[211] Sprenger, p. 546.

[212] de Spina, pp. 544-5.

[213] Sprenger, pp. 103-25, 267 et seq.; also in vol. ii of Malleorum ... tomi duo, De Pythonicis mulieribus, pp. 42-3.

[214] Sprenger, pp. 152 et seq. and 354.

[215] Ibid., pp. 152 et seq., 341 et seq.; de Spina, in vol. ii, p. 502.

[216] Sprenger, pp. 141 et seq., 296-301, 360 et seq.; De Pythonicis mulieribus, in vol. ii, pp. 65 et seq.

[217] Sprenger, p. 310; De Pythonicis mulieribus, in vol. ii, p. 75.

[218] See Sprenger, p. 581. Cf. Lea, vol. iii, p. 508.

[219] A very effective play based upon this idea is that of H. Wiers-Jenssen, of which the English version is The Witch, by John Masefield.

[220] It was so decided by Gregory XI, when the right of the French inquisition in the matter was challenged. Papal commissions issued to inquisitors early in the fifteenth century specifically enumerate sorcery and witchcraft among offences with which they are to deal.

[221] See Sprenger, pp. 492-3. Innocent VIII gave a great impetus to persecution of witches in 1485 by his bull, Summis desiderantes, in which all the malignant powers of the witch were enumerated. It was this bull that gave authority to Jacob Sprenger, the author of Malleus Maleficarum. It was supplemented by others of a similar character issued by Julius II and Alexander VI.

[222] Sprenger, pp. 172-82.

[223] See Lecky, op. cit., vol. i, p. 3; Michelet, op. cit., p. 10.

[224] Malleorum—tomi duo, vol. ii, p. 520.

[225] Sprenger, p. 214. Inquisitoribus Maleficae non possunt nocere. ‘In oppido nempe Ravenspurg, cum a consulibus Maleficae incinerandae interrogarentur, cur nobis inquisitoribus aliqua maleficia, sicut aliis hominibus, non intulissent, Responderunt: Licet pluries hoc facere attentassent, non tamen potuerunt. Et de causa inquirentibus, respondebant se nescire, nisi quod a Daemonibus informatae fuissent.’ Nevertheless, ibid., p. 559, inquisitors should be careful not to allow themselves to be touched by wizards and witches.

[226] Sprenger, p. 549.

[227] Ibid., pp. 552-3.

[228] Ibid., p. 557. The adjuration was by the bitter tears of Christ shed on the Cross for the sins of the world, by the tears shed by the glorious Virgin Mary, by those shed by all the saints and elect of God on earth.

[229] Such enmity had to be really mortal and well authenticated; for the inquisitorial point of view was that of necessity a witch always would excite a great deal of enmity. Allegations of enmity must, therefore, always be carefully sifted. See Sprenger, pp. 542 et seq.

[230] For the whole remarkable story, see Lea, vol. iii, pp. 519-34.

[231] James, i, 3.

[232] 2 Peter, ii, 1.

[233] 2 Corinth., xi, 13.

[234] Galat., i, 8. See also ibid., iii, 1, 3.

[235] 2 Thessal., iii, 15. Cf. Galat., iii, 1, 3.

[236] Polycarp, Epist. § 7, in The Apostolic Fathers (ed. J. B. Lightfoot, 1891), pp. 171, 179.

[237] ‘Ad officium haereticos compelli, non illici dignum est. Duritia vincenda, non suadenda.’ Tertullian, Opera omnia (ed. Migne, Patrologia latina), vol. ii, col. 125.

[238] Lactantius, Divin. Instit., lib. v, cap. 20 (ed. Migne), vol. i, p. 615.

[239] Tertullian, Opera omnia, vol. i, col. 699. Liber ad Scapulam, cap. 2.

[240] See De Cauzons, op. cit., vol. i, p. 150.

[241] Ibid., p. 154.

[242] See Philippe à Limborch, History of the Inquisition (trans. S. Chandler, London, 1731), vol. i, p. 8; L. Tanon, Histoire des Tribunaux de l’Inquisition en France (Paris, 1893), pp. 127-33; De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 163-8; Cod. Theod., i, xvi, leges 3, 8, 12, 30, 33, 34, 35; C. Moeller in Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique (Louvain, 1913), vol. xiv, pp. 728-9, Les bûchers et les autos-da-fé depuis le moyen âge.

[243] The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom (Oxford ed., Pusey), Homily xlvi, on Matt. xiii, pp. 630 et seq.

