed that he was simply discharged from custody. When the formulas had become more perfected there is frequently the explanatory remark that the Church has nothing left to do to him for his demerits; and the relinquishment to the secular arm is accompanied with the significant addition "_debita animadversione puniendum_"--that he is to be duly punished by it. The adjuration that this punishment, in accordance with the canonical sanctions, shall not imperil life or limb, or shall not cause death or effusion of blood, does not appear in the earlier sentences, and was not universal even at a later period.[501]

That this appeal for mercy was the merest form is admitted by Pegna, who explains that it was used only that the inquisitors might seem not to consent to the effusion of blood, and thus avoid incurring "irregularity." The Church took good care that the nature of the request should not be misapprehended. It taught that in such cases all mercy was misplaced unless the heretic became a convert, and proved his sincerity by denouncing all his fellows. The remorseless logic of St. Thomas Aquinas rendered it self-evident that the secular power could not escape the duty of putting the heretic to death, and that it was only the exceeding kindness of the Church that led it to give the criminal two warnings before handing him over to meet his fate. The inquisitors themselves had no scruples on the subject, and condescended to no subterfuges respecting it, but always held that their condemnation of a heretic was a sentence of death. They showed this in averting the pollution of a Church by not uttering these sentences within the sacred precincts, this portion of the ceremony of an _auto de fé_ being performed in the public square. One of their teachers in the thirteenth century, copied by Bernard Gui in the fourteenth, argues: "The object of the Inquisition is the destruction of heresy. Heresy cannot be destroyed unless heretics are destroyed: heretics cannot be destroyed unless their defenders and fautors are destroyed, and this is effected in two ways, viz., when they are converted to the true Catholic faith, or when, on being abandoned to the secular arm, they are corporally burned." In the next century, Fray Alonso de Spina points out that they are not to be delivered up to extermination without warning once and again, unless, indeed, their growth threatens trouble to the Church, when they are to be extirpated without delay or examination. Under these teachings the secular powers naturally recognized that in burning heretics they were only obeying the commands of the Inquisition. In a commission issued by Philippe le Bon of Burgundy, November 9, 1431, ordering his officials to render obedience to Friar Kaleyser, recently appointed Inquisitor of Lille and Cambrai, among the duties enumerated is that of inflicting due punishment on heretics "as he shall decree, and as is customary." In the accounts of the royal _procureurs des encours_, the cost of these executions in Languedoc was charged against the proceeds of the confiscations as part of the expenses of the Inquisition, thus showing that they were not regarded as ordinary incidents of criminal justice, to be defrayed out of the ordinary revenues, but as peculiarly connected with and dependent upon the operations of the Inquisition, of which the royal officials only acted as ministers. The Inquisitor Sprenger had no hesitation in alluding to the victims whom he caused to be burned--"_quas incinerari fecimus_." In fact, how modern is the pretension that the Church was not responsible for the atrocity is apparent when, as late as the seventeenth century, the learned Cardinal Albizio, in controverting Frà Paolo as to the control of the Inquisition by the State in Venice, had no scruple in asserting that "the inquisitors in conducting the trials, regularly came to the sentence, and if it was one of death it was immediately and necessarily put into execution by the doge and the senate."[502]

We have already seen that the Church was responsible for the enactment of the ferocious laws punishing heresy with death, and that she intervened authoritatively to annul any secular statutes which should interfere with the prompt and effective application of the penalties. In the same way, as we have also seen, she provided against any negligence or laxity on the part of the magistrates in executing the sentences pronounced by the inquisitors. According to the universal belief of the period, this was her plainest and highest duty, and she did not shrink from it. Boniface VIII. only recorded the current practice when he embodied in the canon law the provision whereby the secular authorities were commanded to punish duly and promptly all who were handed over to them by the inquisitors, under pain of excommunication, which became heresy if endured for a twelvemonth, and the inquisitors were rigidly instructed to proceed against all magistrates who proved recalcitrant, while they were at the same time cautioned only to speak of executing the laws without specifically mentioning the penalty, in order to avoid falling into "irregularity," though the only punishment recognized by the Church as sufficient for heresy was burning alive. Even if the ruler was excommunicated and incapable of legally performing any other function, he was not relieved from the obligation of this supreme duty, with which nothing was allowed to interfere. Indeed, authorities were found to argue that if an inquisitor were obliged to execute the sentence himself he would not thereby incur irregularity.[503]

We are not to imagine, however, from these reduplicated commands that the secular power, as a rule, showed itself in the slightest degree disinclined to perform the duty. The teachings of the Church had made too profound an impression for any doubt in the premises to exist. As has been seen above, the laws of all the states of Europe prescribed concremation as the appropriate penalty for heresy, and even the free commonwealths of Italy recognized the Inquisition as the judge whose sentences were to be blindly executed. Raymond of Toulouse himself, in the fit of piety which preceded his death in 1249, caused eighty believers in heresy to be burned at Berlaiges, near Agen, after they had confessed in his presence, apparently without giving them the opportunity of recanting. From the contemporary sentences of Bernard de 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. Quite as significant was the suit brought by the Maréchal de Mirepoix against the Seneschal of Carcassonne, because the latter had invaded his right to burn for himself all his subjects condemned as heretics by the Inquisition. In 1269 the Parlement of Paris decided the case in his favor, after which, on March 18, 1270, the seneschal acceded to his demand that the bones of seven men and three women of his territories, recently burned at Carcassonne, should be solemnly surrendered to him in recognition of his right; or, if they could not be found and identified, then, as substitutes, ten canvas bags filled with straw--a ghastly symbolic ceremony which was actually performed two days later, and a formal notarial act executed in attestation of it. Yet, though the De Levis of Mirepoix rejoiced in the title of Maréchaux de la Foi, it is not to be assumed that this eagerness arose wholly from bloodthirsty fanaticism, for there was nothing to which the seigneur-justicier clung more jealously than to every detail of his jurisdiction. A similar dispute arose in 1309, when the Count of Foix claimed the right to burn the Catharan heresiarch, Jacques Autier, and a woman named Guillelma Cristola, condemned by Bernard Gui, because they were his subjects, but the royal officials maintained their master's privileges in the premises, and the suit thence arising was still pending in 1326. So at Narbonne, where there was a long-standing dispute between the archbishop and the viscount as to the jurisdiction, and where, in 1319, the former in conjunction with the inquisitor Jean de Beaune relaxed three heretics, he claimed for his court the right to burn them. The commune, as representing the viscount, resisted this, and the hideous quarrel was only settled by the representative of the king stepping in and performing the act. In so doing, however, he carefully specified that it was not to work prejudice to either party, while to the end the archbishop protested against the intrusion upon his rights.[504]

If, however, from any cause, the secular authorities were reluctant to execute the death-sentence, the Church had little ceremony in putting forth its powers to coerce obedience. When, for instance, the first resistance in Toulouse had been broken down and the Holy Office had been reinstated there, the inquisitors, in 1237, condemned six men and women as heretics; but the viguier and consuls refused to receive the convicts, to confiscate their property, and "to do with them what was customary to be done with heretics"--that is, to burn them alive. Thereupon the inquisitors, after counselling with the bishop, the Abbot du Mas, the Provost of St. Étienne, and the Prior of La Daurade, proceeded to excommunicate solemnly the recalcitrant officials in the Cathedral of St. Étienne. In 1288 Nicholas IV. lamented the neglect and covert opposition with which in many places the secular authorities evaded the execution of the inquisitorial sentences, and directed that they should be punished with excommunication and deprivation of office and their communities be subjected to interdict. In 1458, at Strassburg, the Burgermeister, Hans Drachenfels, and his colleagues refused at first to burn the Hussite missionary Frederic Reiser and his servant Anna Weiler, but their resistance was overcome and they were finally forced to execute the sentence. Thirty years later, in 1486, the magistrates of Brescia objected to burning certain witches of both sexes condemned by the Inquisition, unless they should be permitted to examine the proceedings. This was held to be flat rebellion. Civil lawyers, it is true, had endeavored to prove that the secular authorities had a right to see the papers, but the inquisitors had succeeded in having this claim rejected. Innocent VIII. promptly declared the Venetian demands to be a scandal to the faith, and he ordered the excommunication of the magistrates if within six days they did not execute the convicts, any municipal statutes to the contrary being pronounced null and void--a decision which was held to give the secular courts six days in which to carry out the sentence of condemnation. A more stubborn contest arose in 1521, when the Inquisition endeavored to purge the dioceses of both Brescia and Bergamo of the witches who still infested them. The inquisitor and episcopal ordinaries proceeded against them vigorously, but the Signiory of Venice interposed and appealed to Leo X., who appointed his nuncio at Venice to revise the trials. The latter delegated his power to the Bishop of Justinopolis, who proceeded with the inquisitor and ordinaries to the Valcamonica of Brescia, where the so-called heretics were numerous, and condemned some of them to be relaxed to the secular arm. Still dissatisfied, the Venetian Senate ordered the Governor of Brescia not to execute the sentences or to permit them to be executed, or to pay the expenses of the proceedings, but to send the papers to Venice for revision, and to compel the Bishop of Justinopolis to appear before them, which he was obliged to do. This inflamed the papal indignation to the highest pitch. Leo X. warmly assured the inquisitor and the episcopal officials that they had full jurisdiction over the culprits, that their sentences were to be executed without revision or examination, and that they must enforce these rights with the free use of ecclesiastical censures. The spirit of the age, however, was insubordinate, and Venice had always been peculiarly so in all matters connected with the Holy Office. We shall see hereafter how the Council of Ten undauntedly held its position and asserted the superiority of its jurisdiction in a manner previously unexampled.[505]

In view of this unvarying policy of the Church during the three centuries under consideration, and for a century and a half later, there is a typical instance of the manner in which history is written to order, in the quiet assertion of the latest Catholic historian of the Inquisition that "the Church took no part in the corporal punishment of heretics. Those who perished miserably were only chastised for their crimes, sentenced by judges invested with the royal jurisdiction. The record of the excesses committed by the heretics of Bulgaria, by the Gnostics and Manichæans, is historical, and capital punishment was only inflicted on criminals confessing to robbery, assassination, and violence. The Albigenses were treated with equal benignity; ... the Catholic Church deplored all acts of vengeance, however great was the provocation given by the ferocity of those factious masses." So completely, in truth, was the Church convinced of its duty to see that all heretics were burned that, at the Council of Constance, the eighteenth article of heresy charged against John Huss was that, in his treatise _de Ecclesia_, he had taught that no heretic ought to be abandoned to secular judgment to be punished with death. In his defence even Huss admitted that a heretic who could not be mildly led from error ought to suffer bodily punishment; and when a passage was read from his book in which those who deliver an unconvicted heretic to the secular arm are compared to the Scribes and Pharisees who delivered Christ to Pilate, the assembly broke out into a storm of objurgation, during which even the sturdy reformer, Cardinal Pierre d'Ailly, was heard to exclaim, "Verily those who drew up the articles were most moderate, for his writings are much more atrocious."[506]

The continuous teachings of the Church led its best men to regard no act as more self-evidently just than the burning of the heretic, and no heresy less defensible than a demand for toleration. Even Chancellor Gerson himself could see nothing else to be done with those who pertinaciously adhered to error, even in matters not at present explicitly articles necessary to the faith.[507] The fact is, the Church not only defined the guilt and forced its punishment, but created the crime itself. As we shall see, under Nicholas IV. and Celestine V., the strict Franciscans were pre-eminently orthodox; but when John XXII. stigmatized as heretical the belief that Christ lived in absolute poverty, he transformed them into unpardonable criminals whom the temporal officials were bound to send to the stake, under pain of being themselves treated as heretics.

* * * * *

There was thus a universal consensus of opinion that there was nothing to do with a heretic but to burn him. The heretic as known to the laws, both secular and ecclesiastical, was he who not only admitted his heretical belief, but defended it and refused to recant. He was obstinate and impenitent; the Church could do nothing with him, and as soon as the secular lawgivers had provided for his guilt the awful punishment of the stake, there was no hesitation in handing him over to the temporal jurisdiction to endure it. All authorities unite in this, and the annals of the Inquisition can vainly be searched for an exception. Yet this was regarded by the inquisitor as a last resort. To say nothing of the saving of a soul, a convert who would betray his friends was more useful than a roasted corpse, and, as we have seen, no effort was spared to obtain recantation. Experience had shown that such zealots were often eager for martyrdom and desired to be speedily burned, and it was no part of the inquisitor's pleasure to gratify them. He was advised that this ardor frequently gave way under time and suffering, and therefore he was told to keep the obstinate and defiant heretic chained in a dungeon for six months or a year in utter solitude, save when a dozen theologians and legists should be let in upon him to labor for his conversion, or his wife and children be admitted to work upon his heart. It was not until all this had been tried and failed that he was to be relaxed. Even then the execution was postponed for a day to give further opportunity for recantation, which, we are told, rarely happened, for those who went thus far usually persevered to the end; but if his resolution gave way and he professed repentance, his conversion was presumed to be the work of fear rather than of grace, and he was to be strictly imprisoned for life. Even at the stake his offer to abjure ought not to be refused, though there was no absolute rule as to this, and there could be little hope of the genuineness of such conversion. Eymerich relates a case occurring at Barcelona when three heretics were burned, and one of them, a priest, after being scorched on one side, cried out that he would recant. He was removed and abjured, but fourteen years later was found to have persisted in heresy and to have infected many others, when he was despatched without more ado.[508]

The obstinate heretic who preferred martyrdom to apostasy was by no means the sole victim doomed to the stake. The secular lawgiver had provided this punishment for heresy, but had left to the Church its definition, and the definition was enlarged to serve as a gentle persuasive that should supplement all deficiencies in the inquisitorial process. Where testimony deemed sufficient existed, persistent denial only aggravated guilt, and the profession of orthodoxy was of no avail. If two witnesses swore to having seen a man "adore" a perfected heretic it was enough, and no declaration of readiness to subscribe to all the tenets of Rome availed him, without confession, abjuration, recantation, and acceptance of penance. Such a one was a heretic, to be pitilessly burned. It was the same with the contumacious who did not obey the summons to stand trial. Persistent refusal of the oath was likewise technical heresy, condemning the recalcitrant to the stake. Even when there was no proof, simple suspicion became heresy if the suspect failed to purge himself with conjurators and remained so for a year. In violent suspicion, refusal to abjure worked the same result in a twelvemonth. A retracted confession was similarly regarded. In short, the stake supplied all defects. It was the _ultima ratio_, and although not many cases have reached us in which executions actually occurred on these grounds, there is no doubt that such provisions were of the utmost utility in practice, and that the terror which they inspired extorted many a confession, true or false, from unwilling lips.[509]

There was another class of cases, however, which gave the inquisitors much trouble, and in which they were long in settling upon a definite and uniform course of procedure. The innumerable forced conversions wrought by the dungeon and stake filled the prisons and the land with those whose outward conformity left them at heart no less heretics than before. I have elsewhere spoken of the all-pervading police of the Holy Office and of the watchfulness exercised over the converts whose liberation at best was but a ticket-of-leave. That cases of relapse into heresy should be constant was therefore a matter of course. Even in the jails it was impossible to segregate all the prisoners, and complaints are frequent of these wolves in sheep's clothing who infected their more innocent fellow-captives. A man whose solemn conversion had once been proved fraudulent could never again be trusted. He was an incorrigible heretic whom the Church could no longer hope to win over. On him mercy was wasted, and the stake was the only resource. Yet it is creditable to the Inquisition that it was so long in reducing to practice this self-evident proposition.

As early as 1184 the Verona decree of Lucius III. provides that those who, after abjuration, relapse into the abjured heresy shall be delivered to the secular courts, without even the opportunity of being heard. The Ravenna edict of Frederic II., in 1232, prescribed death for all who, by relapse, showed that their conversion had been a pretext to escape the penalty of heresy. In 1244 the Council of Narbonne alludes to the great multitude of such cases, and, following Lucius III., orders them to be relaxed without a hearing. Yet these stern mandates were not enforced. In 1233 we find Gregory IX. contenting himself with prescribing perpetual imprisonment for such cases, which he speaks of as being already numerous. In a single sentence of February 10, 1237, the inquisitors of Toulouse condemn seventeen relapsed heretics to perpetual imprisonment. Raymond de Pennaforte, at the Council of Tarragona, in 1242, alludes to the diversity of opinion on the subject, and pronounces in favor of imprisonment; and, in 1246, the Council of Béziers, in giving similar instructions, speaks of them as being in accordance with the apostolic mandates. Even this degree of severity was not always inflicted. In 1242 Pierre Cella only prescribes pilgrimages and crosses for such offenders, and, in a case occurring in Florence in 1245, Frà Ruggieri Calcagni lets off the culprit with a not extravagant fine.[510]

What to do with these multitudes of false converts was evidently a question which perplexed the Church no little, and, as usual, a solution, at least for the time, was found in leaving the matter to the discretion of the inquisitors. In answer to the inquiries of the Lombard Holy Office, the Cardinal of Albano, about 1245, tells the officials to make use of such penalties as they shall deem appropriate. In 1248 Bernard de Caux asked the same question of the Archbishop of Narbonne, and was told that, according to the "apostolic mandates," those who returned to the Church a second time, humbly and obediently, might be let off with perpetual imprisonment, while those who were disobedient should be abandoned to the secular arm. Under these instructions the practice varied, though it is pleasant to be able to say that, in the vast majority of cases, the inquisitors leaned to the side of mercy. Even the ardent zeal of Bernard de Caux allowed him to use his discretion gently. In his register of sentences, from 1246 to 1248, there are sixty cases of relapse, none of which are punished more severely than by imprisonment, and in some of them the confinement is not perpetual. The same lenity is observable in various sentences rendered during the next ten years, both by him and by other inquisitors. Yet, with one exception, the codes of instruction which date about this period assume that relapse is always to be visited with relaxation, and that the offender is to have no hearing in his defence. In the exceptional instance the compiler illustrates the uncertainty which existed by sometimes treating relapse as punishable with imprisonment and sometimes as entailing the stake. Relapse into usury, however, was let off with the lighter alternative. The fact is that in Languedoc, under the Treaty of Paris, as stated above, an oath of abjuration was administered every two years to all males over fourteen and all females over twelve, and any subsequent act of heresy was technically a relapse. This, perhaps, explains the indecision of the inquisitors of Toulouse. It was impossible to burn all such cases.[511]

Whatever be the cause, there evidently was considerable doubt in the minds of inquisitors as to the penalty of relapse, and it must be recorded to their credit that in this they were more merciful than the current public opinion of the age. Jean de Saint-Pierre, the colleague and successor of Bernard de Caux, followed his example in always condemning the relapsed to imprisonment, and when, after Bernard's death, in 1252, Frère Renaud de Chartres was adjoined to him, the same rule continued to be observed. Frère Renaud found, however, to his horror, that the secular judges disregarded the sentence and mercilessly burned the unhappy victims, and that this had been going on under his predecessors. The civil authorities defended their course by arguing that in no other way could the land be purged of heresy, which was acquiring new force under the mistaken lenity of the inquisitors. Frère Renaud felt that he could not overlook this cruelty in silence as his predecessors had done. He therefore reported the facts to Alphonse of Poitiers, and informed him that he proposed to refer the matter to the pope, pending whose answer he would keep his prisoners secure from the brutal violence of the secular officials.[512]

What was the papal response we can only conjecture, but it doubtless leaned rather to the rigorous zeal of Alphonse's officials than to the milder methods of Frère Renaud, for it was about this time that Rome definitely decided for the unconditional relaxation of all who were guilty of relapsing into heresy which had once been abjured. The precise date of this I have not been able to determine. In 1254 Innocent IV. contents himself, in a very aggravated case of double relapse occurring in Milan, with ordering destruction of houses and public penance, but in 1258 relaxation for relapse is alluded to by Alexander IV. as a matter previously irrevocably settled--possibly by the very appeal of Frère Renaud. It seems to have taken the inquisitors somewhat by surprise, and for several years they continued to trouble the Holy See with the pertinent question of how such a rule was to be reconciled with the universally received maxim that the Church never closes her bosom to her wayward children seeking to return. To this the characteristic explanation was given that the Church was not closed to them, for if they showed signs of penitence they might receive the Eucharist, even at the stake, but without escaping death. In this shape the decision was embodied in the canon law, and made a part of orthodox doctrine in the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas. The promise of the Eucharist frequently formed part of the sentence in these cases, and the victim was always accompanied to execution by holy men striving to save his soul until the last--though it is shrewdly advised that the inquisitor himself had better not exhibit his zeal in this way, as his appearance will be more likely to excite hardening than softening of the heart.[513]

Although inquisitors continued to assume discretion in these cases and did not by any means invariably send the relapsed to the stake, still relapse became the main cause of capital punishment. Defiant heretics courting martyrdom were comparatively rare, but there were many poor souls who could not abandon conscientiously the errors which they had cherished, and who vainly hoped, after escaping once, to be able to hide their guilt more effectually.[514] All this gave a fresh importance to the question of what legally constituted relapse, and led to endless definitions and subtleties. It became necessary to determine with some precision, when the offender was refused a hearing, the exact amount of criminality in both the first and second offences, which would justify condemnation for impenitent heresy. Where guilt was ofttimes so shadowy and impalpable, this was evidently no easy matter.

