The Inquisition

by Wayne Nichols

Heresy

1. Men, as free creatures of God, have not the right to do evil, as some today propose. Man was not given free will that he might abuse this privilege, but that he might "do what is good and just meritoriously."¹ It follows that man can only gain merit because he is free, and thus earn heaven.

Heretics, however, choose error to substitute for the doctrine of Christ. These errors took many forms, of which we shall enumerate a few.

2. In first place must be named the Albigensians. These French Manichees, who spread their errors from the city of Albi, called themselves Cathari, or the Pure.

Now, Manicheism was dualism² which taught that all matter was evil, and that souls were imprisoned in men's bodies and could not be blamed for the conduct of those bodies. They condemned marriage as perpetuating the flesh, . . . held that the Mass was idolatry, the Eucharist a fraud and an abomination . . . the Church of Rome the whore of Babylon, and the Pope Antichrist . . .³

Naturally, this sort of error led to all manner of sexual perversion, and the enthronement of murder and suicide, even of infants, as the ultimate good.⁴

It is interesting to note that Protestant sects of various sorts continue to regard the Church and the pope with the same hatred.

3. The Manichees split up into various other sects, each with its own detail, but agreeing on the main principles of the parent heresy. Thus were born . . . Catharos, Patharenos, Speronistas, Leonistas, Arnaldistas . . . (not to mention) . . . Bogomils (who) despised learning, all formal religion, and all but the Lord's Prayer. (They refused) . . . to take oaths . . .⁵

4. In Germany at about this time, a sect known as the Luciferians was proliferating. After a horrible ritual of Satan worship and an orgy, these sectarians often committed sacrilegious acts against the Sacred Host.⁶

5. Thus, it can be seen that the widespread errors of the age required the establishment of some permanent tribunal to bring the guilty to justice, and to correct the unsuspecting who had fallen through ignorance.

The Roman Inquisition

1. Pope Gregory IX, who was the personal friend of Saint Francis and Saint Dominic, and who canonized St. Anthony of Padua, erected and codified the Roman Inquisition in the year 1223. The Inquisition had been founded by Innocent III,⁷ but it was left to Gregory to put it in the hands of the Dominicans and Franciscans.

Thus it was that mendicants, usually Dominicans, went about from town to town extirpating heresy.

2. How did Inquisitors go about uprooting error? After establishing themselves at a certain place, they would announce that any who thought themselves guilty of heresy were to appear before the court of the Inquisition. The Inquisitors, during a period of about one month preached and exhorted these to repentance and to return to the true Faith.

They also heard evidence and denunciations from others, even heretics, regarding the accused. The testimony of two witnesses was sufficient (as is specified in scripture), unless the accused could refute the witnesses.

If the accused did not deny his guilt and was repentant, a penance was imposed on him and he was set free. These penances were suited to the nature and gravity of his errors. It was only when someone deliberately and obstinately persisted in error that he was handed over to the secular arm. These cases were, as a rule, exceptional, since every means was taken to convert the heretic.

No verdict could be given without all the rights of the accused being observed. The Inquisitor was assisted by the bishop of the place, and later by experts of law. The accused, who could not be imprisoned before conviction, could have as many defenders as he like. Moreover, if a verdict was pronounced against, he could always appeal to Rome. This right was universal. (This appeal suspended everything, including the sentence, until the case was taken up by the Papal Court.)

Any torture used during these proceedings, as well as any execution, was performed by the State, never by the Church. It must be pointed out that torture was considered a legitimate means of questioning one strongly suspected of guilt at this time. The Church, in fact, interfered so that the accused would not be mutilated or put to death without his guilt having been established.⁹

3. Let us now contrast the procedure of the Roman Inquisition with that of the Protestants, wherever they came to power.

Protestant historians, themselves, testify that Henry VIII had 72,000 persons executed. Of these, how many were even brought to trial? His illegitimate daughter, Elizabeth, says Cobbett (a Protestant):

This is staggering, especially when we recall that "good Queen Bess" reigned for forty-five years! There was never a trial: one had to renounce his faith or die. This is the infamy of which Cobbett is boasting! This is only a sampling of the butchering that went on throughout Europe at this time.

The Spanish Inquisition

In Spain, the Inquisition was established to keep a nation only recently united from being torn asunder once again. Thus, Ferdinand and Isabella began a national tribunal in 1481. Although there were separate jurisdictions for the religious and civil authority, the state proved to be the more harsh in pursuing heretics.

Although Sixtus IV approved the project erected by Their Catholic Majesties, neither he, nor any of his successors to the See of Peter, condoned the excesses to which the Spanish tribunal was particularly liable.¹¹ More than once the popes intervened on the side of the accused and the innocent.

Abuses

1. Let us now consider the nature of the abuses which occurred in the history of the Inquisition.

It should be noted at the outset that these abuses sprung up especially where the secular power interfered with the free operation of the Inquisitorial Courts. This was the whole reason why Gregory IX had made only religious the Inquisitors: for if they were free of worldly allurements, they would the more perfectly fulfill their obligations as impartial judges.

2. Here we shall consider one case in particular: that of St. Joan of Arc.

Joan was captured and tried by an ecclesiastical court under the jurisdiction of Pierre Cauchon, Bishop of Beauvais. Cauchon, who hated the new French King, Charles VII, had but one ambition: to obtain for himself the rich archbishopric of Normandy.

Now, Joan was an embarrassment to the English, for she had routed them as no man could have. Therefore, she had to die quickly, and it had to look as though the Church had condemned her, not England. So, Cauchon played his part, and, over-ruling her appeal to the pope, sent her to the flames. (Her appeal made all further proceedings against her null and void.)

But that was not the end of the matter. The Church finally caught up with the Bishop of Beauvais. In 1456, Calixtus III rehabilitated Joan, who has since been canonized and made Patroness of France!

Conclusion

1. We have seen the terrible heresies which afflicted the Church in the Middle Ages. We have also seen the just remedy which the Church established in the Roman Inquisition which acted under just laws and not the will of the sovereign, as did the Protestants. We have seen the difference between the ecclesiastical and Spanish Inquisitions, and the abuses of the former which were, in due time, corrected.

2. What may be said of all this? The Inquisition was, of itself, a worthy remedy for the ills of the Church. It had been modified, to suit the age, but never made powerless, until recent years. It was good, even though it was at times abused, for its end was to prevent the loss of souls to eternal damnation.

It is lamentable that, at a time when the Church needs some form of Inquisition so badly as the present day, such a thing does not exist. It may be, however, that when God sets His House in order, He will use this efficacious means, as He did once before, to purge His Church of heresy. Let us hope and pray that this long-awaited day is not far off.

Notes

1. W. Devivier, Christian Apologetics: A Rational Exposition and Defense of the Catholic Religion, trans. by Joseph C. Sasia, Vol. II (New York: Joseph F. Wagner, Inc., 1924), p. 259.

2. William Thomas Walsh, Characters of the Inquisition (New York: PJ. Kenedy & Sons, 1940), p. 25.

3. Walsh, p. 27.

4. Walsh, p. 28.

5. Walsh, p. 40.

6. Walsh, pp. 41-42.

7. Devivier, p. 255.

8. Walsh, p. 45.

9. Bernard Hayward, The Inquisition, trans. by Malachy Carroll (New York: Society of St. Paul, 1966), pp. 43-45.

10. Devivier, p. 271.

11. Devivier, pp. 255-256.

12. Hayward, pp. 101-106.