[244] Letter 82 to Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (ed. P. Schaff), 2nd series, vol. vi, pp. 170 et seq. See Limborch (Chandler’s ed.), pp. 29-30. It has been averred that St. Jerome was in favour of the death penalty, on the score of Epist. 109 ad Ripar. See Lea, vol. i, pp. 214-15, and rejoinder of H. Maillet, L’Église et la répression sanglante de l’hérésie (1909), p. 15.

[245] 48th Epistle to Vincentius.

[246] 50th Epistle to Boniface.

[247] Epistle 185, n. 26. Also Epistle 93, n. 10.

[248] See Lea, vol. i, p. 213; Maillet, p. 17, and De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 186-8.

[249] See Lea, vol. i, p. 215; Maillet, pp. 17 et seq.; Vacandard, pp. 27-30. ‘Nor were they [the bishops] content with merely accepting it [the aid of the secular arm]. They declared that the State had not only the right to help the Church in suppressing heresy, but that she was in duty bound to do so.’ See also De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 189 n., and P. Frédéricq, Les récents historiens catholiques de l’inquisition en France, in Revue historique (vol. cix, Jan.-April, 1912), p. 314.

[250] This suggestion is made by J. Havet in his L’Hérésie et le Bras séculier au Moyen Age in [OE]uvres (Paris, 1896), vol. ii, p. 131.

[251] See ibid., p. 138.

[252] Vacandard, op. cit., p. 33.

[253] Havet, pp. 129-34.

[254] I.e. in the langue d’oïl of France, in Flanders, Germany, Burgundy.

[255] De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 235.

[256] See Havet, p. 135.

[257] See De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 233-4.

[258] Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, pp. 6-7, No. 3, gives Wazon’s letter. See also Frédéricq in Revue historique, already cited, p. 320; also Maillet, op. cit., p. 34. On the strength of this instance he declares: ‘Nous voyons assez souvent les évêques s’opposer aux exécutions’; whereas this episcopal protest is unique.

[259] Havet, op. cit., p. 133. See Maillet on the whole subject in op. cit., chapter ii. He argues that Theoduin had no particular punishment in view and that, therefore, one cannot say he approved the execution of heretics. But as the Bishop must have known very well the sort of punishment customarily inflicted by the State at this time, the argument is not very sound.

[260] See De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 260.

[261] J. D. Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima Collectio (Paris, 1901-13), vol. xxi, p. 718, and Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 31.

[262] See De Cauzons, vol. ii, pp. 271-2; Tanon, p. 454.

[263] Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 34; Maillet, p. 55; Frédéricq, in criticism of Maillet in Revue historique, p. 321.

[264] Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 39; Mansi, vol. xxi, p. 1177; Havet, pp. 151-2.

[265] Mansi, vol. xxii, p. 231; Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 47.

[266] See De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 269.

[267] Stubbs, Select Charters of English Constitutional History (Oxford, 1890), pp. 145-6, § 21 of the Assize.

[268] See De Cauzons, vol. 1, p. 277.

[269] J. A. Llorente, Histoire critique de l’Inquisition d’Espagne (Fr. trans. from the Spanish, Paris, 1818), vol. i, p. 30; Eymeric, Directorium, p. 298.

[270] Ludovico à Paramo, De Origine et Progressu Officii Sanctae Inquisitionis eiusque dignitate et utilitate (Madrid, 1598), p. 90; Havet, p. 167; De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 283. This is the first secular law of the Middle Ages prescribing the penalty of the stake. But it only refers to Waldenses in a particular country, and the stake is only to be had recourse to in the event of banishment (the penalty primarily enjoined) being incomplete. The legislation of general significance is that of the Emperor Frederick II, between 1220 and 1239.

[271] For particulars of a rather interesting case see Lea, vol. i, pp. 111-12. The charge of heresy was mainly based on the obduracy of a young girl in repelling the licentious advances of a young canon of Rheims.

[272] Mansi, vol. xx, p. 476; Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 56.

[273] See Havet, p. 154.

[274] Vacandard, p. 56.

[275] This is the argument of Maillet, op. cit., p. 49.

[276] See Frédéricq, Revue historique, p. 320.

[277] A. Luchaire, Innocent III; la croisade des Albigeois (Paris, 1905), pp. 58-9.

[278] Ibid., pp. 17, 27.

[279] Ibid., pp. 7-8; Tanon, p. 21.

[280] Luchaire, op. cit., p. 103.

[281] J. C. L. Sismondi, History of the Crusades against the Albigenses (Eng. trans.), p. 53.