There were cases in which a first trial had only developed suspicion without proof, and it seemed hard to condemn a man to death for an assumed second offence when he had not been proved guilty of the first. Hesitating to do so, the inquisitors applied to Alexander IV. to resolve their doubts, and he answered in the most positive manner. When the suspicion had been "violent" he said, it was "by a sort of legal fiction" to be held as legal proof of guilt, and the accused was to be condemned. When it was "light" he was to be punished more heavily than for a first offence, but not with the full penalty of relapse. Moreover, the evidence required to prove the second offence was of the slightest; any communication with or kindness shown to heretics sufficed. This decision was repeated by Alexander and his successors with a frequency which shows how doubtful and puzzling were the points which came up for discussion, but the rule of condemnation was finally carried into the canon law and became the unalterable policy of the Church. The authorities, except Zanghino, agree that in such cases there was no room for mercy.[515]

Besides these enigmas there were others respecting forms of guilt which might reasonably be regarded as less deserving of the last resort. Thus relapse into fautorship gave rise to considerable divergence of views. The Council of Narbonne, in 1244, was of opinion that those guilty of this offence should be sent to the pope for absolution and the imposition of penance--a cumbrous procedure, not likely to find favor. During the middle period of the Inquisition, the authorities, including Bernard Gui, while not prescribing relaxation to the secular arm, suggest that penance be imposed sufficiently severe to inspire wholesome fear in others; while, towards the end of the fourteenth century, Eymerich holds that a relapsed fautor is to be abandoned to secular justice without a hearing. Even those defamed for heresy, if after due purgation they again incur defamation, are strictly liable to the same fate, though this was so hard a measure that Eymerich proposes that such cases should be referred to the pope.[516]

There was another class of offenders who gave the inquisitors endless trouble, and for whom it was difficult to frame rigid and invariable rules--those who escaped from prison or omitted to fulfil the penances assigned to them. According to theory, all penitents were converts to the true faith who eagerly accepted penance as their sole hope of salvation. To reject it subsequently was therefore an evidence that the conversion had been feigned or that the inconstant soul had reverted to its former errors, as otherwise the loving and wholesome discipline of the benignant Mother Church would not be spurned. From the beginning, therefore, these culprits were classed with the relapsed. In 1248 the Council of Valence ordered them to have the benefit of a warning, after which further persistence in disobedience rendered them liable to the full penalty of obstinate heresy; and this was sometimes provided for in the sentence itself, by a clause which warned them that any disregard of the observances enjoined would expose them to the fate of perjured and impenitent heretics. Yet as late as 1260 Alexander IV. seems at a loss what rule to prescribe in such cases, and merely talks vaguely of excommunication and reimposition of the penalties, with the assistance, if necessary, of the secular authorities. Yet about the same period Gui Foucoix pronounced in favor of the death-penalty for these offenders, arguing that the offence proved impenitent heresy; but Bernard Gui held this to be too severe, and advised leaving them to the discretion of the inquisitor--a discretion which he himself had no hesitation in exercising. The two most frequent varieties of the offence were laying aside the yellow crosses and prison-breaking. The former was never, so far as I have seen, punished with death, though visited with penalties sufficiently sharp to serve as a deterrent. The latter, according to the later inquisitors, was capital--the escaped prisoner was a relapsed heretic, to be burned without a hearing. Some jurists argued that a failure fully to betray all heretics of whom the convert had knowledge--a pledge to do so forming a necessary part of the oath of abjuration--constituted relapse, but Bernard Gui regards this as unduly harsh. Absolute refusal to perform the penance enjoined was, of course, evidence of obstinate heresy, leading inevitably to the stake. Such cases were naturally rare, for penance was only prescribed for those who had confessed, had professed conversion, and had asked for reconciliation; but there is one on record of a woman, in the latter half of the fifteenth century, before the Inquisition of Cartagena, who was duly abandoned to the secular arm.[517]

* * * * *

Notwithstanding these extensions of the death-penalty, I am convinced that the number of victims who actually perished at the stake is considerably less than has ordinarily been imagined. The deliberate burning alive of a human being, simply for difference of belief, is an atrocity so dramatic and appeals so strongly to the imagination that it has come to be regarded as the leading feature in the activity of the Inquisition. Yet, frequent as recourse to the stake undoubtedly was, it formed but a comparatively small part of the instrumentalities of repression. The records of those evil days have mostly disappeared, and there is now no possibility of reconstructing their statistics, but if this could be done I have no doubt that the actual executions by fire would excite surprise by falling far short of the popular estimate. Imagination has grown inflamed at the manifold iniquities of the Holy Office, and has been ready to accept without examination exaggerations which have become habitual. No one can suspect the learned Dom Brial of prejudice or of ordinary lack of accuracy, and yet in his Preface to Vol. XXI. of the "Recueil des Historiens des Gaules" (p. xxiii.), he quotes as trustworthy an assertion that Bernard Gui, during his service as Inquisitor of Toulouse from 1308 to 1323, put to death no less than six hundred and thirty-seven heretics. Now that, as we have seen, was the total number of sentences uttered by the tribunal during those years, and of these sentences only forty were capital--in addition to sixty-seven dead heretics condemned to be exhumed and burned, for the most part because they were not alive to recant. Again, no inquisitor left behind him a more enviable record for zeal and activity in the relentless persecution of heresy than Bernard de Caux, who labored in the earlier period when the land was yet full of heresy, and heretics had not yet been cowed into submissiveness. Bernard Gui characterizes him as "a persecutor and hammer of heretics, a holy man and full of God, ... wonderful in his life, wonderful in doctrine, wonderful in extirpating heresy;" he wrought miracles while alive, and in 1281, twenty-eight years after his death, his body was found uncorrupted and perfect, except part of the nose. Such a man is not to be accused of undue tenderness towards heretics, and yet, in his register of sentences from 1246 to 1248, there is not a single case of abandonment to the secular arm, unless we may reckon as such the condemnations of contumacious absentees, who were necessarily declared to be heretics. These, indeed, were liable to be burned by the secular justice, but, in fact, they could always save themselves by submission, and this very register affords a very striking instance in point. There was no more obnoxious heretic in Toulouse than Alaman de Roaix. He belonged to one of the noblest families in the city, and one which furnished many members to the heretic church, of which he himself was suspected of being a bishop. In 1229 the Legate Romano had condemned him and had imposed on him the penance of a crusade to the Holy Land, which he had sworn to perform and never fulfilled. In 1237 the earliest inquisitors, Guillem Arnaud and Étienne de Saint-Thibery, again took up his case, finding him unremittingly active in protecting heretics and disseminating heresy, spoiling, ransoming, wounding, and slaying priests and clerks, and this time they condemned him _in absentia_. He became a _faydit_, or proscribed man, living sword in hand and plundering the orthodox to support himself and his friends. No more aggravated case of obstinate heresy and persistent contumacy can well be imagined, and yet when he acknowledged his errors, January 16, 1248, professed conversion, and asked for penance, a score of years after his first conversion, he was only condemned to imprisonment.[518]

In fact, as we have already seen, the earnest endeavors of the inquisitors were directed much more to obtaining conversions with confiscations and betrayal of friends than to provoking martyrdoms. An occasional burning only was required to maintain a wholesome terror in the minds of the population. With his forty cases of concremation in fifteen years, Bernard Gui managed to crush the last convulsive struggle of Catharism, to keep the Waldenses in check, and repress the zealous ardor of the Spiritual Franciscans. The really effective weapons of the Holy Office, the real curses with which it afflicted the people, can be looked for in its dungeons and its confiscations, in the humiliating penances of the saffron crosses, and in the invisible police with which it benumbed the heart and soul of every man who had once fallen into its hands.

* * * * *

A few words will suffice as to the repulsive subject of the execution itself. When the populace was called together to view the last agonies of the martyrs of heresy, its pious zeal was not mocked by any ill-advised devices of mercy. The culprit was not, as in the later Spanish Inquisition, strangled before the lighting of the fagots; nor had the invention of gunpowder suggested the somewhat less humane expedient of hanging a bag of that explosive around his neck to shorten his torture when the flames should reach it. He was tied living to a post set high enough over a pile of combustibles to enable the faithful to watch every act of the tragedy to its awful end. Holy men accompanied him to the last, to snatch his soul if possible from Satan; and, if he were not a relapsed, he could, as we have seen, save also his body at the last moment. Yet even in these final ministrations we see a fresh illustration of the curious inconsistency with which the Church imagined that it could shirk the responsibility of putting a human creature to death, for the friars who accompanied the victim were strictly warned not to exhort him to meet death promptly or to ascend firmly the ladder leading to the stake, or to submit cheerfully to the manipulations of the executioner, for if they did so they would be hastening his end and thus fall into "irregularity"--a tender scruple, it must be confessed, and one singularly out of place in those who had accomplished the judicial murder. For these occasions a holiday was usually selected, in order that the crowd might be larger and the lesson more effective; while, to prevent scandal, the sufferer was silenced, lest he might provoke the people to pity and sympathy.[519]

As for minor details, we happen to have them preserved in an account by an eye-witness of the execution of John Huss at Constance, in 1415. He was made to stand upon a couple of fagots and tightly bound to a thick post with ropes, around the ankles, below the knee, above the knee, at the groin, the waist, and under the arms. A chain was also secured around the neck. Then it was observed that he faced the east, which was not fitting for a heretic, and he was shifted to the west; fagots mixed with straw were piled around him to the chin. Then the Count Palatine Louis, who superintended the execution, approached with the Marshal of Constance, and asked him for the last time to recant. On his refusal they withdrew and clapped their hands, which was the signal for the executioners to light the pile. After it had burned away there followed the revolting process requisite to utterly destroy the half-burned body--separating it in pieces, breaking up the bones and throwing the fragments and the viscera on a fresh fire of logs. When, as in the cases of Arnaldo of Brescia, some of the Spiritual Franciscans, Huss, Savonarola, and others, it was feared that relics of the martyr would be preserved, especial care was taken, after the fire was extinguished, to gather up the ashes and cast them in a running stream.[520]

There is something grotesquely horrible in the contrast between this crowning exhibition of human perversity and the cool business calculation of the cost of thus sending a human soul through flame to its Creator. In the accounts of Arnaud Assalit we have a statement of the expenses of burning four heretics at Carcassonne, April 24, 1323. It runs thus:

For large wood 55 sols 6 deniers. For vine-branches 21 sols 3 deniers. For straw 2 sols 6 deniers. For four stakes 10 sols 9 deniers. For ropes to tie the convicts 4 sols 7 deniers. For the executioner, each 20 sols 80 sols. ----------------- In all 8 livres 14 sols 7 deniers.

or, a little more than two livres apiece.[521]

When the heretic had eluded his tormentors by death and his body or skeleton was dug up and burned, the ceremony was necessarily less impressive, but nevertheless the most was made of it. As early as 1237 Guillem Pelisson, a contemporary, describes how at Toulouse a number of nobles and others were exhumed, when "their bones and stinking corpses" were dragged through the streets, preceded by a trumpeter proclaiming "_Qui aytal fara, aytal perira_"--who does so shall perish so--and at length were duly burned "in honor of God and of the blessed Mary His mother, and the blessed Dominic His servant." This formula was preserved to the end, and it was not economical from a pecuniary point of view. In Assalit's accounts we find that it cost five livres nineteen sols and six deniers, in 1323, for labor to dig up the bones of three dead heretics, a sack and cord in which to stow them, and two horses to drag them to the Grève, where they were burned the next day.[522]

The agency of fire was also invoked by the Inquisition to rid the land of pestilent and heretical writings, a matter not without interest as signalizing the commencement of its activity in what subsequently became the censorship of the press. The burning of books displeasing to the authorities was a custom respectable by its antiquity. Constantine, as we have seen, demanded the surrender of all Arian works under penalty of death. In 435 Theodosius II. and Valentinian III. ordered all Nestorian books to be burned, and another law threatens punishment on all who will not deliver up Manichæan writings for the same fate. Justinian condemned the _secunda editio_, in which the glossators agree in recognizing the Talmud. During the ages of barbarism which followed there was little to call forth this method of repressing the human mind, but with the revival of speculation the ancient measures were speedily again called into use. When, in 1210, the University of Paris was agitated with the heresy of Amaury, the writings of his colleague, David de Dinant, together with the Physics and Metaphysics of Aristotle, to which it was attributed, were ordered to be burned. Allusion has already been made to the burning of Romance versions of the Scriptures by Jayme I. of Aragon and to the commands of the Council of Narbonne, in 1229, against the possession of any portion of Holy Writ by laymen, as well as to the burning of William of St. Amour's book, "_De periculis_." Jewish books, however, and particularly the Talmud, on account of its blasphemous allusions to the Saviour and the Virgin, were the objects of special detestation, in the suppression of which the Church was unwearying. In the middle of the twelfth century Peter the Venerable contented himself with studying the Talmud and holding up to contempt some of the wild imaginings which abound in that curious compound of the sublime and the ridiculous. His argumentative methods were not suited to the impatience of the thirteenth century, which had committed itself to sterner dealings with misbelievers, and the persecution of Jewish literature followed swiftly on that of Albigenses and Waldenses. It was started by a converted Jew named Nicholas de Rupella, who, about 1236, called the attention of Gregory IX. to the blasphemies with which the Hebrew books were filled, and especially the Talmud. In June, 1239, Gregory issued letters to the Kings of England, France, Navarre, Aragon, Castile, and Portugal, and to the prelates in those kingdoms, ordering that on a Sabbath in the following Lent, when the Jews would be in their synagogues, all their books should be seized and delivered to the Mendicant Friars. A report of the examination which ensued in Paris has been preserved, and shows that there was no difficulty in finding in the Jewish writings abundant matter offensive to pious ears, though the Rabbis who ventured to appear in their defence endeavored to explain away the blasphemous allusions to the Christian Messiah, the Virgin, and the saints. The proceedings dragged on for years, and sentence was not finally rendered until May 13, 1248, after which Paris was edified with the spectacle of the burning of fourteen wagon-loads at one time and of six at another. Like the _luz_ or _os coccygis_, which the Rabbis held to be indestructible, the Talmud could not be wiped out of existence, and, in 1255, St. Louis, in his instructions to his seneschals in the Narbonnais, again orders all copies to be burned, together with all other books containing blasphemies; while in 1267 Clement IV. (Gui Foucoix) instructed the Archbishop of Tarragona to coerce by excommunication the King of Aragon and his nobles to force the Jews to deliver up their Talmuds and other books to the inquisitors for examination, when, if they contain no blasphemies, they may be returned, but if otherwise they are to be sealed up and securely kept. Alonso the Wise of Castile was wiser, if, as reported, he caused the Talmud to be translated, in order that its errors might be exposed to the public. The passive resistance of the faithful was not to be overcome, and in 1299 Philippe le Bel felt obliged to denounce the persistent multiplication of the Talmud, and to order his judges to aid the Inquisition in its extermination. Ten years later, in 1309, we hear of three large wagon-loads of Jewish books publicly burned in Paris. How fruitless were all these efforts is seen in a formal sentence recited by Bernard Gui in the _auto de fé_ of 1319. Under the impulsion of the Inquisition the royal officials had again made diligent perquisition and had collected all the copies of the Talmud on which they could lay their hands. Experts in the Hebrew tongue had then been employed to examine them carefully, and after mature counsel between the inquisitors and the jurists called in to assist, the books were condemned to be carried in two carts through the streets of Toulouse, while the royal officers proclaimed in loud voice that their fate was due to their blasphemies against the Lord Jesus Christ and his mother the most holy Virgin and the Christian name, after which they were to be solemnly burned. This is the only case of execution occurring during Bernard Gui's term of service as inquisitor, and, from two carts being required to accommodate the obnoxious books, it was probable the result of search continued for a considerable time. That he deemed the matter to require constant vigilance is shown by his including in his collection of forms one which orders all priests for three Sundays to publish an injunction commanding the delivery to the Inquisition, for examination, of all Jewish books, including "Talamuz," under pain of excommunication. The warfare against this specially obnoxious work continued. In the very next year, 1320, John XXII. issued orders that all copies of it should be seized and burned. In 1409 Alexander V. paused in his denunciation of rival popes to order its destruction. The contest is well known which arose over it at the revival of letters, with Pfefferkorn and Reuchlin as the rival champions, and not all the efforts of the humanists availed to save it from proscription. Even as late as 1554 Julius III. repeated the command to the Inquisition to burn it without mercy, and all Jews were ordered, under pain of death, to surrender all books blaspheming Christ--a provision which was embodied in the canon law and remains there to this day. The censorship of the Inquisition was not confined to Jewish errors, but its activity in this direction will be more conveniently considered hereafter.[523]

This is not the place for us to consider the influence of the Inquisition in all its breadth, but while yet we have its procedure in view it may not be amiss to glance cursorily at some of the effects immediately resulting from its mode of dealing with those whom it tried and condemned or absolved.

On the Church the processes invented and recommended to respect by the Inquisition had a most unfortunate effect. The ordinary episcopal courts employed them in dealing with heretics, and found their arbitrary violence too efficient not to extend it over other matters coming within their jurisdiction. Thus the spiritual tribunals rapidly came to employ inquisitorial methods. Already, in 1317, Bernard Gui speaks of the use of torture being habitual in them; and in complaining of the Clementine restrictions, he asks why the bishops should be limited in applying torture to heretics, while they could employ it without limit in everything else.[524]

Thus habituated to the harshest measures, the Church grew harder and crueller and more unchristian. The worst popes of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries could scarce have dared to shock the world with such an exhibition as that with which John XXII. glutted his hatred of Hugues Gerold, Bishop of Cahors. John was the son of an humble mechanic of Cahors, and possibly some ancient grudge may have existed between him and Hugues. Certain it is that no sooner did he mount the pontifical throne than he lost no time in assailing his enemy. May 4, 1317, the unfortunate prelate was solemnly degraded at Avignon and condemned to perpetual imprisonment. This was not enough. On a charge of conspiring against the life of the pope he was delivered to the secular arm, and in July of the same year he was partially flayed alive and then dragged to the stake and burned.[525]

This hardening process went on until the quarrels of the loftiest prelates were conducted with a savage ferocity which would have shamed a band of buccaneers. When, in 1385, six cardinals were accused of conspiring against Urban VI. the angry pontiff had them seized as they left the consistory and thrust into an abandoned cistern in the castle of Nocera, where he was staying, so restricted in dimensions that the Cardinal di Sangro, who was tall and portly, could not stretch himself at full length. The methods taught by the inquisitors were brought into play. Subjected to hunger, cold, and vermin, the accused were plied by the creatures of the pope with promises of mercy if they would confess. This failing, torture was used on the Bishop of Aquila and a confession was procured implicating the others. They still refused to admit their guilt, and they were tortured on successive days. All that could be obtained from the Cardinal di Sangro was the despairing self-accusation that he suffered justly in view of the evil which he had wrought on archbishops, bishops, and other prelates at Urban's command. When it came to the turn of the Cardinal of Venice, Urban intrusted the work to an ancient pirate, whom he had created Prior of the Order of St. John in Sicily, with instructions to apply the torture till he could hear the victim howl; the infliction lasted from early morning till the dinner-hour, while the pope paced the garden under the window of the torture-chamber, reading his breviary aloud that the sound of his voice might keep the executioner reminded of the instructions. The strappado and rack were applied by turns, but though the victim was old and sickly, nothing could be wrenched from him save the ejaculation, "Christ suffered for us!" The accused were kept in their foul dungeon until Urban, besieged in Nocera by Charles of Durazzo, managed to escape and dragged them with him. In the flight the Bishop of Aquila, weakened by torture and mounted on a miserable hack, could not keep up with the party, when Urban ordered him despatched and left his corpse unburied by the wayside. The six cardinals, less fortunate, were carried by sea to Genoa, and kept in so vile a dungeon that the authorities were moved to pity and vainly begged mercy for them. Cardinal Adam Aston, an Englishman, was released on the vigorous intercession of Richard II., but the other five were never seen again. Some said that Urban had them beheaded; others that when he sailed for Sicily he carried them to sea and cast them overboard; others, again, that a trench was dug in his stable in which they were buried alive with a quantity of quicklime, to hasten the disappearance of their bodies. Urban's competitor, known as Clement VII., was no less sanguinary. When, as Cardinal Robert of Geneva, he exercised legatine functions for Gregory XI., he led a band of Free Companions to vindicate the papal territorial claims. The terrible cold-blooded massacre of Cesena was his most conspicuous exploit, but equally characteristic of the man was his threat to the citizens of Bologna that he would wash his hands and feet in their blood. Such was the retroactive influence of the inquisitorial methods on the Church which had invented them to plague the heretic. If Bernabo and Galeazzo Visconti caused ecclesiastics to be tortured and burned to death over slow fires, they were merely improving on the lessons which the Church itself had taught.[526]

* * * * *

On secular jurisprudence the example of the Inquisition worked even more deplorably. It came at a time when the old order of things was giving way to the new--when the ancient customs of the barbarians, the ordeal, the wager of law, the wer-gild, were growing obsolete in the increasing intelligence of the age, when a new system was springing into life under the revived study of the Roman law, and when the administration of justice by the local feudal lord was becoming swallowed up in the widening jurisdiction of the crown. The whole judicial system of the European monarchies was undergoing reconstruction, and the happiness of future generations depended on the character of the new institutions. That in this reorganization the worst features of the imperial jurisprudence--the use of torture and the inquisitorial process--should be eagerly, nay, almost exclusively, adopted, should be divested of the safeguards which in Rome had restricted their abuse, should be exaggerated in all their evil tendencies, and should, for five centuries, become the prominent characteristic of the criminal jurisprudence of Europe, may safely be ascribed to the fact that they received the sanction of the Church. Thus recommended, they penetrated everywhere along with the Inquisition; while most of the nations to whom the Holy Office was unknown maintained their ancestral customs, developing into various forms of criminal practice, harsh enough, indeed, to modern eyes, but wholly divested of the more hideous atrocities which characterized the habitual investigation into crime in other regions.[527]

Of all the curses which the Inquisition brought in its train this, perhaps, was the greatest--that, until the closing years of the eighteenth century, throughout the greater part of Europe, the inquisitorial process, as developed for the destruction of heresy, became the customary method of dealing with all who were under accusation; that the accused was treated as one having no rights, whose guilt was assumed in advance, and from whom confession was to be extorted by guile or force. Even witnesses were treated in the same fashion; and the prisoner who acknowledged guilt under torture was tortured again to obtain information about any other evil-doers of whom he perchance might have knowledge. So, also, the crime of "suspicion" was imported from the Inquisition into ordinary practice, and the accused who could not be convicted of the crime laid to his door could be punished for being suspected of it, not with the penalty legally provided for the offence, but with some other, at the fancy and discretion of the judge. It would be impossible to compute the amount of misery and wrong, inflicted on the defenceless up to the present century, which may be directly traced to the arbitrary and unrestricted methods introduced by the Inquisition and adopted by the jurists who fashioned the criminal jurisprudence of the Continent. It was a system which might well seem the invention of demons, and was fitly characterized by Sir John Fortescue as the Road to Hell.[528]

APPENDIX.

