The Inquisition: A Critical and Historical Study of the Coercive Power of the ChurchVacandard, E. (Elphège)
History
The Inquisition: A Critical and Historical Study of the Coercive Power of the Church
Vacandard, E. (Elphège)
Inquisition -- History
Strangely enough, some of his disciples persisted in believing in
him; "they preferred to die rather than renounce their belief," says
an historian of the time. They were handed over to the secular arm
and perished at the stake. In decreeing this penalty, the civil power
was undoubtedly influenced by the example of Robert the Pious.
It is easy to determine the responsibility of the Church, i.e., her
bishops and priests, in this series of executions (1020 to 1150). At
Orleans, the populace and the king put the heretics to death; the
historians of the time tell us plainly that the clergy merely
declared the orthodox doctrine. It was the same at Goslar. At Asti,
the Bishop's name appears with the names of the other nobles who had
the Cathari executed, but it seems certain that he exercised no
special authority in the case. At Milan, the civil magistrates
themselves, against the Archbishop's protest, gave the heretics the
choice between reverencing the cross, and the stake.
At Soissons, the populace, feeling certain that the clergy would not
resort to extreme measures, profited by the Bishop's absence to burn
the heretics they detested. At Liège, the Bishop managed to save a
few heretics from the violence of the angry mob. At Cologne, the
Archbishop was not so successful; the people rose in their anger and
burned the heretics before they could be tried. Peter of Bruys and
the Manichean at Cambrai were both put to death by the people. Arnold
of Brescia, deserted by fortune, fell a victim to his political
adversaries; the prefect of Rome was responsible for his
execution.[1]
[1] The case of Arnold, however, is not so clear. The _Annales
Augustani minores_ (_Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. x, p. 8) declare that the
Pope hanged the rebel. Another anonymous writer (cf. Tanon, _Hist.
des tribunaux de l'Inq. en France_, p. 456, n. 2) says with more
probability, that Adrian merely degraded him. According to Otto of
Freisingen (_Mon. Germ. SS_., vol. xx, p. 404), Arnold _principis
examini reservatus est, ad ultimum a præfecto Urbis ligno adactus_.
Finally, Geroch de Reichersberg tells us (_De investigatione
Antichristi_, lib. i, cap. xiii, ed. Scheibelberger, 1875, pp. 88-89)
that Arnold was taken from the ecclesiastical prison and put to death
by the servants of the Roman prefect. In any case, politics rather
than religion was the cause of his death.
In a word, in all these executions, the Church either kept aloof, or
plainly manifested her disapproval.
During this period, we know of only one bishop, Théodwin of Liège,
who called upon the secular arm to punish heretics. This is all the
more remarkable because his predecessor, Wazo, and his successor,
Adalbero II, both protested in word and deed against the cruelty of
both sovereign and people.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account