[282] Lea, vol. i, p. 154. See, however, Lord Acton in his review of Lea’s work in The History of Freedom of Thought and other Essays (1909), p. 567. The chronicler, Caesarius Heisterbach, does not relate a fact, but tells a story, which may or may not be fact.

[283] The potestas inquirendi handed down from Christ to St. Peter has been annexed to the episcopal dignity. See Ludovico à Paramo, op. cit., book ii, p. 89.

[284] C. Douais, L’Inquisition; ses origines, sa procédure (Paris, 1906), pp. 45-6.

[285] Sometimes a new heresy was not at once recognized as one at all. Gregory VII was indulgent to Berengar of Tours and Alexander III congratulated Peter Waldo. See Luchaire, op. cit., p. 38.

[286] See De Cauzons, op. cit., vol. i, p. 333.

[287] Simancas, op. cit., Tit. xxv, p. 150, ‘De Episcopis.’

[288] See Lea, vol. i, p. 310; De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 378-80. See also A. Esmein, Histoire de la Procédure Criminelle en France, et spécialement de la Procédure inquisitoire (Paris, 1882), pp. 66-78; in English version, A History of Continental Criminal Procedure, Continental Legal History Series, vol. v (Boston, 1913), pp. 3-11, 78-94.

[289] Mansi, op. cit., vol. xxii, pp. 476-8.

[290] See De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 393.

[291] At first sight it may appear as though the completeness of the success of the Albigensian Crusade rendered further action unnecessary. This would appear to be the implication in Douais’ L’Inquisition, pp. 45-6. As a matter of fact it was rather a case of following up an initial advantage.

[292] Mansi, vol. xxii, p. 785.

[293] Ibid., vol. xxiii, p. 24, § xiv. ‘Ut sint in omnibus parochiis, qui de haeresi & manifestis criminibus inquirant.’

[294] Ibid. p. 194, § i.

[295] Mansi, vol. xxii, pp. 989-90.

[296] See De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 395; P. Fournier, Les Officialités au Moyen Age (Paris, 1880), pp. 266-9.

[297] Ludovico à Paramo, pp. 27, 31, 49.

[298] Luchaire, op. cit., p. 71. ‘En 1204, il enleva aux évêques, pour la donner aux légats, la juridiction ordinaire en matière d’hérésie, première esquisse du procédé d’où sortira l’Inquisition.’ To which M. Douais rightly retorts: ‘Il n’est pas exact de dire que le Pape enleva aux évêques la juridiction ordinaire en matière d’hérésie. Il ne leur enleva rien.’ L’Inquisition, p. 67. See, however, De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 414. ‘Sans enlever donc aux évêques le droit de juger les hérétiques, les rescrits romains constituaient, à côté de leur tribunal, un pouvoir, pouvant juger lui aussi, avec des juges d’une juridiction plus étendue que le leur, ayant le droit d’exiger des chefs des diocèses l’obéissance à leur autorité. Il suffisait d’assurer à ce tribunal nouveau les moyens d’exécuter ses sentences et de le rendre permanent, pour avoir l’Inquisition.’

[299] For claim that Dominic was the first inquisitor, see Ludovico à Paramo, pp. 95-6; Douais, L’Inquisition, pp. 25-6; De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 421 n. Dominic was certainly more than a missionary preacher; he examined and condemned heretics. See Acton, op. cit., p. 554.

[300] It has been said, truly, that it is neither the crime, nor the procedure, nor the penalty that makes the inquisitor in the strict sense; but his character as a permanent judge-delegate for the cause of heresy. Douais, L’Inquisition, pp. 37-8.

[301] For text of commission to Conrad, see Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, p. 71, No. 72. ‘ ... diligenter et vigilanter inquiras heretica pravitate infectos in partibus memoratis, ut per illos, ad quos pertinet, zizania valeat de agro Domini extirpari.’ Douais on this comments (op. cit., p. 53 n.), ‘Si Conrad eut été inquisiteur, c’est à lui que ce soin eût d’abord incombé comme juge.’ The argument is invalid. The appeal to the assistance of the secular arm is normal and certainly does not prove Conrad not to have been an inquisitor. See Lea, vol. ii, p. 319, ‘This was in effect an informal commission as inquisitor-general for Germany’; and De Cauzons, vol. i, p. 449.