I.

CATHARAN ARGUMENTS TO JUSTIFY THE ATTRIBUTION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT TO THE EVIL PRINCIPLE.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXVI. 91.)

The literature of the Cathari has been so successfully exterminated that anything attributable to the sect is of interest. The following, from a controversial tract, dating probably about the close of the thirteenth century, may be regarded as a fair summary of the reasons alleged by the sect to prove that the Creator, Jehovah, was Satan. There is sufficient identity between them and those given by Moneta (adversus Catharos, Lib. II. c. vi.) to show that they are in some sort the official and customary arguments of the heretics. I omit the counter-arguments of the writer, who generally follows Moneta, though he often reasons independently.

Primo igitur objicitur illud, Geneseos tertio: _Ecce Adam quasi unus ex nobis factus est_. Hoc dicit Deus de Adam postquam peccavit, et constat quod dicit verum aut falsum: si verum, ergo Adam factus erat similis ei qui loquebatur et eis cum quibus loquebatur. Sed Adam post peccatum factus erat peccator; ergo malus: si dixit falsum, ergo est mendax, ergo sic dicendo peccavit, et sic fuit malus.

Item ad idem. Deus ille dicit, Geneseos primo: _Videte ne forte sumat de ligno vitœ_ etc. Deus autem novi testamenti dicit, Apocalipsis primo: _Vincenti dabo edere de ligno vitœ_. Ille prohibet, iste promittit, ergo contrarii sunt ad invicem.

Item ad idem, Geneseos primo: _Tenebrœ erant super facie abyssi, dixitque Deus: Fiat lux_. Ergo Deus veteri testamenti incepit a tenebris et finivit in lucem; ergo est tenebrosus; ergo est malus, qui prius fecit tenebras quam lucem.

Item ad idem, Geneseos tertio: _Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et inter semen tuum et semen mulieris_. Ecce Deus veteris testamenti seminator est discordiæ et inimicitiæ. Deus autem novi testamenti dator est pacis et solutor inimicitiarum, sicut legitur Coloss. primo: _Quoniam in ipso placuit omnem plenitudinem deitatis habitare, et per ipsum reconciliari omnia in ipsum, sive quœ in cœlis, sive quœ in terris sunt_. Ecce ille seminat inimicitias, iste vult omnia reconciliare et pacificare in se; Ergo sunt contrarii sibi.

Item, Geneseos tertio: _Maledicta terra in opere tuo_. Ecce Deus veteri testamenti maledicit terram quam Deus novi testamenti benedicit, psalmo: _Benedixisti domine terram tuam_: Ergo sunt contrarii.

Item, Genesi: _Omnis anima quœ circumcisa non fuerit peribit de populo suo_. Apostolus autem e contra prohibet Galatis: _si circumcidimini Christo nihil vobis prodest_: Ergo iste contrarius illi.

Item ad idem, Exodi undecimo: _Postulet unusquisque a vicino suo et unaquœque a vicina sua vasa aurea et argentea_. Ecce Deus veteris testamenti præcipit rapinam. Deus autem novi testamenti _non rapinam_ arbitratus est, ut dicit Apostolus: Ergo sunt contrarii.

Item ad idem, Matthæi quinto: _Dictum est antiquis: Diliges proximum tuum et odio habebis inimicum tuum_. Sed constat quod hoc dictum est a Deo veteris testamenti. Deus autem novi testamenti dicit: _Diligite inimicos vestros_. Igitur contrariantur sibi invicem.

Item ad idem, Matthæi quinto: _Dictum est antiquis: Oculum pro oculo_ etc. _Ego autem dico vobis non resistere malo, sed si quis percusserit_ etc. Ecce ille Deus vindictam, iste veniam imperat: Ergo sunt contrarii.

Item ad idem, Exodi vicesimo primo dicit Deus veteris testamenti: _Si occiderit quispiam proximum suum dabit animam pro anima_. Deus autem novi testamenti dicit apud Lucam: _Non veni animas perdere sed salvare_.

Item, Joannis primo: _Deum nemo vidit unquam_, et ad Timotheum: _Quem nullus hominum vidit_. At e contra Deus veteris testamenti dicit, Deuteron. tertio: _Si quis fuerit inter vos propheta_ etc.; et paulo post: _At non talis est servus meus Moyses_ etc.; et infra: _Ore ad os loquitur ei et palam non per ænigmata et figuras Deum vidit_.

Item ad idem, Levitici vicesimo sexto: _Persequimini inimicos vestros_; At e contra, Matthæi quinto: _Beati qui persecutionem patiuntur_; et iterum: _Cum vos persecuti fuerint in unam civitatem, fugite in aliam_. Ille præcipit persequi inimicos, iste fugere: Ergo, etc.

Item, Deus veteris testamenti præcipit sibi immolari animalia, et in illis delectatur sacrificiis; Deus autem novi testamenti, secundum aliam translationem dicit in Psalmo: _hostiam et oblationem noluisti, corpus autem aptasti mihi; holocaustomata pro peccato tibi non placuerunt_. Ille Deus talia præcipit, iste respuit: Ergo, etc.

Item ad idem, Deuteron. decimo tertio: _Si surrexerit de medio tuo prophetes etc. et ita interficietur_; et iterum: _si tibi voluerit persuadere frater tuus_ etc.; et infra: _non parcet ei oculus tuus ut miserearis et occultes eum, sed statim interficies_. Deus autem novi testamenti e contra dicit: _Estote misericordes_ etc. Hie præcipit misereri, ille non miserere: Ergo etc.

Deus veteris testamenti dicit: _Crescite et multiplicamini_, Geneseos octavo. Deus autem novi testamenti dicit, Lucæ decimo octavo: _Vœ prœgnantibus et nutrientibus in diebus illis_; et in eodem vicesimo: _Beatœ steriles quœ non genuerunt_. Item, Matthæi quinto: _Qui viderit mulierem ad concupiscendam eam_ etc.

Ecce ille præcipit coitum, iste prohibet omnem coitum, tam uxoris quam mulieris alterius: Igitur sunt sibi contrarii.

Item, Matthæi vicesimo, Lucæ vicesimo secundo: _Scitis quoniam principes gentium dominantur eorum, et qui majores sunt_, etc. _et non ita erit inter vos sicut inter gentes_. Ecce iste reprobat principatus et dominationes, ille probat.[529]

Item, Deuteronomii decimoquinto multis gentibus concedit hic usuram; Deus autem novi testamenti prohibet in Lucæ sexto: _Date mutuum nihil inde sperantes:_ Ergo sunt contrarii.

Tentavit Deus veteris testamenti Abraham, Deus novi testamenti neminem tentat; Jac. primo: _Ipse intentator malorum est_: Ergo sunt contrarii.

Item ad idem, Deus veteris testamenti dicit_: Veniam ad te in caligine nubis;_ Deus autem novi testamenti _habitat lucem inaccessibilem_ ut legitur Hebræor. primo; Ergo sunt contrarii.

Item ad idem, Matthæi quinto: _Dictum est antiquis: non perjurabis, reddes autem Deo juramenta tua; ego autem dico vobis non jurare omnino_; quod ille concedit iste prohibet; Ergo etc.

Item, Exodi vicesimo primo: _Maledictus omnis qui pendet in ligno_; Sed Paulus dicit Galat. quarto: _Christus nos redemit de maledictione legis, factus pro nobis maledictum_; Ergo Deus veteris testamenti, quem dicis patrem Christi, maledixit Christum, sed constat quod pater non maledicit filium, ergo ille non est pater ejus, imo est malus et contrarius cui maledicit.

Item ad idem, Deus veteris testamenti promittit terrain ut ibi; _Dabo vobis terram fluentem lac et mel_. Ecce deliciæ terrenæ. Deus autem novi testamenti promittit regnum cœlorum, requiem æternam, delicias cœlestes ut ibi: _Invenietis requiem animabus vestris_. Ergo ipsi sunt diversi et contrarii.

Item ad idem, Deus novi testamenti dicit Matthæi sexto: _Jugum meum suave est et onus meum leve_. Deus autem veteris testamenti imponit jugum importabile, Deuteronomii vicesimo octavo, ubi maledixit illos qui non servaverunt illa quæ præceperat, de quo jugo dicit Petrus: _cur vos imponere tentatis nobis jugum quod nec vos nec patres vestri portare potuistis?_ Ergo sunt contrarii; ille enim malus et iste bonus.

Item ad idem, Exodi quarto: _si dixerint mei, quod est nomen ejus qui misit me etc. respondit Dominus: sic dices ad eos: qui est misit me ad vos_. Ecce Deus veteris testamenti translator est, qui non vult nomen ejus manifestare; sed dicit _qui est_ etc. Ita enim asinus et bos est qui est. Deus autem novi testamenti nomen suum manifestat per angelum suum, Lucæ secundo, _et vocabis nomen ejus Jesum_.

Deus veteris testamenti dicit Geneseos sexto: _Pœnitet me fecisse hominem._ Ecce qualis Deus quem pœnitet de opere suo; ergo mutatur. Præterea pœnitentia est de peccato, ergo si pœnitet peccavit; Ergo malus fuit.

Item ad idem, Exodi tricesimo secundo: Postquam filii Israel adoraverunt vitulum, dicit Deus ille Moysi: _Dimitte me, ut irascatur furor meus contra eos_, et infra: _Placatusque est Deus ne faceret malum quod locutus fuerat adversus populum suum_. Ecce quod mutatus est Deus veteris testamenti; Deus autem novi testamenti (non) immutatur, juxta illud Jacobi primo: _Omne datum est_ etc.; et infra; _Apud quem non est immutatio_ etc.

Item ad idem, Exodi vicesimo, Deus veteris testamenti dicit: Non _mœchaberis_, et idem Deus dicit Numerorum duodecimo: _Ecce ego suscitabo super te malum de domo tuo, et tollam uxorem tuam et dabo proximo tuo, id est, filio tuo_. Ecce non solum mœchationis quam ibi prohibuit, sed etiam incestus est procurator; ille Deus ergo malus et mutabilis.

Item ad idem, Exodi vicesimo primo: _non facies tibi sculptile nec aliquam similitudinem_, et infra, vicesimo quinto: _Facies duo cherubim aurea_. Ecce quanta mutabilitas, _facies_ et _non facies_.

Qualis est Deus ille qui tot millia hominum submersit in diluvio etc.; habetur Geneseos sexto; et in mare rubro, Exodi decimo quinto; et in deserto, et in multis aliis locis. Si dicis quod non est crudelitas punire malos etc. quæro, si erat omnipotens et omnisciens, sciebat omnes peccaturos et futuros malos, et propter hoc damnandos, quare ergo fecierat eos? Nonne crudelis est qui homines ad hoc facit ut perdat?

Item ad idem, Exodi tricesimo secundo: _Hoc dicit Dominus_; et infra: _Ponat vir gladium super femur suum_; et infra: _Et occiderunt in illa die viginti tria millia_. Ecce qualis Deus quos habet clericos et ministros siquidem totius crudelitatis. Deus autem novi testamenti ministros pietatis; unde Joannes in canonica: _Qui diligit Deum diligit et fratrem suum_. Iste præcipit fratrem diligi, ille occidi.

Item ad idem, Numeror tricesimo quarto; Deus veteris testamenti dixit filiis Israel de gentibus illis qui erant in terra Cham: _Si nolueritis occidere eos, erunt clavi in oculis nostris et lanceæ in lateribus_. Ecce crudelis Deus qui non vult injurias dimitti. Deus autem novi testamenti dicit Matthæi sexto. _Si non dimiseritis hominibus, nec pater vester cœlestis dimittet vobis peccata vestra_.

Item ad idem, Geneseos decimo nono, ubi Deus veteris testamenti justum simul et impium occidit, sicut patet in submersione Sodomæ et Gomorrhæ, ubi parvulos et adultos simul extinxit.

Item ad idem, Judicum vicesimo legitur quod cum filii Israel vellent pugnare contra filios Benjamin proper scelus quod commiserant in uxorem cujusdam fratris sui, consuluerunt Dominum si pugnandum esset contra eos, et quis esset dux belli, et expressit illis Judas, et quod pugnandum esset; unde sub hac fiducia inierunt bellum et occiderunt ex eis in primo conflictu viginti duo millia, in secundo octodecim millia, in tertio pauciores. Ecce quam crudelis et deceptor Deus, qui sic eos decepit ut perirent.

Item, Exodi quinto dicit Deus veteris testamenti: _Indurabo cor Pharaonis et non dimittet populum_; ecce crudelis Deus qui indurat ut occidat. Item, mendax Deus qui dicit _non dimittet_, et postea dimisit.

Item ad idem, Numerorum decimo quinto: Deus ille lapidare præcepit quemdam colligendum ligna in Sabbato, consultus super hoc a Moysi et Aaron. Deus autem novi testamenti excusat discipulos fricantes spicas Sabbato; Ecce quam contrarii iste et ille!

In Genesi promisit Deus ille se daturum terram Chanaan Abrahæ, nec tamen dedit, ergo fuit mendax.... Quod autem objiciunt de illis qui egressi sunt de Ægypto, quibus et promisit per Moysen terram illam, et tamen omnes prostrati sunt in deserto.

Ad idem, Exodi tricesimo secundo: _Domine ostende mihi faciem tuam_ et Dominus respondit: _Ego ostendam tibi omne bonum_, et postea ostendit ei omnia posteriora, id est, turpitudinem. Ecce qualis Deus!

Ad idem, Geneseos undecimo de Gigantibus qui ædificabant turrim, dixit ille Deus: _non desistent a cogitationibus suis donec eas opere compleverint_; et tamen sequitur ibidem: _Et cessaverunt ædificare_. Ecce quam mendax Deus!

Ad idem, Geneseos XXXII. dicit angelus Dei ad Jacob: _Nequaquam vocaberis ultra Jacob, sed Israel erit nomen tuum_. Et postea dicit in Exodo: _Ego sum Deus Abraham, Isaac, et Jacob_; et ita sibi contradicit; mendax igitur est ille Deus.

Dicit ille Deus: _Quis decipiet nolis Achab?... Ego ero spiritus mendax in ore omnium prophetarum ... Egredere et fac, decipies enim et prævalebis ... Dedit Deus spiritum mendacii in ore omnium prophetarum_. Ecce qualis Deus: si esset Deus veritatis constat quod non diceret: _quis decipiet_ etc.

II.

BULL OF GREGORY IX. ORDERING AN EPISCOPAL INQUISITION.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXII, fol. 103.)

Gregorius episcopus servus servorum Dei venerabilibus fratribus suffraganeis ecclesiæ Bisuntinensis salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Ad capiendas vulpes parvulas, hæreticos videlicet qui moliuntur in partibus Burgundiæ tortuosis anfractibus vineam Domini demoliri, et penitus eliminandas ab ipsa suscepti cura regiminis nos hortatur. Ad nostram siquidem audientiam noveritis pervenisse quod quidam hæretici in vestris diocesibus constituti, qui metu mortis falso ad ecclesiam catholicam revertentes necnon et plures alii de hæretica pravitate convicti, ad errorem pravitatis ejusdem, quam a se abdicasse penitus videbantur, ut gravius scindere valeant catholicam unitatem sæpius revertuntur. Ne igitur per tales sub falsa conversionis specie catholicæ fidei professores corrumpere contingat, universitati vestræ per apostolica scripta præcipiendo mandamus, quatinus hujusmodi pestilentes, postquam fuerint de jam dicta pravitate convicti, si aliter puniti non fuerint, ita quod quilibet vestrum in suo diocesi ut ipsis det vexatio intellectum, in perpetuo carcere recludatis, de bonis ipsorum, si qua fortassis habent sibi vitæ necessaria prout consuevit talibus ministrantes; alioquin noventis nos venerabili fratri nostro Archiepiscopo Bisuntino nostris dedisse litteris in mandatis ut vos ad id auctoritate nostra, sublato cujuslibet appellationis impedimento, compellat. Datum Laterani, sexto Kalendas Junii, pontificatus nostri anno septimo (27 Mai. 1234).

III.

BULL RELIEVING INQUISITORS FROM OBEDIENCE TO THEIR SUPERIORS.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXII. fol. 15.)

Clemens episcopus servus servorum Dei dilectis filiis fratribus ordinum prædicatorum et minorum inquisitoribus hæreticæ pravitatis per diversas Burgondiæ et Lotharingiæ partes auctoritate apostolica deputatis et in posterum deputandis, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Catholicæ fidei negotium quod plurimum insidet cordi nostro in vestris prosperari manibus et de bono in melius procedere cupientes, ac volentes omne ab eo impedimentum et omne obstaculum removeri, præsentium vobis auctoritate mandamus quatinus in eodem negotio de divino et apostolico favore et omni humano timore postposito constanter ac intrepide procedentes circa extirpandam hæreticam pravitatem, tam de Burgondia quam de Lotharingia cum omni vigilantia omnique studio laboretis, et si forsitan magister et minister generalis, aliique priores et ministri provinciales, ac custodes seu guardiani aliquorum locorum vestrorum ordinum prætextu quorumcumque privilegiorum seu indulgentiarum ejusdem sedis dictis ordinibus concessorum ac concedendorum in posterum, vobis vel vestrum alicui seu aliquibus injunxerint seu quoquo modo præceperint ut quoad tempus et quoad certos articulos certasve personas negotio supersedeatis eidem, nos vobis universis et singulis auctoritate apostolica districtius inhibemus ne ipsis obedire in hac parte vel intendere quomodolibet præsumatis. Nos etiam privilegia seu indulgentias hujusmodi ad hunc articulum tenore præsentium revocantes, omnes excommunicationis, interdicti et suspensionis sententias, si quas in vos vel vestrum aliquos hac occasione ferri contingerit, irritas prorsus decernimus et inanes.... Non enim aliqua eis super hujuscemodi inquisitionis negotio vobis immediate a prædicta sede commisso et committendo facultas vel jurisdictio attribuitur seu potestas. Datum Viterbii, Idus Julii, pontificatus nostri anno tertio (15 Jul. 1267).

IV.

EUGENIUS IV. TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF NARBONNE.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXV. fol. 184.)

Eugenius episcopus, servus servorum Dei, venerabilibus fratribus Archiepiscopo Narbonensi et ejus suffraganeis Carcassonæ, Sancti Pontii Thomeriarum, Agathensi et Aletensi episcopis, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Scripsit nobis vestra fraternitas dilectum filium fratrem Petrum de Turelule, inquisitorem hæreticæ pravitatis in provincia Narbonensi, intendere a nobis aliqua suum officium Inquisitionis et jurisdictionem vestram tangentia petere et impetrare, supplicastisque ut eum in brevi de eo et exorbitantiis suis a jure intenderetis sedem apostolicam informare, nollemus interea quicquam prædicto in vestrum et prælatorum provinciæ præjudicium facere aut concedere; ad quæ respondentes fatemur prædictum Inquisitorem aliquando significasse justam sibi fore quærimoniam adversus nonnullos vestrum se in suo Inquisitionis officio injuste perturbantes, atque etiam pro viribus impedientes, petens sibi per nos viam et modum ostendi quibus taliter in posterum exercere possit officium, ut cum honore Dei et sui officii integritati valeret lites, jurgia, et contentiones ordinariorum effugere et declinare. Cum itaque sit nostræ intentionis prout ex officio pastoralis curæ nobis incumbere non ignoratis, et vos et ipsum Inquisitorem in vestris et suis juribus confovere, et lites ac controversias quæ fortassis inter vos vigerent cum justitia tollere ac terminare, hortamur in Domino vestram fraternitatem ut attente considerantes quod hujusmodi Inquisitores ab ecclesia fuerint instituti ad relevandum ordinarios parte sollicitudinis incumbente illis in favorem et augmentum fidei catholicæ, enervationemque ct extirpationem hæreticæ pravitatis, contenti esse velitis in hac materia dispositionibus et institutis sacrorum canonum, et ad negotium hoc hæresum quo nullum in ecclesia habetur majus, prædictis Inquisitoribus assistere favoribus opportunis. Nam sic gratum erit nobis et summe acceptum quicquid favoris, commodi et adjumenti prædictis a fraternitatibus vestris juxta spem nostram præstabitur, ita molestias et illata eorum laudabili exercitio disturbia cum displicentia audiremus; pro bono autem concordiæ volumus ut gravaminibus propter quæ ab ipso Inquisitore per vos extitit appellatum ab eodem revocatis, lites quæ hodie inter vos pendent indecisæ sopiantur penitus et extinguantur, prout nos illas auctoritate apostolica in eventum revocationis antedictæ ad nos advocantes, tenore præsentium extinguimus, cassamus, et pro extinctis et cassatis haberi volumus et mandamus. Datum Florentiæ anno Incarnationis Dominicæ MCCCC quadragesimo primo Kalendas Julii pontificatus nostri anno undecimo.

V.

DISABILITIES OF DESCENDANTS OF HERETICS.

(Registrum curiæ Franciæ Carcassonæ.--Doat, XXXII. fol. 241.)

