| |
THE INQUISITION OF THE MIDDLE AGES
BOOK 1
- ORIGIN AND ORGANIZATION OF THE INQUISITION
CHAPTER II
-
HERESY.
3
The Sacraments in polluted hands
The antisacerdotal heresies
were directed against the abuses in doctrine and practice which priestcraft had invented to enslave the souls of men. One
feature common to them all was a revival of the Donatist tenet that the sacraments are polluted in polluted hands, so that a priest
living in mortal sin is incapable of administering them. In the existing condition
of ecclesiastical morals this was destructive to the functions of nearly the
whole body of the priesthood, and its readiness as a means of attack had been
facilitated by the policy of the Holy See in its efforts to suppress clerical
marriage and concubinage.
In 1050 the Synod of Rome, under the impulsion of
Nicholas II, had adopted a canon forbidding any one to be present at the mass
of a priest known to keep a concubine or wife. This was inviting the flock to
sit in judgment on the pastor; and though it remained virtually a dead letter
for fifteen years, when it was revived and effectually put in force by Gregory
VII, in 1074, it produced immense confusion, for continent priests were rare
exceptions. So violent was the contest excited that, in 1077, at Cambrai, the married or concubinary priesthood actually
burned at the stake an unfortunate who resolutely maintained the orthodoxy of
the papal rescripts. The orders of Gregory were
reiterated by Innocent II as late as the Council of Reims, in 1131, and in that
of Lateran, in 1139, and Gratian embodied the whole series in the canon law,
where they still remain. Although Urban II had endeavored to point out that it
was merely a matter of discipline, and that the virtue of the sacraments
remained unaltered in the hands of the worst of men, still it was difficult for
the popular mind to recognize so subtle a distinction.
A learned theologian
like Geroch of Reichersperg might safely declare that
he paid no more attention to the masses of concubinary priests than if they
were those of so many pagans, and yet be unimpeached in his orthodoxy, but to minds less robust in faith the question presented
insoluble difficulties. Albero, a priest of Mercke, near Cologne, shortly afterwards, when he taught
that the consecration of the host was imperfect in sinful hands, was forced, by
the unanimous testimony of the Fathers, to recant; but he adopted the theory
that such sacraments were profitable to those who took them in ignorance of the
wickedness of the celebrant, while they were useless to the dead and to those
who were cognizant of the sin. This was likewise heretical, and Albero’s offer to prove its orthodoxy by undergoing the
ordeal of fire was rejected on the logical ground that sorcery might thus
enable false doctrine to triumph.
The question continued to plague the Church until,
about 1230, Gregory IX abandoned the position of his predecessors, and
undertook to settle it by an authoritative decision that every priest in mortal
sin is suspended, as far as concerns himself, until he repents and is absolved,
yet his offices are not to be avoided, because he is not suspended as regards
others, unless the sin is notorious by judicial confession or sentence, or by
evidence so clear that no tergiversation is possible. To the Church it was, of
course, impossible to admit that the virtue of the sacrament depended upon the
virtue of the ministrant, but these finedrawn distinctions show how the question troubled the minds of the faithful, and how
readily the heresy could suggest itself that transubstantiation might fail in
the hands of the wicked. In fact. even without the suggestive commands of
Gregory and Innocent, to a thoughtful and pious mind there was a grievous
incompatibility between the awful powers vested by the Church in her ministers
and the flagitious lives which disgraced so many of them. That the error should
be stubborn was unavoidable. As late as 1396 it was taught by Jean de Varennes, a priest of the Remois,
who was forced to recant, and in 1158 we find Alonso de Spina declaring it to be common to the Waldenses, the Wickhffites, and the Hussites.
One or two of the earlier antisacerdotal heresies may be mentioned which were local and temporary in their character,
but which yet have interest as showing how ready were the lower ranks of the
people to rise in revolt against the Church, and how contagious was the
enthusiasm excited by any leader bold enough to voice the general feeling of
unrest and discontent.