[302] For text of the bull, Ille humani generis, see Mansi, vol. xxiii, pp. 74-5; Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 83, pp. 82-3. The Friars are urged to demolish the heretics who ‘sicut cancer serperent in occulto, & velut vulpes latentes niterentur vineam Domini Sabaoth demoliri.’

[303] Lea, vol. i, p. 328. Cf. Tanon, op. cit., p. 175, who considers that Lea does not attach sufficient importance to these bulls.

[304] The first bull delegating inquisitorial powers to the Brothers Minor in collective fashion is apparently one issued by Innocent IV, Jan. 13, 1246. See Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 122.

[305] See De Cauzons, op. cit., vol. i, p. 446 n. ‘La transformation des inquisitions épiscopaux en juges pontificaux, a été la vraie fondation de l’Inquisition; telle qu’elle est connue et louée par certains, abhorrée par d’autres. Or, cette transformation s’est faite progressivement, par tâtonnements autour des années 1230-1233, non par édit général, plutôt par rescrits spéciaux. Les dominicains ont été l’occasion d’un bon nombre de ces rescrits, mais non de tous.’

[306] See Lea, vol. i, p. 330.

[307] Ibid., p. 339.

[308] Ibid.

[309] Tanon, op. cit., pp. 177-80.

[310] Historia Diplomatica Friderici Secundi, Huillard-Bréholles (Paris, 1852-61), vol. ii, pt. i, pp. 4-6; Monumenta Germaniae historica, G. A. Pertz (Hanover and Berlin), vol. iv, pp. 242-5; Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, pp. 70-1, No. 71.

[311] See Maillet, op. cit., ch. ii; Frédéricq in Revue historique, p. 310. This edict was drawn up five days before the coronation ceremony by the Curia and sent to receive the imperial signature, so that it might be published in the Emperor’s name in St. Peter’s. For Frederick’s promise to assist the Pope against heresy, see Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, p. 70, No. 70.

[312] Huillard-Bréholles, vol. ii, pp. 421-3; G. A. Pertz, vol. iv, p. 252. ‘Presenti edictuli constitutione nostra in tota Lombardia inviolabiliter de cetero valitura duximus sanciendum ut quicumque per civitatis antistitem vel diocesanum in qua degit post condignam examinationem fuerit de haeresi manifeste convictus et hereticus judicatus, per potestatem, consilium et catholicos viros civitatis et diocesis earumdem ad requisitionem antistitis illico capiatur, auctoritate nostra ignis judicio concremandus, ut vel ultricibus flammis pereat, aut si miserabili vite ad coercitionem aliorum degerint reservandum, eum lingue plectro deprivent, quo non est veritas contra ecclesiasticam fidem invehi et nomen Domini blasphemari.’

[313] Huillard-Bréholles, vol. i, pp. 5-8; Pertz, vol. ii, p. 242; Mansi, vol. xxiv. pp. 586-8.

[314] Havet, op. cit., pp. 169-70.

[315] For arguments ascribing the responsibility to Frederick, see Havet (passim) and J. Ficker, Die Gesetzliche Einführung der Todesstrafe für Ketzerei in Mittheilungen des Instituts für oesterreichische Geschichtsforschung (1880), pp. 177-226, 430-1. See also C. Moeller in Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique (Louvain, vol. xiv, 1913); Les Bûchers et les Autos-da-fé de l’Inquisition depuis le Moyen Age (pp. 720-51), esp. pp. 725-6; Maillet, op. cit., p. 87, and De Cauzons, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 293-7: ‘La théorie qui met sur le dos de Frédéric II la responsabilité des mesures de répression sanglante, du bûcher en particulier, est née de tendances apologétiques mal comprises, car vouloir concilier l’Inquisition avec nos idées modernes est une chimère.’ Also Tanon, op. cit., p. 462. These laws ‘n’en sont pas moins eu une grande importance pour le temps où elles ont été rendues, en présence des difficultés que l’Église rencontrait, en Italie aussi bien qu’en France, de la part des autorités laïques, pour assurer la répression de l’hérésie, en donnant à cette répression la sanction nouvelle de l’autorité impériale elles devaient aider puissamment l’Église à vaincre ces résistances.’

[316] See Maillet, op. cit., in ch. ii; Douais, L’Inquisition, ch. 5, esp. pp. 141-2; also De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 296-7 n., and Moeller, op. cit., pp. 727-8.

[317] Lea, vol. i, pp. 227-8. ‘We can imagine the smile of amused surprise with which Gregory IX or Gregory XI would have listened to the dialectics with which the Comte Joseph de Maistre proves that it is an error to suppose, and much more to assert, that Catholic priests can in any manner be instrumental in compassing the death of a fellow creature.’