Noverint universi prsesentes litteras inspecturi quod nos frater Guillelmus de Sancto Sequano ordinis fratrum prædicatorum, inquisitor hæreticæ pravitatis in regno Franciæ authoritate apostolica deputatus attendentes quod secundum merita personarum debent distribui officia dignitatum, et quia expedit crimina nocentium esse nota, præsertim ilia per quæ extenditur ultio non solum in autores scelerum sed in progeniem dampnatorum, ideo nos ad instantiam procuratoris domini regis in seneschallia Carcassonæ de infrascriptis sibi copiam fieri postulantis, ad honorem Dei et fidei munimentum per nos ipsos exquisivimus et per discretum virum dominum Raimundum rectorem ecclesiæ de Mouteclaro publicum notarium Inquisitionis nostræ perquiri et inspici fecimus diligenter in libris et actis publicis Inquisitionis prædictæ, et invenimus quod anno Domini MCC quinquagesimo sexto Guiraldus de Altarippa quondam de Graoleto qui dicitur fuisse pater Guiraldi de Altarippa servientis armorum domini regis, confessus fuit in judicio coram Domino Bernardo de Monte-Atono tunc inquisitore hæreticæ pravitatis, quod viderat hæreticos et verba eorum audiverat. Item invenimus quod Lombarda uxor dicti Guiraldi, quæ dicitur fuisse mater præfati Guiraldi de Altarippa servientis armorum domini regis, coram eodem inquisitore et eodem tempore confessa fuerit quod multotiens in diversis locis vidit hæreticos ct eos pluries adoravit misitque eis panem et poma et credidit eos esse bonos homines et quod posset salvari in fide eorum. Item invenimus in eisdem libris quod Raimundus Carbonelli de Graoleto, qui dicitur fuisse avunculus dicti Guiraldi servientis domini regis fuit hæreticus perfectus et per fratrem Stephanum Gastinensem et Hugonem de Boniolis tunc inquisitores hæreticæ pravitatis, et tanquam hæreticus curiæ sæculari relictus et per ministros curiæ domini regis Carcassone publice, ut hæreticus et relapsus, combustus anno Domini MCC septuagesimo sexto. De quibus omnibus de nostris libris et actis publicis extractis fideliter dicto procuratori domini regis copiam fecimus, et omnibus quorum interest per ipsum fieri volumus, non ad suggilationem vel injuriam alicujus sed propter bona quæ agit vel excipit, vel propter posteros in quos parentum præfati criminis sceleratorum proserpit infamia, ne contra constitutiones domini regis vel sanctiones canonicas ad honores vel officia publica ullatenus admittantur. In cujus rei testimonium sigillum nostrum præsentibus duximus apponendum. Datum Carcassonæ decimo septimo Kalendas Julii, anno Domini MCC nonagesimo secundo.

VI.

MINUTES OF AN ASSEMBLY OF EXPERTS.

(Doat, XXVII. fol. 118.)

Anno Domini MCCC vicesimo octavo, indictione undecima, die Veneris in festo Stæ. Leocadiæ virginis, intitulata quinto Idus Decembris pontificatus SSmi. domini nostri Domini Joannis divina providentia papæ XXII. anno decimo tertio, venerabiles religiosi et discreti viri frater Henricus de Chamayo ordinis prædicatorum in regno Franciæ auctoritate regia et Germanus de Alanhano archipresbyter Narbonesii, rector ecclesiæ Capitistagni in civitate et diocesi Narbonensi auctoritate ordinaria, inquisitores pravitatis hæreticæ deputati, volentes in negotio fidei de consilio discretorum et peritorum procedere, convocarunt in aula seu palatio majori archiepiscopali Narbonæ dominos canonicos, jurisconsultos, peritos sæculares et religiosos infrascriptos (sequuntur nomina 42) qui omnes superius nominati juraverunt ad sancta Dei evangelia dare bonum et sanum consilium in agendis, unusquisque secundum Deum et conscientiam suam, prout ipsis a Domino fucrit ministratum et tenere omnia sub secreto donec fuerint publicata, et ibidem præstito juramento, lectis et recitatis culpis personarum infrascriptarum, petierunt præfati domini inquisitores consilium ab eisdem consiliariis quid agendum de personis prædictis, et divisim et singulariter de qualibet, ut sequitur:

Super culpa fratris P. de Arris ordinis Cartusiensis monasterii de Lupateria diocesis Carcassonensis omnes et singuli consiliarii supradicti, tam sæculares quam religiosi consilium dando concorditer dixerunt, contemplatione ordinis sui, quod assignetur sibi pro carcere perpetuo claustrum ct ecclesia monasterii supradicti, et etiam camera una, necnon et injungantur sibi certæ pœnitentiæ, sicut orationes et jejunia et alia quæ non repugnant observantiæ sui ordinis et regulæ supradictæ, et quod non puniatur in sermone publico sed in secreto, præsentibus paucis personis.

Item de personis infra proximo nominatis, auditis corum culpis dixerunt cas judicandas fore ut sequitur:

Richardum de Narbona, nulla pœna puniendum.

Guillelmum Mariæ de Honosio arbitrarie puniendum, cruces simplices, peregrinationes minores.

Favressam matrem prædicti Guillelmi arbitrarie puniendam, sine crucibus, pœnitentias minores.

Guillelmum Cathalani seniorem, Guillelmum ejus filium, Raymundum Veysiani, Bernardum Baronis, P. Lunatii, tanquam impeditores officii, cruces et pœnitentias minores.

Guillelmum Espulgue de Capitestagno immurandum.

Perretam de Flassacho valdensem impœnitentem fore exhumandum.

P. Guillelmi Canorgue de Capitestagno immurandum.

Vincentium Rayses de Caberia mortuum, si viveret, immurandum.

Gregorium Bellonis apostatam monachum, mortuum impœnitentem, exhumandum.

Guillelmum Bocardi Bourserium de Agenno habitatorem Narbonæ, mortuum, si viveret, immurandum.

Arnaudam uxorem Pontii de Biterris de Capitestagno immurandam.

Amicam uxorem P. Gaycons, ad murum.

Habitum fuit hoc consilium anno, indictione, die, loco, et pontificatu prædictis, præsentibus Arnaldo Assaliti procuratore incursuum hæresis domini regis, testibus et notariis qui hoc prædictum consilium scripserunt, etc.

VII.

INNOCENT IV. ORDERS INQUISITORS TO DIMINISH THEIR RETINUE AND AVOID EXACTIONS.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXI. fol. 116.)

Innocentius episcopus servus servorum Dei dilectis filiis inquisitoribus hæreticæ pravitatis in terris nobilis viri domini Comitis Tholosani et Albiensis constitutis salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Cum a quibusdam intellexerimus fidedignis quod vos occasione inquisitionis vobis commissæ contra hæreticam pravitatem superfluos scriptores aliosque familiares habetis pro vestræ libito voluntatis et graves exactiones fiunt a conversis ab eadem ad fidem et converti volentibus pravitate ad infamiam apostolicæ sedis et scandalum plurimorum, præsentium vobis auctoritate præcipiendo mandamus quatinus scriptorum et aliorum familiarium multitudinem onerosam ad necessarium numerum protinus reducentes, a gravibus exactionibus per quas infamia potest et scandalum generari, vos et familiam vestram taliter compescatis quod honestatis vestræ titulus conservetur illæsus, et nos discretionis vestræ prudentiam merito commendare possumus.--Datum Lugduni secundo Idus Maii, pontificatus nostri anno sexto (14 Maii, 1249).

VIII.

ABUSE OF THE NUMBER OF ARMED FAMILIARS IN FLORENCE.

(Arch. di Firenze, Riformagioni, Arch. Diplom. XXVII.)

Bertrandus miseratione divina archiepiscopus Ebredunensis apostolicæ sedis nuncius circumspectis et religiosis viris inquisitoribus hæreticæ pravitatis qui in civitate et dioc. florentin. sunt et fuerint in futurum salutem in salutis autore. Quia quidam potestate sibi tradita abutentes et concessis a jure forma et modis debitis non utentes interdum favore seu alias concedunt aliqua ex quibus dampna proveniunt et scandala generantur, oportet talium abusus debito juris limitibus coartari. Cum igitur fidedigna relatione ad nostram audientiam sit deductum et nos fide probavimus oculata quod quidam inquisitores qui in civitate et dioc. florentin. prædictis vos in inquisitionis officio precesserint immoderatum et excessivum numerum consiliariorum notariorum et aliorum officialium ac familiarium licet non indigerunt eisdem sibi assumere curaverunt passim eisdem et aliis sub familiaritatis vel officii titulo diversis quæsitis coloribus portandi arma offensibilia et defensibilia licentiam concedendo ex quibus multa provenerunt scandala et multis data fuit occasio aliis qui arma portare non poterant offendendi. Nos juxta cominissam nobis circa reformationem officii inquisitionis sollicitudinem hujusmodi scandalis et quibusvis fraudibus occurrere cupieutes et volentes præfatum inquisitionis officium sic laudabiliter et feliciter servatis eidem suis privilegiis gubernari quod propterea non offendatur justitia nec ex abusu privilegiorum aliis præjudicium generetur, autoritate apostolica qua in hac parte fungimur decernimus et statuendo tenore præsentium ordinamus quod inquisitor florentinus qui est vel pro tempore fuerit possit duntaxat quatuor consiliarios seu assessores, duos notarios, et duos custodes carcerum et duodecim alios inter officiales et familiares sibi eligere et assumere et non ultra quibus possit dare licentiam arma prout consuetum est deferendi, hoc salvo quod si urgens necessitas pro inquisitionis officio immineret, possit in hujusmodi necessitatis articulo arma portandi licentiam impertiri. Illud autem præsenti ordinationi ex superhabundanti duximus inserendum quod ne ex limitatione prædicta inquisitionis detrahatur officio et in executione ipsius dispendium patiatur potestas ac priores artium florentini teneantur prout etiam sunt de jure stricti inquisitori qui est vel erit pro tempore fideles et diligentes existere et familiarios et etiam alios cum armis omni difficultate sublata tradere quoties pro capiendis malefactoribus et suspectis et aliis officium inquisitionis tangentibus exequendis per inquisitorem hujusmodi fuerint requisiti. In quorum testimonium præsentes literas fieri fecimus et nostri sigilli appensione muniri. Dat. in Castro Scarparic florentin. dioc. die secunda Maii sub anno Domini MCCCXXXVIL Indict. V. Pontificatus III. Domini nostri summi pontificis.

IX.

REGULATIONS OF ARMED FAMILIARS BY THE COUNCIL OF VENICE.

(Archivio di Venezia, Misti Consiglio X. Vol. XIII. p. 192; Vol. XIV. p. 29.) 1450, 19 Augusti.

Cum facta sit conscientia quod inquisitor hæreticorum qui stat Venetiis dat licentiam XII. personis portandi arma et illam vendit per pecuniam, quod non est bene factum quod XII persone pro inquisitore portent arma per civitatem quum ad capiendos hereticos datur super talibus inquisitoribus auxilium brachii secularis, videlicet per dominos de nocte et per capita, Et propterea vadit pars quod inquisitores de cetero non possint dare licentiam nisi quatuor personis tantum sicut per consuetudinem antiquam solebant, quos quatuor quilibet inquisitor faciat presentari capitibus hujus concilii ut cognita condictione personarum possint provvidere sicut fuerit opus.

De parte--14. De non--2. Non sinceri--0.

1450 (1451), 17 Februarii.

Quod ad complacentiam Generalis minorum qui supplicavit ne inquisitori heretice pravitatis in civitate Venetiarum in suo tempore fiat novitas super custodibus et officialibus suis quos antiquitus inquisitores habuerunt. Vadit pars quod concedatur eidem quod non obstante parte capta in isto concilio die 9 Augusti 1450 mandetur officialibus de nocte quod pro honore officii observet inquisitori consuetudinem antiquam cum hoc conditione videlicet. Quod ipsi officiales associent inquisitorem ad officium faciendum et aliter sicut fuerit opus et sicut antiquitus faciebant; et propterea dentur in nota officio de nocte et capitibus sexteriorum ut videatur si actualiter faciant officium vel non, ita tamen quod non excedant numerum XII.

De parte--10. De non--5. Non sinceri--1.

X.

TRANSFER OF PRISONERS FROM ITALY TO FRANCE.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXII. fol. 155.)

Nicholaus episcopus servus servorum Dei dilecto filio fratri Philippo ordinis fratrum prædicatorum inquisitori hæreticæ pravitatis in Marchia Trevisina auctoritate sedis apostolicæ deputato salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Significarunt nobis dilecti filii Hugo de Boniolis et Petrus Arsini ordinis fratrum prædicatorum, inquisitores hæreticæ pravitatis in regno Franciæ auctoritate sedis apostolicæ deputati, quod dudum in diocesi Veronensi quamplures hæretici de mandato tuo capti fuerunt et adhuc eos facis detineri captivos, quorum aliqui fore dicuntur de regno Franciæ oriundi, et unus eo in dicto regno pro episcopo hæreticorum ipsorum, secundum eorumdem hæreticorum usum habetur. Cum autem, sicut habeat eorumdem inquisitorum assertio, firma spes habeatur quod eorumdem hæreticorum dicti regni præsentia in illis partibus erit plurimum orthodoxæ fidei fructuosa, pro eo quod si contingat eorum aliquos divina gratia operante redire ad ipsius fidei unitatem, per ipsos multorum qui sunt in eodem regno prædictæ pravitatis fermento aspersi, occultata nequitia detegi poterit, et haberi plena notitia eorumdem. Nos qui tenemur exaltationem ipsius fidei totis viribus procurare, discretioni tuæ per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatinus tam illum qui, ut prædictum est, episcopus reputatur, quam alios hæreticos supradictos ejusdem regni præfatis inquisitoribus per eorum certum nuncium ad te propter hoc specialiter destinandum, qui sumptibus ministrandis ab inquisitoribus supradictis sub fida custodia hæreticos ducat eosdem, deinceps sub ipsorum inquisitorum cura et jurisdictione mansuros, prius tamen diligentius inquisitis ab eisdem hæreticis ad præfatos fratres inquisitores ut præmittitur destinandis, quæ ad utilitatem ejusdem fidei et utiliorem executionem commissi tibi officii videris inquirenda transmittas. Nos enim prædictis inquisitoribus nostris damus litteris in mandatis, ut eosdem hæreticos ad ipsos per te taliter destinandos diligenter et fideliter faciant custodiri, facturi nihilominus circa illos libere in eos commissum sibi contra hæreticos officium exequendo, prout secundum Dei honori et commodo ejusdem orthodoxæ fidei viderint expedire. Datum Romæ apud Sanctum Petrum quarto Idus Februarii, pontificatus nostri anno primo (10 Feb. 1289).

XI.

ORDER OF INQUISITOR-GENERAL TO MAKE TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDS.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXII. fol. 101.)

Joannes miseratione divina Sancti Nicolai in carcere Tulliano diaconus cardinalis, religiosis viris in Christo sibi dilectis fratribus ordinis prædicatorum et minorum inquisitoribus pravitatis hæreticæ in Citramontanis partibus auctoritate sedis apostolicæ deputatis, salutem in Domino nostro. Nil majus accedit affectui quam quod fidei catholicæ puritas ubique terrarum ad Dei gloriam valeat ampliari, et macula pravitatis hæreticæ de locis illis quæ infecisse dinoscitur virtutis divine cooperante subsidio per nostræ ac vestræ sollicitudinis ministerium penitus deleatur. Cum igitur hujusmodi cura negotii sit nobis ab apostolicæ sede commissa nos dilectorum nobis in Domino inquisitorum pravitatis ejusdem in regno Franciæ condignis desideriis annuentes, universitati vestræ auctoritate qua in hac parte fungimur, in virtute obedientiæ districte præcipiendo mandamus quatenus depositiones testium super pravitate ipsa jam receptorum a vobis vel recipiendorum in posterum, quia negotium Inquisitionis in prædicto regno Franciæ inquisitoribus commissum eosdem contingere dinoscitur, in eo scilicet quod depositiones hujusmodi faciunt ad instructionem sibi commissi negotii ut per eas de statu personarum præfati regni habere possunt notitiam pleniorem, eisdem vel ipsorum certo et fido nuntio ad transcribendum sine difficultatis obstaculo assignetis, ut iidem inquisitores depositionibus ipsis pro loco et tempore uti possint contra personas prædicti regni, quæ per depositiones ipsas apparebunt de heresi culpabiles vel suspectæ. Datum apud Urbem veterem, decimo quarto Kalendas Junii, anno Domini MCC septuagesima tertio, pontificatus Domini Gregorii papæ decimi anno secundo.

XII.

BULL OF ALEXANDER IV. AUTHORIZING INQUISITORS TO ABSOLE EACH OTHER.[530]

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne,--Doat, XXXI. fol. 196.)

Alexander episcopus, servus servorum Dei dilectis filiis fratribus ordinis prædicatorum, inquisitoribus hæreticæ pravitatis in Tholosa et aliis terris nobilis viri A. comitis Pictavensis, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Ut negotium fidei valeatis liberius promovere, vobis auctoritate præsentium indulgemus ut si vos excommunicationis sententiam et irregularitatem incurrere aliquibus casibus ex humana fragilitate contingat vel recolatis etiam incurrisse, quia propter vobis injunctum officium ad priores vestros super hoc recurrere non potestis, mutuo vobis super hiis absolvere juxta formam ecclesiæ, ac vobiscum auctoritate vestra dispensare possitis, prout in hoc parte prioribus ab apostolica sede concessum est. Nulli ergo omnino hominum liceat etc.... Datum Anagniæ Nonis Julii pontificatus nostri anno secundo (7 Jul. 1256).

XIII.

CASE OF FALSE WITNESS.

(Doat, XXVII. fol. 204.)

