Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/64

 INQUISITION

36

INQUISITION

CXL, (1907), p. 364]. It may be that in modern times men as a rule judge more leniently the views of others, but does this forthwith make their opinions ob- jectively more correct than those of their predecessors? Is there no longer any inclination to persecution? As late as 1871 Professor Friedberg wrote in Holtzen- dorff's " Jahrbuch fiir Gesetzgebung " : " If a new re- ligious society were to be established to-day with such principles as those which, according to the Vat- ican Council, the Catholic Church declares a matter of faith, we would undoubtedly consider it a duty of the state to suppress, destroy, and uproot it by force" (Kolnische Volkszeitung," no. 782, 15 Sept., 1909). Do these sentiments indicate an ability to appraise justly the institutions and opinions of former cen- turies, not according to modern feelings, but to the standards of their age? [cf. Th. de Cauzons, "Histoire de I'lnquisition en France", Tome I: " Les Origines de rinquisition " (Paris, 1909); O. Pfiilf in "Stimmenaus Maria-Laach ", no. 8 (1909), pp. 290 sqq.].

In forming an estimate of the Inquisition, it is necessary to distinguish clearly between principles and historical fact on the one hand, and on the other those exaggerations or rhetorical descriptions which reveal bias and an ob\'ious determination to injure Catholi- cism, rather than to encourage the spirit of tolerance and further its exercise. It is also essential to note that the Inquisition, in its establishment and pro- cedure, pertained not to the sphere of belief, but to that of discipline. The dogmatic teaching of the Church is in no way affected by the question as to whether the Inquisition was justified in its scope, or wise in its methods, or extreme in its practice. The Church established by Christ, as a perfect society, is empowered to make laws and inflict penalties for their violation. Heresy not only violates her law but strikes at her very life, unity of belief; and from the begin- ning the heretic had incurred all the penalties of the ecclesiastical courts. When Christianity became the religion of the Empire, and still more when the peoples of Northern Europe became Christian nations, the close alliance of Church and State made unity of faith essential not only to the ecclesiastical organization, but also to civil society. Heresy, in consequence, was a crime which secular rulers were bound in duty to punish. It was regarded as worse than any other crime, even that of high treason; it was for society in those times what we call anarchy. Hence the sever- ity with which heretics were treated by the secular power long before the Ini|uixition was established.

As regards the chanu-lt-r of these punishments, it should be considered that they were the natural ex- pression not only of the legislative i)Ower, but also of the popular hatred for heresy in an age that dealt both vigorously and roughly with criminals of every type. The heretic, in a word, was simply an outlaw whose offence, in the popular mind, deserved and sometimes received a punishment as summary as that which is often dealt out in our own day by an infuriated popu- lace to the authors of justly detested crimes. That such intolerance was not peculiar to Catholicism, but was the natural accompaniment of deep religious con- viction in those, also, who abandoned the Church, is evident from the measures taken Ijy some of the Ke- formers again.st those who differed from them in matters of belief. As the learned Dr. SchafT declares in his "History of the Christian Church" (vol. V, New York, 1907, p. 524), "To the great luimihation of the Protestant churches, religious intolerance uiid even persecution unto death wen^ continued long after the Reformation. In Ceneva tlie pernicious theory was put into practice by state and church, even to the use of torture and the admission of tlu' testimony of children against their parents, and with the sanction of Calvin. Bullinger, in the second I lel- vetic (Jonfe.ssion, announced the principle that heresy could be punished like murder or treason." Moreover,

the whole history of the Penal Laws against Catholics in England and Ireland, and the spirit of intolerance prevalent in many of the American colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries may be cited in proof thereof. It would obviously be absurd to make the Protestant religion as such responsible for these practices. But having set up the principle of private judgment, which, logically applied, made heresy impossible, the early Reformers proceeded to treat dissidents as the medieval heretics had been treated. To suggest that this was inconsistent is trivial in view of the deeper insight it affords into the meaning of a tolerance which is often only theoretical and the source of that intolerance which men rightly show towards error, and which they naturally, though not rightly, transfer to the erring.

(B) The Inquisitionin Spain. — (1) Historical Facts. — Religious conditions similar to those in Southern France occasioned the establishment of the Inquisi- tion in the neighbouring Kingdom of Aragou. As early as 1226 King James I had forbidden the Cath- arists his kingdom, and in 1228 had outlawed both them and their friends. A little later, on the advice of his confessor, Raymund of Pennafort, he asked Greg- ory IX to establish the Inquisition in Aragon. By the Bull " Declinante jam mundi " of 26 May, 1232, Arch- bishop Esparrago antl his suffragans were instructed to search, either personally or by enlisting the ser- vices of the Dominicans or other suitable agents, and condignly punish the heretics in their dioceses. At the Council of L6rida in 1237 the Inquisition was for- mally confided to the Dominicans and the Francis- cans. At the Synod of Tarragona in 1242, Raymund of Pennafort defined the terms hwrelicus, receptor, fau- tor, defensor, etc., and outhned the penalties to be in- flicted. Although the ordinances of Innocent IV, Ur- ban IV, and Clement VI were also adopted and exe- cuted with strictness by the Dominican Order, no striking success resulted. The Inquisitor Fray Ponce de Blanes was poisoned, and Bernardo Travasser earned the crown of martyrdom at the hands of the heretics. Aragon's best-known inquisitor is the Do- minican Nicolas Eymeric (Qu^tif-Echard, " Scriptores Ord. Pr.", I, 709 sqq.). His "Directorium Inquisi- tionis" (written in Aragon, 1376; printed at Rome 1587, Venice 1595 and 1607), based on forty-four years' experience, is an original source and a document of the hit;hest historical value.

The S])anish Inquisition, however, properly begins with the reign of Ferdinand the Catholic and Isabella. The Catholic faith was then endangered by pseudo- converts from Juilaism (Marranos) and Mohamme- danism (Moriscos). On 1 November, 1478, Sixtus IV empowered the Catholic sovereigns to set up the Inqui- sition. The judges were to be at least forty years old, of unimpeachable reputation, distinguished for virtue and wistlom, masters of theology, or doctors or licen- tiates of canon law, and they must follow the usual ecclesiastical rules and regulations. On 17Soptember, 1480, Their Catholic Majesties appointed, at first for Seville, the two Dominicans MigueUle Morilloand Juan de San Martin as inquisitors, with two of the .secular clergy as assistants. Before long complaints of griev- ous abuses reached Rome, and were only too well founded. In a Brief of Sixtus IV of 29 January, 1482, they were blamed for having, upon the alleged author- ity of papal Briefs, unjustly imprisoned many people, .subjected them to cruel tortures, declared them false believers, and se((uestrated the i)rciperiy of the exe- cuted. They were at first admonished to act only in conjunction willi the bishops, and finally were threat- ened with deposition, and would indeed have been deposed had not Their Majesties interceded for them (Pastor, "(ie.sehichli' der Papste", 2nd ed., II, p. ,'583). Fray Tom^s Toniuemada (b. at ValladoUd m 1420, (1. at Avila, 16 September, 1498) was the true organizer of the Spanish hujuisition. At the solicita-