[318] Havet, p. 174; Douais, L’Inquisition, p. 122.

[319] Havet, p. 176; Acton, op. cit., p. 555.

[320] Acton, op. cit., p. 557. ‘The five years of his abode in Rome changed the face of the Church.... Very soon after Saint Raymond appeared at the Papal court, the use of the stake became law, and the inquisitorial machinery had been devised and the management given to the priors of the order. When he departed he left behind him instructions for the treatment of heresy, which the Pope adopted and sent out whenever they were wanted.... Until he came, in spite of much violence and many laws, the popes had imagined no permanent security against religious error, and were not formally committed to death by burning. Gregory himself, excelling all the priesthood in vigour and experience, had for four years laboured, vaguely and in vain, with the transmitted implements. Of a sudden, in these successive measures, he finds his way, and builds up the institution which is to last for centuries. That this mighty change in the conditions of religious thought and life, and in the functions of the order was supported by Dominicans, is probable. And it is reasonable to suppose that it was the work of the foremost Dominican then living, who at that very moment had risen to power and predominance at Rome.’

[321] See De Cauzons, vol. i, pp. 301-3.

[322] Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, pp. 78-80, No. 80, Capitula Senatoris Annibaldi et populi Romani edicta contra Patarenos. See Gregorovius, City of Rome, vol. vi, pt. 1, pp. 156-61. Heretics were at this time numerous in the States of the Church, Viterbo, Perugia and Orvieto; also in Lombardy. Some of these, the Arnoldists at any rate, were also Ghibellines. ‘The Inquisition now became another instrument in the hands of the Pope for the subjection of the people.’

[323] Mansi, vol. xxiii, pp. 586 et seq.

[324] Council of Rheims, 1148, Frédéricq, Corpus, vol. i, No. 31; Montpellier, 1162, ibid., No. 35; Lateran, 1179, ibid., No. 47.

[325] Verona, 1184, Frédéricq, Corpus, No. 56; Montpellier, 1195, ibid., No. 58; Fourth Lateran, 1215, ibid., No. 68. See also Mansi, vol. xxii, pp. 987-8; Eymeric, Directorium, pt. ii, question 46, p. 378.

[326] In Mansi, vol. xxiii, pp. 569 et seq.

[327] § 1.

[328] §§ 3, 5, 12-15.

[329] §§ 24, 25, 31.

[330] § 37.

[331] Summa, 2, 2, qu. 11, arts. 3 and 4. ‘Multo enim gravius corrumpere fidem, per quam est animae vita, quam falsare pecuniam, per quam temporali vitae subvenitur. Unde si falsarii pecuniae vel alii malefactores statim per saeculares principes juste morti traduntur, multo magis haeretici statim ex quo de haeresi convincuntur, possunt non solum excommunicari, sed et juste occidi.’ Vacandard (p. 176) answers: ‘Such reasoning is not very convincing. Why should not the life-imprisonment of the heretic safeguard the faithful as well as his death? Will you answer that this penalty is too trivial to prevent the faithful from falling into heresy? If that be so, why not at once condemn all heretics to death, even when repentant? That would terrorize the wavering ones all the more. But St. Thomas evidently was not thinking of the logical consequences of his reasoning. His one aim was to defend the criminal code in vogue at the time. That is his only excuse. For we must admit that rarely has his reasoning been so faulty and so weak as in his thesis upon the coercive power of the Church and the punishment of heresy.’ St. Thomas’s logic is sounder than his apologist’s, if his humanity is less! It is not St. Thomas’s logic that is at fault, but the standpoint of mediæval Christianity, which it is vain to seek to harmonize with modern humanitarianism.

[332] St. John, xv, 6. Vacandard, p. 177. ‘To regard our Saviour as the precursor or rather the author of the criminal code of the Inquisition evidences, one must admit, a very peculiar temper of mind.’ So judged, again by modern humanitarianism.

[333] Tanon, pp. 52-3. To be carefully distinguished from Arnaud of Citeaux, Archbishop of Narbonne, the former papal legate in Languedoc.

[334] Vaissete & Devic, op. cit., vol. iv, p. 118. ‘Clamor validus et insinuatio luctuosa fidelium subditorum, processus suos inquisitionis negotio a captionibus, quaestionibus, et excogitatis tormentis incipiens personas quas pro libito asserit haeretica labe notatas, abnegare Christum ... vi vel motu tormentorum fateri compellit.’