Bernardus Pastoris de Marcelhano mercator, habitator Pedenacii diocesis Agathensis, sicut per ipsius confessionem, sub anno Domini MCCCXXIX., mense Maii XIX die factam et processum inde habitum apparet, veniens spontanea voluntate, non vocatus nec citatus per episcopum nec inquisitorem, sed per aliquos complices suos inductus, in domo episcopali Biterris, ubi tunc nos, frater Henricus de Chamayo, ordinis predicatorum, inquisitor Carcassonne, eramus, quamdam papiri cedulam scriptam nobis presentari et tradi per aliquos de familiaribus dicti Domini Episcopi procuravit et fecit, cujus tenor sequitur in hec verba: Significatur religiose majestati domini inquisitoris heretice pravitatis in seueschallia Carcassonne, seu ejus locumtenentis, quod cum eo anno Begguini heretici et de heresi dampnati fuissent combusti juxta castrum de Pedenaco, mandate domini nostri regis et domini Inquisitoris, mandato summi Pontificis et domini Episcopi Agathensis; hinc est quod quidam perverso spiritu imbutus, adherens heretice pravitati, perversum animum suum ad fidem heresis perversis operibus ac hereticis et dampnosis suasionibus immittens, eorum perversa opera sequendo, quadam die post combustionem hereticorum et specialiter post combustionem cujusdam vocati Formayro et ejus sociorum, Raimundus Barseti, notarius, catholice fidei spernens doctrinam, et mandata Apostolica et domini nostri regis, et dicti domini Agathensis Episcopi, si potuisset, impugnando, et, quod deterius est, si adherentes habuisset, contra fidem Catholicam infringendo, accessit ad locum ubi dictus Formayro et alii superius nominati sunt combusti, et flexis genibus tanquam adoraret eorum nequitiam, accepit de ossibus dictorum combustorum hereticorum et de heresi dampnatorum et pro heresi, justo mandato domini nostri summi pontificis ac domini nostri regis legitime combustorum, et ipsa ossa in pallio sive sindone involvens cum multa reverentia ac si essent reliquie sanctorum, accepit ac secum asportavit, et cum per quosdam supervenientes peteretur quid faciebat ibi ipse Raimundus respondit: "Ego colligo de ossibus istorum combustorum, vere martirum, quia pro certo ipsi erant sanioris fidei quam illi qui eos fecerant comburi, et de hoc habeo fidem meam, et ipsi erant optimi Christiani, et cum magno prejudicio et contra jus sunt combusti, et credo eos martires et eorum fidem laudo et credo quod sunt in Paradiso." Sic tunc testes infrascripti ejus vesaniam et incredulitatem ac etiam hereticam pravitatem increpantes, dixerunt dicto Raimundo: "Ut quid talia facitis et talia dicitis ac asseritis rebellionem Catholice fidei, quia certe nos credimus quod quidquid per sanctam Ecclesiam fit, digne et juste fiat, quia si non essent reperti heretici et pro heresi dampnati, jam non devinissent ad taliam sententiam." Ad quod respondens dictus Raimundus Barseti dixit hec verba vel similia: "Deberent teneri pro bonos christianos et veros martires, et hic non possem non credere quod non sint boni christiani," et nihil aliud posset sibi dari intellegi contra suam opinionem predictam. Quare supplicatur vestre Magnifice Dignitati ut ex vestro officio super premissis per vos adhibeatur remedium opportunum, et ad informandum vos nominantur testes, Imbertus de Ruppefixa, domicellus, Joannes Maurendi. Qua quidem cedula ut premittitur presentata et per nos recepta, dictum Bernardum ad nostram presentiam fecimus evocari, qui in judicio constitutus, juratus de veritate dicenda postmodum recognovit se fecisse fieri et dictari eamdem per magistrum Guillelmum Lombardi clericum et procuratorem Pedenacii habitatorem et scribi per Petrum clericum magistri Arnaudi Vasconis notarii dicti loci ad instantiam et instructionem Guillelmi Masconis de Pedenacio apotecarii, qui ipsam cedulam seu substantiam facti super quo formata fuit, conscientibus aliquibus aliis complicibus inferius nominandis primitus scripsit manu propria in vulgari, et postmodum eam sic in vulgari scriptam fecerunt formari et transcribi in forma predicta. Vocatis autem Joanne Maurendi, Guillelmo Masconis, Imberto de Ruppefixa, Durando de Podio, Guillelmo de Casulis, a quibus idem Bernardus primo asserebat se audivisse narrari factum predictum, in dicta cedula expressum, et quod a principio, ut dixit, credebat esse verum, et coram nobis, Inquisitore predicto, uno post alium singulariter in judicio constitutis ac medio juramento interrogatis, si sciebant factum, prout in ipsa cedula continebatur fuisse verum, et primo respondentibus se nihil scire de ipso facto, nisi per auditum dici alienum, excepto dicto Joanne Maurendi, qui asseruit ipsum factum fore verum et deposuit de scientia et de visu, tandem prefatis Joanne Maurendi et Imberto de Ruppefixa in dicti Bernardi presentia affrontatis, et in judicio constitutis, et de veritate dicenda juratis, negaverunt unus post alium se dixisse predicto Bernardo factum predictum, et aliquid scire de ipso facto, excepto dicto Imberto qui, cum dicto Joanne Maurendi, finaliter asseruit se scire et vidisse, prout in culpa sua inferius postea recitanda plenius est expressum. Quibus omnibus premissis sic actis, habita suspicione per nos, Inquisitorem predictum, ex verisimilibus conjecturis et circumstantiis in eisdem tunc notatis, de consilio discretorum ibi presentium, eosdem Bernardum, Joannem, Guillelmum et Imbertum in carcere fecimus detineri; qui omnes sic detenti et in carcere reclusi, per paucos dies, apud Biterrim fuerunt auditi, interrogati et super premissa cedula plenius examinati, tandemque post multas exhortaciones, interrogationes et requisitiones eis factas, falsitatem et machinationem per eos factam inimicabiliter et dolose contra dictum Raimundum aperuerunt, unus post alium, non tamen ex toto nec clare donec fuerunt in dicto carcere per dies multos detenti et apud Carcassonam adducti. Dictus tamen Imbertus fuit primus qui predictam falsitatem et machinationem apperuit et detexit, non tamen ex integro donec omnes predicti quatuor, scilicet Bernardus Pastoris, Joannes Maurendi, Imbertus et Guillelmus fuerunt apud Carcassonam adducti et in ipso muro detenti. Demum vero dictus Bernardus post multas exhortaciones, inductiones et deductiones, effusis lacrymis, modum et seriem totius tractatus et machinationis predicte, falsitatis et cedule fabricationis et consentie in eis, corde gemebundo, detexit ac confessus fuit, quod, licet a principio dixisset se credere contenta in ipsa cedula fore vera, prout ab ipsis Joanne Maurendi, Guillelmo Masconis, et Imberto predictis se audivisse asseruerat, finaliter tamen bene perpendit ex dictis predictorum et ex circumstanciis in dicto tractatu habitis, et firmiter credidit quod predicta omnia in ipsa cedula contenta prout contra dictum Raimundum Berseti proposita erant non essent vera sed falsa et eidem Raimundo imposita falso et mendaciter, per malevolentiam et inimicitiam quam ipse et alii predicti et quidam alii de Pedenacio quos nominat, querebant vel habebant contra vel apud istum Raimundum Berseti ex causas quas in sua confessione expressit, et hoc etiam credebat et perpendebat antequam redderet cedulam predictam, sicut dixit, quodque in itinere dum ipse qui loquitur et dictus Joannes Maurendi ibant apud Biterrim ad redendam cedulam predictam dixit ipse loquens dicto Joanni: "Pectus multum me sollicitat non reddere istam cedulam," et dictus Joannes Maurendi respondit quod bene redderet eam nisi esset ibi pro teste scriptus; et hoc audito ipse Bernardus respondit: "Melius est quod estis testes et ego ipsam presentabo, quia quando sunt plures testes melius probabitur factum predictum." Item, quando fuerunt Biterrim, ipse Bernardus Pastoris fecit dictum Joannem Maurendi recedere et reverti postmodum, ne, si videretur per dominum inquisitorem esset suspectus quod se ingereret in testem, non vocatus nec citatus, et postea fecit eum cum aliis citari, et eisdem citatis, ministravit expensas in cena, non tamen de pecunia sua aliorum consentientium in predictis. Item, quamdam informationem seu inquestam que fiebat in curia regia seu vicarii regii Bitterris contra dictum Raimundum Berseti super quibusdam casibus officium Inquisitionis minime tangentibus, tam ad expensas proprias quam aliorum, prosequebatur pro viribus et ducebat in odium et malum dicti Raimundi Berseti, non obstanti quod crederet contenta in ipsa cedula non esse vera, et quod etiam dixisset Joanni Maurendi et Guillelmo Mascon predictis se non credere ea fore vera nec adhibere fidem dictis eorumdem, et quod etiam sibi respondissent: "Vos, si est verum aut non, solus debetis ferre testimonium." Interrogatus quare ergo reddebat dictam cedulam ex quo sciebat eam contiuere falsitatem, respondit quod propter suum malum et suam ruinam et quod volebat quod propter illa ipse Raimundus Berseti haberet inde malum et dampnum. Interrogatus quare credebat inde malum eventurum dicto Raimundo Berseti, si ipsa cedula vel contenta in ea probarentur, respondit se nescire modum curie domini Inquisitoris, tamen sciebat, ut dixit, eadem contenta in ipsa cedula esse hereticalia, et quod dictus Raimundus propter hoc caperetur et in carcere poneretur et detineretur et postmodum remitteretur domino Episcopo Biterrensi et quod ipse episcopus posset de ipso Raimundo facere inquestam, sciens tum, ut dixit, quod dictus dominus Episcopus portabat tunc eidem Raimundo Berseti malam voluntatem, et quod non fecisset illi nisi malum et dampnum, credens tunc, ut dixit et desiderans quod ipse Raimundus condempnaretur ad perdendum officium suum, scilicet notariatus, et quod perderet magnam vel majorem partem bonorum suorum, et quod hoc sibi dixerant aliqui de complicibus predictis et aliis, quod talia erant in dicta cedula que, si probarentur, et causa bene duceretur, dictus Raimundus perderet magnam partem bonorum suorum committens predicta. Dixit se penitere de predictis.

XIV.

HOPELESSNESS OF DEFENCE.

(MSS. Bibl. Nat., fonds latin, nouvelles acquisitions, 139, fol. 33.)

Anno quo supra XIIII Kal. Februarii (19 Jan. 1252) P. Morret comparuit coram magistris inquisitoribus apud Carcassonam et requisitus si volebat se deffendere de hiis que in instructione inventa sunt contra eum et si volebat ea recipere dixit quod non. Item requisitus dixit quod habebat inimicos, videlicet B. de Beo et sorores ejus pro eo quod habuit causam cum eis, tamen postmodum pacificatum fuit inter eos. Item B. Seguini est inimicus suus. Item Savrina est inimica sua quia ipsa dicebat quod rem habuerat cum filia sua. Et requisitus si aliud volebat dicere vel proponere ad deffensionem suam dixit se nichil aliud scire, et fuerunt sibi publicata dicta testium in inquisitione contra ipsum inita in præsentia domini episcopi et dictorum inquisitorum. Et facta publicatione iterum fuit requisitus semel, secundo et tertio si volebat aliquid aliud dicere ad deffensionem suam vel aliquas legitimas exceptiones proponere, dixit quod non, nisi sicut dixerat; et fuit sibi assignata dies super hiis que inventa sunt contra eum in inquisitione et sibi publicatis in presentia prædictorum ... ad audiendam deffinitionem suam in octava Sti Vincentii (29 Jan.) in burgo. (Registre de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.)

XV.

BULL OF GREGORY XI. RELEASING A "PEXARIACH."

(Doat, XXXV. fol. 134.)

Gregorius episcopus servus servorum Dei dilecto filio inquisitori heretice pravitatis in partibus Carcassonensibus, auctoritate apostolica deputato, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Humilibus supplicum votis libenter annuimus eaque favore prosequimur opportuno; sane petitio pro parte Bidonis de Podio Guillermi, laici, Burdegalensis diocesis, nobis nuper exhibita, continebat quod ipse qui dudum cum nonnullis dampnatis societatibus per regnum Francie discurrentibus, qui de Pexariacho nuncupabantur, et de heresi fuerunt vehementer suspecte, per heresim hujusmodi quam secundum quod testes contra cum super hoc producti deposuerunt, confessus, extiterat ad perpetuum carcerem condempnatus et in eo ex tunc continue stetit, suam penitentiam humiliter faciendo, et vere penitens et a predicta heresi discedens ad gremium et unitatem sancte matris ecclesie redire desiderat quamplurimum et affectat; quodque illi qui eum propter hujusmodi heresim auctoritate apostolica condemnarunt, liberandi eum ab hujusmodi carceribus, quamvis sit contritus et redire velit, ut perfertur, nullam habent potestatem, quare pro parte dicti Bidonis nobis fuit humiliter supplicatum ut providere ei in premissis de benignitate apostolica dignaremur; nos, hujusmodi supplicationibus inclinati, discretioni tue prefatum Bidonem si in judicio conscientie tue tibi videatur, quod ad hoc ipsius Bidonis merita suffragantur, liberandi a predicto carcere et sibi alias penitentias salutares auctoritate apostolica imponendi, hujusmodi heresi per eum primitus abjurata, tibi tenore presentium concedimus facultatem. Datum apud Pontem-sorgie, Avenionensis diocesis, secundo Idus Maii, Pontificatus nostri anno primo (14 Maii, 1371).

XVI.

MONITION OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF NARBONNE IN 1329 TO PROTECT PENITENTS WEARING CROSSES.

(Doat, XXVII. fol. 107.)

Quoniam illis qui pœnitentiam sibi impositam proper crimen hæresis agunt improperia obloquentium vel detrahentium quandoque dant materiam retrahendi a via veritatis et pœnitentias facere omittendi, potissime quando de crucibus vel de pœnitentiis aliis sibi impositis irrisiones et detractiones eis inferuntur, idcirco nos Archiepiscopus, Episcopi, Inquisitores et Commissarii antedicti volentes talium obloquentium detrahentium et deridentium verbositatibus et malitiis obviare, et eos pœnitentiatos in suo bono proposito confovere, monemus canonice semel secundo et tertio ac peremptorie omnes et singulos utriusque sexus cujuscumque conditionis aut status existant et nihilominus in virtute sanctæ obedientiæ eisdem auctoritate apostolica inhibemus ne quis cujuscumque conditionis aut status existat audeat vel præsumat dictis personis pœnitentiatis vel crucesignatis occasione prædicti criminis improperium dicere vel dictum crimen retrahere vel quomodolibet imputare, intimantes omnibus tenore præsentis edicti quod eisdem detractoribus improperatoribus irrisoribus et oblocutoribus, si qui fuerint et de transgressione hujus edicti nostri legitime constiterit, cruces similes imponemus et alias procedemus contra eos secundum quod de jure ct provincialibus conciliis prælatorum extiterit procedendum. Monemus insuper dictos crucesignatos et pœnitentiatos ut dictas cruces eis impositas humiliter continuo infra domum et extra portent, et sine ipsis crucibus infra domum vel extra ullatenus incedant, intimantes eisdem quod si eorum aliqui sine dictis crucibus prominentibus et apparentibus infra domum vel extra incedere præsumpserint ipsos tanquam hæreticos et impœnitentes reputabimus et eos puniemus animadversione debita prout in Valentino et Biterrensibus conciliis est ordinatum.

XVII.

OATH ADMINISTERED TO JAILOR OF INQUISITION.

(Archives de l'Inquisition de Carcassonne.--Doat, XXXII. fol. 125.)

Anno Domini MCC octuagesimo secundo, sexta feria (vel) Sabbato infra octavas Apostolorum Petri et Pauli (3 Julii, 1282), fuit injunctum et districte mandatum et per juramentum Radulpho custodi immuratorum et Bernardæ uxori suæ per fratrem Joannem Galandi inquisitorem, in præsentia fratris P. regis prioris, fratris Joannis de Falgosio et fratris Archembaudi quod de cætero non teneat scriptorem aliquem in muro nec equos, nec ab aliquo immuratorum mutuum recipiant nec donum aliquod. Item nec pecuniam illorum qui in muro decedunt, retineant, nec aliquid aliud, sed statim inquisitoribus denuncient et reportent. Item quod nullum incarceratum et inclusum extrahat de carcere. Item quod immuratos pro aliqua causa extra primam portam muri nullo modo extrahat, nec domos intrent nec cum eo comedant. Item nec servitores qui deputati sunt ad serviendum aliis occupent in operibus suis, nec eos nec alios mittant ad aliquem locum sine speciali licentia inquisitorum. Item quod dictus Radulphus non ludat cum eis ad aliquem ludum, nec sustineat quod ipsi inter se ludant, et si in aliquo de prædictis inveniantur culpabiles ipso facto incontinenter de custodia muri perpetuo sint expulsi. Actum coram prædicto inquisitore in testimonio prædictorum et mei Pontii præpositi notarii, qui hæc scripsi.

XVIII.

ROYAL LETTERS CONCERNING THE CONFISCATIONS AT ALBI.

(Doat, XXXIV. fol. 131.)

Universis presentes litteras inspecturis, Petrus Textor, notarius Domini Regis, tenens locum nobilis viri domini Raynaldi de Nusiacho, domini nostri regis militis, ejusque vicarii Albie et Albigesii, salutem et presentibus dare fidem. Noveritis nos vidisse, tenuisse et diligenter inspexisse quosdam patentes litteras excellentissimi principis et domini clare memorie Sancti Ludovici Dei gratia Francorum regis, ejus sigillo cereo viridi et filis sericis viridibus et rubeis in pendenti sigillatas, inter cetera continentes quoddam capitulum cujus de verbo ad verbum tenor sequitur: "In hunc modum est sciendum quod immobilia que nobis et successoribus nostris advenient de heresibus et faidamentis hereticorum debemus nos et successores nostri et tenemur vendere vel alienare infra annum, talibus personis que facient episcopo et ecclesie Albiensi et successoribus suis servicium et alia que tenebantur facere eis veteres possessores pro rebus iisdem; si vero nos vel successores nostri non vendiderimus vel alienaverimus infra annum immobilia hujusmodi, episcopus Albiensis vel successores sui in secundo anno et in tertio accipiet auctoritate propria illa immobilia et possidebit et faciet fructus suos, et si nos vel successores nostri infra tertium annum non vendiderimus vel alienaverimus predicta ut dictum est, episcopus Albiensis et successores sui ex tunc habeant et retineant auctoritate propria possessionem et proprietatem omnium predictorum pleno jure." In cujus visionis et inspectionis testimonium, nos dictus locumtenens dicti domini vicarii sigillum autenticum curie Albie domini nostri regis huic presenti vidimus in pendenti duximus apponendum. Datum Albie, die Veneris post festum beati Vincentii Martyris, anno Domini MCCCIII. (23 Januarii, 1304).

Philippus Dei gratia Francorum rex seneschallo Tholosano vel ejus locumtenenti salutem. Ex parte dilecti et fidelis noster episcopi Albiensis nobis fuit expositum quod super incursibus et faidimentis condemnatorum de heresi, inter Sanctum Ludovicum avum nostrum et dictum episcopum quedam ordinatio facta fuit, quod nos medietatem bonorum immobilium ipsorum condemnatorum ad manum nostram devenientium tenemur extra manum nostram ponere infra annum, et si infra primum et secundum annum dicta bona non fuerint vendita, idem episcopus in tertio anno dictorum bonorum fructus facit suos, et si bona hujusmodi condemnatorum in tertio anno vendita non fuerint, in quarto anno tam in possessione quam in proprietate dictus episcopus bonorum ipsorum efficitur dominus in solidum, et habet idem episcopus electionem dicta bona retinendi pro pretio pro quo alii venderentur, prout in litteris inde confectis et sigillo regio in cera viridi sigillatis dicitur plenius contineri, et quod gentes et nonnulli officiarii vestri seneschallie vestre et quidam alii dictam ordinationem que retroactis temporibus servata fuit, infringunt et infringere ac contra eam venire nituntur indebite et de novo; quare mandamus vobis quatinus si, vocatis procuratore nostro et aliis evocandis, vobis constiterit ita esse, dictam ordinationem juxta dictarum litterarum continentiam faciatis ratione previa firmiter observari, ea que contra ipsius ordinationis tenorem in dicti episcopi prejudicium indebite et de novo facta fuisse inveneritis ad statum debitam taliter reducentes quod super hoc ad nos non reperitur querela. Actum apud Novum Mercatum, die decima septima Augusti, anno Domini MCCCVI.

(Doat, XXXV. fol. 94.)

Philippus Dei gratia Francorum rex, Tholose et Carcassone Seneschallis aut eorum locumtenentibus salutem. Exposuerunt nobis nostri super incursibus heresis senescalli Carcassone et episcopi Albiensis procuratores quod, cum incursus heresis civitatis Albie et districtus ejusdem ad nos et ad dictum episcopum equis partibus pertineant, nonnullique dicte civitatis pro heresis crimine fuerint condempnati, et per hujusmodi condempnationem bona ipsorum nobis et dicto episcopo confiscata; nihilominus tamen nostri et episcopi procuratores predicti debita que per nonnullas personas diversorum locorum dictis condempnatis debebantur, quorum obligationes in dicta civitate celebrate fuerunt et ibidem exsolvi promisse, voluerunt exigere et nostris et episcopi, ut decet, rationibus applicare, quidam barones, nobiles et prelati quibus dicti debitores sunt subditi, nitentes dicta debita per dictos suos subditos contracta, sibi applicare, dicentes quod ad eos pertinet confiscatio ipsorum debitorum, dictos procuratores in exactione debitorum hujusmodi impedire nituntur indebite, cum in dicta civitate contracta et solvi promissa, ut predicitur, fuerint, sicut dicunt: quare mandamus vobis et vestrum cuilibet, ut pertinebit ad eum, quatinus, si vocatis evocandis, summarie et de plano constiterit de premissis, dictos barones nobiles et prelatos ab impedimento predicto opportunis remediis desistere compellentes, predicta talia debita per dictos procuratores pro nobis et dicto episcopo levari et exigi, et debitores ad ea solvendum compelli permittatis et faciatis, ac ipsa exacta nobis et dicti episcopi rationibus applicari; et cum vos propter debatum hujusmodi de predictis debitis plura per manum nostram ut superiorem, levari et exigi fecisse dicamini, de quibus ipse episcopus partem ipsum contingentem non habuit, ut dicit; si premissa vera sint, de hac parte episcopum ipsum contingente, eidem expeditionem fieri faciatis. Datum Parisius, decima sexta die Martii, anno Domini MCCCXXIX.

XIX.

GIFT TO INQUISITOR FROM THE CONFISCATIONS.

(Doat, XXXI. fol. 171.)

Alfonsus filius regis Franciæ, Pictavensis et Tholosanus comes, universis presentes litteras inspecturis salutem in Domino. Notum facimus quod nos libere et pie concedimus et donamus Egidio clerico, inquisitori de heresi in partibus Tholose de cujus servitio nos laudamus, intuitu pietatis, centum solidos Tholosanos annui redditus, in terra Raimundi de Vaure, militis, diocesis tholosane, sita in territorio Sancti Felicis et in feodo, que terra devenit ad nos incursa pro crimine heretice pravitatis, tenenda ab eodem et etiam possidenda quamdiu vixerit pacifice et quiete ita tamen quod post ejus decessum ad nos seu successores nostros libere revertatur, et si inveniretur quod plus valeret tempore date presentium litterarum, illud non intelligimus concessisse nec donasse, ita tamen quod illam terram vel redditum alienare non possit sine nostra licentia speciali. In cujus rei testimonium presentibus litteris sigillum nostrum duximus apponendum, salvo jure quolibet alieno. Actum apud hospitale juxta Corbolium, anno Domini MCCLI., mense Julii.

XX.

CHARLES OF ANJOU'S INSISTENCE AS TO CONFISCATED PROPERTY.

(Archivio di Napoli, Anno 1272, Reg. 15, Lettera C, fol. 77.)

Scriptum est seneschallo Provincie etc. Olim vicario et subvicario quandam Massilie dedisse dicimur in mandatis ut cum maria Roberta de Massilia mulier accusata de crimine heresis antequam ad carcerem occasione predicte criminis finaliter condempnaretur quamdam domum suam predicti criminis occasione ad nostram curiam legitime devolvendam vendiderit fraudulenter, ipsi vel eorum alter inquirerent de premissis diligentius veritatem, et si rem invenirent ita esse dictam domum ad opus nostre curie revocantes facerent ipsam publice subastari, rescripturi nobis quantum de ea poterat inveniri: ipsi vero mandatum nostrum in hac parte ducentes penitus in contemptum id facere non curarunt. Unde nos presenti vicario et subvicario Massilie sub obtentu gratie nostre districte precipimus ut ipsi vel alter eorum super premissis inquisita diligenter veritate si eamdem domum invenerint ad nostram curiam occasione hujusmodi pertinere ipsam ad opus ipsius curie nostre revocantes ipsam subastari faciant rescripturi nobis quantum de ea poterit inveniri. Quia tamen ipsum negotium plurimum nobis cordi existit, volumus et fidelitati tue precipiendo mandamus quatenus in premissis committi non patiatis negligentiam vel defectum, et si forsan procurator curie nostre in provincia occupatus aliis hiis interesse nequiverit alium qui degat Massilie statuas ut executioni predictorum omnium intersit prout de jure fuerit et utilitati nostre curie videatur expedire. Datum Capue XIIII. Januarii prime indictionis.

* * * * *

(On the next following folio is a similar letter addressed to the viguier and sous-viguier.)

END OF VOL. I.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Johann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. lib. IV. cap. iii.--Honor. Augustod. Summ. Glor. de Apost. cap. v., viii.--Innocent PP. III. Regest. de Negot. Rom. Imp. xviii.; Ejusd. Serm. de Sanctis vii.; Serm. de Diversis iii.--Eymerici Direct. Inquisit. Ed. Venet. 1607, p. 353.