About 1108, in the Zeeland Isles, there appeared a
preacher named Tanchelm, who seems to have been an
apostate monk, subtle and skilled in disputation. He taught the nullity of all
hierarchical dignities, from pope to simple clerk, that the Eucharist was polluted
in unworthy hands, and that tithes were not to be paid. The people listened
eagerly, and after filling all Flanders with his heresy, he found in Antwerp an
appropriate centre of influence. Although that city was already populous and
wealthy through commerce, it had but a single priest, and he, involved in an
incestuous union with a near relative, had neither leisure nor inclination for
his duties. A people thus destitute of orthodox instruction fell an easy prey
to the tempter and eagerly followed him, reverencing him to that degree that
the water in which he bathed was distributed and preserved as a relic. He
readily raised a force of three thousand fighting men, with which he dominated
the land, nor was there duke or bishop who dared withstand him.
The stories
that he pretended to be God and the equal of Jesus Christ, and that he
celebrated his marriage with the Virgin Mary, may safely be rejected as the
embroideries of frightened clerks; nor could Tanchelm have really considered himself as a heretic, for we find him visiting Rome with
a few followers for the purpose of obtaining a division of the extensive see of
Utrecht and the allotment of a portion of it to the episcopate of Terouane. On his return from Rome, in 1112, while passing
through Cologne, he and his retinue were thrown in prison by the archbishop,
who the next year summoned a synod to sit in judgment on them. Several of them
purged themselves by the water-ordeal, while others succeeded in escaping by
flight. Of these, three were burned at Bonn, preferring a frightful death to
abandoning their faith, while Tanchelm himself
reached Bruges in safety. The anathema which had been pronounced against him,
however, had impaired his credit, and the clergy of Bruges had little
difficulty in procuring his ejectment. Yet Antwerp
remained faithful, and he continued his missionary career until 1115, when,
being in a boat with but few followers, a zealous priest piously knocked him on
the head, and his soul went to rejoin its master, Satan. Even this did not
suppress the effect of his teaching and his heresy continued to flourish. In
vain the bishop gave twelve assistants to the lonely priest of St. Michael’s in
Antwerp; it was not until 1126, when St. Norbert, the ardent ascetic who
founded the Premonstratensian order, was placed in
charge of the city with his followers, and undertook to evangelize it with his
burning eloquence, that the people could be brought back to the faith. St.
Norbert built other churches and filled them with disciples zealous as himself,
and the stubborn heretics were docile enough to pastors who taught by example
as well as by words their sympathy for those who had so long been neglected.
Consecrated hosts which had lain hidden for fifteen years in chinks and corners
were brought forth by pious souls, and the heresy vanished without leaving a
trace.
Somewhat similar was the heresy propagated not long
afterwards in Brittany by Éon de l’Etoile,
except that in this case the heresiarch was unquestionably insane. Sprung from
a noble family, he had gained a reputation for sanctity by the life of a hermit
in the wilderness, when, from the words of the collect, “per eum qui venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos”, he
conceived the idea that he was the Son of God. It was not difficult to find
sharers in this belief who adored him as the Deity incarnate, and he soon had a
numerous band of followers, with whose aid he pillaged the churches of their
ill-used treasures, and distributed them to the poor. The heresy became
sufficiently formidable to induce the legate, Cardinal Alberic of Ostia, to preach against it at Nantes in 1145, and Hugues, Archbishop of Rouen,
to combat it with dreary polemics; but the most convincing argument used was
the soldiery dispatched against the heretics, many of whom were captured and
burned at Alet, refusing obstinately to recant. Éon retired to Aquitaine for a season, but in 1148 he
ventured to appear in Champagne, where he was seized with his followers by
Samson, Archbishop of Reims, and brought before Eugenius III at the Council of Rouen.
Here his insanity was so manifest that he was charitably consigned to the care
of Suger, Abbot of St. Denis, where he soon after
died, but many of his disciples were stubborn, and preferred the stake to
recantation
CIVILIZATION OF SOUTHERN FRANCE.
|