[2] Gratiani P. I. Dist. LXII.--Concil Lateran. IV. c. xxiii.-xxv.--Isambert, Anciennes Loix Françaises, I. 145.--P. Damiani Lib. I. Epist. ii.

[3] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 261.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. cv.--Alex. PP. III. Epist. 395.--Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. Dist. VI. c. 5.--Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1050 c. 2.--Rodolphi Glabri Hist. Lib. v. c. 5.--Guibert. Noviogent. de Vita sua Lib. III. c. 2.--Joann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. Lib. VII. c. 19.--Hist. Monast. Andaginens. c. 81.--Ruperti Tuitens. Chron. S. Laurent. c. 28, 45.--Hist. Monast. S. Laurent. Leodiens. Lib. v. c. 62, 121-3.--Chron. Cornel. Zantfliet ann. 1305.

A story very similar to that of Philip Augustus is told of the Chancellor of Roger of Sicily and three competitors for the see of Avellana--Joann. Saresberiens. ubi sup.

[4] P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. xxxvi.--Chron. Turon. ann. 1097.--Ivon. Carnotens. Lib. I. Epp. lxvi., lxvii.

[5] Chron. Senonens. Lib. v. cap. xiii.-xv.--Chron. S. Trudon. Lib. v.--Fulbert. Carnotens. Epist. 112.--Metzleri de Viris Illust. S. Gallens. Lib. ii. cap. 28, 30, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 53, 54, 56, 57, 60.--Martene Collect. Ampliss. I. 1188-9.--Vaissette, Hist. Gén. de Languedoc. T. IV. p. 7 (Ed. 1742).--Gerhohi Reichersperg. Exposit. in Psalm lxiv. cap. 34.--Ejusd. Lib. de Ædificio Dei cap. 5.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. II. cap. 9.--Matt. Paris. Hist. Angl. ann. 1196.--Rog. Hovedens. ann. 1197.--Benedicti Gesta Henrici II. ann 1188.--Baggiolini, Dolcino e i Patarini, p. 53 (Novara, 1838).--Martene Thesaur. II. 90-93, 99, 100, 150, 151, 192.

A clerical rhymer of the thirteenth century describes the prelates of the day--

"Episcopi cornuti conticuere muti; ad prædam sunt parati et indecenter coronati, pro virga ferunt lanceam pro infula galeam.

"sicut fortes incedunt et a Deo discedunt. ut leones feroces et ut aquilæ veloces, ut apri frendentes exacuere dentes."

Carmina Burana, p. 15 (Breslau. 1883).

[6] P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. liv.--Pet. Blesens. Epist. ccxl.--Cæsar. Heisterb. Dial. Mirac. Dist. II. c. 27, 28; Dist. VI. c. 20.--Varior. ad Alex. PP. III. Epist. xxi. (Migne, Patrolog. CC. 1379).--Pet. Blesens. Tract. quales sunt P. II. IV.

[7] Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 277; XIV. 125; XVI. 63, 158.--II. 34; VII. 84.--III. 24; VII. 75, 76; VIII. 106; IX. 66; X. 68; XIII. 88; XV. 93. See also II. 236; VI. 216; X. 182, 194; XI. 142; XII. 24, 25; XV. 186, 235; XVI. 12.--Gollut, République Séquanoise (Ed. Duvernoy, Arbois, 1846, pp. 80, 1724).--La Porte du Theil (Académie des Inscriptions, Notices des MSS. III. 617 sqq.).--Opusc. Tripartiti P. III. cap. iv. (Fasciculi Rer. Expetendarum et Fugiendarum, II. 225, Ed. 1690).

In May, 1212, Legate Arnauld is addressed as Archbishop-elect of Narbonne (Innocent. PP. III. Regest. XV. 93, 101), but in the necrology of the Abbey of Saint-Just of Narbonne, Berenger, at his death, Aug. 11, 1213, is qualified as archbishop (Chron. de S. Just, Vaissette, Ed. Privat, VIII. 218).

[8] P. Cantor. Verb, abbrev. cap. 71.--S. Bernardi Tract, de Mor. et Offic. Episc. c. vii. No. 25.--Gesta Treviror. Archiep. cap. 92.--Prutz, Malteser Urkunden und Registen, München, 1883, p. 38.--Guillel. Nangiac. Contin. ann. 1305.--Hist. Prior. Grandimont. (Martene Ampliss. Coll. VI. 122, 135-137).--Matt. Paris Hist. Angl. ann. 1245, 1248, 1250, 1252, 1255, 1256.--Hincmari Epist. xxxii. 20.--Hildeberti Cenoman. Epist. Lib. ii. No. 41, 47.--S. Bernard. de Consideratione Lib. i. cap. 4.--Innocent. PP. III. Gesta xli.--Ejusd. Regest. I. 330; II. 265; v. 33, 34; X. 188.--Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. _Desiderantes plurimum_ (Potthast Regesta, I. 673).--Chron. Augustan, ann. 1260.--Stephani Tornacens. Epist. 43.--Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. II. cap. VII.

[9] Can. 43, Extra Lib. I. tit. iii.--Petri Exoniens. Summula Exigendi Confessionis (Harduin. VII. 1126).--Concil. Herbipolens. ann. 1187 c. 37.--Concil. apud Campinacum ann. 1238 c. 1, 2, 7.--Concil. apud Castrum Gonterii ann. 1253 can. unic.--C. Nugariolens. ann. 1290 c. 3.--C. Avenionens. ann. 1326 c. 49; ann. 1337 c. 59.--C. Bituricens. ann. 1336 c. 5.--C. Vaurens. ann. 1368 c. 10, 11.--Lucii. PP. III. Epist. 252.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. Lib. I. Epist. 235, 349, 405, 456, 536, 540; II. 29; III. 37; VI. 120, 233, 234; VII. 26; X. 15, 79, 93; XI. 144, 161, 275; XV. 218, 223; Supplem. 234.--Berger, Registre d'Innocent. IV. pp. lxxvi-lxxvii., No. 2591, 3214, 3812, 4086.--Theiner Vet. Monument. Hibern. et Scotor. No. 196, p. 75.--De Reiffenberg, Chron. de Ph. Mouskes, I. ccxxv.

When the comprehensive annual curse, known as the Bull in Cæna Domini, came in fashion, falsifiers of papal letters were included in its anathemas, until the abrogation of the custom in 1773.

[10] Fascic. Rerum Expetendarum et Fugiendarum II. 7, 254-255 (Ed. 1690).

[11] P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 24.--Cf. Petri. Blesensis Epist. 23; Johann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. Lib. VII. cap. 21, Lib. VIII. cap. 17.

[12] Concil. Juliobonens. ann. 1080 c. 3, 5.--Concil. Bremens. ann. 1266.--Eadmer. Hist. Novor. Lib. IV.--Concil. Melfitan. ann. 1284 c. 5.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 24, 79.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. X. 85; XII. 37.--Pet. Blesensis Epist. 209.

[13] Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1231 c. 48.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 23.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 376.--Chron. Andres. Monast.--Narrat. Restaur. Abbat. S. Mart. Tornacens. cap. 113, 114.--Joann. Saresberiens. Polycrat. Lib. v. cap. 15. Cf. Lib. VI. cap. 24.

[14] P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 86.

[15] Concil. Lemovicens. ann. 1031.--Concil. Avenionens. ann. 1209 c. 1.--Concil. Lateranens. ann. 1215 c. 10.--Millot, Hist. Litt. des Troubadours, II. 61.

[16] S. Bernard. Epistt. 271, 274, 276.--Can. 2, 3, Extra Lib. i. Tit. xiii.--Thomassin, Discip. de l'Église. P. IV. Lib. ii. cap. 38.--Gaufridi Vosiensis Chron. ann. 1181.--Concil. Turon. ann. 1231. c. 16.--Concil. Lugdun. ann. 1274 c. 12.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 55, 60, 61.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. XI. 142.--Even a pontiff such us Innocent III. was not above intruding his dependants upon the churches everywhere. His registers are full of such missives.

[17] Concil. Lateran. III. ann. 1179 c. 13, 14; IV. ann. 1215 c. 29.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 82, 191, 471.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 31, 32, 34. 80.--Honor. PP. III. Epist. ad Archiep. Bituricens. ann. 1219.--Urbani. PP. V. Constit. 1367 (Harduin. Concil. VII. 1767).--Isambert. Anc. Loix Franç. I. 252.--Matt. Paris. Hist. Angl. ann. 1246 (Ed. 1644 p. 483)--Wadding. Annal. Minor, ann. 1238, No. 8.--D'Argentré, Collect. Judicior. de Nov. Error. I. I. 143.

The correspondence of the papal chancery under Innocent IV., as preserved in the official register, for the first three months of 1245, embraces three hundred and thirty-two letters, and of these about one fifth are dispensations to sixty-five persons to hold pluralities (Berger, Registres d'Innoc. IV. t. I.). A considerable proportion of the remainder are licenses for violations of canon law, showing how exhaustless were the vices of the clergy as a source of profit to the curia. For the rapacity with which the benefices of the dying were sought and disputed, see ibid. No. 1611.

[18] Clement. PP. IV. Epist. 456. (Martene Thesaur. II. 461).--Alcuini Epist. i. ad Arnon. Salisburg. (Pez Thesaur. II. i. 4).--Decreti P. II. Caus. XIII. Gratiani Comment, in Q. I. cap. i; Caus. XVI. Q. i. cap. 42, 43, 45-47, 56, 57; Caus. XVI. Q. vii. cap. 1-8.--Extra Lib. III. tit. xxx.--Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1189 c. 23.--Concil. Wigorn. ann. 1240 c. 44, 45.--Concil Mertonens. ann. 1300.--Concil. apud Pennam Fidelem ann. 1302 c. 7.--Concil. Maghfeldens. ann. 1332.--Concil. Londin. ann. 1342 c. 4, 5.--Concil. Nimociens. ann. 1298 c. 16.--Concil. Nicosiens. ann. 1340 c. 1.--Concil. Marciac. ann. 1326 c. 30.--Concil. Vaurens. ann. 1368 c. 68-70.--Gerhohi Reichersperg. Lib. de Ædificio Dei c. 46.

[19] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. iii. cap. 40, 41.--Hist. Monast. S. Laurent. Leodiens. Lib. v. cap. 39.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 220; II. 104.--Pet. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 27-29, 38-40.--Grandjean, Registre de Benoit XI. No. 975.--Concil. Lateran. IV. ann. 1215, c. 63-66.--Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1231, c. 14.--Teulet, Layettes II. 306, No. 2428.--Const. Provin. S. Edmund. Cantuar. ann. 1236, c. 8.--Synod. Wigorn. ann. 1240, c. 16, 26, 29.--Concil. Turon. ann. 1239, c. 4, 17.

[20] Synod. Andegav. ann. 1294, c. 3.--Capit. Car. Mag. II. ann. 811, cap. 5.--Concil. Cabillon. II. ann. 813, c. 6.--Concil. Turonens. III. ann. 813, c. 51.--Concil. Remens. ann. 813.--Concil. Mogunt. ann. 813, c. 6.--Can. 10, Extra Lib. III. tit. xxvi.--Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1227, c. 5.--Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1228, c. 5; ann. 1229, c. 16.--Concil. Rotomag. ann. 1231. c. 23.--Concil. Arelatens. ann. 1234, c. 21; ann. 1275, c. 8.--Constit. Provin. S. Edmund. Cantuar. ann. 1236, c. 33.--Concil. Albiens. ann. 1254, c. 11.--Concil. Andegav. ann. 1206; 1300.--Respons. Episc. Carcassonn. ann. 1275 (Martene Thesaur. I. 1151).--Concil. Nemausiens. ann. 1284, c. 8.--Concil. Reatinens. ann. 1303, c. 8.--Concil. Cameracens. ann. 1317.

[21] Decreti. II. Caus. xiii. Q. 2.--Can. 1-10, Sexto Lib. III. Tit. xxviii.--Anon Zwetlens. Hist. Rom. Pontif. No. 155 (Pez Thesaur. I. iii. 383).--Narrat. Restaur. Abbat. S. Martini Tornacens. cap. 86-89.--Synod. Wigorn. ann. 1240, c. 50.--Ripoll Bullar. Ord. Prædic. VII. 5.--Grandjean, Registre de Benoit XI. No. 974.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. VII. 165.--G.B. de Lagrèze, La Navarre, t. II. p. 165.--Concil. Avenion. ann. 1326, c. 27; ann. 1237, c. 32.--Teulet, Layettes II. 306, No. 2428.--Concil. Nimociens. ann. 1296, c. 17.--Constit. Joann. Arch. Nicosiens. ann. 1321, c. 10.--Concil. Vaurens. ann. 1368, c. 63, 64.

[22] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. III. cap. 27.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 138.--Löwenfeld Epistt. Pont. Rom. ined. No. 92, 114 (Lipsiæ, 1885).--See the Author's "Historical Sketch of Sacerdotal Celibacy," 2d edition, 1884.

[23] Stephani Tornacens. Epist. XII.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. VI. 183; VIII. 192-193; X. 209-210, 215; XV. 202. For the subsequent career of Waldemar of Sleswick, see Regest. XI. 10, 173; XII. 63; XIII. 158; XV. 3; Supplement. 187, 224, 228, 243. Cf. Arnold. Lubecens. VI. 18; VII. 12, 13; and Vaissette, Hist. Gén. de Languedoc, IV. 80 (ed. 1742). For details of clerical immunity, see the author's "Studies in Church History," 2d edition, 1883.

[24] Concil. ap. Campinacum ann. 1238, c. 1, 6.

[25] Varior. ad Alex. PP. III. Epist. XCV. (Migne, Patrolog. CC. 1457). Cf. Pet. Blesens. Epist. XC.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 386, 476, 483, 499; V. 159; VIII. 12; IX. 209; XIII. 132; XV. 105.--Pet. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 44.--Gerhohi Lib. de Ædificio Dei cap. 33; Ejusd. Exposit. in Psalm. lxiv. cap. 35.--Chron. S. Trudon. Libb. III., IV., V.--Hist. Vezeliacens. Libb. II.-IV.--Chron. Senoniens. Libb. IV., V.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. IV. cap. 65-67. For ample details as to the immorality of the monasteries, see the author's "History of Celibacy."

[26] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. I. cap. 3, 24, 31.--Hist Monast. Andaginens. cap. 34.

[27] Gregor. PP. I. Dialog. IV. 55.--D'Achery Spicileg. III. 382.--Chron. S. Trudon. Lib. VI.

[28] Augustin. de Op. Monachor. ii. 3.--Cassiani. de Cœnob. Instit. ii. 3.--Hieron. Epistt. XXXIX.; CXXV. 16.--Regul. S. Benedicti. cap. 1.--S. Isidor. Hispal. de Eccles. Offic. II. xvi. 3, 7.--Ludov. Pii de Reform. Eccles. cap. 100.--Smaragd. Comment. in Regul. Benedict. c. 1.--Ripoll Bull. Ord. FF. Prædic. I. 38.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. VI. cap. 20.--Catalog. Varior. Hæreticor. (Bib. Max. Patrum. Ed. 1618, t. XIII. p. 309).

[29] Brevis Hist. Prior. Grandimont.--Stephani Tornacens. Epistt. 115, 152, 153, 156, 162.

Prior Peter's fear that the convent would be converted into a market-place and a fair is illustrated by the complaint of the Council of Béziers in 1233, that many religious houses were in the habit of retailing their wine within the sacred enclosure, and attracting consumers by having jugglers, actors, gamblers, and strumpets there.--Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1233, c. 23.

[30] Giberti Gemblac. Epistt. v. vi.

[31] Petri Exoniens. Summ. Exigendi Confess. ann. 1287 (Harduin. VII. 1128).--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. III. cap. 45.--Martene Ampliss. Coll. I. 357.

[32] P. Damiani Opusc. V.--Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. Decret. de Justific. c. 16, 30.--Migne, Encyclopédic Theologique. t. XXVII. pp. 59-63, 118.--Abælardi Ethica, cap. 25.--Cap. 14 Extra Lib. v. tit. iii.--Concil. Lateran. IV. c. 72.--Alani de Insulis contra Hæret. Lib. II. cap. xi.--Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. 29 Apr. 1228; 18 Jul. 1237 (Potthast Regesta, I. 705, 884).--Addis and Arnold's Catholic Dict. s. v. _Portiuncula_.--Lib. Conformitatum S. Fran. Lib. II. tract. ii. (fol. 135-138. Ed. 1513).--Bonifacii PP. VIII. Bull. _Antiquorum habet_.--Concil. Claromont. ann. 1195, c. 2.--Urbani PP. II. Synodalis Concio.--Concil. Lateran. IV. can. ult.--Le Grand d'Aussy, Fabliaux, I. 379, 392.--Prediche del B. Frà Giordano da Rivalto (Firenze, 1831, I. 253).--Nicolai PP. IV. Bull. _Illuminit_, ann. 1291.--Gregor. PP. XI. Bull. _Dudum_, 23 Apr. 1372.

The mediæval doctrine of indulgence is truly expressed by Alonso, Bishop of Avila, in 1443, when disculpating himself to Eugenius IV. from an accusation of doubting the papal power: "Papa etiam potest absolvere ab omnibus peccatis et potest dare plenariam indulgentiam, liberando homine a tota pœna Purgatorii, scilicet faciendo quod non veniet in illum etiamsi multa pœna (peccata) commiserit" (D'Argentré, Collect. Judic. de novis Error. I. ii. 241). Yet when an enthusiastic Franciscan taught at Tournay, in 1482, that the pope at will could empty purgatory, the University of Paris qualified the proposition as doubtful and scandalous (Ibid. I. ii. 305). The same year the University again interfered, when the church of Saintes, having procured a bull of indulgence from Sixtus IV., announced publicly that, no matter how long a period of punishment had been assigned by divine justice to a soul, it would fly from purgatory to heaven as soon as three sols were paid in its behalf to be expended in repairing the church (Ibid. 307). In 1518 the university was obliged to repeat its condemnation of the same promises made to those who would contribute a _teston_ for the crusade which was always under way and never attempted (Ib. 355). Yet the doctrine thus condemned by the university was pronounced to be unquestionable Catholic truth by the Dominican Silvestro Mozzolino, in his refutation of Luther's Theses, dedicated to Leo X. (F. Silvest. Prieriatis Dialogus, No. 27). As Silvestro was made general of his order and master of the sacred palace, it is evident that no exceptions to his teaching were taken at Rome. Those who doubt that the abuses of the system were the proximate cause of the Reformation can consult Van Espen, Jur. Eccles. Universi P. II. tit. vii. cap. 3 No. 9-12. Cf. Ibid. P. II. tit. xxxvii. cap. 6 No. 43-46, for their continuance into the eighteenth century.

The modern commercial spirit has not failed to take advantage of the indulgence. The Libreria Religiosa of Barcelona is enabled to advertise that various Spanish prelates have granted an indulgence of 2320 days (fifty-eight quarantaines) to every one who will read or hear read a chapter or even a single page of any of its publications.

[33] Concil. Turon. ann. 1236, c. 1.--Établissements de S. Louis, Liv. i. cap. 84.--Berger, Les Registres d'Innocent IV. No. 2230.

[34] Matt. Paris. Hist. Angl. ann. 1251 (p. 553, Ed. 1644).--Chron. Turon. ann. 1226.--Joannis PP. XXII. Regest. IV. 73, 74, 76, 77, 95, 97, 99.--Baluz. et Mansi Miscell. III. 242.--Concil. Ravennat. ann. 1314, c. 20.

[35] Concil. Avenion. ann. 1326, c. 3.--Concil. Marciacens. ann. 1326, c. 45.--Concil. Vaurens. ann. 1368, c. 127.--Concil. Narbonn. ann. 1374, c. 27.

The magic character attributed to these formulas of devotion is well illustrated by the story of Thierry d'Avesnes, who, during a raid into the territories of Baldwin of Mons, burned the convents of St. Waltruda of Mons, and St. Aldegonda of Maubeuge. Thereupon a holy hermit had a vision in which he saw the two angry saints demanding from the Virgin satisfaction for their injuries. This the Virgin refused, because Ada, the wife of Thierry, rendered to her the most grateful service by repeating the Ave Maria sixty times a day--twenty standing, twenty on her knees, and twenty prostrate. The saints still insisted on their wrongs, and the Virgin at length promised them revenge, when it could be inflicted without injury to Ada. Some years afterwards Thierry incautiously procured a divorce from her on the plea of consanguinity, because she remained barren after twenty years of marriage, and in a short time, while hunting, he was ambushed and slain by an enemy. His nephew and successor, Joscelin, took warning by this, and was very particular in constantly repeating the Ave Maria, and forcing his troopers to do likewise, so that, although he wrought much evil, yet he made a good ending.--Narrat. Restaur. S. Martini Tornacens. cap. 57.

Somewhat similar is the story of the knight, who, though cruel and revengeful, had such veneration for the cross that he never passed one without descending from his horse and adoring it. Once, when riding alone through a dense forest, he was assailed by the kinsmen of a noble whom he had slain, and was forced to seek safety in flight. Coming to a cross-road, where stood a cross, he dismounted and knelt before it, when his enemies, coming up, were struck with sudden blindness, and groped vainly around, while he rode quietly away.--Lucæ Tudensis de Altera Vita Lib. III. cap. 6.

[36] Concil. Lateran. IV. c. 62.--P. de Pilichdorf contr. Waldenses cap. xxx.--Concil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, c. 5.--Concil. Cenomanens. ann. 1248.--Concil. Burdegalens. ann. 1255, c. 2.--Concil. Vienn. ann. 1311 (Clementin. Lib. v. tit. ix. c. 2).--Concil. Remens. ann. 1303.--Concil. Carnotens. ann. 1325, c. 18.--Martene Thesaur. IV. 858.--Martene Ampliss. Collect. VII. 197, etc.--Concil. Moguntin. ann. 1261, c. 48.--La Secchia Rapita, xii. 1. For the repression of these abuses after the Reformation see cap. 1, 2 in Septimo iii. 15.

[37] Gesta. Consulum. Andegavens. iii. 23.--Roger. Hoveden. ann. 1177.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. IX. 243.--Cæesar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. VIII. cap. 53.--Muratori. Antiq. Med. Ævi Dissert. lviii.--Anon. Passaviens. adv. Waldens. cap. 5 (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 301).

[38] Hartzheim. Concil. German. III. 543.--Campana, Storia di San Piero Martire Lib. II. cap. 3.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. IX. cap. 6, 8, 24, 25.

[39] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. X. cap. 56.--Wibaldi Abbat. Corbeiens. Epist. 157.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 29.

[40] Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. III. cap. 2, 3, 6; Dist. v. cap. 3.

[41] S. Bernardi Serm. de Conversione cap. 19, 20.--Ejusd. Serm. 77 in Cantica cap. 1.--Cf. Ejusd. Serm. 33 in Cantica cap. 16; Tract. de Moribus et Offic. Episc. cap. vii. No. 25, 27, 28.--De Consideratione Lib. III. cap. 4, 5.--Pothon. Prumiens. de Statu Domus Dei Lib. I.

[42] Cod. Diplom. Viennens. No. 163.--P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. cap. 57, 59--Guiberti Abbat. Gemblacens. Epist. 1.--S. Hildegardæ Revelat. Vis. X. cap. 16.

[43] Honor. PP. III. Epist. ad Archiep. Bituricens. (Martene Collect. Amplis. I. 1149-1151; Thesaur. Anecdot. I. 875-877).--Fascic. Rer. Expetendarum et Fugiendarum, II. 251 (Ed. 1690).--W. Preger, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Waldesier, München, 1875, pp. 64-67.

[44] Guill. Pod. Laurent. Chron. Proœm.--Narrat. Restaur. Abbat S. Martini Tornacens. cap. 38.--Panniers Walthers von der Vogelweide sämmtliche Gedichte, No. 110, p. 118. Cf. No. 85, 111-113.

[45] From "La Gesta de Fra Peyre Cardinal," Raynouard, Lexique Roman, I. 464. See also pp. 446, 451. Cardinal was of noble birth and high consideration at the courts of Aragon and Toulouse; he was born in 1206, and is said to have lived until 1306. He was no heretic, although "los fals clerques reprendia molt."--(Miquel de la Tor, Vie de Peire Cardinal, ap. Meyer, Anciens Textes p. 100.)--See also his Sirvente, "Un sirventes vuelh for dels autz glotos" (Raynouard, Lexique Roman, I. 447).

[46] Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles I. 405 (Madrid, 1880).--Petri Venerab. Opp. pp. 650 sqq. (Ed. Migne).--F. Francisci Pipini Chron. cap. 16.--Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1210.--Concil. Paris. ann. 1210.--Gregor. PP. IX. Bull. _Cum salutem_, 29 Apr. 1231.--S. Bernardi de Consideratione Lib. i. cap. 4.

For the adoration paid to Aristotle by the schoolmen of the twelfth century see John of Salisbury's Metalogicus Lib. ii. c. 16.

[47] Reinerii contra Waldenses cap. 3.--Tractatus de Modo procedendi contra Hæreticos (MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Doat XXX. 185 sqq.).--Lucæ Tudensis de Altera Vita Lib. III. cap. 7-10.--P. de Pilichdorf contra Waldenses cap. 16.--Passaviens. Anon. (Preger, Beiträge, pp. 64-67).--Raynouard, Lexique Roman, V. 471.

[48] Concil. Roman. ann. 1059, can. 3.--Lambert. Hersfeld. ann. 1074.--Gregor. PP. VII. Epist. Extrav. 4; Regist. Lib. IV. Ep. 20.--Concil. Remens. ann. 1131, c. 5.--Concil. Lateran. II. ann. 1139, c. 7.--c. 5, 6, Decret. I. xxxii.; c. 15; I. lxxxi.--Gerhohi Dial. de Different. Cleri. Cf. Ejusd. Lib. contr. duas Hæreses c. 3, 6; Dialogus de Clericis Sæcul. et Regular.--Anon. Libell. adv. Errores Alberonis (Martene Ampliss. Collect. IX. 1251-1270).--Can. 10 Extra Lib. III. tit. ii.--D'Argentré, Collect. Judic. de novis Erroribus, I. ii. 154.--Fortalicium Fidei, fol. 62 _b_ (Ed. 1494). The importance of the question in the twelfth century is shown by the number of canons devoted to it by Gratian.

[49] Hartzheim Concil. German. III. 763-766.--Meyeri Annal. Flandriæ Lib. IV. ann. 1113-1115.--Sigeberti Gemblacens. Contin. Valcellens. ann. 1115.--P. Abælardi Introd. ad Theolog. Lib. II. cap. 4.--Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1127.--Vit. S. Norbert. Archiep. Magdeburg, cap. iii. No. 79, 80.

[50] Sigibert. Gemblac. Continuat. Gemblac. ann. 1146.--Ejusd. Continuat. Præmonstrat. ann. 1148.--Roberti de Monte Chron. ann. 1148.--Guillel. de Newburg. Lib. I. cap. 19.--Otton. Frising. de Gest. Frid. I. Lib. I. cap. 54, 55.--Hugon. Rothomag. contr. Hæret. Lib. III. cap. 6.--Schmidt, Histoire des Cathares, I. 49.

[51] Saige, Les Juifs du Languedoc. P. I. ch. ii.; P. II. ch. ii. (Paris, 1881). The same causes were at work in Spain, where the faithful complained that they were not allowed to persecute the Jew (Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. III. cap. 3), and missionary work among the slaves of Jews was rendered costly by forcing the bishop of the diocese to pay to the master an extortionate price for every slave converted to Christianity and thus set free, for Jews could not hold Christian slaves. They were also relieved from the oppressive tax of the tithe (Innocent. III. Regest. VIII. 50; IX. 150). Even until late in the thirteenth century we find Jews freely holding real estate in Languedoc. See MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Doat. T. XXXVII. fol. 20, 146, 148, 149, 151, 152.

For the independence of the communes, see Fauriel's edition of William of Tudela, Introd. pp. lv. sq., and Mazure et Hatoulet, Fors de Béarn, p. xliii.

[52] Jonæ. Aureliens. de Cultu Imaginum.--Petri Venerab. Tract. contra Petrobrusianos.--P. Abælardi Introd. ad Theolog. Lib. II. cap. 4.--Alphonsi a Castro adv. Hæreses Lib. III. p. 163 (Ed. 1571).--Fisquet, La France Pontificale, Embrun, p. 848.

[53] S. Bernardi Epistt. 241, 242.--Gesta Pontif. Cenomanens. (D. Bouquet T. XII. pp. 547-551, 554).--Hildebert. Cenoman. Epistt. 23, 24.--S. Bernardi Vit. Prim. Lib. III. cap. 6; Lib. VII. p. iii. ad calcem; Lib. VII. cap. 17.--Guill. de Podio-Laurent. cap. 1.--Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1148.

[54] Matt. Paris. Hist. Angl. ann. 1151.--S. Bernardi Epist. 472.--Hereberti Monachi Epist. (D. Bouquet. XII. 550-551).

[55] S. Bernardi Epistt. 189, 195, 196, 243, 244.--Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. cap. xxiv.--Otton. Frisingens. de Gestis Frid. I. Lib. I. cap. 27; Lib. II. cap. 20.--Harduin. Concil. VI. ii. 1224.--Martene Ampliss. Collect. II. 554-558.--Guntheri Ligurin. Lib. III. 262-348.--Gerhohi Reichersperg. de Investigat. Antichristi I.--Baronii Annal. ann. 1148, No. 38.--Jaffé Regesta, No. 6445.--Vit. Adriani PP. III. (Muratori III. 441, 442).--Sächsische Weltchronik, No. 301.--Cantù, Eretici d'Italia, I. 61-63.--Tocco, L'Eresia nel Medio Evo, pp. 242, 243.--Comba, La Riforma in Italia, I. 193, 194.--Bonghi, Arnaldo da Brescia, Città di Castello, 1885.

[56] Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.--Bonacursi Vit. Hæreticor. (D'Achery T.I. 214, 215).--Constit. General. Frid. II. ann. 1220 § 5.--Ejusd. Constit. Ravennat. ann. 1232.--Conrad. Urspergens. ann. 1210.--Pauli Æmilii de Rebus. Gest. Fran. Lib. VI. p. 316 (Ed. 1569).--Nicolai PP. III. Bull. _Noverit Universitas_, 5 Mart. 1280.--Julii PP. II. Bull _Consueverunt_, 1 Mart. 1511.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. II. 228.--Joann. Andreæ Gloss. super cap. Excommunicamus (Eymerici Direct. Inquisit. p. 182). The name of the Poor Men of Lyons was likewise forgotten, for Andreas's only remark with respect to them is that poverty is not a crime in itself.

The differences between the Italian and French Waldenses are set forth in a very interesting letter from the former to the German brethren, subsequently to a conference held at Bergamo in 1218. This was discovered about twelve years ago by Wilhelm Preger in a MS. of the Royal Library of Munich, and is printed in his Beiträge zur Geschichte der Waldesier im Mittelalter, 1875.

[57] Chron. Canon. Laudunens. ann. 1173 (Bouquet XIII. 680).--Steph. de Borbone s. Bellavilla Lib. de Sept. Donis Spiritus, P. IV. Tit. vii. cap. 3 (D'Argentré Coll. Judicior. de Nov. Error. I. i. 85 sqq.)--Richard. Cluniacens. Vit. Alex. PP. III. (Muratori III. 447).--David Augustens. Tract. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1778).--Monetæ adv. Cath. et Waldens. Lib. v. cap. 1 § 4.--Pet. Sarnens. cap. 2.--Passaviens. Anon. ap. Gretser (Mag. Bib. Pat. Ed. 1618, T. XIII. p. 300).--Petri de Pilichdorf contr. Hæres. Waldens. cap. 1.--Pegnæ Comment. 39 in Eymerici Direct. Inquis. p. 280.

The pretension of the Waldenses to descend from the primitive Church through the Leonistæ and Claudius of Turin is, I believe, now generally abandoned. See Edouard Montet, Histoire Litt. des Vaudois, Paris, 1885, pp. 32, 33; Prof. Emilio Comba, in the Rivista Christiana, Giugno, 1882, pp. 200-206, and his Riforma in Italia, I. 233 sqq.--Bernard Gui, in his Practica, P. v. (MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Doat. T. XXX. fol. 185 sqq.), following Richard of Cluny and Stephen of Bourbon, places the rise of Peter Waldo about 1170, and the Canon of Laon gives the date of 1173.

The time and place of Peter Waldo's death are unknown. His French disciples affectionately revered his memory and that of his assistant Vivet, to the extent of asserting, as a point of belief, that they were in Paradise with God; the Lombard branch, however, would only prudently admit that they might be saved if they had satisfied God before death; both sides were obstinate, and at the Conference of Bergamo, in 1218, this promised to make a schism (Rescript. Paup. Lombard. 15.--W. Preger, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Waldesier, pp. 58, 59).

Waldensian literature long retained the impress given to it by Waldo of stringing together extracts from the Fathers of the Church. The slavishness with which these were followed is curiously exemplified in an exposition of Canticles analyzed by M. Montet (op. cit. p. 66). The verse "Take us the little foxes, the little foxes that spoil the vines" (Cant. ii. 15) in mediæval exegesis was traditionally explained by the ravages of heretics in the Church. In the papal bulls urging the Inquisition to redoubled activity the heretics are habitually alluded to as the foxes which ravage the vineyard of the Lord. If any originality could be looked for in Waldensian exposition, we might expect it in this passage, and yet Angelomus, Bruno, and Bernard are duly quoted by the Waldensian teacher to show that the foxes are heretics and the vines are the Church.

[58] Chron. Canon. Laudunens. ann. 1177, 1178 (Bouquet XIII. 682).--Stephani de Borbone 1. c.--Richard. Cluniac. 1. c.--David Augustens. 1. c.--Monetæ 1. c.--Gault. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. 1. cap. xxxi.--Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.--Conrad. Ursperg. ann. 1210--Bernardi Fontis Calidi adv. Waldenses Liber.

[59] Alani de Insulis contra Hæreticos Lib. II.--Disputat. inter Cathol. et Paterin. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1754).--Rescript. Pauperum Lombard. 21, 22 (W. Preger, Beiträge, pp. 60, 61).--Eymerici Direct. Inquis. p. ii. q. 14. (pp. 278, 279).--Petri Sarnaii Hist. Albigens. cap. 2.--In 1321, a man and wife brought before the Inquisition of Toulouse both refused to swear, and they alleged as a reason, in addition to the sinful nature of the oath, the man that it would subject him to falling sickness, the woman that she would have an abortion (Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. Ed. Limborch, p. 289).

In the persecution of the Waldenses of Piedmont towards the close of the fourteenth century, one of the crucial questions of the inquisitors was as to belief in the validity of the sacraments of sinful priests.--Processus contra Valdenses (Archivio Storico Italiano, 1865, No. 39, p. 48).

[60] Rivista Cristiana, Marzo, 1887, p. 92.--Pegnæ Comment. 39 in Eymerici Director. p. 281.--Steph. de Borbone 1. c.--Concil. Gerundens. ann. 1197 (Aguirre, V. 102, 103).--Marca Hispanica, p. 1384.

[61] See the Sentences of Pierre Cella in Doat, XXII--Montet, Hist. Litt. des Vaudois, pp. 116 sq.

[62] Tract. de Paup. de Lugd. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1792).--Wadding. Annal. Minor. Ann. 1332, No. 6.--Bern. Guidon. Practica P. v. (Doat, XXX.).--Montet Hist. Litt. pp. 38, 44, 45, 89, 142.--Haupt, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, 1885 p. 551.--Pet. Cœlest. (Preger, Beiträge, pp. 68, 69).--Kaltner, Konrad von Marburg, pp. 69-71.--Rescript. Paup. Lombard. §§ 4, 5, 17, 19, 22, 23.--Nobla Leyczon, 409-413; cf. Montet. pp. 49, 50, 103, 104, 143.--Passaviens. Anon. cap. 5 (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 300).--Disput. inter Cath. et Paterin. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1754).--David Augustens. (ibid. p. 1778).--Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. I. cap. 4-7.--Tract. de modo procedendi contra Hæret. (Doat XXX.).--Index Error. Waldens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 340).--P. de Pilichdorf contra Waldens. cap. 34.--Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 200, 201.--Nobla Leyczon, 17-24, 387-405, 416-423.

Yet it was impossible to resist the contagion of superstition. The Pomeranian Waldenses, in 1394, are described as believing that if a man died within a year after confession and absolution, he went directly to heaven. Even speaking with a minister preserved one from damnation for a year. There is even a case of a legacy of eight marks for prayers for the soul of the deceased.--Wattenbach, Sitzungsberichte der Preuss. Akad. 1886, pp. 51, 52.

[63] Passaviens. Anon. cap. 5.--Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. v.--David Augustens. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1786).--Steph. de Borbone, l. c.--Wattenbach, ubi sup.--Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 352.

[64] Wattenbach, Sitzungsberichte der Preuss. Akad. 1886, p. 51.--Lib. Sentt. Inq. Tolosan. p. 367.--Anon. Passaviens. cap. 7, 8.--Refutat. Error. Waldens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 336).--David Augustens. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1771-1772).--Archivio Storico Italiano, 1865, No. 38, pp. 39, 40.--Rorengo, Memorie Istoriche, Torino 1649, p. 12.--Even as late as the end of the fourteenth century, in the extensive inquisitions of the Celestinian Peter, from Styria to Pomerania, there is no allusion to immoral practices. (Preger, Beiträge, pp. 68-72; Wattenbach, ubi sup.).

For the ascetic tendency of the Waldenses, recognizing vows of chastity, and the seduction of nuns as incest, see Montet, pp. 97, 98, 108-110. For the merit of fasting, see p. 99.

[65] Lib. Sententt. Inquis. Tolosan. p. 367.--Anon. Passaviens. cap. 1, 3, 7, 8.--Refutat. Error. Waldens. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 336).--David Augustens. (Martene Thesaur. V. 1771, 1772, 1782, 1794).--P. de Pilichdorf contra Error. Waldens. cap. 1.--Innocent PP. III. Regest. II. 141.--La Nobla Leyczon, 368-373.--Frat. Jordani Chron. (Analecta Franciscana, T. I. p. 4. Quaracchi, 1885).

[66] MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Moreau, 1274, fol. 72.

[67] Bonacursi Vit. Hæreticorum (D'Achery I. 211, 212).--Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.--Muratori Antiquitat. Dissert. LX.--Constit. General. Frid. II. ann. 1220, § 5.--Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. III. cap. 3.--Anon. Passaviens. contra Waldens. cap. 6.--P. de Pilichdorf contra Waldens. cap. 12.--Hoffman, Geschichte der Inquisition, II. 371.--Schmidt, Hist. des Cathares, II. 284.

[68] Mosaic. et Roman. Legg. Collat. tit. XV. § 3 (Hugo, 1465).--Const. 11, 12, Cod. I. v.--P. Siculi Hist, de Manichæis.--Zonara Annal. tom. III. pp. 126, 241, 242 (Ed. 1557).--Findlay's Hist. of Greece, 2d Ed. III. 65.

The Bogomili (Friends of God), another Manichæan sect, whose name betrays their Slav or Bulgarian origin, have been cited as a link connecting the Paulicians and the Cathari, but incorrectly, although they may have had some influence in producing the moderated Dualism of a portion of the latter. Their leader, Demetrius, was burned alive by Alexis Comnenus in 1118 after a series of investigations more creditable to the zeal of the emperor than to his good faith. They continued to enjoy a limited toleration until the thirteenth century, when they disappeared.--See Annæ Comnenæ Alexiados Lib. XV.--Georgii Cedreni Hist. Comp. sub ann. 20 Constant.--Zonaræ Annal. t. III. p. 238.--Balsamon. Schol. in Nomocanon tit. X. cap. 8.--Schmidt, Hist. des Cathares, I. 13-15; II. 265.

About the middle of the eleventh century Psellus describes another Manichæan sect named Euchitæ, who believed in a father ruling the supramundane regions and committing to the younger of his two sons the heavens and to the elder the earth. The latter was worshipped under the name of Satanaki--(Pselli de Operat. Dæmon. Dial.).

[69] P. Siculi op. cit.--Bleek's Avesta, III. 4.--Haug's Essays, 2d ed. pp. 244, 249, 286, 367.--Yajnavalkya, I. 37.

For the corresponding tenets of the Cathari, see Radulf. Ardent. T. I. p. II. Hom. xix.--Ermengaudi contra Hæret. Opusc.--Epist. Leodiens. ad Lucium PP. III. (Martene. Ampl. Collect. I. 776-778).--Ecberti Schonaug. Serm. contra Catharos, Serm. I. viii. xi.--Gregor. Episc. Fanens. Disput. Catholici contra Hæret.--Monetæ adv. Catharos Lib. I. cap. 1.--Arch. de l'Inq. de Carcassonne (Coll. Doat, XXXII. f. 93).--Rainerii Saccon. Summa.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. v. cap. 21.--Lib. Sentt. Inquis. Tolosan. pp. 92, 93, 249 (Limborch).--Lib. Confess. Inq. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat. fonds latin 11847).--Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1163.

In a MS. controversial tract against the Cathari, dating from the end of the thirteenth century, the writer, following Moneta, states that their objections to the Old Testament sprang from four roots: first, the contradiction which seemed to exist between the Old and New Testaments; second, the changefulness of God himself, manifest in Scripture; third, the cruel attributes of God in Scripture; fourth, the falsehood ascribed to God. A single example will suffice of the arguments which the heretics advanced in support of their position. "They quote Genesis iii. 'Behold, Adam has become as one of us.' Now God says this of Adam after he had sinned, and he must have spoken truth or falsehood. If truth, then Adam had become like him who spoke and those to whom he spoke; but Adam after the fall had become a sinner, and therefore evil. If falsehood, then he is a liar; he sinned in so saying and thus was evil." To this logic the orthodox polemic contents himself with the answer that God spoke ironically. Throughout the tract the reasoning ascribed to the Cathari shows them to possess a thorough acquaintance with Scripture, and the use which they made of it explains the prohibition of the Bible to the laity by the Church.--Archives de l'Inq. de Carcassonne, Coll. Doat, XXXVI. 91. (See Appendix.)

Yet the Catharan ritual published by Cunitz quotes Isaiah and Solomon. (Beiträge zu den theolog. Wissenschaften, B. IV. 1852, pp. 16, 26.)

[70] Tract. de Modo Procedendi contra Hæreticos (MSS. Bib. Nat. Coll. Doat, XXX. fol. 185 sqq.).--Rainerii Saccon. Summa.--E. Cunitz in Beiträge zu den theol. Wissenschaften, 1852, B. IV. pp. 30, 36, 85.

[71] Rainerii Saccon. Summa.--Lib. Confess. Inquis. Albiens. (MSS. Bib. Nat. fonds latin, 11847).--Coll. Doat, XXII. 208, 209; XXIV. 174; XXVI. 197, 259, 272.--Lib. Sentt. Inquis. Tolosan. pp. 10, 33, 37, 70, 71, 76, 84, 94, 125, 126, 137-139, 143, 160, 173, 179, 199.--Bern. Guidon. Practica P. IV. V. (MSS. Bib. Nat. Collect. Doat. T. XXX.).--Landulf. Senior Hist. Mediolan. ii. 27.--Anon. Passaviens. contra Waldens. cap. 7.--Processus contra Valdenses (Archivio Storico Italiano, 1865, No. 39, p. 57). The description in the text of the form of heretication, by Rainerio Saccone, is confirmed in its details by the depositions of witnesses before the Inquisition of Toulouse, showing that the form was essentially the same throughout the churches.--Doat, XXII. 224, 237 sqq.; XXIII. 272, 344; XXIV. 71. See also Vaissette III. Preuves, 386, and Cunitz, Beiträge zu den theolog. Wissenschaften, 1852, B. IV. pp. 12-14, 21-28, 33, 60.

The practice of the Endura among the Cathari of Languedoc has been investigated with his customary thoroughness by M. Charles Molinier (Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Bordeaux, 1881, No. 3). It was not always limited to three days, and its rigor may be guessed by a single example. Blanche, the mother of Vital Gilbert, caused her infant grandchild to be "consoled" while sick, and then prevented the mother, Guillelma, from giving it milk till it died (Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolos. p. 104). Molinier's theory that the custom was of comparatively late introduction is confirmed by the absence of any allusion to it in the ritual published by Cunitz (loc. cit.), but that it was not confined to Languedoc is shown by the Anon. Passaviens. and the evidence in the Piedmontese trials of 1388 (Arch. Storico, ubi sup.).

A case in which the Consolamentum was administered to an insensible patient who subsequently recovered is recorded in the sentences of Pierre Cella (Doat, XXI. 295), and also several instances in which young girls were "perfected" at a very early age, and wore the vestments for limited periods of two or three years (ibid. 241. 244).

[72] S. Bernardi Serm. lxvi. in Cantica, cap. 3-7.--Ecberti Schonaug. Serm. i. v. vi. contra Catharos.--Bonacursi Vit. Hæreticor.--Gregor. Fanens. Disput. Cathol. contra Hæreticos cap. 1, 2, 11, 14.--Monetæ adv. Catharos Lib. I. cap. 1.--Cunitz (Beiträge zu den theol. Wissenschaften, 1852, p. 14).--Radulf. Coggeshall. Chron. Anglic. (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 92, 93).--Evervini Steinfeldens. Epist. ad S. Bernard, cap. 3.--Concil. Lombariens. ann. 1165.--Radulf. Ardent. T. I. p. II. Hom. xix.--Ermengaudi contra Hæret. Opusc.--Bonacursus contra Catharos (Baluz. et Mansi, II. 581-586).--Alani de Insulis contra Hæret. Lib. I.--Monet adv. Catharos. Lib. IV. cap. vii. § 3.--Rainerii Saccon. Summa.--Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan. pp. 111, 115.--Coll. Doat, T. XXX. fol. 185 sqq.; XXXII. fol. 93 sqq.--Stephan. de Borbone (D'Argentré, Coll. Judic. de novis Error. I. I. 91).--Archiv. Fiorent. Prov. S. Maria Novella, Giugno 26, 1229.

In the early days of the Inquisition a certain Jean Teisseire, summoned before the tribunal of Toulouse, defended himself by exclaiming, "I am not a heretic, for I have a wife and I lie with her, and have children, and I eat flesh, and lie, and swear, and am a faithful Christian."--(Guillel. Pelisso Chron. Ed. Molinier, Anicii 1880, p. 17). See also the Sentences of Pierre Cella, Coll. Doat, XXI. 223.

[73] Rainerii Saccon. Summa.--Tocco, L'Eresia nel Medio Evo, p. 75.--Gregor. Fanens. Disput. cap. iv.--Monetæ adv. Catharos Lib. I. cap. 1, 2, 4, 6.--Alani de Insulis contra Hæret. Lib. I.--Ecberti Schonaug. Serm. i., xiii. contra Catharos.--Ermengaudi contra Hæret. Opusc. cap. 14.--Millot, Hist. Litt. des Troubadours, II. 64.--Lib. Sententt. Inq. Tolosan, p. 84.--Gest. Episcop. Leodiens. Lib. II. cap. 60, 61.--Stephan, de Borbone (D'Argentré, Collect. Judic. de nov. Error. I. I. 90).--Muratori Antiq. Ital. Diss. lx.

Among the early Christians there was a strong tendency to adopt the theory of transmigration as an explanation of the apparent injustice of the judgments of God. See Hieron. Epist CXXX. ad Demetriadem, 16.

[74] Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. III. cap. ii.

Before ridiculing the Catharan theory of Dualism, we must bear in mind how strong is the tendency in this direction of sensitive and ardent souls, who keenly feel the imperfections of man's nature and its contrast with the possibilities of an ideal. Thus Flacius Illyricus, the fervid reformer, about 1560, came perilously near to the Catharan myths, and gave rise to a warm controversy by maintaining that original sin was not an accident, but the substance in man; that the original image of God was, through the Fall, not replaced, but metamorphosed into an image of Satan, a transformation of absolute good into absolute evil; a theory which, as he was warned by his friends Musæus and Judex, must necessarily lead to Manichæism.--See Herzog, Abriss der gesammten Kirchengeschichte, III. 313.

Orthodox asceticism also trenches closely on Manichæism in its denunciation of the flesh, which it treats as the antagonist and enemy of the soul. Thus, St. Francis of Assisi says, "Many, when they sin or are injured, blame their enemy or neighbor. This should not be so, for every one has his enemy in his power, namely, the body through which he sins. Thus blessed is that servant who always holds captive and guards himself against that enemy delivered to him, for when he does thus no other visible enemy can hurt him" (S. Francisci Admonit. ad Fratres No. 9). And in another passage (Apoph. xxvii.) he describes his body as the most cruel enemy and worst adversary, whom he would willingly abandon to the demon.

According to the Dominican Tauler, the leader of the German mystics in the fourteenth century, man in himself is but a mass of impurity, a being sprung from evil and corrupt matter, only fit to inspire horror; and this opinion was fully shared by his followers even though they were overflowing with love and charity (Jundt, les Amis de Dieu, Paris, 1879, pp. 77, 229).

Jean-Jacques Olier, the founder of the great theological seminary of St. Sulpice, in his "Catechisme Chrétien pour la vie interieure," which I believe is still in use there as a text-book, goes as far as Manes or Buddha in his detestation of the flesh as the cause of man's sinful nature--"Je ne m'étonne plus si vous dites qu'il faut haïr sa chair, que l'on doit avoir horreur de soi même, et que l'homme, dans son état actuel, doit étre maudit ... En verité, il n'y a aucune sorte de maux et de malheurs qui ne doivent tomber sur lui à cause de sa chair."--See Renan, Souvenirs de l'enfance et de jeunesse, p. 206.

With such views it is simply a question of words whether the creator of such an abomination as the crowning work of the terrestrial universe is to be called God or Satan; he certainly cannot be the Good Principle.

[75] Processus contra Valdenses (Archivio Storico Italiano, 1865, Nos. 38, 39).--S. Bernardi Serm. in Cantica lxv. cap. 5; lxvi. cap. 1.--Gregor. Fanens Disputat. cap. 17.--Anon. Passaviens. contra Waldens. cap. 7.--Radulf. Coggeshall. Chron. Anglic. (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 93).--Concil. Remens. ann. 1157, c. 1.--Ecberti Schonaug. contra Catharos Serm. i. cap. 1.--Cunitz, Beiträge zu den theol. Wissenschaften, 1852, B. IV. pp. 4, 12-14.--Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. II. cap. 9; Lib. III. cap. 5.--Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 550.

The Cathari probably had Romance versions of the New Testament as early as 1178, when we find the cardinal legate disputing at Toulouse with two Catharan bishops whose ignorance of Latin was a subject of ridicule, while they seem to have been ready enough with Scripture.--Roger. Hoveden. Annal. ann. 1178. See also Molinier, Annales de la Faculté des lettres de Bordeaux, 1883, No. 3.

Abbot Joachim bears testimony to the external virtues of the Cathari of Calabria, and the advantage which they derived from the vices of the clergy.--Tocco, L'Eresia nel Medio Evo, p. 403.

The story of the sacrament made from the bodies of children born of promiscuous intercourse was widely circulated and variously applied. It was related in the eleventh century of the Euchitæ by Psellus (De Operat. Dæmon.) and continued to be told of successive heretics--even of the Templars.

[76] Ecberti Schonaug. contra Catharos Serm. I. cap. 2.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. v. cap. 18.--Lucæ Tudensis de altera Vita Lib. II. cap. 9; Lib. III. cap. 9, 18.

[77] Anon. Passaviens. c. 6.--Processus contra Valdenses (Arch. Storico Ital. 1865, No. 39, p. 57).

[78] Radulpli Glabri Lib. III. c. 8.--Landulf. Senior. Mediolan. Hist. II. 27.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. V. c. 19.--Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1163.--Guill. de Newburg. Hist. Anglic. Lib. II. c. 13.--Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1210.--Chron. Turon. ann. 1210.--Radulf. Coggeshall Chron. Anglic. (D. Bouquet. XVIII. 93).--Bernard. Guidon. Practica P. IV. (Doat, XXX.).--S. Bernardi Serm. in Cantic. LXV. c. 13.--Lucæ Tudens. de altera Vita Lib. III. c. 21.--Constitt. Sicular. Lib. I. tit. i.

The story of the young girl of Cologne assumes a somewhat mythical air when we find it repeated by Moneta as occurring in Lombardy (Cantù, Eretici d'Italia, I. 88); but this only enforces the universal tribute to the marvellous constancy of the heretics.

[79] Radulf. Coggeshall l.c.--Pauli Carnotens. Vet. Aganon. Lib. VI. c. iii.--Campana, Storia di San Piero Martire, Lib. II. c. 2, p. 57.--Fragment, adv. Hæret. (Mag. Bib. Pat. XIII. 341).--Cf. Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1315.

[80] Schmidt, Hist. des Cathares, I. 15-21.--Muratori Anecdota Ambrosiana, II. 112.--Guillel. Tyrii Lib. II. c. 13.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. II. 176; III. 3; v. 103, 110; VI. 140, 141, 212.--See also the curious letter of a Patarin in Matt. Paris, Hist. Angl. ann. 1243 (Ed. 1644 p. 413).

[81] Gerberti Epist. 187.--Radulphi Glabri Lib. ii. c. 11, 12.--Epist. Leodiens. ad Lucium PP. II. (Martene Ampliss. Collect. I. 776-8).

[82] Ademari S. Cibardi Hist. Lib. III. c. 49, 59.--Pauli Carnot. Vet. Aganon. Lib. VI. c. 3.--Frag. Hist. Aquitan. et Frag. Hist. Franc. (Pithœi Hist. Franc. Scriptt. xi. pp. 82, 84).--Radulf. Glabri Hist. III. 8, IV. 2.--Gesta Synod. Aurel. circa 1017 (D'Achery I. 604-6).--Chron. S. Petri Vivi.--Synod. Atrebat. ann. 1025 (Labbe et Coleti XI. 1177, 1178; Hartzheim. Concil. German. III. 68).--Landulf. Sen. Mediol. Hist. II. 27.--Gesta Episcop. Leodiens. cap. 60, 61.--Hermann. Contract. ann. 1052.--Lambert. Hersfeldens. Annal. ann. 1053.--Schmidt, Hist. des Cathares, I. 37.--Radulf. Ardent. T.I.P. ii. Hom. 19.

Bishop Wazo's complaint that pallor was considered a positive proof of heresy was by no means a new one. In the fourth century it was regarded as sufficient to betray the Gnostic and Manichæan asceticism of the Priscillianists (Sulpic. Severi Dial. III. cap. xi.), and Jerome tells us that the orthodox who were pale with fasting and maceration were stigmatized as Manichæans (Hieron. Epist. ad Eustoch. c. 5). To the end of the twelfth century pallor continued to be regarded as a diagnostic symptom of Catharism (P. Cantor. Verb. abbrev. c. 78).

[83] Guibert. Noviogent. de Vita sua Lib. III. c. 17.--Schmidt, op. cit. I. 47.--Martene Thesaur. I. 336.

[84] Epist. Leodiens. ad Lucium PP. II. (Martene Ampl. Coll. I. 776-778).--Alex. PP. III. Epist. 2 (ibid. II. 628).--Concil. Remens. ann. 1157.--Hist. Monast. Vezeliacens. Lib. IV. ann. 1167.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dial. Mirac. Dist. v. c. 18.--Radulf. Coggeshall ubi sup.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. IX. 208.

[85] Alex. PP. III. Epist. 118, 122.--Varior. ad Alex. PP. III. Epist. No. 16.--Annal. Aquiciuctens. Monast. ann. 1182, 1183.--Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1183.

[86] Histor. Trevirens. (D'Achery II. 221, 222).--Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1200.--Evervini Steinfeld. Epist. (S. Bernardi Epist. 472).--Trithem. Chron. Hirsaug. ann. 1163.--Ecberti Schonaug. contra Catharos Serm. VIII.--Schmidt, I. 94-96.

[87] Guillel. de Newburg Hist. Anglic. Lib. II. c. 13.--Matt. Paris. Hist. Anglic. ann. 1166 (p. 74).--Radulf. de Diceto ann. 1166.--Radulf. Coggeshall (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 92).--Assize of Clarendon, Art. 21.--Petri Blesens. Epist. 113.--Schmidt, I. 99.

[88] The nomenclature of the heresy is quite extensive. The sectaries called themselves Cathari, or the pure. The origin of the term Patarin has been the subject of considerable dispute, but there would seem to be no doubt that it arose in Milan about the middle of the eleventh century, during the civil wars resulting from the papal efforts to enforce celibacy on the Milanese married clergy. In the Romance dialects _pates_ signifies old linen; rag-pickers in Lombardy were called Patari, and the quarter inhabited by them in Milan was known, even up to the last century, as Pattaria, or Contrada de' Pattari. Even to-day there are in Italian cities quarters or streets of that name (Schmidt, II. 279). In the eleventh-century quarrels the papalists held secret meetings in the Pattaria, and were contemptuously designated by their antagonists as Patarins--a name which was finally recognized and accepted by them (Arnulf. Mediolanens. Lib. III. cap. 11; Lib. IV. c. 6, 11.--Landulf. Jun. c. 1.--Willelmi Clusiens. vita Benedicti Abbat. Clusiens. c. 33.--Benzon. Comm. de Reb. Henrici IV. Lib. VII. c. 2). As the papal condemnation of clerical marriage was stigmatized as Manichæan, and as the papalists were supported by the secret heretics, followers of Gherardo di Monforte, the name was not unnaturally transferred to the Cathari in Lombardy, when they became publicly known, and it spread from there throughout Europe. In Italy the word Cathari, vulgarized into Gazzari, was also commonly used, and came gradually to designate all heretics; the officials of the Inquisition were nicknamed Cazzagazzari (Cathari hunters), and even accepted the designation (Muratori Antiq. Diss, LX. Tom. XII. pp. 510, 516), and the word is still seen in the German Ketzer. The Cathari, from their Bulgarian origin, were also known as Bulgari, Bugari, Bulgri, Bugres (Matt. Paris, ann. 1238)--a word which has been retained with an infamous signification in the English, French, and Italian vernaculars. We have seen above that from the number of weavers among them they were also known in France as Texerant, or Textores (cf. Doat, XXIII. 209-10). The term Speronistæ was derived from Robert de Sperone, bishop of the French Cathari in Italy (Schmidt, II. 282). The Crusaders who met the Paulicians (Παυλικανοι) in the East brought home the word and called them Publicani, or Popelicans. More local designations were Piphili or Pifres (Ecbert. Schonaug. Serm. I. c. 1), Telonarii or Deonarii (D'Achery, II. 560), and Boni Homines, or Bonshommes. The term Albigenses, from the district of Albi, where they were numerous, was first employed by Geoffroy of Vigeois, in 1181 (Gaufridi Vosens. Chron. ann. 1181), and became generally used during the crusades against Raymond of Toulouse.

The various sects into which the Cathari were divided were further known by special names, as Albanenses, Concorrezenses, Bajolenses, etc. (Rainerii Saccon. Summa. Cf. Muratori Dissert. LX.).

In the official language of the Inquisition of the thirteenth century, "heretic" always means Catharan, while the Vaudois are specifically designated as such. The accused was interrogated "Super facto hæresis vel Valdesiæ."

[89] Schmidt, I. 63-5.--Muratori Antiq. Dissert. LX. (p. 462-3).--Raynald. Annal. ann. 1199 No. 23-5; ann. 1205 No. 67; 1207 No. 3.--Lami, Antichità Toscane, p. 491.--Innocent. PP. III. Regest. I. 298; II. 1, 50; v. 33; VII. 37; VIII. 85, 105; IX. 7, 8, 18, 19, 166-9, 204, 213, 258; X. 54, 105, 130; XV. 189; Gesta cxxiii.

[90] Schmidt I. 38.--Chron. Episc. Albigens. (D'Achery III. 572).--Udalr. Babenb. Cod. II. 303.--Concil. Tolosan. ann. 1119 c. 3.--Concil. Lateran. II. ann. 1139 c. 23.--Concil. Remens. ann. 1148 c. 18.

[91] Concil. Turon. ann. 1163 c. 4.--Concil. Lombariense ann. 1165 (Harduin. VI. II. 1643-52).--Roger de Hoveden. ann. 1176.--D. Vaissette, Hist. Gén. de Languedoc, III. 4--Löwenfeld, Epistt. Pont. Roman. inedd. No. 247 (Lipsiæ, 1885).

[92] D. Bouquet, XIV. 448-50.--D. Vaissette, III. 4. 537.

[93] Roger. Hoveden. Annal. ann. 1178.--D. Vaissette, III. 46-7.

[94] Benedict. Petroburg. Vit. Henrici. II. ann. 1178.--Alexander. PP. III. Epist. 395 (D. Bouquet, XV. 950-960).

[95] Roger. Hovedens. Annal. ann. 1178.--Schmidt, I. 78.--Martene Thesaur. I. 992.--Rob. de Monte Chron. ann. 1178.--Benedict. Petroburg. Vit. Henrici II. ann. 1178.

Roger Trencavel of Béziers was no heretic (see Vaissette, III. 49) and his treatment of the Bishop of Albi and disregard of the missionary bishops shows the complete contempt into which the Church had fallen, even among the faithful.

[96] Concil. Lateran. III. ann. 1179 c. 27.

[97] Gaufridi Vosiens. Chron. ann. 1181.--Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1181.--Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1181.--Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1181.--Chron. Turonens. ann. 1181.--D. Vaissette, III. 57.--Guillel. de Pod.-Laurent. c. 2.

[98] Stephani Tornacens. Epist. 92.--Gaufridi Vosiens. Chron. ann. 1183.--Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. xxix.--Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1183.--Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1183.--Guillel. Brito de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1183.--Ejusd. Philippidos Lib. I. 726-45.--Grandes Chroniques, ann. 1183.--Du Cange s. vv. _Cotarellus, Palearii_.

[99] Lucii PP. III. Epist. 171.--Concil. Monspeliens. ann. 1195.

[100] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Tempore XII.--Guillem. de Tudela, c. ii.--Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. xxx.--Guillel. de Pod.-Laurent. Proœm.; cf. cap. 3, 4.--Cæsar. Heisterbac. Dist. v. c. 21.--Stephani Tornacens. Epist. 92.--Anon. Passaviens. (Bib. Mag. Pat. XIII. 299).--Schmidt, I. 200.

[101] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Diversis III.

[102] Innocent. PP. III. Serm. de Diversis VI.; Regest. VII. 165, X. 54.--Honor. PP. III. Epist. ad Archiep. Bituricens. (Martene Ampl. Collect. I. 1149-51).

In 1250 Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, told Innocent IV. at Lyons that the corruption of the priesthood was the cause of the heresies which afflicted the Church (Fascic. Rer. Expetend. et Fugiend. II. 251. Ed. 1690).

[103] Roberti Autissiodor. Chron. ann. 1198-1201.--Hist. Episcopp. Autissiodor. (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 725-6, 729).--Petri Sarnens. Hist. Albigens. c. 3.--Innoc. PP. III. Regest. II. 63, 99; v. 36; VI. 63, 239; IX. 110; X. 206.--Potthast, No. 9152.--Alberic. Trium Font. Chron. ann. 1200.--Chron. Canon. Laudunens. ann. 1204 (D. Bouquet, XVIII. 713).

[104] Regest. II. 141, 142, 235.--Gesta Treviror. c. 104.

[105] Villani Cronica, Lib. v. c. 90.--Diez, Leben und Werke der Troubadours, 424.--Guill. Pod. Laur. cap. 47.--Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VIII. 558.--Petri Sarnensis Hist. Albigens, c. 1.--Vaissette, Éd. 1730, III. 101.

[106] Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1207.--Vaissette, III. 128, 132.--Guillel. Pod. Laurent. c. 6, 7.--Regest. VIII. 115-6.--For the condition of other sees--Carcassonne, Vence, Agde, Ausch, Narbonne, Bordeaux--see Regest. I. 194; III. 24; VI. 216; VII. 84; VIII. 76; XVI. 5.

For the biography of Foulques, or Folquet, of Marseilles, who, after being favored by Raymond V., became the most bitter enemy of Raymond VI., see Paul Meyer ap. Vaissette, Éd. Privat, VII. 444. Dante places him in the heaven of Venus, together with Cunizza, the lascivious sister of Ezzelin da Romano (Paradiso, IX.). It is related of him that once when preaching against the heretics he compared them to wolves and the faithful to sheep. A heretic whose eyes had been torn out and his nose and lips cut off by Simon de Montfort, arose and said, "Did you ever see sheep bite a wolf thus?" to which Foulques rejoined that de Montfort was a good dog who had thus bitten the wolf. A more pleasing trait is seen in the story that he gave alms to a poor heretic beggar-woman, saying that he gave it to poverty and not to heresy.--Chabaneau (Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. 292).

[107] Regest. I. 92, 93, 94, 165, 395; II. 122, 123, 298; III. 24; v. 96; VII. 17, 75; VIII. 75, 106; IX. 66; X. 68; XIII. 88; XIV. 32; XVI. 5.--Vaissette, III. 117.

[108] Petri Sarnens. c. 1, 17.--Vaissette, III. 129, 134-5; Preuves, 197.--Regest. VI. 242-3.

[109] Pet. Sarnens. c. 3.--Vaissette, III. 133, 135--Guillem de Tudela